Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ???

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/2/2013 3:46:53 AM   
JRyan


Posts: 555
Joined: 3/29/2005
Status: offline
Interesting article on the J-31. Kind of comes as a surprise to me....




Picture from Fox News..


"if it's not good enough for China, why should we buy it?”


Fox News Link


I will have to see how this one is modeled in the DB....Information seems to be very scarce...

< Message edited by JRyan -- 10/2/2013 3:47:57 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/2/2013 3:48:58 PM   
ruixilyy


Posts: 117
Joined: 1/26/2008
From: Brighton, UK
Status: offline
The article from Fox news contains confusing information. As you can see, Sina Military <http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2013-09-18/1055741156.html> mentions the J-15 and its shortcomings (referring the J-15 as 'flopping fish', as cited in the Fox news), not the shortcomings of the J-31. The Fox News article is commenting on the J-31, but it actually uses the Sina Military's comments on J-15 to support its point of view on J-31. Really unconvincing. I can only say the editor of Fox news lacks common sense.

< Message edited by ruixilyy -- 10/2/2013 3:52:44 PM >


_____________________________

You should fire when ready!

(in reply to JRyan)
Post #: 2
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/2/2013 10:04:52 PM   
JRyan


Posts: 555
Joined: 3/29/2005
Status: offline
I did not now that, for some reason I feel better...Still I have not seen anything of quality out of China yet, but their day will come as did Japan...

Thank you for the explanation..

(in reply to ruixilyy)
Post #: 3
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/2/2013 11:03:53 PM   
mikeCK

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 5/20/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ruixilyy

The article from Fox news contains confusing information. As you can see, Sina Military <http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2013-09-18/1055741156.html> mentions the J-15 and its shortcomings (referring the J-15 as 'flopping fish', as cited in the Fox news), not the shortcomings of the J-31. The Fox News article is commenting on the J-31, but it actually uses the Sina Military's comments on J-15 to support its point of view on J-31. Really unconvincing. I can only say the editor of Fox news lacks common sense.


The "flopping fish" quote is properly attributed to the J-15 in the article. It's context is that traditionally, Chinese aircraft have not lived up to the hype. Not confusing at all. Now whether the J-31 is crap or not is a different story...but the article suggests it is and that is why the Chinese are exporting it.

"Even the Chinese press has been critical of the jets manufactured by the country, with Bejing-based Sina Military Network calling another fighter, the J-15, a “flopping fish,” and claiming that the plane could not take off from a carrier with heavy ammunitions which could cripple its attack range as well as firepower."

< Message edited by mikeCK -- 10/2/2013 11:05:12 PM >

(in reply to ruixilyy)
Post #: 4
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/3/2013 1:14:29 PM   
ruixilyy


Posts: 117
Joined: 1/26/2008
From: Brighton, UK
Status: offline
What i said is that there is not enough convincing reason in that article to claim J-31 a 'junk'. J-31 is totally different from J-15, and the article itself admits that as of today only limited info of the J-31 is available. The shortcomings of J-15 not necessarily lead to the same issue of J-31. To assess a new plane based on a totally different type is really unreasonable. That is why I think the citation from Sina Military News is totally useless. It can never be regarded as a convincing fact to support the author's premature claim on J-31. Ironically, the Fox News boasts 'fair and balanced'.

< Message edited by ruixilyy -- 10/3/2013 1:19:37 PM >

(in reply to mikeCK)
Post #: 5
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/3/2013 1:33:15 PM   
mjk428

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ruixilyy

What i said is that there is not enough convincing reason in that article to claim J-31 a 'junk'. J-31 is totally different from J-15, and the article itself admits that as of today only limited info of the J-31 is available. The shortcomings of J-15 not necessarily lead to the same issue of J-31. To assess a new plane based on a totally different type is really unreasonable. That is why I think the citation from Sina Military News is totally useless. It can never be regarded as a convincing fact to support the author's premature claim on J-31. Ironically, the Fox News boasts 'fair and balanced'.



The article doesn't claim that. Seems you didn't get past the first two words of the headline. Right after them was a question mark. Which means it's a question not a claim. Following the question mark is a statement of fact. Headlines are designed to grab attention. "Chinese Junk" is also a play on words.

The article states the opinions from different sources on past Chinese aircraft and on a future aircraft. Some more skeptical than others. These are the last four paragraphs:


quote:

James Hardy, Asia-Pacific Editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly, said there is no way to compare the J-31 to other fighter planes, given the secrecy still surrounding it.

“Because we have only limited data on the J-31, it impossible to say whether it is inferior to the F-35,” Hardy said. "Qualitatively there's no way to compare unless we know its fire-control radar, subsystems, avionics, and what it is made of. Its planform [silhouette] certainly makes it look like a fifth generation fighter, but what materials it is made of and all kinds of other questions mean judging its radar cross section - and so its stealthiness - is hard to do.”

Hardy adds that lack of strong information about the fighter --and the fact that it is going straight to export--might make it a hard sell on the international market.

“One key point is that if the People's Liberation Army air forces aren’t going to field it, that might deter other countries," he said. "The thinking may go: if it's not good enough for China, why should we buy it?”




_____________________________


(in reply to ruixilyy)
Post #: 6
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/3/2013 1:50:09 PM   
RockKahn

 

Posts: 165
Joined: 10/27/2011
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ruixilyy

The article from Fox news contains confusing information. As you can see, Sina Military <http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2013-09-18/1055741156.html> mentions the J-15 and its shortcomings (referring the J-15 as 'flopping fish', as cited in the Fox news), not the shortcomings of the J-31. The Fox News article is commenting on the J-31, but it actually uses the Sina Military's comments on J-15 to support its point of view on J-31. Really unconvincing. I can only say the editor of Fox news lacks common sense.


I read the article. It didn't confuse me. It says in the article not much is known about the J-31, so it can't really be compared to anything. Sounds fair and balanced to me.

_____________________________

I don't write Universal Law. I just live by it.

(in reply to ruixilyy)
Post #: 7
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/4/2013 10:57:47 AM   
ruixilyy


Posts: 117
Joined: 1/26/2008
From: Brighton, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428


quote:

ORIGINAL: ruixilyy

What i said is that there is not enough convincing reason in that article to claim J-31 a 'junk'. J-31 is totally different from J-15, and the article itself admits that as of today only limited info of the J-31 is available. The shortcomings of J-15 not necessarily lead to the same issue of J-31. To assess a new plane based on a totally different type is really unreasonable. That is why I think the citation from Sina Military News is totally useless. It can never be regarded as a convincing fact to support the author's premature claim on J-31. Ironically, the Fox News boasts 'fair and balanced'.



The article doesn't claim that. Seems you didn't get past the first two words of the headline. Right after them was a question mark. Which means it's a question not a claim. Following the question mark is a statement of fact. Headlines are designed to grab attention. "Chinese Junk" is also a play on words.

The article states the opinions from different sources on past Chinese aircraft and on a future aircraft. Some more skeptical than others. These are the last four paragraphs:


quote:

James Hardy, Asia-Pacific Editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly, said there is no way to compare the J-31 to other fighter planes, given the secrecy still surrounding it.

“Because we have only limited data on the J-31, it impossible to say whether it is inferior to the F-35,” Hardy said. "Qualitatively there's no way to compare unless we know its fire-control radar, subsystems, avionics, and what it is made of. Its planform [silhouette] certainly makes it look like a fifth generation fighter, but what materials it is made of and all kinds of other questions mean judging its radar cross section - and so its stealthiness - is hard to do.”

Hardy adds that lack of strong information about the fighter --and the fact that it is going straight to export--might make it a hard sell on the international market.

“One key point is that if the People's Liberation Army air forces aren’t going to field it, that might deter other countries," he said. "The thinking may go: if it's not good enough for China, why should we buy it?”





Well, there are a lot of other sources/expert comments about the J-31, such as those from the Russians and other Chinese media source (In fact, Sina Military has a couple of articles on the J-31, many of which hold positive opinion on the plane). Obviously the author of this article only quotes those holding sceptical opinions so as to support his biased point of view. The question mark and the use of the word 'junk' cannot hide his prejudiced 'US-paramount' stereotype. As you can see, the author also cites that 'No amount of espionage or copying of U.S. technology can duplicate American air power' from an air force pilot. 'Espionage', 'copying'...So where is the evidence? Nothing. I don't see any evidence, and that 'espionage' statement is groundless and hence, untenable. If you look at other comments from the same 'veteran pilot' in the later paragraphs you can see how conceited this guy is. Yet the author still quotes this statements as his supporting material, the traditional way of misleading readers.

< Message edited by ruixilyy -- 10/4/2013 11:04:19 AM >

(in reply to mjk428)
Post #: 8
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/4/2013 2:12:11 PM   
mikeCK

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 5/20/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ruixilyy

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428


quote:

ORIGINAL: ruixilyy

What i said is that there is not enough convincing reason in that article to claim J-31 a 'junk'. J-31 is totally different from J-15, and the article itself admits that as of today only limited info of the J-31 is available. The shortcomings of J-15 not necessarily lead to the same issue of J-31. To assess a new plane based on a totally different type is really unreasonable. That is why I think the citation from Sina Military News is totally useless. It can never be regarded as a convincing fact to support the author's premature claim on J-31. Ironically, the Fox News boasts 'fair and balanced'.



The article doesn't claim that. Seems you didn't get past the first two words of the headline. Right after them was a question mark. Which means it's a question not a claim. Following the question mark is a statement of fact. Headlines are designed to grab attention. "Chinese Junk" is also a play on words.

The article states the opinions from different sources on past Chinese aircraft and on a future aircraft. Some more skeptical than others. These are the last four paragraphs:


quote:

James Hardy, Asia-Pacific Editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly, said there is no way to compare the J-31 to other fighter planes, given the secrecy still surrounding it.

“Because we have only limited data on the J-31, it impossible to say whether it is inferior to the F-35,” Hardy said. "Qualitatively there's no way to compare unless we know its fire-control radar, subsystems, avionics, and what it is made of. Its planform [silhouette] certainly makes it look like a fifth generation fighter, but what materials it is made of and all kinds of other questions mean judging its radar cross section - and so its stealthiness - is hard to do.”

Hardy adds that lack of strong information about the fighter --and the fact that it is going straight to export--might make it a hard sell on the international market.

“One key point is that if the People's Liberation Army air forces aren’t going to field it, that might deter other countries," he said. "The thinking may go: if it's not good enough for China, why should we buy it?”





Well, there are a lot of other sources/expert comments about the J-31, such as those from the Russians and other Chinese media source (In fact, Sina Military has a couple of articles on the J-31, many of which hold positive opinion on the plane). Obviously the author of this article only quotes those holding sceptical opinions so as to support his biased point of view. The question mark and the use of the word 'junk' cannot hide his prejudiced 'US-paramount' stereotype. As you can see, the author also cites that 'No amount of espionage or copying of U.S. technology can duplicate American air power' from an air force pilot. 'Espionage', 'copying'...So where is the evidence? Nothing. I don't see any evidence, and that 'espionage' statement is groundless and hence, untenable. If you look at other comments from the same 'veteran pilot' in the later paragraphs you can see how conceited this guy is. Yet the author still quotes this statements as his supporting material, the traditional way of misleading readers.


Ok, the article doesn't really suggest anything! It merely poses a question that was reasonably raised based on the fat that the plane is set for export so quickly and other reasons.

Seems to me that you are a fan of the J-31 (which is ok) and simply have an issue with anyone questioning the quality of the aircraft. That's fine...your opinion, but the article is just a question...it's not unfair and quotes noted sources on military equipment. It's ok...it will be fine. I remember when the M2 Bradley came on line to replace the M113 and people were opining about all of the differnt ways it was garbage. As an infantryman, I loved it.

You have reached a comclusion about the aircraft that others have not. So don't get frustrated when those who have not, discuss it

As for copying...many Chinese aircraft are known copies. The J-15 was a close copy of the Su 33. Heck, the J31 looks like an F35. The Chinese barely even try to deny that they reverse engineer stolen/acquired/purchased machinery. So don't act shocked when it is at least discussed in the article (whether or not they really do steal and copy or whether its coincidence)


< Message edited by mikeCK -- 10/4/2013 2:23:24 PM >

(in reply to ruixilyy)
Post #: 9
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/4/2013 7:18:38 PM   
jdkbph


Posts: 339
Joined: 2/11/2007
From: CT, USA
Status: offline
quote:

As you can see, the author also cites that 'No amount of espionage or copying of U.S. technology can duplicate American air power' from an air force pilot. 'Espionage', 'copying'...So where is the evidence? Nothing. I don't see any evidence, and that 'espionage' statement is groundless and hence, untenable.


Hehehe... you're kidding, right? This is pretty much indisputable. Ask the Russians if you think the US sources are biased.

JD


< Message edited by jdkbph -- 10/4/2013 7:19:12 PM >

(in reply to ruixilyy)
Post #: 10
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/4/2013 8:46:30 PM   
mikeCK

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 5/20/2008
Status: offline
The Chinese stealing things and pirating the tech? You don't say

(in reply to jdkbph)
Post #: 11
RE: Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? - 10/4/2013 9:01:03 PM   
RockKahn

 

Posts: 165
Joined: 10/27/2011
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:


Well, there are a lot of other sources/expert comments about the J-31, such as those from the Russians and other Chinese media source (In fact, Sina Military has a couple of articles on the J-31, many of which hold positive opinion on the plane)


Yeah. If you don't want bias, read Russian and Chinese sources.

_____________________________

I don't write Universal Law. I just live by it.

(in reply to ruixilyy)
Post #: 12
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Chinese junk? The J-31 "Falcon Hawk" ??? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.191