China doesn't Copy Western Aircraft! (sort of...)

I often say that China doesn't copy western aircraft and weapons systems as much as it is commonly believed. There is an articulate reason for this.
I am trying to explain what I beleive is really happening.
#china #Aircraft
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com...
Join the Discord server / discord
Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/...
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.c...
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the KZbin Partner Program, Community guidelines & KZbin terms of service.

[@abdulrashidabang5583]

China was not accepted to join ISS but china is able to build its own space station.Did china copy ISS to make its own space station?

[@llkk290]

China has also built its own "Beidou" global satellite navigation system

[@janpistelak1352]

Usually, I rarely put any comments here, but I just have to this time. Sir, please pay no attention to those critics accusing you of bias or not being patriotic enough. In my humble opinion, you are doing a tremendous job, and I have learned many interesting facts and knowledge from you. Please keep posting your videos - I believe I speak on behalf of all technology enthusiasts that we would miss you a great deal if you decided to cease to do so. Stay safe, and have a nice day! 👍

[@adrianhinds9200]

A lot of US aircraft knowledge was stolen from Germany, actually taking the people with the knowledge is common knowledge to all.

[@rustygates3367]

Didn't know a lot of aircraft knowledge required to build all the cutting edge aircraft post WW2, from the SR-71 to the F22, F35, B2 etc. were stolen from Nazi Germany :O. Also, white Americans are Europeans. Germans migrating from Europe to the US is still the "west"...

[@adrianhinds9200]

@@rustygates3367 But all of those technologies were built on the foundation of the German technology and knowledge, not saying good or bad just the facts.

[@oxvendivil442]

They took NA*Is and turned them into NASA, they took UNIT 731 and turned it to Fort Detrick Bioweapons Lab HQ.

[@92HazelMocha]

Not to mention the entire US space program.

[@jon2431]

america joined the western front to save the nazis from the soviets and acquire their technology.

[@ashavahishta7023]

When you are doing your homework, copying other people's homework word by word is called COPY. If you look at other people's homework, analyze the process, and then complete your homework after you have mastered it completely, it's not copy, it's called LEARNING.

[@dbloskijr4665]

wow good point👍👍

[@OhFookinELL]

Nicely put.

[@stupidburp]

Only a foolish plagiarizing student makes an exact copy. Picking and choosing elements to copy and rewording them is more likely to succeed without getting caught but is still cheating.

[@user-ie5gg1lp4j]

@Stu Bur, you say that plagiarism is plagiarism. It doesn't matter. At least, these weapons have been in China, and they can be continuously updated according to our needs.Bleeding new, standing on the shoulders of the giant, always accumulate faster than himself, and defense should not delay!Insufficient weapons are the pain of China. What methods are used to create and master these weapons and defend the country.

[@SHINR__]

If the end end product looks exactly the same, it's a copy.

[@jawadkazmi5327]

And even while travelling you put out content of this quality. Thanks ever so much. Don't pay attention do trolls and forever upset and triggered folks. Stay healthy and keep on doing what you are doing, cuz that's what fair and unbiased viewers like about you.

[@djmicrowave6073]

Honestly this is the only channel I can enjoy on the topic of military equipment, every other channel that I know of is littered with propaganda and trolls

[@ex0duzz]

If it was so easy to do, India, Japan, Korea etc would all have domestic engines and jets already. Yet they all use American or French or whatever engines.

[@kentl4386]

Those countries wouldn't dare tho, or they'd be sanctioned back to the stone age

[@fatdoi003]

Indian engines??? seriously?

[@aj777mc8]

@@fatdoi003 Japan or Korea jet engines??? seriously?

[@fatdoi003]

@@aj777mc8 yeah ikr.... when the latest eurofighter engine has 27000lb on reheat, basic WS-10A already has 30000lb and newer variants with 32000lb and 35000lb.... and people still laughing..... weird

[@aj777mc8]

@@fatdoi003 EJ200 max thrust is around 2000 Lb. it is smaller engine compared to ws10, but it's Thrust-to-weight ratio is better. don't get me wrong, bigger fighter jet engine is harder to build. at the same time, India, Japan or Korea engine technologies are far inferior to the Chinese.

[@olderchin1558]

Please don't be intimidated by some. I personally enjoy your analysis because it is unbiased.

[@commie5211]

After reading some of comments saying you are paid by Chinese, i am going to make that true, and you can not deny it next time. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

😂 Thank you so much! You have no idea how much I do appreciate it!

[@junkeatng]

It's not easy even to just copy. If I give you a recipe and tell you how to cook the dish, even then the end results will be very different. Cooking is a simple process. Designing and building a state of the art fighter is infinitely more complex.

[@SonsOfLorgar]

And when you start your tech base through copying by reverse engineering advanced machines, there is no way to avoid learning a hell of a lot and discover new paths the original designers might not have spotted or dismissed due to external incentives/disincentives that isn't present for those trying to reverse engineer the tech. Eg. the Chinese started by copying and reverse engineering back in the 1950ies, nowdays, they are using those lessons to go their own way.

[@sevrent2811]

To say that China copies almost everything the west does is an over-exaggeration. I'd also say that people who think China developed these technologies completely in-house on its own are probably an over-exaggeration as well. Chinese attempts at gaining US technology are very well documented at this point, and of course, we all know the F-35 debacle at this point. It's still unlikely China gained in-depth knowledge and 'blueprints' of these technologies but they likely have bits and pieces. These bits and pieces of information are likely to fill gaps in China's own technological know-how and accelerate its development. China has shown that it at least understands what it's doing, they're not blatant copiers who blindly follow and do whatever we do. They can see what we do, this inspires China's own designs and they can modify them to suit their needs, this requires at least some understanding and proficiency with the technology at hand. To make an analogy. China is not like some kid who never shows up to class, and during the test day, copies whatever the person next to them wrote. Even if this person got a good grade, they did not understand the material at hand. China is more like someone who generally pays attention in class, and when stuck on a question, looks over at the other person's work, and is able to understand what they got missing, correct their work, and answer the question. In this case, yeah they looked at someone else's work, but they were still able to understand the material at hand. it filled gaps in their knowledge.

[@stevenhoman2253]

Fair comment.

[@ShanghaiShuguangAnshabu]

Too bad so many Americans still see the world as 60s and want to party like 1999. It doesn’t work that way anymore.

[@peanz2157]

well say

[@ivanzlatar2445]

@@ShanghaiShuguangAnshabu There are MANY hardworking and extremely talented AMERICAN Engineers. A tremendous amount on innovation and research still takes place in the USA.

[@THUGPUTIN]

The problem is they copy design exactly.. Coming to tech, They have understanding of every tech which can only be gained by reverse engineering with trail and error process... Reverse engineering is done by everyone... Including Americans, Japanese, Indians, European etc... Blaming China for reverse engineering all US tech is crazy.. As long as they modify design with respect to the original, they can beat patents.. I know many say Chinese copy things which is true with design but when it comes to tech they are really good at reverse engineering over the years... That's the reason why they can easily replace any new tech so fast into the market...

[@fruitbunny]

The Chinese invented gunpowder so in a sense yall copying from the Chinese.

[@namcho2947]

Hi, you have left out something very important. China more than most other countries, have for decades been under hundreds of technology export restrictions and sanctions. There are famous restrictions such as US Congress’s 2011 law restricting China exclusively from participating in the ISS or any other NASA projects, but also hundreds of others going back decades including restrictions on CNC machinery to CPU’s. China’s accomplishments are all the more extraordinary given the concerted efforts by the USA to “contain” or hold back China’s development.

[@olivieryeung398]

That's A very important factor in the growth of China after the cultural revolution

[@suntzu1409]

Its literally the primary motivation behind china's progress beyond pure race or rivalry

[@longdog33]

Chinese copycats is overly simple stereotyping obviously. Stereotyping is how average people understand a complex world and also makes white and western people feel superior.

[@sgt.grinch3299]

Showing your bias.

[@spartan5921]

I am more than happy to hear your unbiased views. Those that do not like it, need to take a spoon of cement and harden TF up! If we are completely honest about aircraft, how many ways can you design them? Should everyone who uses Canards be called spies on the SAAB aircraft factory, as I think they were the most prolific users of them at first. The Germans of WWII had developed the flying wing bomber which the B2 so closely resembles. There is no doubt that the USA stole the Japanese and Germans technology along with scientists to further their own limited capabilities. This has led to many breakthroughs in the advancement of jet technology. The USSR, also competing with the USA followed the same path and also took many designs and people for their own benefit to counter the USA, at least as far as in the Europe campaign. I do not think the British got much out o the deal, nor did China (CPC). The technology for Stealth is not a secret and applies to all vehicles, so they will all have a similar shape, to callthem copies is just ludicrous and damn stupid of people. Geez, you better not make mashed potato and gravy like my mum does or you'll be accused of copying her...FFS😒🙄🧐

[@tommarquez1980]

I love your pragmatic approach to technology. It’s not an individual, it’s a team. It’s collective knowledge and supply chains.

[@GSteel-rh9iu]

Most Western people have an extremely outdated notion of Chinese manufacturing prowess (as they did the SK and Japanese). Many US designed products have been manufactured there for decades. Everything from iPhones to appliances; we design them but it would take us decades to reinvest and retool to be able to manufacture those products domestically. Very thoughtful and balanced video; keep up the good work, that rain looked refreshing!?!

[@fatdoi003]

a high-end audio company owner said he has to source their cases from China as US cannot produce the level of finish he wants

[@stevenhoman2253]

I don't believe that the west has an outdated or false opinion of China's prowess. What I do know, is that, without fail, totalitarian regimes (probably more so in China due to their culture) discourage invention, innovation and creativity. It is a built-in feature of totalitarian systems. As opposed to Japan, where conformity is essential, but creativity is encouraged. It leaves them in a position where they are more reliant on stealing external ideas and developing them. China needs Russian jet engines and Soviet era crew systems for their space program. They cannot develop these independently.

[@fatdoi003]

@@stevenhoman2253 OMG what ignorant comment.... You should take a look at Chinese EV scene.... Lots of top EU design bosses are working there as most Chinese EV brands have no corporate images so they have unlimited freedom to design whatever they like.... Also look at tier 1 and 2 even tier 3 cities' architecture.... See if you dare to say there's no creativity.... Chinese is about to finished their own space station so tell me there's no engineering creativity there.... Jesus such ignorance

[@lawrance6540]

@@stevenhoman2253 normally I don't judge people. But I bet you are from American right? Please spread your idea and make sure Trump in power 2024. We chinese people really hope U.S full of people like you. Trust me.

[@codygroening6282]

We have already made those investments a couple of years ago

[@wasdwasdwwasd]

You can't fool me! M7* is clearly under the employ of big Winne the Pooh. In all seriousness, great video.

[@oxvendivil442]

Thank you for being fair to China.

[@taklai2390]

Honestly think this dude knows or is qualified. 😂😂😂

[@taklai2390]

Guys a gate keeper talking a lot. Unable to provide any real usable analysis on the Commies. So begrudging 😂😂😂

[@Splattle101]

Agree. The Chinese have been following a strategy of developing their industrial, technological and human depth for decades. This is reflected in their development & production of obsolete Soviet types since the early 1980s. Building an obsolete plane grew their skilled workforce. Next step was 'minor' modifications, growing their design & engineering capabilities. Next step, next step and so on ad nauseam. Their production runs are large, too. So they're not just growing breadth of skills, they're building depth and redundancy. They're going to be very formidable.

[@subipan4593]

As an engineer, I can concur that copying is not so easy. Unless you have the complete blueprint of the hardware and the source code of the software, copying requires in-depth understanding of the system. After such in-depth understanding, people can improve upon the initial system. Besides, military secrets are very well protected. I doubt any country can steal the complete blue prints and source codes from the US, but bits and pieces here and there is possible.

[@snslifestyleorg]

The Chinese was able to get a full blueprint of the F35.

[@klubcj]

@@snslifestyleorg then you cannot blame on the Chinese, if the blueprint is so easily stolen

[@snslifestyleorg]

@@klubcj That's why the Chinese is supplying the magnet on the F35.

[@zetareticulan321]

@SnSLifestyle Why is US security so shitty?

[@snslifestyleorg]

@@zetareticulan321 May not have anything to do with US security. Rather the information may be leaked by the US Allies. After all, what's keeping Chinese engineers from getting access to the F35, F15, F16 in Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Pakistan, South Korea, and Singapore which happen to be China's number one trading partners?

[@blueeyes6192]

There is a British military analyst who concurs with you about China’s rapid advancement. Ignore the haters .

[@blueeyes6192]

Let’s do a hypothetical scenario and assume China “copies everything”. Then using simpleton logic : This should give usa overwhelming advantage on lead time next gen dev cycle and knowing how to defeat its own ip? 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@appa609]

Every other country doesn't copy American tech. they just buy it.

[@fizjak5250]

dude we dont need chinese propaganda and we dont need western propaganda. i like your videos keep up :*

[@chan6565]

Don't worry, they will be fed to you without you knowing it

[@oliversmith9200]

Yeah.

[@oliversmith9200]

@@chan6565 but, without respect, we reject.

[@Eruthian]

I always have to think about how Europe and US car and electronic industry looked down on Japan and later South Korea as copy cats. Yes, they did copy up to a certain point. But once they got the neccessary knowledge, they went beyond and look at their reputation compared to European and US counterparts today. And from a millitary standpoint... I mean, look at the cold war periode, which was a whole circus of developing, reverse engineering/copying and improving to catch up with enemy tech. (For those patriots that believe, Russia always lacked behind in everything: Think about western inferior anti air defence and ASW torpedo performance for a certain periode of time.) Or think about how Japan naval airforce caught US with their pants down in WW II because they were thought to be inferiour. Yes, china might to a certain degree still be a copycat today. In which case we need to be prepared for the time, when they are not anymore. (Which is slowly about to start right now.) Besides, if you try to copy something, you also try to understand something. And you kind of have to learn about something in a non standart way, which makes up for good out of the box ideas and improovements. Just saying.

[@Tattlebot]

Japan stole the source code for a mainframe in the 70s. On the other hand we have truly indigenous major advancements such as in-plane switching mode LCD by Hitachi.

[@uilnosaj]

Yeap, it used to be great to own a Philip stereo system and now, ugh!

[@thetigerii9506]

It is the ethnic hubris, that i think is good for the americans to keep. Let them keep their hubris while the asians take the lead

[@alfeeman]

You are right that West has look down upon China for a very long time, only suddenly became alarmed and rush to try counter it. While in the past 40 years China has looked up to the West in awe and and learned as much as she can to catch up, to build its military with the thinking what if one day we need to face off, so it was tailor made for such potential conflicts. While since 911 US military design has steered towards fighting a low tech inferior opponents in the middle east, and just this few years suddenly realized they cannot win China in a potential south china sea conflict. Now China is starting to lose that awe and think if we keep doing the right thing we will be sure able to survive (in contrast to western believe that China aims to conquest, what it actually is trying to defend its territory and rights)

[@martinpalmer6203]

China played a very intelligent game of providing labor services in exchange for know-how. What people don't give them credit for is in taking that know-how and then applying it to entirely indigenous designs and innovation. I guess some in the countries who took advantage of this cheap labor are now surprised that China wants to strike out on its own and cut out the middle-men. Personally not surprised, have observed this innovation across many products and now I see China is pushing this hard earned innovation across many fields. Their investment expands to infrastructure so they can control their own trade routes and probably Ultimately control their entire supply chain including shipping, further cutting costs and strengthening their competitive advantage over basically everyone. I can see this Ultimately resulting in an effort to entirely control their supply lines in order to protect against anticompetitive forces who are only just waking up and realizing they have been beaten at their own game. Honestly think China has already won without firing a shot, it is not China who will need to resort to Military means to keep its place in the world. Well played China 🇨🇳 👏

[@wisenber]

"China played a very intelligent game of providing labor services in exchange for know-how." It didn't really require intelligence so much as opportunity. "I guess some in the countries who took advantage of this cheap labor are now surprised that China wants to strike out on its own and cut out the middle-men." And China has been surprised to see other countries position themselves to cut out China. That, and China's labor rates have been rapidly catching up as they develop.

[@92HazelMocha]

@@wisenber China has a planned economy, so while it is opportunities they are opportunities that were planned. In market economies we exploit naturally occurring opportunities, but in a planned economy these opportunities are manufactured instead of naturally occurring. This is actually one of the primary benefits of that type of economy.

[@wisenber]

@@92HazelMocha The lack of adaptation and innovation in planned economies is actually one of their biggest weaknesses. Technological development in market economies tends to stem from countless smaller failures that develop the knowledge base. That also applies to the overall market. Both systems can have national goals. One just has many more pathways to achieve them than the other.

[@92HazelMocha]

@@wisenber You say it's "one of their biggest weaknesses" but let's be honest, the soviets were first to space and China went from importing second rate aircraft to inventing electric plasma propulsion engines. And while the US has been an economic powerhouse for centuries, both China and the former soviet union were mere farmlands 100 years ago. Both systems can have national goals, but the difference is in a market economy the focus is profitability and in a planned economy its efficiency. The best example is the pacific theatre in WW2; after Pearl Harbor, the US began implementing measures that are normally seen in planned economies and the US navy went from being in pieces to exponentially out pacing the Japanese in only a few short years.

[@pierredelecto7069]

@@92HazelMocha china used to have a planned economy. These days much less so. They have fully embraced free markets in many sectors.

[@DairyCat]

I don't know why copying is so bad, it's how anyone learns anything at first. When you learn to draw, you start by copying other artists first before you start doing your own thing.

[@stupidburp]

It is bad when the copying is done without permission or compensation and with the goal of undermining the sources of the copied material.

[@SHINR__]

Ok I used to draw, this just isn't true. What are you on about? You get tips from different artists, and develope your own style and think for yourself. You don't just copy others, copying other people in art, at least when I was drawing , was something everyone was told not to do.

[@revejmal]

Found the Chinese.

[@treeinafield5022]

@@SHINR__ You think for yourself AFTER you learn the basic building blocks of drawing, like perspective, shading, etc. But BEFORE you have all those skills YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO copy. I actually think that you're lying about knowing how to draw. Because every artist on earth has gone through the phase of copying at the begginning when they're still in the process of learning. Which is the phase that China is in in terms of cutting edge tech.

[@blueeyes6192]

@@stupidburp then sanction China . Simple. What happened to the great security of usa ? You do realize usa steals as well but media doesn’t talk about it. USA are kings of intelligence and spy operations .

[@FFXIrocks-mj8wl]

This is very well said. My understanding of the rapid progress that Chinese has archived in many fields are because of few reasons. Huge funding in development, hard working of the engineers and a technology superior country that they can learn from. No, I am not saying they copy US but they have done very detailed studies of different projects that US had gone through in the history to fully understand the pro and cons of the design. In this way, they have avoided the waste of fundings and time by the failed projects and concepts that they could have encountered without studying US. With the knowledge they have archived through out the year, they can start applying those knowledge with their needs and capabilities to create the big leap of technology in recent years.

[@diclo383]

They copy all, sometimes REALLY badly.

[@ellenation2294]

This. Actually all developing countries even America survived through trial era. Chinas whole governing system is based on all the pros and cons from all countries including Japan Korea Europe (for its regulatory rules) and America …. People think it just worked cus of communis and autocracy but while that it’s true it’s really a mix of all pros from how other countries that developed.

[@112313]

just by looking at a photo of an airplane, a good engineer can probably remake it without knowing any other thing about that aircraft....

[@RM-el3gw]

it would be extremely delusional to say they don't copy anything. Theres several examples of Chinese carbon copies of both Russian and American designs.

[@FFXIrocks-mj8wl]

@@diclo383 I found arguing with idiot is quite a headache so yea whatever you say dude.

[@arthurvandeman]

excellent but sad that u have felt the pressure to post a defensive vlog against all the china haters in order to present ur site/analysis as a balanced one which it truly is. but that's the internet!🙃

[@Lena-vw6ye]

Thank you for this video Millennium. I've been expressing this same perspective for a long time. It is an injustice to the Chinese people that these trolls & individuals try to depreciate China's decades of learning, applying and development as "just copying". From the engineering platforms, to the engineers to the technology available to them to the materials, to the software, etc; all must be researched, developed and tested like any other piece of technology before it goes into production. Coming from experience working with Chinese manufacturers, I know as a fact that they're very competent, and I refuse to hear otherwise from these propagandized individuals in the comment section replying with hate.

[@doc0core]

Speaking as one of the Chinese people, we never care if our military is advanced or innovative or original. We only care about being capable and effective. Stealing and spying is part and partial to our military strategy.

[@per-henrikpersson1884]

Exactly. China is an old country with a long history so one of their best "Sports" is time. This is just a result of a long time plan. And in India there are more high educated enginineers than inhabitants in Sweden. Ive heard that in India there might be almost 100 million of engineer and maybee China has almost as many engineer than People in USA. And their political system People mistly have to do what The Big boss says or... I use to say that beware of The Chineese because you can put a Chineese on an dessert Island and he will find a way to survive and make progress. And for The China from The fuftues this is just a long march 2 and they dont fear The time. I spoke with several Chineese company reprensatives at the airshow in Paris in the early eighties as a reprensatives for The Swedish Defence Materiel Administration missile departement and at that time everybody could see that they where very "inspired" by The Soviet weapon technology but their systems whas not just copues of The Soviet Systems but they used them as a starting point in their education plan. So never underestimate China, India, Turkey and so on. Just think what hapoend when The west didnt allow their comoanies to Israel an South Africa. They just didnt fall on their backs and dued and cried for help - NO they said to them sekf - oj lets do it by oyrselves and we can cooperate wuh South Africa The other oaria country. And that was just The start och Israels sucess and The same for South Africa. And The same hapoend when The west trued to strangle Iran after The Shah. But when Iran started to "brag" about their homemade weaponsystems many of my coleauges said they just lied. But I said just wait and see. Because I had met those talented technical students from Iran at my Technical Unuversity - Iran had a plan. And now Russua want to buy systems from Iran.

[@ivanzlatar2445]

WIth great respect, allow me to note that the two statements are not mutually exclusive. China DOES INDEED HAVE AMAZING and highly competent ENGINEERS; However, CHINA HAS AND CONTINUES to exhibit borderline illegal practices when it comes to joint ventures and collaborations with Western Companies. As a result, technology has VERY FREQUENTLY been STOLEN. I cannot speak for the aviation industry. However, in the telecommunications industry this is something that I HAVE witnessed personally. I have seen the devastating effects to non chinese companies and entrepeneurs. Government sponsored Chinese companies blatantly exploited the promise of an open Chinese market to lower companies into handing their technology to Chinese "partners" who subsequently pulled the rug, kept the proprietary technology, and pushed their "partners" out. All of this is not fictional. I have witnessed blatant patent infringement met by mere slaps in the wrist to offenders within the Chinese legal system. If China wants free access to world markets, then they should play by the same rules, but often do not.

[@Lena-vw6ye]

@@ivanzlatar2445 Copy & paste propaganda regurgitation. I have literally been to the Guangzhou Canton Fair, Shenzhen Technology Fair, Hong Kong Technology fair, Vietnam Trade show, Thailand trade show, New Delhi, to Japan's manufacturing world. I have worked with China's engineers; designed and ordered samples from China for TWS earphones, and import/export all sorts of products from China. None of the very top companies in the world, in the courtroom, expressed any form of hacking or stolen technology from China. Of course companies inside of the country can operate in their own manner, but I have never experienced any form of any of these issues from Chinese manufacturers I have personally worked with.

[@ivanzlatar2445]

@@Lena-vw6ye As I stated previously, I am speaking respectfully from personal experience. You can choose to believe it or not. That does NOT change the facts. It is a long story but one that ends with great disillusion in Chinese industry. Maybe it's not all companies or industries. I can only speak fo those events that I have personally been a part of. NOT PROPAGANDA. FACTS

[@ntal5859]

As an Electronic Engineer In Australia I can tell you China is leading the way is not suffering from a chip shortage ie I can get any part from China while in the Western suppliers there is nothing. and I mean nothing. in Fact many chips have now been put out of production forever. I am not talking your Apple and Samsung but your embedded CPU that really run the world (yes PC/MAC/Phones control nothing) Your planes and industrial controls are run by Atmel /Microchip, ST and a dozen others that licence ARM chips (ARM does not make the chips but licecne the designs to companies with fabs) but most if not all are using older fabs 40 nano meter etc which aren't in the west nor Taiwan but you guessed it China !!! And they really know how to make chips in these area ie stuff about 10yrs behind Intel/AMD/Apple, but the point is 99% industrial designs are at least 2 yrs to 25 yrs old (8bit./16bit) embededd just past 5 yrs 32 bit is pushed intoi the mainstream of design. My point is China does not copy but innovates and leads in these areas. China is a leader not a copier in electronics!

[@horusfalcon]

This is pretty much spot-on. Sure, copying, (and stealing of western information to copy from) did, and still does, go on - it's the quickest way to get from point A to point B and all points in between. That doesn't mean that a certain amount of recombination, innovation, and advances in understand do not occur as well. Without getting down into the weeds, your insights vis-a-vis attacking the "irreplaceable" portions of the equation is something our Chinese enemies have honed to a fine art. This is what should truly terrify our leaders, but they seem to be too busy climbing into bed with our enemies instead of looking after our national interests. I love my country, but what I fear most is the sheer amount of gross stupidity in our government at all levels.

[@llkk290]

In fact, as long as there is an opportunity, the West will not stop copying and stealing Chinese technology for a moment.

[@antonywooster6783]

Right! I am sure there must still be some great men and women in the west, but sure as death and taxes, they are not evident in our governments, not one!

[@michaelwen5540]

@@antonywooster6783 西方民主社會的政府官員再懦弱無能也是可以換掉的。不像你的親愛的習皇上一樣，這個連中學都沒有畢業的傢伙一上來就不肯走了，想改憲法就改憲法。 No matter how incompetent and weak they are, the gouvernement officials in a western democratic society can be replaced. Unlike your precious Emperor Xi, this fella who didn’t even graduate from middle school ain’t leaving anytime soon, now that he can change the constitution on a whim.

[@markustorma4210]

Really liked this video. Good points! As a software engineer... Good luck trying to copy the software just by looking on what it does. Even if you would have access to a system that runs it, its still a major effort to replicate it. In theory you can just copy it but what happens when enemy updates their system... You would need to steal a new sample. In software you can not just easily copy but need create it from scratch but it really helps if someone has a sample that gives you the direction to develope further.

[@michaelwen5540]

Which is more or less why a lot projects in China only really took off after foreign developers have publicized their source codes, like robot dogs or 3D printing. It's hard to be creative in a system that discourages creativity and promotes taking short cuts.

[@snslifestyleorg]

@@michaelwen5540 China's strategy is to copy whenever possible. The copy product may be inferior but China makes up for it in numbers. That's a proven winning strategy throughout history.

[@michaelwen5540]

@@snslifestyleorg Ukraine vs Russia has already shown that "quantity over quality" is a thing of the past. You may try and copy from others, but that also means you are one step behind others, and cheating means you often lack a fundamental understanding of the logic behind designs (meaning that you will have difficulties coming up with newer designs and improvements), forcing you to rely on imports to make your cloned designs, and resort to cloning again once the design becomes outdated. The fact also remains that reversed engineered copies are nearly always inferior to the original. And certain designs took China decades to reverse engineer, which by then said design could already be obsolete. It's a vicious cycle. Besides, for some more advanced technologies such as military, the west is keeping a tight lid on them. So China has to copy from Russia, whose tech is already second rate compared to American and European tech. Which makes China 3rd rate in certain fields. This is far from a winning strategy, this, combined with increasingly isolationist and antagonistic policies along constant boasting is how you dig your grave.

[@snslifestyleorg]

@@michaelwen5540 Quantity vs Quality - Ukraine and Russia are about the same strength so Russia doesn't really have the quantity advantage. This was not the case in other conflicts such as the Korean war, the Vietnam war and most recently Afghanistan where Quantity trumps Quality. Sure copied products are usually inferior. On the other hand the copy cats can also learn something new. The high speed rail, hypersonic technology, EVs and green tech are good examples of the copy cat overtaking over the innovators. The west is keeping a tight lid on them - In the age of internet where information travels at light speed, such strategy doesn't work anymore It used to be the West was decades ahead of China, but not anymore. Just as it took China decades to catch up with the West, it also takes decades to deploy new military hardware. The F35 is a good example. Compared with the F35, the J20 is certainly not decades behind in technology.

[@snslifestyleorg]

@@michaelwen5540 Coming back to the quantity versus quality argument, the Ukraine conflict is a clear example of the quantity advantage. Russia is using vintage military hardware which is cheap to produce and Ukraine with its state of the art military hardware still fails to drive the Russian back to its borders.

[@tranquoccuong890-its-orge]

for anyone trying to accuse the guy of being "unpatriotic", seriously guys he is an italian living in the uk

[@jasonshen7600]

hmmm I wonder what he thinks of the food there

[@FallenPhoenix86]

@@jasonshen7600 Likely that "hurrr durrrr British food baaaad" is a myth.

[@jasonshen7600]

@@FallenPhoenix86 well I immediately lost all interest when they poured beans over bread

[@FallenPhoenix86]

@@jasonshen7600 So you wrote off an entire country based on one single snack that you likely haven't tried... Your opinion is invalid.

[@jasonshen7600]

@@FallenPhoenix86 my opinion is my opinion, it's only valid to me and I need no outside confirmations. ;D

[@suisinghoraceho2403]

2nd mover does have a big advantage in the sense that a lot of bad directions has been eliminated. That said, no two countries’ industry landscapes are identical, some particular constrains may mean following the first mover’s direction is not possible. Again, moving around these constrains may help you find new opportunities.

[@echen71]

Love your vids @Millenium 7!!! Wish other KZbinrs would “replicate” your principle of trying to be unbiased (looking at you Binkov and Caspian Report)!!!!

[@ghostmourn]

Great topic. I often get annoyed by the idea that China copy's everything. This is a scapegoat people use in the west to explain why China is progressing faster than we are in many areas and it fails to recognize that China is a smart, entrepreneurial and hard working society that deserves a lot credit for not only their manufacturing but also their product design. The truth as I see it is that we in the west (Particularly the USA.) are unhappy about the fact that our economy's have evolved into a service based system. This paradigm is so widespread in the USA that its practically the reason Donald Trump was Elected President in 2017.

[@ghostmourn]

During the 1980's people in the USA said the same kind of thing about: "Cheap plastic crap made in Taiwan." and then again with Japan in the 1990's and now its China post 2000. To me this just proves that it has not much to do with the Chinese and everything to do with how we feel about ourselves. (I think this is true of at least the "anglosphere" and perhaps Germany and other nations as well.)

[@tzohardwareandtools5037]

Well done Sir! Thank you for showing the scenery along the way.

[@sgt.grinch3299]

China has done very well in 30 years. At a certain point the optimal design looks the same no matter who designed the product. The only variable is the spectrum of priorities. Great video.

[@bf050173]

you are ABSOLUTELY right!!! Thanks for the nice analysis... Greetings from Serbia

[@donaldduck7628]

With the thousands of technologies involved in each and every system these days, while form may follow function, the substance can't be created based on shape. Technology goes quite deeper than that. It is clear a 3D printed part may be the same shape and materials, but the fundamental properties are completely different from a finished manufactured product, as an example. That is hust one of millions of examples. China can't really copy much because their infrastructure is not a one to one match, no matter how they try. They have to develop their own version, and while they have a guide in a sense,at best, they have to work within their own environment, which has its own set of characteristics and tradeoff considerations.

[@chadbernard2641]

Great video. I get so much hate in forums for defending false facts about SU-57, or telling truth about F-35 . People usually have no facts just emotional response and when you tell truth they accuse you of being Kremlin troll or something. Just as they do when you speak about China or Russia. That is why I think this best fighter channel on KZbin. Just wish you had a million followers so you could do it more full time. Keep up the amazing work.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Thanks! Promote and share my videos on socials if you want to help me!

[@villageidiot8194]

As a propagandized westiod, I can only hear China is a poor farmers in mao suits. Anybody who says otherwise is a 50 Cent wumao

[@mcal27]

Ignore any haters! I subscribe and joined your patreon simply because you were/are the most unbiased channel on Military tech I could find.. safe travels!

[@arthurwright8827]

In the same way that fighter planes all tend to start looking alike as they get more advanced. Aerodynamics is a constant so there are only a finite number of shapes that can move efficiently through the air. As research shows which shapes are the most effective for flight characteristics and stealth abilities the choices will get smaller and smaller. as to your point on, I think you called it second tier engineers, they would definitely get the benefit of seeing the first tiers solutions. Though the shape alone is only a tiny piece of the puzzle.

[@antoniohagopian213]

Why copy a pathetic f15 when you can copy a su27.

[@rustygates3367]

That would suck, because your Su-27 copy would get knocked out of the sky by the F15. Joint exercises between China and Thai resulted in their J-11, Su-27 copies being smashed by Thai air force SAAB Gripens. What chance does it have against the legendary F-15. The Su's are as useful as the Su-35 debris you find in the Ukraine war.

[@oxvendivil442]

@@rustygates3367 They improved lots from that time/they only got beat in the freestyle competition, I would not say the same at this point in time in the present, China actually beat Russia in their last military exercise as far as air combat is concerned except air to ground competition and they used their J-10s in those exercises which is not as good performance wise as their J-11s and Su-27s. Practice and doctrinal change impacts the results just the same as technology. The only way to ascertain is to wait for a war where Chinese jets would be engaged with US jets like the legendary F-15 to make the final conclusion.

[@kevinl2482]

@@rustygates3367 That’s the problem though, the Chinese used the J-11A, probably their worst 4/4.5 gen fighter in their arsenal against the Gripens. Honestly from the moment I read that I knew that the Gripens would win. Just think about the age difference between J-11As and the Gripen C

[@TheOne30264]

@@rustygates3367 It's actually not the plane but the missile system with beyond visual range targeting system. The west is going insane if they China can match them their. In some way they have match them there because China invested heavily on their missile system such as the PL-15. What they are really lacking is training to fight with that advantages. In the dog fight with Thai fighter, the Chinese dominated. I think they realized their mistake and trying to accelerate their training in that department.

[@stretch3281]

In my experience it is normally narrow minded biased people who accuse others of bias, politicians for example. Keep doing what you do 👌

[@elmersbalm5219]

A good example would be the development of rocket engines. The US lost knowhow in building heavy lift engines. They have the documentation, better science and technology. Still, to build new ones, the technical gap is so big that it is better to build new. The SLS is using refurbished shuttle engines. Even after such a long development process.

[@belluh-1huey102]

Thing is, there isn't a need to do so.

[@fatdoi003]

but it seems however much NASA spent, Elon can do it better and cheaper....

[@xsu-is7vq]

@@fatdoi003 big government projects always become wealth sharing projects once congress gets to “oversee” the development.

[@KSmithwick1989]

@@xsu-is7vq What people don't seem to realize private industry owns the government. Most of this inefficiency that economic libertarians point out, is by design. They don't address it for purely ideological reasons. Although it's obvious tax payer money is filtered to the private market. Whether it be in the form of grants, tax credits, and foreign technology transfers. The civilian space industry is based on the US government handing over Soviet RD-160 engines. They simply chose fronts to lead the industry. Which would be promoted by politically connected PR firms.

[@outman6207]

As a Chinese, a Chinese really study some history of PRC, I believe I am qualified to talk about history briefly. Basically one man build everything, Mao and his strategy. Ending civil war as soon as possible to avoid a divisive China before Soviet or USA step in(Soviet wanted CCP stay in north instead of attacking south, which made sence b/c CCP was weaker one by the time). Then he decided to go to war with USA/United nations army in North Korean to gain national security, then gain the respect and support from Soviet Union with all industrial foundamentals projects(even Nuclear tech included). Well, thats also part because of nature of Communist culture, when they still help each other a little. Meanwhile, Mao's Land Reform Movement also provide enough labour force to all the industrial projects.(Which why Indian cant never become to industrial country now) He is also the inventor of strategy of "5 years plan" then this become basically every single plan-form for every national project, and it works well . Then Culture Revolution, even though it wasnt correct, even though it was taken advantages by two other bad political groups, still, it was a pre-revoluntion of Chinese Economic Reform. Now you see, why western society hate Mao so much. Same as Stalin, who made Russian strong as top player from argriculture country. And why everybody sing for Mandela, who gave up Nukes tech for his country.

[@laracroft938]

It's a bit disingenuous to say China doesn’t have people who can work on complex western technology. In the US, chinese students make up the largest foreign national group in Engineering universities. Many aerospace and biotech students go back to China to work for government owned labs. So, China definitely has experts who can put stolen technologies to use.

[@kalas2320]

Aircraft have both software and hardware parts. Purely copying from others is the most difficult thing to do. How can you construct an aircraft structure to have a similar state space model for flight control of the original aircraft since the software details cannot be seen? If it is possible to copy, the middle-east countries who are so rich would do it in 80's or 90's. Learning to design from scratch is much easier. Learning with a mentor like Russia is even more efficient. China started their national strategic plan called "The National Medium- and Long-Term Program for Science and Technology Development (2006-2020)" in 2006. It is now the payback period. Look for the article "China’s 15-year plan for science and technology-a critical assessment" for some details.

[@fatdoi003]

yep and now the MSM saying US missiles can now be fired from Ukrainian/USSR planes..... like putting NATO rounds into AK....

[@miquelescribanoivars5049]

Israel: Is not a copy if you sell it willingly!

[@shmeckle666]

The projection from Westoids over China is, well, projection. It happens with insecurity lmao

[@sohrabroozbahani4700]

So there is a king sitting troubled on his throne, and he has two advisers, one is constantly telling him everything will be fine, his enemies are nothing but imbeciles and even if they could eventually put together a plan to invade his kingdom king doesn't need to worry himself, the enemy is so stupid that they just fall over their faces and die on their own, king should just keep the party going, nothing to ever worry about, the walls are tall, the arrows are sharp and plenty and god watches over the king and his Kingdom, then there is the other adviser who tells the king that he should never take his enemies lightly because if the enemy eventually proves them wrong the outcome will be utter disaster... yeah, I can clearly see who is the patriot and who is the traitor in that scene... thank you...

[@wdfaseer5898]

F35B copied directly from Yak141

[@pashapasovski5860]

Creativity is for artists, but building weapons is a fair game, everyone steals from everyone else

[@chengong388]

Because real world technology is not a tech tree item you click and you can instantly build it in the factories. China can get a original copy of the complete blueprint of say an US jet engine, if the information is complete sure they'll be able to make one copy but to manufacture it on scale is another matter. It's doable but neither fast nor easy for China, but if it was some other country they simply won't be able to manufacture it regardless of how complete the information they have.

[@peterweller8583]

Loa Tzu water seeks its own level. Sun Tsu "avoid doing battle where you have no advantage." War is destructive and wasteful and if you are wise avoidable.

[@Pincer88]

Never mind the accusations and blows below the belt M7*. Careful analysis and prudence generally are only confused with cowardice or 'unpatriotic' attitudes by those who are fanatical. Fanaticism according to Georges Santayana: "Redoubling your efforts when you forgot your aim." Good thing you do not join in with the comunis opinio.

[@etwas013]

It is an interesting topic. I assume many dismiss investigating the topic also due to fear what truths might be disclosed in regards to "Western" technological development. 2/3rds of all post grad positions in the US are filled by non-Americans. In the field of natural sciences the ratio is likely even more pronounced. Among them are by far most numerous Europeans and East Asians. So already talking about "American" technology is very problematic. Many inventions made by the Chinese on American universities end up in American equipment, as American technology. When these people bring the knowledge back to China, can it be called a copy? I think not.

[@zcoosa1648]

How many of these Chinese inventors have US citizenship? Your definition of an "American" must be white anglo saxon when in fact America is a melting pot, always has been whereas China has a large overwhelmingly homogeneous population as it always has been. A Chinese, indian, Pakistani ect can gain citizenship in the US and be able to proudly say "I am an American". Hard to resist the land of freedom and opportunity.

[@vincentlamolinara9476]

Wrong question - we all copy each other in everything, especially military where creativity is hard and expensive. Right question - is the “tool” going to work considering ALL of the variables: resources, training, technology, will to fight, cost…etc.

[@yang5159]

5G6G, artificial moon. Sun. Beidou, space station, land on moon, mard df misdiles, thousands more

[@swisstestpilot]

I love your videos and your videos always have a neutral point of view without political prejudice. Its just military /aviatic facts.

[@cannonfodder4376]

Another informative video M7, very nicely explained the limitations of copying and the Second Mover Advantage in the modern age. It certainly makes things easier in the sense that with a end goal now known to be feasible, one can work toward it with some sense of what to do and how. But Reverse Engineering and Copying is actually a very, very complex task. Especially for high technology items, for one must essentially learn and build the tools to build the tools to build the plane or other object. And the amount of learning required to understand it all... developing and retaining that human capital becomes essential and its its lost... There is a passage in a fan rewrite of the Honorverse novel Mission of Honor that nicely encapulates the real vulnerability of human capital in such military and industrial endeavors. *“We still have complete, daily backups of all their work. But we no longer have the people who understood that work. We’ve lost our entire brain trust between the age of, say, thirty and one hundred. In short, we are looking at a seventy year long ‘shadow’ on our R&D efforts. Actually, given that institutional knowledge is passed down person to person, it’s going to be…essentially a permanent deficit. We’ll recover, but we’ll never be as far ahead as we would’ve been.”*

[@joemeyer6876]

I was expecting Otis in the back seat. Good video!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

He insisted on going on holiday with the microwave.

[@Ni999]

​@@Millennium7HistoryTech No doubt they're cooking up trouble!

[@joemeyer6876]

I enjoyed the talk, especially the notion that there are no more small team designs, only CATIA mind hives. Every country arrives at milestones differently: stealth, super cruise, hypersonics , etc., copying is sometimes just an attempt to catch up. What has China Innovated?

[@cliffordterry2133]

Again, another great video, Thank You, but also a very necessary one. I suspect, but I cannot prove that this 'copying' meme stems from inner fears of China becoming a dominant technological power. Considering that China graduates FOUR MILLION more qualified science, technology, engineering, and mathematics graduates every year than any other country means that China is on the inexorable path to world dominance in this area. Also, back after the Apollo I disaster, I heard the comment that today is more true than ever, yet is so obvious that it is overlooked - 'the job of the engineer is to solve problems.' Thus, in light of this comment we understand that in order to successfully retro-engineer something, you have to establish all of the problems that the original engineers overcame. Most of the problems are readily apparent but there are many that simply are not. Interestingly, in the 1990's, a British museum was attempting to restore to flight a WW II German Me109 fighter and they discovered to their dismay that they could find no one capable of doing that because of the problems that were found in trying to manufacture a new crankshaft for the engine. And the technology for that fighter plane was 55 years old!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Interesting anecdote

[@martinolivera3580]

I agree. Really good observation and better yet synthesis.

[@EdgewiseSJ]

Bruh. Don't take the internet noise overly seriously.

[@whiskeysk]

i was about to quote James May here, but voila, he's right there in the video! :)

[@Gemini73883]

Copying was easy when technology levels and standards were low. As complexity rises the ability of copiers to copy goes down. This is because the tech levels of copiers has to rise, just to understand what they're looking at. At some point the copiers realise that it may be less hassle to design their own. Don't forget it takes longer to copy a design.

[@anasevi9456]

it must be infuriating as a Swiss and seeing the leaders sell out the countries reputation to own current baddie.

[@fatdoi003]

Swiss banks ain't secure no more.....

[@user-mt1xj1zd8u]

Europe still uses paper bills for road tolls. We ( India) have fasttag that allows us to pay our tolls digitally without waiting for more than a few seconds. It automatically scans your fasttag I'd and withdraw the amount from the user's account. So we donot have to leave from our vehicle and collect paper slips. Love those beautiful streets and icy mountains in europe

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I had to leave because it is a right-hand side driver car in a country that drives on the right.

[@user-mt1xj1zd8u]

@@Millennium7HistoryTechsorry if I am just writing to much but I saw that the bill you took was a paper bill but here we just got notification on mobile phones that certain amount( INR 45 for small 4 wheeler ) has been withdrawn from your fasttag I'd.

[@lagrangewei]

@@user-mt1xj1zd8u tag is not new technology. if you want to be impress, Singapore doesn't even need toll at all. you can drive at full speed and the system still capture it and charge you according.

[@superjit6190]

@@user-mt1xj1zd8u still Europe roads have more lanes and have better roads

[@stevenvandenbosch5528]

@@user-mt1xj1zd8u That exists in europe aswell, but not everyone has those tags

[@UmarFarooq-nl4eq]

Americans : China Copied Our F-35 China : Laught At Russian Yak-141 VTOL System..

[@almerindaromeira8352]

For the amount of people it has, china should be number 1 in innovation. My guess is that chinese culture doesn't promote it that much and we are just beginning to see this change.

[@maximme]

Apple copies EVERYTHING it does. Mp3 was a direct copy of Creative Labs, etc. nothing Apple does is original.

[@lightberry1197]

Being right doesn't mean politically correct, that's why..

[@douginorlando6260]

I think China doesn’t just copy, they learn from other countries’ mistakes and avoid copying. China must be learning tons of what works and doesn’t work the last few months … and why. It will be interesting to see what changes they make based on recent events, including reallocation of develop and acquisition efforts

[@fatdoi003]

Chinese make mistakes, tons of them but with the way of government, they can change policies very quickly whilst those democratic countries keep making the same mistakes over n over again....

[@merocaine]

We come for your take, not the comments dude, keep on rocking

[@RaZeCoXe]

Erano mesi che mi chiedevo se tu fossi Italiano lol, finalmente posso metterci una pietra sopra! Spero di continuare a guardare video esclusivamente in inglese ora che sto per ri-trasferirmi in Italia dopo aver vissuto anni e anni in Inghilterra! Complimenti per I video ed il canale!

[@Dare2Blink]

I still amused when the f35 is shown like some kind of achievement or even as a good aircraft. It is so far shown itself to be nothing more than an overly complex system prone to constant failure which is extremely expensive to maintain and operate.

[@92HazelMocha]

Lockheed has poured a lot of time and money into making sure its seen as a great success.

[@andrewlim7751]

That's why the American's car are not a reliable as the japanese ones.

[@simonyip5978]

Most Chinese 'copies' are actually more advanced than the originals. The HQ-9/HQ-16/HQ-17 are all much more capable than the S-300/Buk/Tor SAM systems from Russia. The J-16/J-11B are much better than the Su-27/30. The same applies for most Chinese versions of foreign designs.

[@ViceCoin]

There are millions of open source patents.

[@Ni999]

Pretty good job! 👍 And aside - my heart skipped a beat at the glimpse of that snow, so beautiful!

[@danielhandika8767]

they only copying stuff when they need something quickly, they can make something original if they don't feel any urgency

[@acoustic5738]

Urgency kinda defines de comunist chineese party for me, but OK.

[@danielhandika8767]

@@acoustic5738 what I mean is that they need to catch up very quickly but once they understand the technology they start to make something unique to their need

[@kustovas]

its so easy to copie geometry, but what to do with materials, even if you know refractory steel formula, you must develope everything from begining or steal compleat tecnology(and its will not work normal)

[@onogrirwin]

The US doesn't seem to value long range air to air engagement capability. Is this a correct assessment? Why? We retired the aim-54 a long time ago, didn't replace it, and now, we're finally getting a new missile in the aim-260, but it's going to have the same dimensions as the aim-120. If it's going to be a solid rocket then I can't understand how they could get 50% more deltaV than the aim-120. There haven't been any significant increases in solid rocket propellant or motor technology that I'm aware of. The aim-260 can be made lighter, sure, but I have a hard time imagining a 50% increase in range from making a missile that is already lightweight even lighter. Another part of the long range engagement question is the kinematic performance of the plane. The F-22 is being phased out, the F-35 is not remotely suited to the role... what's that leave, F-15C/EX? Meanwhile the russians have MiG-31BM, the best plane in the world for this role by a large margin. The Chinese have J-20, which while much slower, is also a low RCS aircraft. The MiG-31BM has also shown how useful such a plane can be with it's recent use of the KH-47M2. My country doesn't seem able to do that... Seems clear to me that we have made a commitment to a doctrine that says we don't need this capability. Why?

[@92HazelMocha]

It seems like you're mixing things up here; the aim120D was supposed to have 50% more "range" over the aim120c7. The intent was to shrink the electronics which would make more room for fuel and as a result give the missile more "range" (range is very complicated when it comes to air to air missiles so I'm simplifying). The Aim260 will not be the same as the aim120 in any regard and will likely use a system similar to the Meteor; a variable thrust ducted rocket using a spontaneously combustible liquid fuel. The target range of the aim260 is about double that of the original target for the aim120D. As far as doctrine; the aim54 was dumped because it was heavy, expensive, and not particularly reliable. Also at the time it's range was unnecessary. Keep in mind that in the time of the aim54, the aim7 was the standard with a max range of about 20-25nm. A missile that could hit a target at 140nm was just unneeded, especially when they only worked about half the time. Since the aim54 left service a need for a long range missile never re-appeared until now. The amraam was the longest range missile in service other than the R37, which itself had a host of problems similar to the aim54. Only in recent years with the emergence of the PL15, R37M, and Meteor did the need arise again.

[@onogrirwin]

@@92HazelMocha Yes, but the need has arisen again. Also, you mention that the aim-260 is going to use an air breathing motor? That certainly would change things. Although it's not obvious why heavy, expensive and unreliable is a mark against the aim-54. It represents a capability not offered by other options. That's worth a hefty price tag. And the US military usually is willing to pay. Look at the history of stealth planes. As far as heavy goes, that's an issue for takeoff/landing for carrier fighters. Not for planes that land on runways. When you're supersonic, the added weight means a very, very small amount of extra induced drag, so small that the drag of the missile itself is almost certainly larger. As for unreliable... it's not. As air to air missiles go, 50% is not bad at all. What costs more, using 2 or 3 aim-54 class missiles to shoot an AWACS down, or closing to amraam range and losing one or more aircraft? I'm also somewhat skeptical that air breathing solutions are actually better than simply using a big solid rocket motor. Solids are cheap, simple, reliable, and critically, they work fine at any mach number. air breathing motors don't necessarily work as well at higher mach numbers. I say only somewhat skeptical because I'm not dismissive of air breathing missile propulsion, but there's a reason that almost all missiles use solids. Energetic liquid propellants are always trouble, and I can't imagine the navy is happy about having them on board. In 1998(?) Russia lost a boomer in the Mediterranean due to energetic liquid propellants used in one of it's torpedo systems.

[@92HazelMocha]

@@onogrirwin Normally you'd be right; air breathing systems and energetic liquid fuels have had a pretty poor track record. That's what makes the meteor, and soon the aim260 so revolutionary. Meteor has been around for a good bit now and not only does it not have the issues that normally come with aforementioned characteristics, but it's performance is about twice conventional systems of the same size across every single metric. As for the weight and reliability, the problem is that the weight and size mean far fewer can be carried and the low reliability means more are needed per target. This essentially reduces the capabilites of the individual birds carrying them, especially now with tightly packed pylons bristling with amraams. To answer your question, the thought was that a Hornet with 10 amraams can splash an awacs' escort, then the awacs and still have ordinance to continue fighting or at a minimum fight off fighters coming in to respond. The amraams incredible reliability and insanely high kill ratio (especially compared to its contemporaries) basically meant red aircraft just wouldn't stand a chance, while still being massively outranged so the aim54 was far more of a liability than an asset. Times have changed however and now the need to have a much better missile has arisen, but in its time the amraam was king.

[@onogrirwin]

@@92HazelMocha That explains it a bit more. I must say I'd love to see exactly how the meteor's propulsion system works, in a quantitative sense. I'll probably have to wait 50 years for that tho :P

[@92HazelMocha]

@@onogrirwin You and me both! The most obnoxious part is that it could revolutionize space travel as one of the biggest constraints to getting into orbit is having to bring a massive amount of oxidizer, something the meteor has managed to get around. We can only hope MDBA will sell the fuel formula to the ESA or Space X one day.

[@doc0core]

Doh! You've gone and done it, now you will never see Otis again!

[@tranquoccuong890-its-orge]

there is a problem with underestimating china's technological capability if the west believe that china could not create something on their own, only copying, then when china suddenly brings out a new technology that does not originate from the west and cannot be analyzed based on available data of western equivalents that is underestimation of the enemy, and its bad in a war its unknown if how much china could create things on their own, but would you want to be prepared to face china even when they dont have technological perks, or to face china unaware of their possible technological perks ?

[@wisenber]

"but would you want to be prepared to face china even when they dont have technological perks" Most sane people would prefer that there isn't a war. China's prior history has shown its willingness to sacrifice its people to overcome any disadvantage. Ongoing development of new deterrent military technology is what helps avoid it.

[@wisenber]

@@peterseth3296 "Like American sacrifice losing millions of young lives in American Civil war, ww1, ww2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, " The two century combined total is less than China lost in three years in NK, so no, it's not like that.

[@wisenber]

@@peterseth3296 The US Civil War had around 600k. Care to compare that the Chinese Civil War?

[@wisenber]

@@peterseth3296 My original comment didn't mention the US Civil War. You brought that up. There would not be a comparison if you didn't bring it up.

[@wisenber]

@@peterseth3296 "Your original comment wasn't about comparing US vs Chinese civil war deaths, but about sacrifice." Being the author the the comment, I can say it was China's willingness to throw bodies at a battle more than the US. If you didn't want to include China's civil war (let alone the Cultural Revolution) in the last century, then don't bring up a conflict from the US from over 175 years ago. "But why guess-estimate about past war deaths, when we know US sacrifices their young in the last 20 years in the Middle East?" Why stick to your original point when you can fall back on false equivalence, right? We do know the US spends orders of magnitude more on equipment for the purpose of personnel safety. That's what happens when a government actually has to be concerned about the domestic reaction at home.

[@biochemwang2421]

Anyone with enough brain cells understands it is not copying, it is called "inspired". It would be rather ignorant for a designer/engineerer not to learn from others.

[@djmicrowave6073]

Ayyy first view , love ur content mate

[@511132123211356]

when someone copy one simple music phrase from MJ, it's COPY! but when someone copy the whole ability and art 100% exactly at the high end level of MJ, it's a Master, not that "COPY".

[@Tentacl]

Discovered yout channel yesterday and really like the content. And yes, trying to avoid bias is of paramount importance - and also refreshing.

[@jg3000]

J-10-Influenced by Israeli Lavi jet. (Western.) J-11-Russian Flanker influence. (Eastern.) J-15-Russian Flanker influence. (Eastern.) J-16-Russian Flanker influence. (Eastern.) J-20-The most original design they have. At least visually. Influences debatable. But F-22 and MIG 1.44 seem to be the influences. (Eastern and Western.) FC-31-F-35 and F-15 influence. (Western.) H-6-TU-16. Russian influence. (Eastern.) H-20- Flying wing like B-2. (Western.) "All China makes is western copies." False. If there is copycat technologies it is coming from the eastern block 5 to 4.

[@howso5302]

Just normal mutual learning in the whole history of human kind. Egypt learn from Babylon, Greece learnt from Egypt, Rome learnt from Greece and then Science thrive in EU, US learnt from Europe, Now China learnt from US. Relatively， China 100 yrs ago were more independent for Tech in its history even though Buddhism philosophy was partially incorporated into its culture 2000 yrs ago,

[@Joe_Not_A_Fed]

There are huge advantages in knowing what is possible but that doesn't get the stealth fighter made. That would be like saying that a FIAT 500 is a copy of a Ferrari because they both have 4 tires, an engine and a steering wheel. And that just covers the form. Copying the function is orders of magnitude more difficult. Is the F-22 a copy of the Me-262? After all, they are both twin jets with swept wings. An example of how difficult it is to copy an existing product is the Chinese ARJ-21 passenger jet. It is as close to a direct copy of the MD-80 as it's possible to get. The ARJ looks identical to the MD. In fact the only detectable differences are the work the Russians put in to make the wing more efficient and the engines...which were off the shelf GE's...and the engines and wings are by far, the most technologically difficult bits to develop. It took them decades to get even a few planes off the ground and I don't think any actually saw regular service. If copying an aircraft was easy, this one should have been a slam dunk because some MD-80's were assembled under license in China. They literally had an MD-80 factory and they still couldn't make it work. Their experience gave them a leg up but what they were missing was the engineering and technical expertise. They knew the how...but without the why...the project dead ended. They have taken those lessons to heart. As their designs and manufacturing get more sophisticated, the more the appearance of Chinese homegrown aircraft differ from their western counterparts. They now copy less and they innovate more.

[@jg3000]

J-20 doesn't look like American aircraft. It seems influenced by MIG 1.44 and F-22. If China were an artist J-20 would be considered original. Influences aside.

[@mike4769]

The best Chinese military R&D is done in the United States.

[@aakashjana6225]

I am one of those people who actually marvel at the level of reverse engineering the Chinese can do and their attention to detail. Let's keep high tech fighter jets aside for a moment. Just say Bluetooth earphones, when apple came out with their airpods it was pretty much a monopoly as no other company offered something in such a packaging or atleast had popularity. Within 6 months one could find Chinese clones of the airpods and for every increment in price bracket the earphones would more so resemble the airpods until the one that came as the most expensive clone had hardly any difference from the originals and still came at a fractional cost of original airpods. Any other major company took atleast a full year and a half before they could finally enter the market with something comparable. Reinventing can take time, improvising while Reinventing takes even more. And the Chinese understand that and so they first make a something that resembles as close as possible often by taking apart the original. Now in a space like proprietary military tech it's obvious one can't do much reverse engineering in practice but can always make a replica with guts that try to achieve the original's features. This is my little layman's understanding feel free to correct me. Instead of calling them cheaters we should learn from them to be better at our job.

[@aakashjana6225]

If you think carefully cloning something like airpods takes some of the similar kind of technology capabilities like ASIC design and manufacturing tech like replicating a array radar

[@CaptMikey-vc4ym]

Sometimes it doesn't matter if it is a copy or not. Why re-invent the wheel? The subsonic bomber is a bomb truck. The Xian H-6K fills this role just about as well as the B-52. Any good “bomb truck” can carry the standoff weapons as well as any other bomber. China wise, they have the AG600, the US does not. Who is ahead of who?

[@bigman23DOTS]

There is way more to an airforce then just copying planes.But knowing what the other guys have doesn’t hurt.

[@joecool2501]

is this a reason china hasn't caught up with the west in terms of military capability, it doesn't have the internal expertise to produce these systems yet?

[@amos325]

your Indian viewers are in deep disbelief now