J-15 - PLAN carrierborne fighter

Hendarto said:
I don't think there is such a thing as "China obligated" It is more out of courtesy. It is not illegal copy more like reverse engineering. Because China is not happy with Russian avionics, radar, and weapons,
In a way, China gets a monkey version of SU 27. And we don't know the agreement details. it could entail Technology transfer because Russia was desperate for money at that time.

it has been done multiple times in history. You should know that of all people read "operation paper clip"

China has done a lot to revitalize the Russian aero industry. If it were not for China's large buying of Su 27 the Russian industry would die. So at least quid pro quo The Russian consent to the Chinese version of Su27
Click to expand...


I think we can discuss a lot on legal or not legal regarding the regular Su-27SK aka J-11A and since the "China WAS not happy with Russian avionics, radar, and weapons" maybe even the J-11A/B, but for that type it had a signed contract with quite clearly noted specifications and rules.

For any other Flanker type, aka the Su-37UBK as the J-11BS, the Su-27K/Su-33 as the J-15 and Su-30MKK as the J-16 there si from the legal point of view nothing to deny, they are blatant illegal copies or "reverse engineered" types, but China never had a contract to manufacture them and as such it never had a right to develop them..

Also, China never got a "monkey version of SU 27". They just got what they signed a contract for and what they paid for ... It is surely correct, that they wanted more and Russia wanted to rip them off like they always do, but that alone gives them no right to copy the naval and twin-seater variants.
 
As it seems, the "B" still uses AL-31F engines

1730384695438.png
 
Deino said:
I think we can discuss a lot on legal or not legal regarding the regular Su-27SK aka J-11A and since the "China WAS not happy with Russian avionics, radar, and weapons" maybe even the J-11A/B, but for that type it had a signed contract with quite clearly noted specifications and rules.

For any other Flanker type, aka the Su-37UBK as the J-11BS, the Su-27K/Su-33 as the J-15 and Su-30MKK as the J-16 there si from the legal point of view nothing to deny, they are blatant illegal copies or "reverse engineered" types, but China never had a contract to manufacture them and as such it never had a right to develop them..

Also, China never got a "monkey version of SU 27". They just got what they signed a contract for and what they paid for ... It is surely correct, that they wanted more and Russia wanted to rip them off like they always do, but that alone gives them no right to copy the naval and twin-seater variants.
Click to expand...
You seem to know the contract wow surprise. Nobody knows the details of the contract. If Russia is not happy that the Chinese "illegally" copied their design. They can sue. But so far they didn't. There is muttering of complaints from the Russian expert but nothing from the official Rosoboronexport.

As I said there is nothing wrong with RE a design It has been done multiple times. The problem is many people in the West just can't accept that the Chinese jet fighter is as good as anything the West can offer and that superiority is gone for good. That is why all those carping of copy etc
 
Hendarto said:
You seem to know the contract wow surprise. Nobody knows the details of the contract. If Russia is not happy that the Chinese "illegally" copied their design. They can sue. But so far they didn't. There is muttering of complaints from the Russian expert but nothing from the official Rosoboronexport.

As I said there is nothing wrong with RE a design It has been done multiple times. The problem is many people in the West just can't accept that the Chinese jet fighter is as good as anything the West can offer and that superiority is gone for good. That is why all those carping of copy etc
Click to expand...

I think you too don't know the contract but from what we know they were not happy, complained a lot but in the end, they couldn't do anything.

Simply based on this I think there was indeed no contract and China simply copied since it was capable to do so ... in the end however it seems, there was some other sort of compensation (since Russia couldn't revert this anyway!) or alternative contract.

I directly covered this story and issue in a chapter in my book.
 
As it seems, the PLAN Naval Aviation not only revealed the J-15B to be in service, but as it seems, - @RickJoe_PLA already hinted this - the J-15D is in service too! 😯

Additionally two J-15Ds were parked in front of the PLANS-17 "Shandong's island.

(Image via @水獭一般编-阿怡 from Weibo)

1730387171015.png
1730387148260.png
 
Well, he based his estimate on the color of the nose cone It could be just a different batch of J 15. But we know they have been manufacturing J15 B for some time now. It is about time they show up in service with PLAN
 
Deino said:
As it seems, the PLAN Naval Aviation not only revealed the J-15B to be in service, but as it seems, - @RickJoe_PLA already hinted this - the J-15D is in service too! 😯

Additionally two J-15Ds were parked in front of the PLANS-17 "Shandong's island.

(Image via @水獭一般编-阿怡 from Weibo)

View attachment 76088
View attachment 76087
Click to expand...
Are there any other EW fighter beside EA18G grolwer and J15D,J16D?
 
So what's the overall count of j-15?100-120?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top