There's a lot more to building a viable stealth aircraft than just looking like one.

@tm-ym2ye

Жыл бұрын

Umm like a secretary of state having a private server

@awookiefromendor

Жыл бұрын

@@tm-ym2ye I’m with her

@tm-ym2ye

Жыл бұрын

@@awookiefromendor George Bush I am sure you are

@mobiuszero2424

Жыл бұрын

even harder blending two jets with different philosophy then make it as flying stealth fighter

@greenleafycabbage8715

Жыл бұрын

Boom! Hahaha savage

A person I know well told me stuff he wasn't supposed to. He was stationed on a aircraft carrier and said that russian ships use to follow behind them, the carrier task force, just out of the leagaly designated distance. He asked why they would do that and was told for intelligence gathering. One of the things they use to do to that end was sift through jettisoned debris, ( it was the early 80s and dumping garbage overboard was still a thing), to look for anything useful. Apparently our upper brass knew this and would from time to time feed them corrupted information . Just good enough to get them excited that they found a secret tech but with fatal flaws that would take them forever to figure out thus draining resources. I cant help but wonder if we dont still do the same thing but digitally. "Oh geez ! You hacked us ! I guess you have our secrets now "😉

@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle

Жыл бұрын

That is hilarious.

@rabernar1

Жыл бұрын

And true

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, counter-intelligence 101: The only thing better than an arrested spy, is a spy you know about, but who doesn't know you know. So you can feed him exactly what you want him to pass on. Not to mention track him and find his contacts, and their contacts, etc. Seeding the garbage is a little less exotic, but uses a similar principal. During the cold war, it was "expected" that carrier battle groups would have a russian yacht or fishing boat who would be their "buddy" for their deployment. It was a dangerous job though, for the Russians on those ships I mean. If war actually did break out, the very first target of the carrier battle group would be to sink their "buddy", so as to stop having their position tracked.

@TheZoePath

Жыл бұрын

KZread commenter: "A person I know well told me stuff he wasn't supposed to." 45 minutes later: "This is the NSA!" ... flashbang rolls across his floor ... "Tell us your source, or it's Guantanamo for you pal!" 😂😂😂

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

@@TheZoePath Realistically not so much. Classified information falls into different brackets. There are many things which are classified just because someone classified them 50 years ago, and it no longer has any meaning, but it's still classified because nobody want's the hassle of the red tape involved in declassing. If you say something really pointedly relevant to current era classified matters though, yeah, you'll garner some attention. A good rule of thumb is just "could this information endanger the lives of servicemen, vs. 'any' potential adversary?" If not, then it's really not worth it make a fuss, which would only draw more attention to the topic. If "yes" though, well, wear earplugs. Cuz flashbangs cause permanent hearing damage ;) TL/DR: just don't talk about capabilities of current hardware which is not readily found in published material. Even then, ideally wait for it to be published for a while, to make sure it's not published by mistake.

The Mig 144 looks like the least stealthy jet ever made. It’s odd that they didn’t want to integrate low radar observability into a new 5th generation fighter.

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

The mig-1.44 was a copy of the eurofighter/typhoon. I don't think the 1.44 was ever intended to be a 5th gen. And given the odd designation, I don't think it was ever intended to be a production aircraft. More of an "X-plane", with the possibility of evolving into a production fighter. Also, from an aerodynamics standpoint, the Su-27 and Mig-29 are actually superb. So iterative improvement of those designs (lighter, stronger, thrust vectoring, better engines, better radar & avionics) was seen as a more viable route for non-stealth modern gen 4.5's. The tooling was already in place. The maintenance supply chains could be iterated piecemeal with new features instead of building out with a completely new design. etc. The Su-57, and eventually Su-75 were/are their bids for 5th gen. Doctrinally, russia thinks stealth isn't for every platform. They kinda want about a 25% stealthy air force, with more emphasis on gen 4.5+. While at the same time, fielding tech & systems which "somewhat" erode the US's stealth advantages (like IRST on all new fighters, etc). It's a "bang for the buck" argument. Russia's equivalent of DARPA, and their aerospace engineers, are pretty good. But anemic funding is pretty evident.

It's a F-3522 Su-1.44 Flanktor that uses several different design philosophies mashed together, which just like in motorsports.... you usually can't just mix and match things together effectively.

@belluh-1huey102

Жыл бұрын

You can actually, they not only stole the blueprints but also the R&D to make such a plane.

@leihtory7423

Жыл бұрын

its more of a Mig-Lightning. F35+Su.144 Nothing from the Raptor or Sukhoi. Copy not steal. I didnt steal your homework, I copied it.

@TMHedgehog

Жыл бұрын

@@leihtory7423 Mightning.

@agenthex

Жыл бұрын

That's certainly what people who've never done engineering believes how engineering works.

@Scotch20

Жыл бұрын

except that you totally can. in motorsports too, actually. The CLK GTR stomps this argument. of course you still need competent design, which the j20 may or may not have

One down side to stealing all of your tech is that the other side knows its weaknesses

@tailgatetommy1571

Жыл бұрын

Big man.... USA stealing CHINA stealth tech. NOT other way around. Mighty dragon defeated over 40 raptors vs. ONE J-20 in training simulation.

@gaussmanv2

Жыл бұрын

@@tailgatetommy1571 this feels computer generated.

@tedmoss

Жыл бұрын

@@gaussmanv2 Are you saying TailgateTommy is an AI?

@gaussmanv2

Жыл бұрын

@@tedmoss just saying that if it isn't, he writes in a nonsensical way like a robot does.

@thomaszhang3101

Жыл бұрын

No, the real downside to stealing tech is that you skipped the process of raising a a team of scientists and designers who can go on to deliver better future advancements. Time will tell if China truly came up with its own tech - whether it can deliver more 5th gen and even 6th gen fighters or will its technology stagnate at J-20.

The J-20 is like if the F-22/F-35 and the Mig 1.44 mixed together

Japan's Shinshin, Korea's Kai KF-21, India's AMCA all uses exactly the same aerodynamics with F-22, yet you claim China's totally different canard delta wing layout as copy? WTF

@gopnik690

Жыл бұрын

Those two countries have deals directly with the US ie. Mitsubishi and Lockheed Martin. China doesn't. That's the difference

@kinstonGulane101

Жыл бұрын

Alvin yap just like asking a Teacher to go to CR with permission instead going CR trying not to get caught

@dickmelsonlupot7697

Жыл бұрын

@@gopnik690 Mitsubishi is Japanese, he was talking about South Korea and India. Plus having partnerships doesn't necessarily mean they can just copy paste everything though.

@gopnik690

Жыл бұрын

@@dickmelsonlupot7697 he mentioned Japan's Shinshin fighter which is designed by Mitsubishi in collaboration with Lockheed. Not only Korea and India. And if that design is the best advised by lockheed Martin, then copying it would be the wisest option. Note advised and consulted not copying without knowing what's going on.

@dickmelsonlupot7697

Жыл бұрын

@@gopnik690 The problem with that assumption is that you are not acknowledging the fact that there isn't much you can actually do about fighter jet designs. Much if not basically all designs will almost always than not, stick to one specific type of design no matter how hard you do and spend on R & D. It's the same reason why all passenger jets now almost all look the same with very little difference and any "similarities" or "copying" is actually looked as a good thing especially if the copied design helps in increasing safety or efficiency. It's the same with fighter jets. Sure, there have been many different designs before but if you look into them and research why they were abandoned, you'd know that much of these other designs have major problems to them or don't offer better efficiency overall or are even waayyyy more expensive compared to what was chosen and what we have now. Like it or not, the basic "look" and "design" of a fighter jet or even a "stealth fighter" we have now are results of years of realizing that they is only very few ways you can actually do things and that the ones we have now are the most efficient.

You can't just jam together two completely different blue prints into one stealth fighter. US and Soviet designs from two completely separate lineages with each one designed based on the available technologies and manufacturing techniques that are available to either country. You cannot simply replicate that engineering expertise and manufacturing know-how even if you are given the complete blue prints (let alone some hypothetical and likely incomplete stolen plans). We are talking about stealth fighter operating at Mach 2. Even a tiny change to configuration of the plane would lead to huge differences in performance characteristics. The configuration difference between the F22 and the J20 are greater than the difference you see between most 4.5 gen fighters. Think about the Boeing 737 Max. It is basically a 737 with bigger engines, yet this simple change to a tried-and-true platform eventually caused 2 planes to crash. People also overestimate the ability of hackers to obtain information, as if they are magicians. Lockheed Martin isn't some inexperienced contractor on their first rodeo, do you really think it is possible for the blue print to be stolen when they don't want it to be. Yes a Chinese national stole some 600,000 files relating to the program but this program probably generates tens of millions of files, do you really think Lockheed Martin would be so lax as to allow the most important files to be hacked? We are talking about the United States here, the land of NSA and PRISM.

@leoarc1061

Жыл бұрын

Your first points are absolutely correct, so there's not much to say about them other than agreeing with them 100%. However, the 737 Max analogy is not the best one. The engine upgrade, per se, was not the problem (aircrafts of all types upgrade engines fairly regularly without any issues). The issue was that Boeing installed a new system which overrode the pilots' pitch authority, without telling the pilots anything about it. "Lockheed Martin would be so lax as to allow the most important files to be hacked? We are talking about the United States here" IT security (this is more my field) does not depend on the name of any company, and it certainly doesn't give a dam about the country's name. How much information gets hacked is difficult to know because, quite often, the victim doesn't know there was a breach, and it's not in the interest of the attacker to publicize about it. Furthermore, large portions of the industry, for various reasons rely on archaic protocols ran on obsolete systems. Convenience, continuity, compatibility, reliability... They are the obvious reasons. Above all else, we should NEVER underestimate Russia's, China's or North Korea's cyber warfare capabilities. These countries have a lot of people with a lot of time with a lot of motivation.

@ICU1337

Жыл бұрын

Eh there is a reason why the J20 is junk. Like you said, "You can only get so far with copying." And yea, I recall other reports/vids saying that, "Yup they stole a bunch of files. Nope, none of them were super sensitive good stuff." I do disagree with you on the fact that the Chinese didnt steal this tech. Its what they do... And yea what Leo said with the 737 analogy. Its not quite comparable but I see what you were trying to do and appreciate the attempt. Not always easy to nail that apples to apples comparison.

@Uruz7Laevatein

Жыл бұрын

Sorry but engineering is not adobe photoshop and can go both ways, "Eh there is a reason why the J20 is junk.".. how do you people know these things without getting hands on classified information's. The only thing that can be gathered from the J20 is , China has the industrial ability to manufacture components necessary for stealth fighters (such as RAM coatings, Semiconductors used in Radars/Avionics, Programmers to write code for said systems, etc). Besides if one is capable of reverse engineering something, then it is by baseline one has the ability to design and make the components (reverse engineering is more demanding than making your own aircraft).

@ICU1337

Жыл бұрын

@@Uruz7Laevatein the engines ✌🏽

@izana6179

Жыл бұрын

@@ICU1337 Do u guys really believe that china can't fully grasp engine tec within 5 years???

Cumbersome, I look at it and that’s the first word that comes to mind .

I'm a bit baffled why anyone in the world believes China competently (and exceptionally quickly) built a functioning stealth aircraft. It seems amusing to call it a genuine 5th generation stealth aircraft when it appears to be little more than a tarted up "lookalike".

@bugstomper4670

Жыл бұрын

They probably have an eject button for the canards, to go into super-stealth mode.

@llkk290

Жыл бұрын

J-20 is much better than F-22,🙂

@MrCraigtastic

Жыл бұрын

@@llkk290 your 50 cent army badge is showing

@rickjames18

Жыл бұрын

@@llkk290 Says no one and no experts.

@TheMilpitasguy

Жыл бұрын

@@llkk290 Doubtful the J-20 is even stealthy. Su-30MKI Indian pilots detected & tracked it. Taiwanese Sky Bow radar 60 Ghz in X-band detected it too, as it approached the island. E-3 Sentry AWACS can probably track it as well & E-2D Hawkeye.

The bit I find fascinating about the whole 'China steals tech' story is the intimation that they're the only people doing it.

@james_l4337

Жыл бұрын

Too true, Iran, Turkey etc they all have the capabilities Japan, S Korea easily but they are under superpower gaze

@malusignatius

Жыл бұрын

@@james_l4337 I was referring more to the US, USSR/Russia, UK etc. doing it for... Well, the entirety of those nation's existences.

@james_l4337

Жыл бұрын

Yes, the fact that copying or adapting others discovery has always been since before civilization. It's nothing new. Anyhow it's another killing machine for boys to pass the time

@thulomanchay

Жыл бұрын

Its called double standards. Mentioned all the time. Who's been getting these one sided story all the time? All of 🇺🇸.

@raevj

6 ай бұрын

⁠@@malusignatiuswhat examples do you have of these nations doing theft of IP like China?

the real issue for us is the capability of producing the fighter, you can give the whole design to india or iran or russia, it won't even matter much bc they aren't able to produce it

Kelly Johnson? Absolutely!! Check that box. All of this tech is interesting, to say the least, but useless without being used to advantage and fielded in force. That requires funding and thanks to the state of the global economy one has to wonder just how much delay is being built into the development programs of these systems? And what of access to the components and parts to make these things go? Your reporting certainly does get me thinking and your perspectives are provoking. Keep 'em coming! (Five Stars)

@tedmoss

Жыл бұрын

But pretty weak on actual stuff.

@arnobeerkens4775

Жыл бұрын

Heb Heb en ik heb ik niet niet op en en ik heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb ik niet niet niet op en en ik heb ik ik heb heb ik niet niet niet op op en ik heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op op en ik ik heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet op en en ik heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet op op en ik heb heb heb ik ik heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik ik heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb heb ik niet niet op op en ik heb heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik ik heb heb ik niet niet niet op en en ik heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb heb ik ik heb heb ik niet niet op op en ik ik heb ik ik heb ik niet heb ik niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet op op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op op en en ik heb heb ik ik heb ik niet niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet op op en ik heb heb ik ik heb ik niet niet op op en ik ik heb heb ik niet niet op op en ik heb heb ik ik heb heb ik niet niet op op en ik heb heb heb ik ik heb ik niet niet op op en ik heb heb heb ik ik heb ik niet niet op en ik ik heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik ik heb ik ik heb ik niet heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb heb heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb ik niet niet op en ik heb heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb heb heb ik niet niet niet op en ik heb heb ik ik heb ik niet niet op op en en ik heb ik ik heb heb ik ik heb ik heb ik niet niet op en

@jessier3602

Жыл бұрын

Exactly the technology of the Stealth fighter of China was stolen from the US and they just redesigned it so that it does not look like the F-22 Raptor. China steals military secrets from the US, UK, Russia, Canada & Australia and China reverse engineer all those military planes, aircraft carriers, battleships etc etc and call it their own design. The only great invention that China gave to the world was fireworks used during the 4th of July celebrations, new years celebrations so without further ado US and all its allied nations should find a way to stop Chinese hackers from stealing our military and intelligence secrets

"Did China steal..." The answer is yes. It's always yes. All "Chinese" military designs up to a couple of years ago, yes.

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

The grug brain kneejerk answer here speaks truth ;)

@teddy.d174

Жыл бұрын

They never stopped stealing…and they probably never will.

@CorePathway

Жыл бұрын

A very dishonorable people when it comes to respecting other people’s work, commercially or militarily.

@jakeaurod

Жыл бұрын

Maybe they think it's OK since Europeans stole gunpowder and paper.

@zimtak6418

Жыл бұрын

Oh yes, they steal designs in so many ways, even outside of military. Cars, toys, everything. You name it they've ripped it off. Especially their latest designs for smartphones, CPUs, GPUs, and even their 7nm chip fabrication are all stolen from other countries' reach and designs, mostly the US's.

Oh my goodness, the Honda civic is a copy of a Ford focus. They put four wheels underneath the frame. The muffler is in the back and engine in the front. Don't get me started. Like Honda thought Ford was too stupid to realize the windshield wipers were mounted on the front of the windshield. Let's not forget the two identical side mirrors, they are mounted exactly on the same spot. Oh, they even copy the front and rear bumpers.

@dengsamuel4557

Жыл бұрын

50 cents was added to your account, you ccp bot

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

exactly, this video has to be the nastiest slandering in this area.

@Uguru-John

26 күн бұрын

If you have to make that stretch your defense is pretty weak

The wing and tail layout of the Su-57 looks closer to that of the F-22 than the J-20 is, just like how the Flanker layout is very similar to the F-16/F-15 and yet nobody is saying Russians copied/stole the designs from the Americans.

@natem2396

Жыл бұрын

The flanker has a lot more in common with the MiG-29 than American fighters

The lawnmower analogy definitely made me chuckle

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

except the lawmower has canard wings and longer but perception is based on wishful thinking for you guys.

It's simple, I see a Sandboxx video.. I watch a Sandboxx video..

@atomicshadowman9143

Жыл бұрын

I see a comment.... I reply to comment, it's simple.

@MardukTheSunGodInsideMe

Жыл бұрын

We are merely simple people.

YES !! An episode focusing on Kelly would be GREAT !! He had a distinguished career at Lockheed, Designing MANY iconic aircraft !!

I'm skeptical of any countries that claim to have 5th Gen fighter and can't even come up with their own jet engine

An Indian Air Force colonel said that the Russian-made radar in his MIG could see the J-20 at long range!...NOTHING special! Just because you SAY a jet is "stealth" doesn't means that it is! [I suppose it's "stealth" compared to a B-52...]

@manumano3887

Жыл бұрын

Yeah indian air force. PS : Indian air force is a bloody joke and I say that as an Indian.

@TheRibbonRed

Жыл бұрын

The same case with Su-57, though that one at least has the tried-and-true Sukhoi supermaneuverability on its sleeves.

@maxchilla732

Жыл бұрын

And US F35 were tracked over Germany. That's how it works.

@dereklinscott8488

Жыл бұрын

Question is if you believe that pilot more than whomever else. Do we even know that person's name? I dont trust any source out of either military right now.

@manumano3887

Жыл бұрын

@@dereklinscott8488 especially not the indian air force

It's China. I'm gonna say yes before even watching the video.

Yes! do a special on Kelly Johnson. In fact, make it a multi-part for each aircraft he directly had a hand in - thanks! Good stuff as always.

@tedmoss

Жыл бұрын

Sounds like he will be busy for the next 10 years.

@shadypark78

Жыл бұрын

One of the best aircraft designers ever.

@andrewsmart2949

Жыл бұрын

he was incredible,all figured out in his head without much computers used

Hey man, love your detail and knowledge re Aviation, I have just subbed.

Tiananmen Square Lawnmowers suspiciously look like tanks.

@ariaynrahman707

Жыл бұрын

Social credit is flowing to you.

@YourSocialistAutomaton

Жыл бұрын

How does that relate

@Revan_258

Жыл бұрын

Social credit -1000

@M_Jono

Жыл бұрын

Still believing tiananmen and credit score lies ? Hahahahaha phatetic

@secretbassrigs

Жыл бұрын

@@M_Jono Everytime someone invites me to Tiananmen Square, I always say "No tanks"

I would love to see an in-depth video on Kelly Johnson, his life, career, and how he thought about engineering advanced aircraft.

@ddegn

Жыл бұрын

Agreed! I'm amazed how many amazing designs were produced by Skunkworks.

@speedntktzlastname2182

Жыл бұрын

Get to the prototype

@lowkateng153

Жыл бұрын

Totally agree

@buildmotosykletist1987

Жыл бұрын

@@ddegn : I have D'Skunk hanging above my head right now :-)

@andrewsmart2949

Жыл бұрын

and the titanium shot glasses he had made LOL

Loved that breakdown! New subscriber but steadily making my way through yeast videos! 👌

Another great video Alex. Thanks.

Other than the effect on security, it doesn't matter whether they stole it or not. If our roles were reversed, we'd do the same thing- and be delighted that we got the design. Adversaries do that, just as enemies do.

@proy3

Жыл бұрын

We DID do the same thing. Remember the MIG-31 pilot who defected from the Soviets and handed his jet to the Japanese? Remember that time when the west bought a dozen Su-27s from defunct Soviet states to use as training for our pilots? The Germans still fly some of them as aggressors. This is the nature of spying. I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA and DoD weren't sitting on J-20 and J-31 blueprints already.

@manilajohn0182

Жыл бұрын

@@proy3 Well, it was a Mig- 25 (the Mig 31 stemmed from the Clint Eastwood film "Firefox") and the pilot DID defect- but I know what you mean, and I agree. While I can't think of an incident offhand where we stole technology from an adversary, the odds are overwhelming that we have. Funny, the human reactions; when we do it, we're seen as clever by our own people. When our adversaries do it, they're generally portrayed as desperate dolts. The nature of the beast, I guess. What a shame that we just can't stop pulling one another's chains. It'll be the death of all of us soon enough. (EDIT: Cheers...)

@TheRibbonRed

Жыл бұрын

One thing to learn from history is that our roles have been reversed plenty times enough. The differences being, *we stayed on the up because we learned from it.* Remember the Mig/Foxbat Scare? It'd be so easy just to rely on spies & reverse engineering to create the exact same. *But the US didn't, their objective was surpassing the MiG-25. Leading to the birth of the F-15; fully utilizing their doctrine (energy conservation, BVR) into their own tech.* What China has done with the J-20 here is similar to what the Soviets had done with the Su-24 & early Tu-160 models. They copied the F-111 and the B-1 respectively. What the Soviets failed to realize is that both of those Western jets were made with terrain masking in mind; which the non-existence of made the Su-24 role reduced into an overengineered Attack aircraft, while the Tu-160 being the supersonic bomber that's missing some features its design could've fully utilized.

@tailgatetommy1571

Жыл бұрын

Yeah.... It's called the Yak 141 and the lift fan system. *Cough* F-35B

@manilajohn0182

Жыл бұрын

@@tailgatetommy1571 "Military secrets are the most fleeting of all"- Spock

The only thing I would question is why they were unable to reach engineering tolerances on the 747 (or 737 or whichever it was) and then were able to reach significantly higher requirements on these? I guess maybe if the documents explain processes more than just a teardown? I would have thought there would have had to have been assistance from somebody with a lot of experience with tooling actually being in 中国 (China) and assisting with the process.

@civiltrialatty

Жыл бұрын

Hey I can mail

@MrNicoJac

Жыл бұрын

Maybe they stole that info too, just from some other firm than a US defense contractor? (just speculating/theorizing)

@tedmoss

Жыл бұрын

@Hans Otto Kroeger Kaethler No.

@MrNicoJac

Жыл бұрын

@Hans Otto Kroeger Kaethler Yes. From Da Vinci. Obviously ;)

@thomasbarrack1384

Жыл бұрын

Because manufacturing is hard. The techniques and technologies required to manufacture components is as complex as designing the aircraft, if not more.

I’ve seen virtually every documentary on the Skunk Works and more to the point: Kelly Johnson! Your style and approach will add a true bump up to the story of Skunk Works and the legendary “slide rule” man himself. Thank you for your hard work and enlightened passion! PS: Grew up in Hollywood… Received my “ticket” at Burbank. The stories were rampant!!!

They must have a crappy security for their top secret programs, if it was that easy to steal.

@milopepper2559

Жыл бұрын

Everything they have they were given. Otherwise, the US aircraft manufacturers would be out of work! So they leak some information the other side told something and then they can go to the Pentagon and say wow we need to build something even better, we need a few more billion dollars.

@jj4791

7 ай бұрын

China has ~1Bn people. The same percentage of their population is Genius IQ and many are educated in the USA. In order to stop hackers, you have to be smarter than them. And also employ that person to construct a better defense than another genius cant figure out. Chess grand-masters often lose. Why is that? Can't they just so better?

Thanks for stating as fact the design link from the F-16 to the Lavi to the J-10. There are proponents of the last two who insist the designs were not related; I encourage anyone with doubts to simply look at the aircraft.

@nikoc8968

Жыл бұрын

everything China has is a copy or uses stolen tech...anyone who tries to argue this is either anti-western or simply pro-China/communism.

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

@@jack99889988 I agree that looks can be deceiving. And good ideas, aerodynamically speaking, can visually "inspire" other aeronautical engineers, without any "stealing" of tech/blueprints. I've actually had opportunity to converse with some former soviet aerospace engineers, generally in russia, 'copying' was just a matter of seeing a photo of a US design, and saying "oh, that's a good solution to this or that engineering problem, lets use that idea in our design". And to be fair, that happened both ways. However... in the case of the J-10, it IS a Lavi with a few trim pieces swapped. To be fair to China, back then China wasn't quite as aggressive about stealing tech (compared to now anyway). It was more that the Lavi was "sold" to China, under the table. Much to the disappointment of the american taxpayers who paid for the Lavi development. So were a number of other key systems, like some of the loaned out Patriot missile systems. And I don't really care if it's classified. I'm not into covering up treasonous behavior.

@buildmotosykletist1987

Жыл бұрын

@@jack99889988 : A US engineer who looked at the Zero and was involved in the design of the P38 and other planes wrote a book about the Zero. I suggest you find it. It's a good read and might fill in a few holes for you.

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

@@jack99889988 Perhaps read my stand-alone comment under this video. China has a very doctrinal approach to not wasting effort "inventing" tech, when it's cheaper to steal it. That's not to say that there aren't brilliant people in China, but that the CCP's official policy is that if you invent something rather than steal it, you may have wasted CCP resources. This is rather limiting to China's long term success. And sometimes leads to "close copies" which actually lack the key details needed to do what they're designed to do. China is perpetually a generation away from having a truly competent aerospace engineering sector, and will remain so until the CCP changes it's spots. That's not to say that "knock-offs" in large quantity can't be a serious problem.

@johnserrano9689

Жыл бұрын

@@jack99889988 you're right and have a good point. But you're arguing a known Fact. China did I fact steal almost all knowledge which was viable, Fact. Theyre doing the best they can overall, but designs of their own ground up components such as the engines where they were not able to steal prints of the newest designs, and it shows as the installed engines are lacking severely in capability, new design to basically make full use of the j20s capability are way, way over due taking an extremely long time to produce successfully on their own.

What you get, when you order an F22 off Wish.

@rgloria40

Жыл бұрын

Korean Stealth jet sure looks like a F22...

@Clee-os6pv

Жыл бұрын

Sorry the South Korean KAI KF-21 Boramae takes the cake on this one. It's been said to be called the little Raptor.

For a country that don't have a presence on world's leading consumer / commercial grade automobile and aircraft, it's very hard to comprehend they are ableto suddenly master stealth 5th gen military aircraft

@rodrozil6544

Жыл бұрын

Commercial planes have to pass tests set by West.

@ctai010

Жыл бұрын

@@rodrozil6544 very good point 😂😂😂, I'm sure that's why 👍👍👍

@rodrozil6544

Жыл бұрын

@@ctai010 yeah, good educating you 👍

@joshm3484

Жыл бұрын

But they haven't mastered it. Like most Chinese knockoffs, it somewhat resembles what it says it is, and kinda does something similar, but not as well, and not the same. It's the 5th gen fighter version of the Chinese iPhome or Strarbuck's.

@ctai010

Жыл бұрын

@@joshm3484 I agree with you 100%, they are very far from master it. As I said, they didn't even have world-class commercial automobile and commercial aircraft. (and they like to drench in their excuses such as 'West set standards", that's very good. When your enemy is making a mistake, don't correct them)

It's not just that the J-20 has the MiG 1.44's shape and the F-22's skin. It's targeting system is incredibly similar to the F-35. The similarities to America and Russian designs are not just superficial.

@jacksonteller1337

Жыл бұрын

They bought the Mig 1.44 design and stole the technology on the Boeing mainframe. Part of the avionics are stolen from Thales Netherlands and the ejection seat is a very bad copy of the British one.

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

@@jacksonteller1337 keep thinking like that, Americans stole everything from the Europeans during the industrial revolution. It will be a matter of time before the US is accused of stealing from China.

It also bears a lot of resemblance to the cancelled J9 interceptor. J20 = J9 mixed with Mig 1.44 with American 5th gen design concepts

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

It's enough of a mixture of ideas to call it a home-grown design I think. But it's blatantly obvious that they stole the technology to modify their design, to make it actually functionally stealthy (or at least semi-stealthy) and applied that tech to their home grown design (which has some visual copying, but frankly everybody copies visual inspiration in aerospace).

@PW060284

Жыл бұрын

@@kathrynck agreed. I think the strong resemblance to J9 is enough for me to call it indigenous design. The individual components, not sure

@tedmoss

Жыл бұрын

@@PW060284 You can't see what you can't see.

@rodrozil6544

Жыл бұрын

@@kathrynck many Chinese studies and work in American companies. One of Boeing early chief designer was Chinese. Chinese guided missile was gifted by Chinese who also co founded JPL. I don't doubt intelligence of Chinese scientists and engineers.

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

@@rodrozil6544 Oh it's not an intelligence issue. It's a CCP policy issue.

How stealthy are those Chinese 'packages' routinely probing Taiwan's ADIZ?

@TheRibbonRed

Жыл бұрын

Taiwan frequently spots the rest of the fleet, but no news of J-20s yet. Maybe the PLA still have some logic left, but it's only a matter of time before their ego-waggling results in Taiwan exchanging info with US & NATO.

@tainechen1634

Жыл бұрын

If they did, they are stealthy enough becasue they were never detected by ROCAF.

So basically it's a copy of every single plane out there... Which makes it unique imo

Drawing upon the developments and engineering of other countries may be looked upon as unethical, it is well worn practice and common between competing nations and companies. Never underestimate the level a competitor will sink to attain victory.

@patrick_test123

Жыл бұрын

These machines only purpose is to kill humans. I don't think industrial espionage is making a noticeable difference in an ethical calculus here.

@olsonspeed

Жыл бұрын

@@patrick_test123 Perhaps you will change your mind when an aggressor nation bombs your home.

@patrick_test123

Жыл бұрын

@@olsonspeed What are you reading/projecting into my comment?

You mean the fighter that India was able to pick up on weather radar?

@viktornicht260

Жыл бұрын

Exactly this one ;)

@MardukTheSunGodInsideMe

Жыл бұрын

To be fair, you just need to spoof the targeting radar until your weapons are in range to be stealth.

@misgarcruz3779

Жыл бұрын

Wait what???? Can you pass me the document?

@jonathanpfeffer3716

Жыл бұрын

J-20s, like all VLO fighters, wear radar reflectors in peacetime. This isn’t meaningful.

@nighthawk4298

Жыл бұрын

Not weather radar su 30 mki radar detected the j 20

If you position the wings on the j20 forward and place the carnards as horizontal stabilizers the jet does bare a striking resemblance to the f22

@brittoncooper1251

Жыл бұрын

Physics is weird like that.

@ToreDL87

Жыл бұрын

It looks kinda like a mix between the sukhoi and the raptor.

@l123u6

Жыл бұрын

Quite a difference though ain't it

@0MoTheG

Жыл бұрын

Also cut off some of the wings trailing edge. Reshape the air inlets.

@russellfisher2853

Жыл бұрын

@@l123u6 yes, nothing nearly as capable.

China got access to American F16 and other military equipment of US from Pakistan for decades in exchange of Missile technology from China to Pakistan.

Man loved this vid. Great work on bringing all in at the end. Makes us wonder if we are going to see a J36 or something like that from the info they got about F35. Humm.

Is it me or does that look like normal 1.5in pvc pipe just underneath the forward part of the canopy as its closing? About 1:16....

Well you can't steal combat experience.

@oxide9717

Жыл бұрын

CCP hold my beer 🍻

@hughmungus2760

Жыл бұрын

US combat experience bombing insurgents with no airforce... real relevant.

@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368

Жыл бұрын

@@hughmungus2760 Yeah, using the US airlift/sealift capacity to bring to bear all the logistics, maintenance, and all the required personnel to run those operations -- irrelevant, right? -And using all the intel, sensors, and c2 to coordinate the efforts of all branches of the military, intel community and NATO allies? Irrelevant. -Testing the accuracy and abilities of pilots, ordinance, and the vehicles? Irrelevant. -Doing it all over the world, Vietnam, Panama, Kosovo, Iraq 1 & 2, Afghanistan, Libya and god knows how many black ops? Irrelevant. But sure, China doesn't need any of that experience. I'm sure they can learn all that on the fly in a combat zone.

@hughmungus2760

Жыл бұрын

@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 Maintainance and logistics are something that can be done in peacetime. Thats no difference to china coordinating annual flood relief and counter-terrorism. Also, any pilot that flew in combat missions earlier than iraqi freedom are likely retired by now and in their late 40s at the youngest. Combat experience is only relevant for a decade at most before soldiers age out. Hell. the 2003 invasion of Iraq is hardly against a peer adversary either, its not like Iraq had stealth fighters and AESA equipped missile cruisers. The last time the US faced a peer competator military was WW2.

@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368

Жыл бұрын

@@hughmungus2760 Oh yeah, the CCP are known for their awesome flood relief. Every year they drown hundreds of thousands of people downstream of dams, act surprised, then tout their relief efforts in front of the state-run media to appear like they're everyone's savior. Go live in China, and you'll see just how flawed their capacity for mobilization is. And the near-peer argument is BS. Nice chatting with you.

Now I can't stop thinking about stealth lawnmowers.

There’s no way that MIG 144 is stealthy. It looks more like a Eurofighter.

@kevinc8633

Жыл бұрын

The logic used was quite twisted. When faced with the fact that the J20 is a completely different aerodynamic configuration than the F22, the video, instead of drawing the simplest conclusion that it was not a copy, suggests that it is a copy of a combination of Soviet and US designs. You can make anything a copy this way. Just pick some traits of the thing and find some other things that matches its traits and claim that it is a copy of a combination of different things.

@jj4791

7 ай бұрын

The J-20 utilizes stolen stealth technology from the F-35 program. They stole the engineering data in order to make their own. As in, they downloaded the actual computer program that is used to shape all-aspect stealth geometry and used it to design their own fighter incorporating all the features they desired. Including Diverter-less supersonic inlets, and many other stealthy features that can't simply be copies from a photo. Specific angles, etc.

This video is not helping your Chinese social credit score!

Borrowed? Are they going to give it back?

@capricorn839

Жыл бұрын

To the commies : to cheat, lie and steal is glorious

For something like aircrafts, if it is not a 1 to 1 copy, it will not work and probably require just as much work as to making new ones from scratch.

Dude you could do a feature film about Johnson and the Skunk Works (or Jack Northrop, for that matter), and I'd be here for it.

I just wanna know what the actual radar cross section numbers are

@brothergrimaldus3836

Жыл бұрын

From what I've found J-20 rcs is 1-3 m2.

@jonathanpfeffer3716

Жыл бұрын

@@brothergrimaldus3836 Not even close to true.

A lot of people are confusing targeting radar with detection radar when discussing if the plane is truly stealth. You just need to be untargetable until you can release your weapons to achieve successful stealth strike.

@TheRibbonRed

Жыл бұрын

Survivability Onion. If you're already detected, it's only a short matter of time before the targeting problem isn't a problem anymore. If your country is spending billions of dollars & years of effort in a stealth program, try to make it worthwhile.

@tedmoss

Жыл бұрын

So you become completely target-able after release of weapons? What video game is this? Do you then get shot down by the fighter behind you?

@itsmederek1

Жыл бұрын

​@@tedmoss Releasing weapons doesn't necessarily break stealth lol

@MGZetta

Жыл бұрын

their supremacy at risk, give them a break. they at the refusal and anger part, soon they gonna accept when they learn j-20 intercepted their invisible f-35 without trouble.

@itsmederek1

Жыл бұрын

@@MGZetta The point is that the F-35 would see the J-20 first and then shoot it down. Are you saying stealth is pointless or that china has better stealth? Either is dumb

Hey dude, could we have a video like that for the J-31/FC-31? Really like the way you explain it.

If it looks like a crook, if it acts like a crook, if it talks like a crook, if it steals from other crooks......it's the PRC (China)! GREAT video content, Alex! You obviously did your homework, and you showed your work ;-) You've always got the best data when you're crunching numbers. A comment I'd like to mention, & I know it's not your fault, but 8 minutes in, the video was fuzzy, choppy, w/ extreme tiling. It was a real strain on the eyes. Not sure if others experienced it, but it didn't play well for me. Thanks.

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

maybe if you look at WW2 airplanes they all look similar, yet no one is accusing others copying. Airplane design is based testing not aesthetics. the video is fuzzy because he got old low resolution videos, btw.

Let’s ask the magic 8 ball: Question: “Did China steal the plans for US and Russian stealth aircraft?” Answer: “Does a bear shit in the woods? Does Howdy Doody have a wooden ass? Is the Pope Catholic?”

@thefoundingtitanerenyeager2345

Жыл бұрын

I watched a video on nuclear USS Ford class nuclear aircraft carriers and apparently the everything about the reactor design of us submarines and aircraft carriers are completely classified China probably still only has diesel boats because they can’t get a good lack at the reactors

@tranbachuyen6655

Жыл бұрын

is there anything wrong about stealing stuff and tech from your biggest and most threaten enemy ? the game of throne for top 1 superpower is either you die or i do , 100% zero sum game . so stealing , spying , robbing ...do anything to harm your enemy = fair game . because your enemy will clearly do the same to you at any given change

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

also Answer:" "Do Americans shoot each other with guns"

Can you cover the new aircraft carrier that built like Gerald Ford carrier… it’s technically AirPower….

Damn shame… We let those SOBs get to powerful. We should’ve put a stop to their military advancement kinking ago.

An F-35 and a Raphael had too many drinks together at a Chinese New Year party.

Mig 1.44 seemed more a response to the Eurofighter Typhoon, X-31, British Aerospace EAP, Mirage 4000 and Rafale, and others.

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

He conveniently forgot that canard wing design is the trend in Europe. He could have said J-20 stole design from the French and the Germans, it won't even matter because he is just making accusations based on "precedents". The company that "stole" Su-33 was Shenyang, not that Chengdu company that designed J-20. Chengdu engineers are truly great engineers.

@SoloRenegade

Жыл бұрын

@@alanOHALAN "Chengdu engineers are truly great engineers." time will tell. But I work with Chinese engineers in my job, and they are Not innovative at all. It's a cultural issue that prevents them from being innovative. And I've even had fellow Chinese engineers back me up on this. they see the same problems I do. But if you don't think China copies from Russia, US, and others, you clearly know nothing about aviation. the list of CCP knock offs is ridiculously long. Russia even wont sell certain things to CCP because they Know they only want to buy a few to copy them. the CCP makes no attempts to hide the fact they are copying.

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

@@SoloRenegade China is a big place, it is hard to generalize. If you look Chinese engineers as a whole, they have come a long way, considering China was a rural national prior to 1949 now it has the most complete industrial sectors, and this is only their catching up. Once they are done catching up, then they will be doing more of the inventions. This current generation of engineers born after 1980s have proper education, unlike those before then who had only basic education due to culture revolution and just poverty in general.

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

@@SoloRenegade CCP is a party like Democrat party, the party doesn't run the country's industries. You need to realize CCP is more about politics than engineering. Most of the engineers are not into politics.

@SoloRenegade

Жыл бұрын

@@alanOHALAN I can generalize in this case because the reason their engineers aren't good or innovative is not due to lack of individual ability, but due to societal pressures. China is catching up so fast because the world economic groups are still favoring china and giving them every unfair advantage. also, the CCP implemented Capitalism, which it is now trying to roll back. "Once they are done catching up, then they will be doing more of the inventions." it doesn't work like that. "This current generation of engineers born after 1980s have proper education, unlike those before then who had only basic education due to culture revolution and just poverty in general." that has nothing to do with why they suck at engineering. the lesser educated people are actually better engineers. I'll hire a farm boy with no college degree over a modern day engineering graduate.

"This isn't your lawnmower! Your lawnmower didn't have canards on it like this one!" - Your Neighbor who Definitely Stole Your Lawn Mower

@chrisbraswell8864

Жыл бұрын

We have never liked canards on our aircraft, except the first one and some in ww2 (never produced) and the XB-70, and delta wings went out with the F-106 which was very fast but turned like a brick in the air. We usually use very high tech thin wings with all kind of moving parts. It has served the f-16-15-18 very well . One of their planes is very like a f-16 with intakes as a f-35. I'm sure our data went into it.

America can’t keep a secret!

When you steal it. You don't gain the knowledge of failure, and loose the advantage of success.

@hughmungus2760

Жыл бұрын

the money saved reinventing the wheel goes into more useful things, like developing a hypersonic missile that works.

But the real question: how good is it really?

@AZ-hj8ym

Жыл бұрын

J20 is as agile as F22 while having the cuting edges avionics like the F35

@james_l4337

Жыл бұрын

@@AZ-hj8ym Supposedly if only it has the WS15 engine? But there's trouble with mass production so only 2/3 original speed with WS10C US engine on F35 is more then double that of WS15 while service & life is longer. So in the end It's not something one can catch up in a decade easily.

@Yelocalhooman

Жыл бұрын

No one knows

And yet the Chinese don't seem to be capable of producing an airliner which can be certified by EASA or the FAA. It doesn't make any sense, if you can produce a 6th generation fighter, an airliner is a doddle.

@tainechen1634

Жыл бұрын

Actually, build an airliner is considerably more difficult, that is why about a dozen companies build fighters but only airbus and boeing builds airliners.

@hughmungus2760

Жыл бұрын

Fighter jets tend not to have to worry about profitability. airlines operate with extremely thin margins for competitiveness.

@umbrellastudio7481

2 ай бұрын

​@@hughmungus2760so, C919 doesn't count.

@hughmungus2760

2 ай бұрын

@@umbrellastudio7481 the only reason why the C919 even exists is because china's airlines are state owned enterprises which can be instructed to buy from specific suppliers by the government. The only way the C919 would be competative is if your country is literally sanctioned by the US and EU and can't buy commerical airliners from either.

Kelly Johnson was more than an incredible engineer, he had the ability to envision the future of and then build it in the present. His name belongs among the greats Nikola Tesla, Howard Hughes, Wernher von Braun, and Kelly Johnson.

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

He had to bring out Kelly Johnson to try to make his BS video more credible, but if anyone believes his accusations I guess all power to them. Keep thinking you are the best and lie to yourself.

@ianmastin

Жыл бұрын

@@alanOHALAN I would be very interested to hear your counter argument or any evidence you may have against his theory.

@CountingStars333

Жыл бұрын

R Kelly.

So? Chinese designed cars must have 3 or 5 wheels to claim them as their own designs?

And as usually here come the KZread military aviation experts who think they know everything about the J-20... "it's not stealth" "It's not 5th gen" "its too slow" "it can't do this or that" Yet they have never flown it, never worked on it and never even been up to it before lol.

@yingnyang2889

Жыл бұрын

It is not stealthy….too much noise. Stealth is not just radar. It is acoustic, visual, infrared and speed. That thing is a joke for detection - the canards give up a lot of RCS and was added for maneuverability. They do not have vectored thrust and the verticals stabilizers are too small (hence the canards). I suspect the canards are also there for anti-stall characteristics.

@Yelocalhooman

Жыл бұрын

@@yingnyang2889 and may i ask where you get those?

Love your work…….wish you covered or brought someone on to cover land tech, sea tech and space tech with the same love you cover the air…….happy fourth and gods bless you

When you build a fighter that's a copy if your neighbour, you also run the risk that your neighbour also knows how to defeat it. Much better to build something unique that leaves your neighbour forever guessing

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

first of all, it needs to be actually a copy, which this video doesn't prove, at least not without speculation and Russian state media report.

Canards are the dumbest thing you can put on your stealth fighter. Completely negates the point of a low radar cross section

@voidtempering8700

9 ай бұрын

That isn't true. Many 6th gen proposals have canards, along with the Sea Widow. Both would have been very stealthy.

@Jake-mi3bj

9 ай бұрын

@voidtempering8700 proposal not in practice and tests have been done by the US Air force, Lockheed, Grumman, etc and they all concluded canards outweighs the maneuvering ability and showed higher radar return when maneuvering or when the canards actuated defeating the purpose

I love these videos on the current and future generation aircraft. What's funny about china stealing designs for our steal fighters is the fact that anyone can make a jet look stealthy on the outside, but what's more important is the internals and avionics. Which they do not have, yet....

@user-vt2cr8qd1b

Жыл бұрын

we don't know exactly how much they stole though

@thomasbarrack1384

Жыл бұрын

@@user-vt2cr8qd1b agreed. But as has happened in history when our IP has been sold, having the documentation and Information regarding the specifications and dimensions does not mean they have the ability to manufacture said product. Anyone can look at designs and blueprints, but the technology, techniques, and materials required to actually build one are not easy to manage. Which is where china still lays behind, for now. They also don't have the interconnectivity, avionics, electronics, and electronic warfare capabilities as the United States. That is for sure, for the time being. But yeah, as much as the J-20 looks like a 5th gen fighter, it's not. Still uses 4th gen engines. Hasn't been updated to be useable on a carrier, and we have no idea what kind of avionics are in there. Furthermore, the j-20 is being upgraded to include thrust vectoring, which entirely changes the dynamics of flight. Flight characteristics, and training regimes required to have competent pilots. Which will have to be learned through experience or with help from the Russians. Thankfully despite appearances, China is still at least 20 years behind us in many respects. And almost on par in others. Hopefully the U.S. will start hinting at their 6th gen jet which has already had its first flight, and the F-35 production isn't even finished yet. Crazy how this all works.

@chrisbraswell8864

Жыл бұрын

They didn't have to steal, we have invited them to our colleges, businesses, military and our government, we have now been way to friendly with them. "Crack Pipe Hunter" can get Biden to do anything for him ( He said so) and Hunter is with a company that would love to do business with China and I'm sure Hunter has put right in to sell it to them (old news).

@thomasbarrack1384

Жыл бұрын

@@chrisbraswell8864 businesses and colleges sure. But not to our black and Q programs. They stole it with the hell of underpaid American citizens. Most of the information they get is either through blackmail, bribery, or coercion using money and other perks. Of course espionage has taken place, but its so much easier to find disgruntled employees and just pay them. Much harder to insert someone into black programs. The level of getting is unbelievable. I worked on nuclear power in the navy, and my clearance alone cost 200k+, they went and spoke to neighbors I didn't even know I had when I was a child. Foreign nationals aren't allowed to work on those programs, "no forn" is a level of security clearance, considered lower than confidential. They are not letting individuals who are not U.S. citizens have access to these programs, many of the DoD officials and other wings of the government don't even know they are happening. Let alone foreign nationals from any nation, including most allies.

@jul1anuhd

Жыл бұрын

@@thomasbarrack1384 As Elon Musk once said "We realized that the true problem, the true difficulty, and where the greatest potential is - is building the machine that makes the machine." Thats the most important thing. It doesn't mean you can build the aircraft 1:1, as long as you don't have the machine which builds the machine. Thats the more complicated thing.

The J-20 isn't a 5th generation stealth fighter. It is at best a 4.5 generation flying brick.

@llkk290

Жыл бұрын

J-20 is much better than F-22,

@pugbug288

Жыл бұрын

@@llkk290 Please tell me how it’s better.

@brothergrimaldus3836

Жыл бұрын

@@llkk290 riiiiiiiiight

@brothergrimaldus3836

Жыл бұрын

@@llkk290 J-20 has an rcs of 1-3 m2. Estimated F22 RCS... .005m2

@llkk290

Жыл бұрын

@@pugbug288 The F22 is a product of the last century, and when it entered service, it was already lagging behind, especially its stealth coating needs to be repaired after every flight, making an already expensive aircraft even more expensive, which is how its production line was Reason for removal

Well done video!

I like the lawnmower analogy.

Do a video on everything you know so far about the j31 please please please please please please please

@wall7171

Жыл бұрын

Come on man look three people want to watch it make the video

Well seeing how "quality" China projects are i wouldn't be surprised if this falls apart.

@hughmungus2760

Жыл бұрын

haha. like american infrastructure right?

@didyoumissedmegobareatersk2204

Жыл бұрын

😂nah more like f35

@alanOHALAN

Жыл бұрын

which projects?

@opmacace523

Жыл бұрын

@@alanOHALAN their tofu dregs

@opmacace523

Жыл бұрын

@@hughmungus2760 no more like the tofu dregs in China

You also forgot to mention that the weapons bays on the J20 looks exactly like the F22 but you got to admit the J20 looks damm fine

One thing I do not understand is how in military forces it's fine to bomb, shoot and destroy but it's somehow 'unethical' to copy.

Probably be great for 4 or 5 flights then the wing cracks to reveal the carbon fibre is actually cardboard. Tofu dreg style.

@elmohead

Жыл бұрын

That's some advanced cardboard tech

@RobsonRoverRepair

Жыл бұрын

@@elmohead double walled technology

China also “borrowed” Russias ability to Exaggerate performance tests. The J-20 is much slower and the radar cross section is 8x that of F-35

@tarmaque

Жыл бұрын

Nicely stated, and my very own observaton.

@weishi9804

Жыл бұрын

Slower?

@stevesoltysiak1161

Жыл бұрын

@@weishi9804 that’s correct. The J-20 is massively under powered for its size and weight

@shadypark78

Жыл бұрын

It would be even slower if they used their own trash engines.

@MGZetta

Жыл бұрын

and somehow j-20 snake up on f-35 and spooked it. lmao.

For a while, there were 600 million copies of Microsoft Office in China for every license actually purchased.

An interesting similar situation was that the soviets spent so much effort trying to copy US chip designs, they were always perpetually 5 to 10 years behind. Not only that, they always lacked the necessary manufacturing expertise.

It's utter bs to just claim something is a copy just because it REMOTELY looks somewhat similar, of the 5th gen designs, J-20 is more unique than it seems. In fact the F-35 looks a lot more like the Russian Yak-141first flew in 1987, than J-20 look like the Mig-1.44

@sujitbala1492

Жыл бұрын

The F-35 and the Yak-141 have an age difference of 20 years, besides, the F-35 has its own logistics and concepts much different than a jet used in the 80s. The Chinese have a long history of copying or forging originals in any vehicular case. And I don't think that an exact replica of an F-22 and a Su-57 are "remotely similar". I think its a lot more than that.

@obsidianstatue

Жыл бұрын

@@sujitbala1492 The only difference between an F-35 and a Yak-141 is that F-35 has sloped edges, just go take a look, and you are a hypocrite to deny F-35 is a copy of Yak-141, and at the same time claim the J-20 which has an entirely different configuration to F-22 and Su-57 as "exact replica"

@sujitbala1492

Жыл бұрын

@@obsidianstatue I've taken my look and the entire design is not a copy. The Yak-141 wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for Lockheed. People such as yourself would claim that anyhow but the Yak would have had no impact on the design of the F-35. All that the 141 provided was data on what NOT to do for engine design and lift engine interconnectivity. The Yak was a failure. The F-35 is a success.

@james_l4337

Жыл бұрын

It took US a long time to physically research & put together a working prototype of the plane. Absolutely it is based on USSR plane US & USSR had always have had copy espionage theft steal each other. The mass of comments here shows the low quality of these people, the chooks cattles

That YF-23 is one beautiful aircraft.

J-20 is China's mighty paper dragon breathing reusable cooking oil

It is not a stealth fighter. It is a 4.5 gen fighter with an internal weapons bay.

@james_l4337

Жыл бұрын

Perhaps 4th Gen ☺️ Or 3 Gen it is a plane... So much drama hahaha

Looks nothing like the F22, or anything the US has out really. It's a canard layout, where the F22 and F35 are basically traditional rear elevator style airplanes. If it is a ripoff of anything, it would seem to be from the Swedish Saab aircraft or the Eurofighter Typhoon, neither of which is really a stealth. The Chinese stealth, to me, looks long compared to its span. That would give it longer moment, causing it to be less agile, I would think. If it uses regular Chinese screws, we have not much to worry about. It will fall apart on its own.

Last time I was this early my mom needed a c-section

Mach 2 takes inlets like those of the F-22 or Mig1.44. J-20 is a Mach 1.2 optimized design.

Even though the technologies were stolen/copied it is still impressive how fast the turn around time

One thing China has yet to learn (or may learn too late) is that copying =/= long-term success. Yes, copying everything your competitors did is a quick way to level the playing field. But if your indeginous research, logistics, etc. are having hard time catching up, would they really be able to keep peer-to-peer? Some of the Soviet programs learned this the hard way. Mainland propaganda victims would scream to differ, mostly because PLA/CGTN/Whatever state-run media says. But can you really fully believe those that covered up mass deaths from rocket disasters to current day flu like they're nothing? At least other militaries have in-country detractors freely expressing their discontent, grounded or otherwise.

@QuantumAscension1

Жыл бұрын

Agreed. If you can't innovate on your own, you'll always be behind the curve.

@dereklinscott8488

Жыл бұрын

Define success. If they get good enough tech to blockage Taiwan into submission using the tyranny of distance and missile tech - I'd argue copying can indeed = success.

@N1njaSnake

Жыл бұрын

Good enough knock-offs, numbers and little regard for human life can make up for long-term deficiencies.

@ChilapaOfTheAmazons

Жыл бұрын

If you are 30 years behind the curve technologically, copying stuff that brings you 20 years behind the leading edge is still a step forward.

@TheRibbonRed

Жыл бұрын

@Seiyuan Lin on that topic, lack of properly understanding the technologies they've copied (e.g. Battleships over Carriers, no coordination between IJA & IJN) have led them into getting vibe-checked in WW2. It's not about "reinventing the wheel". It's about understanding what you've copied and improving on it to your local needs. China's rush on trying to have the exact same Blue Water Navy & Air Force as the United States, while ignoring how their own doctrines will suit those militaries, will time & time again lead to their downfall. Unless they also want to change their doctrines & way of thinking, simply copying everything is only a momentary advantage. It's a foundation of sticks; quick to build, can't hold for decades.

Kelly or Ben Rich would be greatly enjoyed.

How did Lockheed manage to have such a huge security failure?

It’s how the military stays so well funded

It's always funny when experts are confused as to what a Chinese product should be a copy of, ask a room of them and get just as many answers. I see the same things in car reviews. BTW a WS-15 fitted J20 was spotted in March doing tests, and in that regard is maybe overtaking the Russians which were in a similar situation with the Su-57 waiting for the final engines.

@tiagogomes3807

Жыл бұрын

But the intended engines for the Su-57 are a generation or 2 after the WS-15. The engines in the Su-35 are superior to the ones China is still developing. And than there is the engine life cycle. Those engines China are developing won't be able to fly 150 hours...

@jinye6222

Жыл бұрын

@@tiagogomes3807 Your info is probably over a decade years old. Don't assume you're an expert in fighter jet engines. Read from real experts.

@rgloria40

11 ай бұрын

They (US NON STEM DEGREE SENIOR MANAGEMENT) outsource engineering effort to a foreign country by stealing jobs from US CITIZEN with advance STEM degrees. They don't suck dick...or do fake fucks...

For the record, Russia's state media says alot, if you pay attention (I recommend for your sanity, to not) Russia basically invented everything. The wheel, Russians, fire, obviously Russians, religion...that was the English, but the tank, Russians, the helicopter, fighter aircraft, all invented by Russians...is any of that true...no, of course not. Great work Alex...great content and excellent quality as always! Cheers mate!

@sOOpAhSCHIEFEL

Жыл бұрын

Religion by the English?

@lurchibold

Жыл бұрын

@@sOOpAhSCHIEFEL well they gotta blame someone for turning a huge amount of the world's population into nut jobs

@dwyderdom

Жыл бұрын

you had me in the first half not gonna lie

@startingbark0356

Жыл бұрын

Lol they still respect the lend leased vehicles of the USA and restore them for victory day parade, if russia claims to have invented everything same can be said about the USA, they claim they invented most things aswell which of many arent even their inventions

@Administrator0101

Жыл бұрын

Well, next time try to fix the internal problems in Canada, after all 99% of Canadians live near the border with the Americans.

As a student myself, i would love to hear more about Johnson.

You should see "PLA gyrocopter" and its similarity with AutoGyro MT-03 ( a German autogyro ). It is a direct ripoff mounted with anti-tank missiles but China state media said it is developed in China.