J-10 FIREBIRD: I dug DEEP into the sources and here is what we know. - The Long Version

The J-10 is the workhorse of the Chinese Air Force. This video is a summary of what we know about the J-10. It is a long version of the series about the J-10 already published.
#J10 #PLAAF
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Mille...
Join the Discord server / discord
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0
--------------------
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.

[@RocketPropelledMexican]

PLA opsec is quite impressive tbh, given how frequently they catch other intelligence services off guard even with mundane developments

[@karlchilders5420]

how does that make THEIR OPSEC good? It means OTHERS have poor OPSEC. IT shows how desperate and stupid they really are, that they can't innovate on their own, they have to steal to get anywhere. Well, you can't steal everything.... That's what they have learned, the hard way.

[@famousraperandrapperkriswu656]

Greetings from China. Great video. It's hard to imagine a western blogger with such a deep dive into Chinese fighter jets on youtube. respect

[@cl4998]

Shouldn't you be in the gulag for being on KZbin?

[@tannen3339]

lol that name bro

[@user-lb8bg6kj9m]

i thought YT is banned in China.

[@ronmaximilian6953]

"The official Chinese name is vigorous dragon, which sounds like a male performance enhancing drug." I don't think my neighbors were happy at me laughing this early in the morning.

[@ultramarsfinest1536]

The pilots took those before flying so they don't get blood pressure rush from high g.

[@woc-fh6jr]

只能说明你思想比较猥琐，才会想到那方面

[@heyidiot]

CCP: _"Vigorous Dragon!"_ NATO: _"Firebird."_ CCP: _"Why didn't WE think of that!?"_

[@DeanZYT]

It's a horrible translation, but a hilarious one nonetheless, lol.

[@Ken-no5ip]

Its a variable body blood volume modulator ;)

[@vickydroid]

Bravo, just the distraction I needed doing chores, Chinese aircraft are sufficiently different to be interesting, their systems too. Don't mind revisiting a topic if they're interesting.

[@braddavis4377]

Yes I agree 👍 it will be cool to see what he says about the checkmate fighter. Good distraction for sure

[@blech71]

Another wonderful OSI brief my dood! Love the depth of your research.

[@cannonfodder4376]

Another good long-form video on a numerous yet understated aircraft of the PLAAF. Where the J-20 and Flanker's get all the attention, this bird is quietly doings its job and forming the backbone of the new PLAAF.

[@asiftalpur3758]

It's the pace of iterative improvement that's profound about PLAAF/N.

[@MRTY323]

Actually in PLAAF internal mock combats the Flankers got thrashed by J10s, they chalked it down to the smaller RCS of J10 I think.

[@weifan9533]

The J-10 project can be traced back all the way to the failed canard fighter project J-9 in the 1970's. Of course there might be some technology transfers from the west in the 1980's (not necessarily from Israel, could be France or US), but to say that the aircraft is a copy is just way far-fetched. Credit where credit is deserved. The Chinese took nearly 2 decades to develop the J-10, if it was a simple copy it wouldn't take that long.

[@Georgejoseph74]

Tx u for the in-depth video…very informative 👍🏻👍🏻

[@kakavdedatakavunuk8516]

Informative and interesting, as usual

[@wecare838]

*I commend the growing industrial power of China. They are now at a stage when they are even building their own jet engine capable of flying a full fledged modern fighter jet. Respect from India.*

[@karlchilders5420]

Their engines STILL suck, they STILL can't "steal" or copy someone else's metallurgy so that they can make reliable, solid engines that will make power and stay together more than a few hours. You give them respect eh? We shall see what you give them when they come and try to take your shit over, or when they side with Pakistan in a conflict between you and them. I'm sure you'll have a lot of " respect" for them then eh?

[@Wallyworld30]

*Doesn't India and China get into border conflicts using Melee weapons at border with Battle Axes, baseball bats wrapped in barbed wire and Shields?*

[@saleemkirmani5583]

The PLAAF might be close to fielding a stealthier version of J-10 C designated as J-10 D.

[@RobotNacionalista]

China have the ws 10 motor, ws 15 and ws 20 that are more powerful

[@karlchilders5420]

@@RobotNacionalista Says *who*? Them? They are just like the Russians in that regard. There is no press to hold them accountable for bullshit information. There is no public discourse or criticism of their programs. There is no sharing of information if they somehow "fail" (and they do, a LOT, especially with regards to engines..) and there is nothing but speculation because they won't verify or share data. I don't mean sharing their supposed "secrets". I am talking about basic stuff like "we're on target, we're doing (x) with (y) ". All they do is release these slick edited videos which are tantamount to little more than cheap propaganda. As I've said before, SHOW ME SUCCESS, I'll be there to congratulate them. They are not yet successful, thus they are worthy of scorn and derision given their deluded thinking regarding the global press and how they are covering their programs.

[@teashea1]

Another excellent analysis

[@simonyip5978]

I believe that the total number of Flankers (Su-27SK/UBK, Su-30MK2/MKK, Su-35, J-11/11A/11B/11D, J-15/15A, J-16/16D and the 2 seat trainers J-11BS?) in both the PLA Naval Aviation and the PLA Airforce, is between 600-700 aircraft. I believe that the J-10 variants total slightly less.

[@vrendus522]

Thanks for the info update :)

[@kevins5911]

Fantastic video, very informative. Thanks 👍

[@doncalypso]

I definitely enjoy the editing of multipart topics into those long-form format videos. More snarky comments from OTIS would be good though.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

OTIS took note of the comment.

[@doncalypso]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

[@garynew9637]

Haha

[@braddavis4377]

I have to say I appreciate your aircraft analysis, were you an aeronautical engineer? Good work!

[@heinzbongwasser2715]

I love your channel.

[@discoplumber]

I love how China has developed a system that looks like air refuling but actually sucks the back seat and passanger out at 15:12 awesome.

[@danielch6662]

Removing the passenger and his seat makes the plane more maneuverable. 🤣

[@Nachos237]

Best videos on jets

[@ArizonaAstraLLC]

Excellent video. I've always tried to be as well-versed in the J-10 and its variants as much as I can, and MAN, this is another excellent video from you. Keep them coming! The Gripen video was superb!

[@xmeda]

If you have good computational options for targeting you can achieve very good accuracy of bombardment even with cheap unguided bombs.

[@karlchilders5420]

like they say, "If IFS and BUTS were candy and nuts, oh what a wonderful Christmas we'd have!!!".... Their targeting software, if not stolen, is probably about as good as Jethro Bodine's computer programming skills.

[@zhli4238]

Thank you for the through explanation of J-10, and clarification of “copying”. You’re right that when things are too complex, the common sense of copying does not exist anymore. On copying again, towards the end of the video you showed deck crew launching jet off Chinese carrier, do hand gestures of the sailors remind you that of US Navies? Even that cannot be straightforwardly copied, because there would be training and certification programs for the Chinese.

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

Not sure, but i asume that these gestures are usually developed to be instictive and logical intrepetations of the actions required. That usually leads to simillar results in the end. The reason the usa navy uses them probably is because it is the most efficient way to do it that leads to the least mistakes, they have been doing it for a long long time already and had ample time to perfect it. Eventually everyone else looking for the most efficient way to do it which is least prone to mistakes will end up with a system that will look almost the same.

[@Solarbonite]

this comment aged well... turns out they copied the training and certification programs cause they went and hired one of the former US airmen. :D

[@lorenzoo90]

That's cool I see you have chosen to collaborate with someone else on your KZbin videos

[@Steve-yf9my]

Thanks!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Thank you so much! Much appreciated!

[@0MoTheG]

Ventral fins are both for supersonic and low speed directional stability.

[@scramjet7466]

6:37 i have a guess regarding why the wing looks like that. its because they had to use some kind of continuous beam spanning the wing and fuselage becuase they couldn't make the wing stiff for whatever reason. so to make space for the dsi intake, the internal beam had to connect to the top part of the fuselage (to leave clearance for the intake)

[@philoso377]

A word of canard wing configuration. Canard originated adding a fraction of total lift, an essential element in pitch stability and control for its first generation air craft. Modern fore wing do look like canard aren’t operated as canard but those who want to show off usually toss the term canard between their left/right hands. Modern fore fins are not for weight bearing or lift but are reduced to steering function, which shouldn’t be call canards. Practically fore fins originate from leading edge flaps in the main wind. It can be regarded as a fore jib of a sailing yacht.

[@nickhimaras9331]

Another extremely well-made and presented piece! BTW the gun fires at 3400 RPM (per minute, not "per second"). Tiny nitpick.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Yep, my mistake, there was the correction in red on the screen.

[@alanfenick1103]

I remember when the Russian MIG-27 defected to Japan! At first glance by the CIA, Air Force and Navy they called it a primitive aircraft as it lacked all the bells and whistles of Western designs. It took the Army to call the aircraft “incredible” and other positive acculades. What the West failed to see and the Army found was a serviceable aircraft that could be repaired by minimally trained personnel almost anywhere in the world. The use of steel in place of exotic metals, tube (valve) electronics, simple radar detectors. The example the Army gave was if a piece of electronics failed it could be replaced in the field and not have to be returned to the manufacturer or depot. Basically it was Western prejudice that interfered in seeing the total picture (design) of a great aircraft. The Western prejudice that interferes with a true evaluation of a Chinese aircraft and other military designs. There have been many Chinese failures, bout there have been some very interesting positive, brilliant designs. Thanks for your objective evaluations it’s refreshing. Sorry for being too wordy!

[@yzdatabase4175]

25

[@karlchilders5420]

MiG-25, not 27...

[@emonsuparman9248]

SU-27 too ...surprise 🇯🇵 and 🇺🇸 in 1988, in the end of cold war era

[@paulbellas8797]

The mig Mig 29 and SU 27 were both considered very formidable aircraft of their time. No idea where you get this impression that western countries thought they were crap. Russia always was at parity with the US until their collapse in the 90’s

[@wrongturn3485]

Please make a detailed video on jf 17 thunder block 3

[@patrickchase5614]

The other key attribute of an LPI radar that you didn't mention at 17:30 is spread-spectrum or broadband transmissions. By distributing each pulse's energy over a wide range of frequencies known only to the radar, you make it difficult to detect for anybody else who doesn't know that "spectral fingerprint". Basically it just looks like low-amplitude random noise to anybody who doesn't know how to decode it. Note that this is different from pulse-to-pulse agility, wherein each pulse has high amplitude in a certain frequency or range, but every pulse is different. The catch of course is that spread spectrum is somewhat in tension with coherency as required for MTI. Excellent point at 19:30 about radar "brochure ranges". The J-10's specs sound a bit "sandbagged" to me. The Chinese have good microelectronics (better than the Russians) and I would expect this radar to be in the range of first-generation Western AESAs.

[@daniyardilimulati8420]

8:23 it was also around this time that a Chinese navy admiral said that the Chinese gen 5 was a “J-10 Kai”

[@ronparty19]

Does the refueling probe permanently stick out like that (a la the A-4)? Or was that just on early iterations. I would think that might affect RCS?

[@Chrisknot94]

While I don't know anything about ARINC in particular, having worked with a few communication protocols, I don't see a reason why it wouldn't suffice. The requirements in both applications are very similar. The systems on an airplane need to be highly robust, reliable, redundant and able to resolve diverging data from it's redundant systems. (eg. it needs to be able to resolve the conlict of two speed meters showing mach 0.8 and one speed meter showing m1.5.) If it fails at one of these aspects, it will sooner or later fall out of the sky or emergency land, either way resulting in a possibly business destroying PR desaster - think Boeing 777-Max. The only difference to a fighter jet is that it has more systems on the bus (radar, weapons, etc.) From an IT/networking point of view I see no reason why ARINC would be less suitable than the military standard you mentioned. Also it is probably more accessible than the western military standard - fewer issues with dual use, export bans, etc. Clearly the chinese agree ;)

[@abbkrabbkr3218]

30:14 What of the r33/r37?

[@cl4998]

Why is the fueling system static rather then being dynamic ( ie static vs retractable) like similar western fighters? Forgive my vernacular as I am not an very familiar with this field.

[@tyrantfox7801]

The French never bothered about making it retractable. Just look at the rafal , mirage 2000

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

Priorities i guess. They had enough to develop already. And making such a thing reliable probably seems easier then it in reality is.

[@vladimirmihnev9702]

"Men performance enhancement" Lol that is a classic!

[@chemiker494]

To what extent are MIL STD 1553 and ARINC 429 compatible? Could a pitot tube, or a GPS receiver be made to use either, or both?

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

They are not. I believe it could be, in theory, possible to build dual standard sensors, but I don't have direct experience.

[@chefchaudard3580]

It boils down to two things: - hardware (communication Integrated Circuits) that must be compatible with the bus. Those components are generally small and can be added easily to the PCB or made interchangeable. - software. Software is the most complex part. It boils down to two things: - the communication layer. This is the part that allow the sensor (or whatever device) to talk with the controller. It can be time consuming, but it is straightforward. And this layer can be reused on all devices, whatever there are. - the data that the device is supposed to provide, or process. For a pitot tube, it is fairly easy. You have a limited amount of information to receive and transmit (speed, heater temperature, heater on/off command, status...). For more complex devices, it would require more work. The big issue here is that devices don't necessarily have the same data to share. For example, the data you can transmit or receive for a Sidewinder is probably different from the ones for a PL15. It means that the controller must be updated to be able to process the data, commands and status available on a PL15. Imagine that as if a software engineer talks to a surgeon: they will speak the same language, let say English, maybe understand most of the other words, but they'll be unable to understand some of them and understand what phrases actually mean, unlike there are teached some software or surgery. This is more work than simply designing a physical interface between the device and the controller. My 2 cents...

[@jpierce2l33t]

@@chefchaudard3580 and a nice 2 cents that was! Thanks! Very informative. The software/surgeon analogy was especially creative and drew the picture very well, lol.

[@karlchilders5420]

@@chefchaudard3580 You are talking about a "protocol"... They lack a common interface such as an API, and also a "protocol" to make those communications possible between the two systems. The standards are only capable of inter-communications between themselves, not each other.

[@chefchaudard3580]

@@karlchilders5420 didn't want to go into too much details and delve into the various communication layers. What you refer to is what i tried to explain with my software engineer/surgeon analogy. There are some software/API/interfaces available from Holt, for example. But, even when using an from the shelves solution, it still requires some manhour... specially with old systems that were designed when an API was not even a thing and we had to deal with the existing software and the protocol.

[@thunderlegion2484]

Why does the discord link not work?

[@mikaelandpond9093]

Stupid question maybe,,, but way does not anyone put the air intake on the top of the plane of fighter jets, like on the B2 ??? For a more stealthy configuration ???

[@commie5211]

becaue high attack angle will chock the engine, which bomber does not do those things.

[@mikaelandpond9093]

@@commie5211 Okay, thanks for the answer :)

[@johnasbury3261]

If you look at the NASA f-16xl you will see the j10 it is almost a complete copy except for being far inferior the electronics and engine are not up to spec of the f-16xl but I will say this they did a good job for the resources they had one thing we can do in the u.s. is throw all the money in the world at it because we print it

[@voidtempering8700]

The two aircraft share very little in common aerodynamically, what are you talking about?

[@ZeeshanSaadiq]

👌

[@petera4476]

Is this a repost, with edits?

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

Reverse engineering is not neccessary easier than engineering. Imagine that you've got the answer, but you have to figure out the question.

[@darkofc]

👍

[@CausticLemons7]

It also looks like the F-16 and X-32. Similar looks are not the same as espionage or a copied design. Great info, thanks!

[@cujbaion1]

21:38 the display on the right shows western type horizont unlike russian aircrafts.

[@user-yp1cs5gt3u]

I guess that you must be from Russia :-)... I like your explanation of the J10... My father used to be MIG 15 and 17 pilot...

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I am Italian

[@nik978]

As an Italian, that never worked on his accent, I also get this Russian impression Video pazzesco. Bravo. Ed ora c'è la D In cantiere.

[@uygaruzunhasan8676]

What is that blinking eye?

[@sarfarazahmedlarik]

J-10C in Dual seat configuration...? Or "D"...?

[@AlyxMSC]

A dual seater J-10C would probably be J-10CS if it exists, following the pattern of J-10AS and J-11BS.

[@nicholasmaude6906]

R-77 - AA-12 Adder

[@defencebangladesh4068]

Re-Upload??

[@suisinghoraceho2403]

Good job clearing the difference between technology transfer and “just developing a variant of Lavi”. The J10 benefited significantly from Lavi development, but it is a totally different fighter.

[@alf3071]

so how do the stealth plane's radar works? do they have a converbible reflective cover that goes over the radar when it's turned off?

[@lordsqueak]

@17:49 ish I see why you record video outside,, it's to get away from OTIS interrupting you , isn't it ;)

[@none941]

Form follows function. An intake is an intake and depends on what you hope to achieve performance-wise. Saying that the Chinese can "copy' only is horseshit. Brilliant people exist all around this world. To say otherwise is either racist or an attempt at bullying. Either way, it is unbecoming to modern humans.

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

They just prefer that China copied.

[@scootiepatootie7721]

Well they are well known for stealing design ideas from the west and reverse engineering Russian tech so they don’t have to import it anymore so the stereotype was kinda earned

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

@@scootiepatootie7721 Mike Pompeo About CIA : We lied, We cheated, We stole

[@jackwilliam2965]

America has been taking intelligent educated people into US from around the world for years that have worked in every industry. Some of the scientist came from Iran etc..

[@jimrobcoyle]

​@@MarvinChenFantasy "We had classes..."

[@VandalIO]

do chinese j-10 has a better radar?

[@user-xx8oy1st9g]

中国的雷达比美国更先进，

[@henkbouwman516]

Where is Otis? In depot service?

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

He is working on the new series...

[@RMGX011]

Isn't it strange that we always thought that Chinese are smarter than us in academic especially MATH but some of us also underestimate their technology... 🤔

[@oleksandraverchenko9920]

Why it had no export success? Why develop a similar JF-17?

[@gsamov]

Despite me not being . . . Fond . . . Of the chinese government, I do have to commend them on being able to operate many more Stealth/Low Observable aircraft than russia has, Even if their generally worse than the Su-57, at least theres more than one squadron of them.

[@whtbobwntsbobget]

ANTONIO MEUCCI INVENTED THE TELEPHONE!

[@user-gv8xk6tj8h]

U do haircut in the middle of the video?

[@homeroperezvelez3417]

please talk more about rafale spectra stealth cancelation, the angloamericans say it´s just ordinary jamming

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

There is no publicly available info on the subject, I'm afraid.

[@pew6126]

Not to be critical but where is the evidence for the effectiveness os #Chinese AA & AG weapons? Ditto for guided weapons?

[@vladimirmihnev9702]

Q band.... Quentin confirmed! Urghhhh scarie

[@kennethcooper1378]

A-wax

[@direwolf7491]

Is this a reupload?

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

A long format of a series, several videos strung together. A quite large fraction of the viewers like them.

[@direwolf7491]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech I liked them too. Thank you for clarifying.😊 Will it be possible for you to draw a comparison between the EF Typhoon, Rafale and the J10C?

[@kalakhatta8652]

1 view 5 likes!!!!

[@artnull13]

YT counts views as those viewing the video for at least 30s It just means this channel has a lot of simps who don’t watch the video and just upvote.

[@tijotypo5252]

sometime i give a like before watching (if i plan to watch it). we all know its going to be a good video

[@braddbradd5671]

I suppose some one had to develop an LGBQ missile

[@parth0990]

Please make it for INDIA's TEJAS 🙏 and AMCA

[@donchen4906]

why makes video for something that IAF doesn't want or even non-exist

[@haikaloronsentnel138]

ILLUS!0N A!RCRAFT WANTS T0 BE EVALUAT!NG?!! ARE Y0U J0KES T0!LET END-!A?!!

[@chinmungkuan8551]

Just a paper jet nothing special 🤣😂

[@HashiramaSenyu]

An aircraft in name only. Meant to further inflate the already over-inflated indian egos.

[@guhankp5308]

This is easy to identyfy any radar easly by its front wing before TEJES j10 is nothing.

[@vladimirmihnev9702]

Well you can find smart people allover the world, but once they are found the USA usually takes them! Money talks! So does standard of living!

[@hrvojemikulcic7074]

Why not the US army build similar plane like J 10 Firebird!?

[@Marc-.]

X-31?

[@hrvojemikulcic7074]

@@Marc-. More like F 16 XL!?

[@Zetler]

Why would they? This plane is at least 30 years behind what the USAF actually wants. The example Americans have the largest fleet of active stealth fighters in world with numbers in the hundreds, if you include NATO and allied nations their stealth fighter production will be north of a 1000 with the F35 alone. Meanwhile the Russians have 2 and the Chinese barely a dozen 🙄 Despite this overwhelming advantage, the Americans are already looking forward to the next generation. Being the best just isn’t enough for the US, they must x10 or x100 any air opposition.

[@jpierce2l33t]

@@Zetler God I love this country 🇱🇷

[@jpierce2l33t]

@@Zetler actually, China has like over 100 J20s I believe...but still, pale in comparison to what America has.

[@artnull13]

Must be using a Huawei phone then.

[@cl4998]

😆

[@panyimao]

The j-10c electronic technology radar is better than the French Rafale. Pakistan should have a small Chinese system combat system. The j-10c or jf17 pl15 launch is guided by the early warning aircraft, and the a launch b guides the target. Even if the opponent is the US f22 and f35, it is not necessarily lost.

[@cl4998]

Shouldn't you be in a gulag for being on KZbin? Its illegal in China

[@randombully3798]

Your source?

[@zyxzevn]

How much of the knowledge and technology was imported in secret?

[@LordDigz12]

I’m sure China researched every possible 4th gen aircraft they could get their hands on. Especially smaller frame multirole fighters, IAI Lavi, Pakistani F-16s, MiG 29s, even the F-35 data breach probably helped with the radar/electronic warfare upgrades.

[@andreasjonsson8075]

A chineese jas gripen

[@commie5211]

Too many ppl asking whether their phone using beidou. in your smart phone there is one combined position sensor that can receives signal from all four gobal position systems. and Beidou is one of them. Regardless where you at you can always receive signal from at least 3 beidou satellites. If you do not like it throw your phone away. because every smart phone regardless who manufactured it will have that sensor.

[@sufianansari4923]

1:06 HA! HA! HA! Your right there all the names of the fighters sound similar to they type of "medicine" only the Chinese feel the need to drum up 2:24 didn't the Chinese worked with the US for a bit as well didn't they? Before Tienanmen Square?

[@jpierce2l33t]

While I agree with you, the Chinese have come a *long* way...(the PL-15 and the PL-21 are especially impressive) it's also been proven that they reverse engineered the Flanker back in the day, and its also known as fact that they hacked into American servers and got complete diagrams, specifications, blueprints, *everything* on the design of the F35. These are more than just 'pictures'. The evidence of info they obtained from this massive intrusion is seen in both the J20, and even more so in the upcoming FC-31. Not exact copies, but you cannot deny the obvious heavy influence. Great video tho, stock full of information and objectivity...nice! 👌 (and I'm not being facetious, this really is good!)

[@mjabb02]

what was stolen is not complete design but data from Lockheed subcontractor. The data is not necessarily only about design, probably just email between employee.

[@jpierce2l33t]

@@mjabb02 no they got a lot more than that. They haven't even released the total amount, because it really burned some folks..understandably. But they have said they got loads of design documents, blueprints, etc. And who knows what else...

[@panyimao]

This is the first time I heard that advanced technology countries steal technology from backward countries. If it is so easy to steal, are you Americans all waste? With the support of the Chinese system, your f35s and f22s are just a pile of rubbish, you are all living In the American fairy tale, and your Department of Defense knows how rubbish you are.

[@panyimao]

In the East China Sea, your f35s were beaten into turkeys by China. If during the war, your early warning aircraft and f35s would have been fed to fish.

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

Countries started with copy, that's also what Amercia and German did in the old days. Great countries go farther than copy, that's what China is doing now. And you just don't want to admit that.

[@practicalshooter6517]

Soon, the J10 will be sold to Russia lol

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

In exchange for?

[@digitalpostman]

@@MarvinChenFantasy oil and gas

[@joechan3388]

Copying is not efficient to develop those highly complicated planes, because there are so many details not obvious in their profound implication on performance. Most of those details depends on the material and workmanship capabilities that simply cannot be bypassed. Tracing the interrelationship between features and parts is simply talent and resource black holes. Even you manage to figure out all the ins and outs, you are already decades behind, you will never able to get ahead. Reinvent the wheel is way more efficient than copying, just like software development, never try to fix an bug in a piece of code, always reprogram the feature, trying to understand the buggy piece of codes then fix it is mentally killing, and it is the best way to get rid of a programmer.

[@syedtalha2848]

Pakistan bought recently these around 27 with +9 and +14 later on total of 50 J-10CE but I still think F-16 block 70s are still superiors over this Pakistan also have F-16 block 52s

[@emonsuparman9248]

J-10C+ is same specs of technology with F-16 Block 70 Bro ...but only for PLAAF

[@ultramarsfinest1536]

I hope future aircraft games use this thing as cannon fodders because it doesn't look aerodynamic at all.. Have a feeling it's a platform mainly for engine and weapons upgrades, it'll be pretty funny if the case is they use the quantity over quality tactics, send so many of these to the enemy lines that some will make through the defense for successful attacks..

[@streeteleven]

Right, just like US has around 2,231 F16s and planning to acquire over more than 2000 of F35s to act as cannon fodder, right? Quantity over quality just like you said.

[@ultramarsfinest1536]

@@streeteleven Bravo you just displayed the logical fallacies of Indians which is why the "tejas" is the laughingstock of recent generation aircraft, comparing the F35 to this is an insult because you seem to forgot or blatantly ignore the stealth and BVR factor.

[@miguelgil7266]

What the fuck are you talking about?

[@dabo5078]

@@ultramarsfinest1536 Sadly for you the J10 is currently better at BVR since it has the better missile and sometimes radar.

[@Sam-Lowry]

"... it doesn't look aerodynamic at all." actually Delta-Canard's like the J10 are way more aerodynamically agile than the F35

[@bastadimasta]

Vigorous Dragon is the worst aircraft name ever. It sounds like a sex toy.

[@tyrantfox7801]

Might be a loose translation

[@doncalypso]

😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

[@doncalypso]

"Vigorous Dragon" sounds more like a _Wushu Kung Fu_ style than a sex toy name though "Wolly Mammoth 3000" on the other hand... 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

[@JCNEOHK]

Its only a translation from Chinese

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

😆

[@yang5159]

Lavi a junk. J10c not a copy

[@janwitts2688]

As soon as I see an advanced airframe deploying unguided weapons I know the country involved has missed the point... Would rather send in 4 aircraft deploying precision munitions.. job done sorted.. move on... than have an entire squadron dropping iron and hosing sneb copies for a day or two with less effect...

[@LOL-zu1zr]

Everyone runs out of precision guided missiles in a few weeks

[@phillip_iv_planetking6354]

@@LOL-zu1zr When have we run out of precision guided munitions? I tried looking but all I could find was a 20 billion increase in munitions back in 2018. At least for the US I have no idea for other nations.

[@janwitts2688]

@Phillip_IV_Planet King Absolutely right... a paveway kit costs almost nothing compared to the wasted repeat mission costs... and uk weapons like brimstone can wipe an armoured unit out in a few salvoes rather than making a total mess of it with unguided weapons...

[@thomaszhang3101]

@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 when have the US being in an all out war before? Precision munition usage was not going to be sustainable and even if it is, the electronics and man power required to make them will become a serious burden on war time economies.

[@phillip_iv_planetking6354]

@@thomaszhang3101 All out? Not since WWII. But given we were fighting for over 18 years nonstop in Iraq and Afghanistan we never ran out then. So what proof do you have besides making shit up?

[@tjohnson4062]

So you don't think there's military espionage? When a country dedicated billions in research and decades of time to develop a n aircraft and it gets leaked or stolen it sets back the project in unknown ways. Certain countries are really good at copying the airframe and power plant but still end up with a inferior aircraft because they couldn't get their hands on the avionics radar, sheath tech, etc. And speed makes a difference due to the maneuverability as well as stand off weapons systems.

[@yiwu5397]

have you watched this video?

[@mac2857]

recycling old content 😐

[@doncalypso]

Not recycling... editing multiple episodes of the same topic into long-form format for the enjoyment of the audience.

[@Ni999]

@@doncalypso Yes and doing it by popular request.

[@LRRPFco52]

They will crash at least one J-10A or J-10S this winter.

[@AliHasan-hv2sl]

J10 and jf 17 best gen fighters than rafale and equal to the f35 💪💪

[@asiftalpur3758]

Looks like Tonys alt

[@LOL-zu1zr]

What?

[@asiftalpur3758]

@@LOL-zu1zr Indian troll. Shame, they aren't even paid for it.

[@AliHasan-hv2sl]

@@asiftalpur3758 tenu pti sopporter troll kei bacche

[@ultramarsfinest1536]

@@asiftalpur3758 I'm also confused why are indians flaming so hard.

[@rollyherrera623]

"Made in China." Nuff said...

[@zhli4238]

Actually Israelis were most helpful in the fly-by-wire computer software in J-10. One cannot copy that software unless it's 100% the same. After learning how that works, one can design a fourth generation plane of own. Computer changed a lot since the 90s, the software must be upgraded just for the weight of the newer ones, and many other things. That's all test pilot's knowledge accumulated over the years, not a an easy thing. Indian Tejas never really entered their own service after decades of R&D. US, Russia, France, UK, Sweden and China can develop own advance fighters independently, who else can? It must be in service and there are foreign buyers.

[@FawadR]

Well, Pakistan's JF17 are not only fully in service but they've also been exported to few countries. You may say they are co-produced by China-Pakistan but in the end the Pakistanis are manufacturing and exporting it now

[@112deeps]

ARINC. Civil Military Fusion?