Eurofighter Typoon Chinese Fakes
Discussion
It seems China even creates replica military hardware!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8617993.st...
Chengdu J-10
EF Typhoon
Conincidence, espionage, or did they just really like the shape and wanted to save some development time?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8617993.st...
Chengdu J-10
EF Typhoon
Conincidence, espionage, or did they just really like the shape and wanted to save some development time?
That's ok, the Gripen is the result of a BAE design project, and, to begin with BAE and SAAB worked on it together.
The Chinese copy whatever they can. Before the J-10 they copied the Flanker variants that Russia sold them. The straw that broke the camels as it were. The Russians backed right off selling the chinese anything. They copied the AL-31 engines which were powering the Flanker and that is now powering the J-10. Reliability and Longevity are yet to be proven.
In some circles, it is suggested that some Israeli's who worked on the Lavi, moved wholesale to design offices either in Russia or China itself to act as 'consultants' on the J10.
I suspect that Airbus are also providing another source of entertainment for the Chinese. However, Airbus know that China will take a while to make a narrow body airliner to rival the A320, and it won't be to the taste of anyone else, so Airbus will have only lost out on some of the future Chinese domestic short haul. Having said that, I heard O'Leary was contracting the Chinese to build him his next Shorthaul airliner. Surely a bargaining chip on the price of NEO, but seems like a pretty poor one.
The Chinese copy whatever they can. Before the J-10 they copied the Flanker variants that Russia sold them. The straw that broke the camels as it were. The Russians backed right off selling the chinese anything. They copied the AL-31 engines which were powering the Flanker and that is now powering the J-10. Reliability and Longevity are yet to be proven.
In some circles, it is suggested that some Israeli's who worked on the Lavi, moved wholesale to design offices either in Russia or China itself to act as 'consultants' on the J10.
I suspect that Airbus are also providing another source of entertainment for the Chinese. However, Airbus know that China will take a while to make a narrow body airliner to rival the A320, and it won't be to the taste of anyone else, so Airbus will have only lost out on some of the future Chinese domestic short haul. Having said that, I heard O'Leary was contracting the Chinese to build him his next Shorthaul airliner. Surely a bargaining chip on the price of NEO, but seems like a pretty poor one.
I like how there are trends in aviation design that means each generation are broadly similar.
Going from aircraft with a central intake and swept wings like the Mig-21, Lightning, Super Sabre, Mystere etc, then the swing wing phase, then delta winged and now stealth.
Whats the advantages of the canard layout? I take it less drag and weight due to the extra lift and probably better pitch control from lifting the nose rather than pushing the tail down. (I think thats how it works)
Going from aircraft with a central intake and swept wings like the Mig-21, Lightning, Super Sabre, Mystere etc, then the swing wing phase, then delta winged and now stealth.
Whats the advantages of the canard layout? I take it less drag and weight due to the extra lift and probably better pitch control from lifting the nose rather than pushing the tail down. (I think thats how it works)
7mike said:
Those damned Frenchies have been at it too (or was this around before the Eurofighter?).
Eric Mc said:
And the Rafale was ready much earlier - and they have a carrier version too.
Sometimes the French get it right.
Not always - they converted quite a few early orders from single to twin seat as they'd screwed the HMI up something chronic. Sometimes the French get it right.
Don't forget the carrier conversion for Rafale took some serious cash - something the Typhoon countries with carriers didn't have or need as they had carrier aircraft at the time that were good enough for the job (and would have been replaced by JSF if it hadn't slipped past its original ISD)
Ian Lancs said:
Eric Mc said:
And the Rafale was ready much earlier - and they have a carrier version too.
Sometimes the French get it right.
Not always - they converted quite a few early orders from single to twin seat as they'd screwed the HMI up something chronic. Sometimes the French get it right.
Don't forget the carrier conversion for Rafale took some serious cash - something the Typhoon countries with carriers didn't have or need as they had carrier aircraft at the time that were good enough for the job (and would have been replaced by JSF if it hadn't slipped past its original ISD)
The problem with collaborative projects is that instead of just one customer constantly changing their minds on what they want, you have three or four customers constantly changing their minds.
Mr Dave said:
I like how there are trends in aviation design that means each generation are broadly similar.
Going from aircraft with a central intake and swept wings like the Mig-21, Lightning, Super Sabre, Mystere etc, then the swing wing phase, then delta winged and now stealth.
Whats the advantages of the canard layout? I take it less drag and weight due to the extra lift and probably better pitch control from lifting the nose rather than pushing the tail down. (I think thats how it works)
It improves turning performance on delta wings, they do not bleed as much speed in sustained turns. The Gripen also use the canards as airbrakes when landing, shortening the landing roll.Going from aircraft with a central intake and swept wings like the Mig-21, Lightning, Super Sabre, Mystere etc, then the swing wing phase, then delta winged and now stealth.
Whats the advantages of the canard layout? I take it less drag and weight due to the extra lift and probably better pitch control from lifting the nose rather than pushing the tail down. (I think thats how it works)
Traveller said:
davepoth said:
It looks like it borrows an awful lot from the F - 16.
It probably does, with the Lavi connection. I wouldn't be surprised if the Flight control software has a " General dynomics" label.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff