those are things that will never be officially confirmed by anyone.
if Israel confirmed it, they would have admitted to having broken the non-disclosure agreement which means they need to have the consequence
if USA confirms it, they will have to give consequences and this means a military-industrial sanction which USA wants to avoid with Israel. Since Israel is essential for the military high technology, and semi-conductor. and also they are good customers.
If China confirms it, they will lose the patriotic pride of this plane that was costly to develop. and losing it might end up going with even more Russian design.
so everyone loses by telling the hypothetical truth and everyone wins by hypothetically lying. at the end. the F-16 was not the best fighter anymore by the time it was discovered. and most of the critical technology, china was unable to copy it so they replaced it with whatever they had that could do. In the end, the impact of this was low.
that is a wise decision, this is also what I decided to follow.
at the end. it removes nothing from the quality of the planes and whatever we think about it, it will change nothing about what it is.
Then I apologise again, but still have some problem.
there was a lower intake design same time as side intake.
that time, many developers including the chief engineers go abroad to learn the advandaced research and producing tech, which are also can’t bring back directly.
there are misunderstandings in “independent design”. Like Lavi, built under American’s help, and mixed with many F-16’s design, but I will call it still a independent design. It should be more like Chinese developers learned from Lavi’s design, and used the knowlodge in J-10’s design.
sorry again about my ptsd in “J-10 is a copy of Lavi”. it’s mainly about the copy word. but this is still a severe accusation to me and the author of my source, as I always try to be one of the most fair-minded guy here after seeing too much bias and rumor.
You know… to deny such rich history of the Chinese aircraft of J-10… to deny the truth of one of China’s most unique jets…
For what reason?
What reason to deny the J-10’s inspirations/origins?
To insult China’s history?
No one here claimed J-10 is a copy of any aircraft.
the placement of the intake is not the only thing that is off. and this design is also very far from the final design and very basic. I could well be anything… it has no details, no feature,. it’s just a simple shape placed together without refinement.
sealing a deal, learning how to do with the Israeli material as a demonstrator. probably even assist to a test flight. coming back with the documents and the knowledge.
the Lavi has still belonged to Israel and while not allowed to export it without American permission, the Americans had little control over who could see it and have access to it. The Leopard 2 are under the regard of KMW for export as well, but they aren’t guarding each leopard 2 of each country either. that is why they are signing an agreement when they sell it. the F-16 and the Lavi had similar agreements regarding export and production. that is called a license usually. it’s common in the military industry.
a piece of advice in history, never take anything personally. some things are out of your or my control. if you take it too personally, you will end up being either disappointed, discredited, or covering up the truth for your view.
just start with the base that every piece of information you know might be wrong and review every fact for the reliability and the quality of their proof.
in military history, never 2 different countries with completely different access to technology, completely different heritage, doctrine, and industries end up with extremely similar vehicles. unless one was copied on the other.
simply bias? idk
it’s common seeing someone saying “chinese copy things”, just like saying Russian
/USSR things are all “cheap and crudely made ork stuff”
But you should know that the wing and duckwing layouts of J10 and Lavi are completely different. All prototypes of J10A did not jump out of the delta wing design, while Lavi has a swept wing design, and each type of aerodynamics requires a large amount of wind tunnel experimental data. Lavi’s wing aerodynamic data design is not helpful for the design of J10
And the fact that the designer visited Lavi does not prove that he plagiarized Lavi. Their designs are completely different, and how do you introduce how the Israelis attempted to revive the Lavi project by changing the Lavi aerodynamic layout and engine to the same J10 model after the J10 aerodynamic data was leaked in 1999
the wings need to be reviewed with the size of the planes and the quality you want to give it at different altitudes, play load, and also depend on the power of the engine. the wings are a rather minor aspect of a plane that can easily be changed with the different variants of the planes. the Taiwanese license-built F-16 also has different wings. so is the Japanese one. that does not make them less based on the F-16
it’s not the fact they visited Israel, it’s the fact they studied a plane that they were not supposed to have access to and the fact that their design drastically changed, the Project took a huge leap forward and was not more stalling at the edge of cancellation to be nearly ready for a prototype which needed to use compartment that China was not yet capable to produce even in the smallest quantity. even less designing it with their technology of 1987. it took them 10 years to have a working prototype and that was only because Russia helped them to mount an interim engine. it took them 25 years (2011) to get the engine they designed for the plane ready… and it was not yet ready for production. it was only in 2018 it was ready for mass production. 30 years after the design of the engine
Your words are incorrect
The Lavi has a layout of “close coupled canard wing+swept wing+pitot tube inlet”, while the J10 has a layout of “mid-range coupled canard wing+delta wing+supersonic rectangular inlet”. The two are fundamentally different
Moreover, Lavi is a two seater multifunctional fighter, while J10 and F16 are the same, both transitioning from air superiority fighters to multifunctional fighters. Moreover, J10 is a single seater and their bodies are completely different
Let me give you an example. The J8 and the Su-15 look almost identical, but their designs and aerodynamics are completely different. Can we say that the J8 is a derivative of the Su-15 or that the Su-15 is a derivative of the J8?
I see no argument there that goes beyond the usual denial rhetoric.
there are reliable sources with clear proof of those claims. I tend to go with the most reliable sources and no opinion comes without sources that would change my mind.
as for me, I do not care if the plane is purely indigenous or a pure copy. but I will still expose what we know and what can be sources no matter if me or anyone else like it or not. i sometimes get wrong and sometimes stand corrected. but so far, after a raging debate 3 years ago, a couple of personal threats, and harassment from a whole community, I still stand in the same position. it’s not by stubbornness, it’s because I saw no other evidence for the rumors to be wrong.
i am not willing to bring back the debate here. if you have actual information to share, do it on the topics. you will be welcome there. simple support are also welcome and any discussion on the topic as well. there is the suggestion on the J-10 and I will update it and correct it upon evidence.
The J7E/G and FTC-2000 series are derivatives of the MIG-21 because although they have different wings, they have the same fuselage design. However, the Lavi and J10 designs are similar in appearance. From the position of the wings and canards to the fuselage, it’s completely different. How can we talk about derivatives
