Home » Air » Maybe This Really Is China’s New Stealth Jet

Maybe This Really Is China’s New Stealth Jet

by John Reed on June 25, 2012

Last week, we were inclined to say this plane was simply a Hondgu L-15 trainer jet being transported accross China via a flatebed truck. Some readers were skeptical, saying that it looked more like the stealth F-60 that China’s Shenyang aircraft-maker is rumored to be building. Well, new pics emerged over the weekend that show an aircraft that has us rethinking our initial call.

As you can see from these new pics, it appears that the mystery jet has air intakes that do indeed resemble those shown on a mock up of the F-60 (see below), it’s wing flaps also seem t resemble the F-60, and the cockpit, well, you be the judge.

Click through the jump to see an overhead view of the mystery jet that also resembles the F-60 as well as a picture of a model F-60 that strongly resembles a smaller version of an F-22 Raptor (with different air intakes and engine nozzles, etc.) I’m not even gonna say it.

If this veiled jet really is the F-60 (it could be another airplane or just a large mock up of the F-60), China might be on track to to reveal two new types of stealth fighters in less than two years.

H/t to China Defense and The DEW Line.

Share |

{ 124 comments… read them below or add one }

Prodozul June 25, 2012 at 2:03 pm

Who'd a thunk it…


SJE June 25, 2012 at 2:11 pm

Maybe our contractors and other private companies will get serious about cyber security.


Stag June 25, 2012 at 2:42 pm

Can you name exactly which private company lost exactly what data? Furthermore, and on which operating system said breach was on? Just curious.


Deaks2 June 25, 2012 at 3:30 pm
@Patrick79x June 25, 2012 at 3:40 pm

The private company was You're A Twat, LLC. The Operating System was Smarmy Blog Commenting Douche XP


SJE June 25, 2012 at 5:29 pm

The USA has a century of leadership in aircraft and technology, and then China designs and builds an almost exact replica of the most advanced fighter in a few years.

As other commenters note, as covered heavily on this blog, and in testimony before Congress, private companies are a weak link.


bon bon hi June 26, 2012 at 11:27 am

we prob gave it to them so the contractors can make money on starting 6en 7 cuz they already have g they are working on.



Vec June 27, 2012 at 11:26 am

Similarly with China.


Kole June 25, 2012 at 2:33 pm

Remember… it's made in China. No fears here.


cozine June 25, 2012 at 2:47 pm

Please watch "Back to the Future III" again, pause after you listen to the "made in Japan" conversation, and THINK.


Kole June 25, 2012 at 2:54 pm

I thought. Tell China to give food to people in Tibet and then let me know how wonderful they are. Furthermore, China's technology comes from the U.S. as we use them to make our parts for very little money. Just look at Apple and all of the iphones they make. Where? CHINA!!!!!


Nessuno June 25, 2012 at 3:30 pm

You’re just full of non sequiturs aren’t you?


justsaying June 25, 2012 at 4:37 pm

"give food to people in Tibet" wtf am I even reading? The people in Tibet have food. Have you even been to Tibet?


Kole June 25, 2012 at 5:08 pm

The people in Tibet have sufficient food? China is a communist state bro. No one there has adequate amounts of anything.

Veng June 25, 2012 at 5:24 pm

Its too bad that in reality, not movies, China has a history of making things completely half-assed.


Southern Ranger May 24, 2013 at 11:02 am

Hahahaa! How arrogant. ALL your gadgets and electronics are Made in China, your smartphone, your TV, you camera, your tablet, your laptop, everything. Even the electronics in the F22 Raptor are built in China.
-"No fears here?". Just blindness and arrogance. It´s not a good strategy subestimate your enemy.


Richard Stalker June 25, 2012 at 2:34 pm

I wonder what its performance is like? How are the engines, does it have super cruise? Avionics? I'm pretty sure that its pilots aren't as good, but there comes a time when that won't matter because of the sheer numbers of these things that China can put in the sky. This is about the first time that I am even a little worried about our dominance in the sky.


Jay June 26, 2012 at 9:19 am



Richard Stalker June 26, 2012 at 10:24 am

I said a little, but that was yesterday


Tad June 25, 2012 at 2:55 pm

Actually, it's a pterosaur. It's covered up with fabric and netting because the Chinese don't want anyone to know that they are cloning dinosaurs at a secret facility.


jacob June 25, 2012 at 7:34 pm

this good sir knows whats going on


Jflo June 26, 2012 at 8:31 am

Yes he does


Vec June 27, 2012 at 11:27 am

Your answer makes u feel good.


Lance June 25, 2012 at 3:04 pm

While the scale model dose look F-22ish the towed plane dose not. Hard to tell with all of it covered. It might be a full sized mock up. Overall with this prove if your DF tech blogger is right that the J-20 is just a experiments while new planes may be more combat oriented in Chinese test now??


Zip June 25, 2012 at 8:54 pm

Lance, you are a dumbass…

Here, let me help you:


@Patrick79x June 25, 2012 at 3:42 pm

Why would you throw your super secret new plane on a flatbed and drive across town in the daylight?


m.t July 13, 2012 at 12:01 pm

Because with 1.3 biilion people and most of the American jobs that people paid taxes into the Goverment and now they are collecting unemployment, China is laughing their butts off at us. They have never been an allie and don't plan on being one. Things are looking worse all the time.


Josh June 25, 2012 at 4:19 pm

Who would have guessed china would copy the F-22′s design (for the most part)?


majr0d June 25, 2012 at 5:27 pm

I know, what a surprise!


Justin June 25, 2012 at 6:15 pm

No kidding, at first glance it looks exactly the same. "Made in China."


Jayson June 25, 2012 at 4:52 pm

Has a certain semblance to you know what lol

Robotech.com got hacked recently too … Certain designs might have gotten stolen and we may be seeing real life VFA-6X Veritech Shadow Fighter!! http://www.robotech.com/news/viewarticle.php?id=4

I'd still be saying ooooo if that does materialize.


richard obrien June 25, 2012 at 5:44 pm

This country has been at war with the U.S. since 1950. They've made it clear to us and lots of other folks, from Vietnam to the Philippines, that they intend to take, by brute force, whatever they want, when they want it.
This is like the "phoney war" of 1939.
We're running out of time to react against an emerging global threat.


matt June 25, 2012 at 5:56 pm

Wow, just wow. That literally is an F22 mock up with an F35 cockpit. These thief's have no original ideas.


asdf June 28, 2012 at 1:38 am

If that's the case then the Spitfire is literally a Messerschmidt with smooth edges. The Mitsubishi zero is literally a p51 with no armor. And the F-86 Sabre is literally a Mig 15 with a smaller gun.


schoolmate July 15, 2012 at 3:49 pm

totally agree!


Black Owl June 25, 2012 at 5:59 pm

Looks like we're starting to see where that hacked F-35 data from a few years ago is being used.


Praetor June 25, 2012 at 6:06 pm

Easy to find out… Does the truck's driver suffered form hypoxia?


kim June 25, 2012 at 6:39 pm

I've seen other jets transported while positioned at an odd angle on their flatbed trailers, the point being to make the load as narrow as possible to clear obstructions along the way.


dubweiser101 June 25, 2012 at 7:28 pm

Another 'original' design from China. I guess creativity is in short supply over there.


SJE June 25, 2012 at 9:43 pm

1. Why create when you can copy?
2. Before you learn to be creative, you need to learn the basics. Show that you can build and operate a knock off, and then tinker to see what else you can do. At this stage of its growth, there is more to be had by copying than creating.


dubweiser101 June 25, 2012 at 10:27 pm

This is what I got from your reply in a practical sense.

"1. Why create when you can copy? " – So what you're saying is it's better to copy off your neighbours exam rather than studying for the exam yourself. Yea, never worked too well for me when I was a freshmen.

"2. Before you learn to be creative, you need to learn the basics. Show that you can build and operate a knock off, and then tinker to see what else you can do. At this stage of its growth, there is more to be had by copying than creating."
– What your saying is it's better to steal others hard work, make a few slight adjustments, then take credit for it…

Maybe it's just me, but a straight up copy of an iconic future fighter is lame in every sense…


SJE June 26, 2012 at 12:20 am

Its not about who is creating "iconic" fighters, its about defense. China has been using very old technology for decades. It wants to upgrade. The fastest way to upgrade is to copy your advanced enemies. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

As to point 2: It's not about "credit". China is trying to develop a domestic hi-tech industry. The fastest way is to copy. They really don't care about getting credit for ingenuity, they only care that they can make and sell for less than the USA.

I am not saying that we should congratulate the Chinese for this: we should use every tool available to stop their rampant piracy. But, from the Chinese side, they are merely picking low hanging fruit.


MGC June 26, 2012 at 1:01 am

I guess we should have thrown all those Nazis, whoops I mean German refugees into the ocean after WW2 and incinerated the train loads of R&D we 'liberated' from Germany. The Saturn V had a lot its design work done by a few Deutsch speakers.


SJE June 26, 2012 at 12:02 pm

Yep. The USA also got jet engines from the Germans and Brits, who were way ahead. I suppose dubweiser 101 thinks that the USA should have stuck with their prop fighters and done all their jet R&D from the ground up. Oh yeah, the USA would not have used radar, penicillin, or bazookas because they were developed by others. Thousands more would have died, but we'd have pride in our ingenuity.

Praetorian June 26, 2012 at 7:40 pm

The first P-59 Airacomet rolled out of the factory in 1942, I dought the Germans helped with that. Although the engine was inferior to the German jet engines, the tech was already here in the US to mature.

Riceball June 27, 2012 at 1:39 pm

For that matter we should probably remake all of our Abrams using nothing but good old fashioned rolled homogenized steel since the Chobam armor we use is a British invention, can't have a tank armored in a material not of our invention. For that matter, we should probably change out the armament too since the current 120mm main gun is a German design and the 105 before it was a British design. While we're at it we need to also replace the co-ax and the turret mounted 240 and use an M1919 since the 240s are Belgian guns and the M60 before it was derived from the MG42.

Rod June 26, 2012 at 12:46 pm

Why reinvent the wheel when we already sunk billions of dollars and decades of research into developing it?


Anlushac11 June 25, 2012 at 7:51 pm

The US could have built a F-35 that could fly Mach 2 but for what purpose? FAA Sea Harriers were able to lock AIM-9L's onto the heat signature of the leading edge of Argentinian Mirage III's/Daggers wings in Falklands conflict. Modern IRST could probably pick up that same heat signature.

What is difference in fuel consumption rate to fly Mach 1.6 versus Mach 2? Is the Mach 1.6 the best balance of speed and fuel consumption?

Is it possible the US has underrated the aircraft to throw off our enemies? The engine in the F-35 is of a newer design, still room to grow. Possibility for more speed with engine upgrades later?

Lastly IMHO USMC would be happy with a Mach 1.6 F-35B versus a subsonic Harrier II. USN F-18's are in Mach 1.8 range so not a major speed difference IMHO. Since F-35 carries most of its payload inside seems it should cruise faster than a Gen 4 with under wing loads.


ben June 26, 2012 at 9:31 am

the main reason for the slower modern fighters is the removal of the variable intake ramps from their designs, which were used to increase engine efficiency at high speeds.
The ramps added weight, and a potential point of failure, since if they got stuck in the high speed position, the engines would stall at low speeds.
They also prevent the intake from being designed to reduce radar cross section.

They were primarily meant to enable high speed penetration for bombers, and were also put in fighters to intercept those bombers. (or in the case of the concorde to improve fuel efficiency.)

The B-1B for example dropped the intake ramps of the original B-1A because it didn't need them for it's low level mission.

similarly, the f/a-18 and f-35 don't have them because they aren't meant to be used for high speed interceptions. and they don't need to go that fast.

The f-22 can still achieve mach 2 speeds without them because of it's immensely powerful engines that can produce enough thrust even with the reduced efficiency.


Chris June 26, 2012 at 11:19 am

Very helpful. Thanks.


Guest July 13, 2012 at 4:47 am

@ Anlushac11

Is the Mach 1.6 the best balance of speed and fuel consumption?

No, Mach 1.6 is not the best balance for speed and fuel comsumption. You won’t be able to survive because you’ll be placed at a significant disadvantage to Mach 2.4 aircraft such as the super cruising Sukhoi, J-20 and perhaps J-60 if it has the mach 2+ requirement. The wing and engine intake geometry for the F-35 is optimised for sub-sonic flight – so a more powerful engine cannot fix the problem even if one would fit in the small JSF airframe. In stealth combat configuration, the F-35 aerodynamically doesn’t and will never be able to outperform all other combat-configured 4th, 4.5, 4++ and 5th generation aircraft in top-end speed, loiter, subsonic acceleration and combat radius. It doesn’t allow unprecedented see/shoot first and combat radius advantages.

The F-35A does have large internal fuel load at 18,500 lbs, its fuel flow is too inefficient which means the aircraft will be burning a lot of fuel while deploying afterburner for e.g. supersonic engagements. Which is why the F-35 has a short range.


Guest July 13, 2012 at 4:49 am

@ Anlushac11

I prefer Mach 2+ because it has the best balance for speed and fuel consumption. This enhances both engagements of flying into the target area and destroying the high threat targets, and escape from, known threats as to get out of the fight as quick as possible to survive. Mach 1.6 doesn't work well for that requirement, which again in air combat you’ll be placed at a significant disadvantage of being shot down while being chased by a Mach 2 Sukhoi, J-20 or J-60 that the F/A-18E/F and F-35 can’t escape from the fight.


Guest July 13, 2012 at 5:18 am

@ Anlushac11

"Is the Mach 1.6 the best balance of speed and fuel consumption"?

No. Mach 1.6 and Mach 1.8 requirements are not the best balance for speed and fuel consumption. It doesn’t work well which the F/A-18 family and soon upcoming F-35 will not be able to escape in air combat and will be placed at a significant disadvantage of being shot down while being chased by the super-cruising Mach 2.4 Sukhoi family of fighters, J-20 Mighty Dragon and perhaps the J-60 if it has a Mach 2+ requirement.


Laconic August 24, 2014 at 12:04 am

much of what made the F4 Phantom so effective was it's terrific speed. It was the first fighter that could force or decline an engagement. That is, it could overtake a fleeing opponent or leave an attacker in its dust. That can't be done a Mach 1.6


Guest July 13, 2012 at 5:18 am

@ Anlushac11

The F-35's wing and engine intake geometry is optimised for sub-sonic flight – so a more powerful engine cannot fix the problem even if one would fit in the small JSF airframe. In stealth combat configuration, the F/A-18 family and F-35 aerodynamically doesn’t and will never be able to outperform all other combat-configured 4th, 4.5, 4++ and 5th generation aircraft in top-end Mach 2+ speed, loiter and combat radius. It doesn’t allow unprecedented see/shoot first and combat radius advantages.

Even though fighters are rarely used at Mach 2 for air-to-air combat or ground attack, but I still believe it is still needed for survivability which enhances both engagements of flying into the target area and destroying the high threat targets, and escape from, known threats as to get out of the fight as quick as possible to survive.

For instance the F-35A does have large internal fuel load at 18,500 lbs, its fuel flow is too inefficient which means the aircraft will be burning a lot of fuel while deploying afterburner for e.g. supersonic engagements. Which is why the F-35 has a short range.


Hunter76 June 25, 2012 at 8:19 pm

Performance differences are not important, if they can build 10 for the cost of 1 F-35.

Otoh, it could be a mock-up in a brilliant piece of strategic disinformation.


EYSY June 25, 2012 at 8:45 pm

All the while the US have been under estimating the capabilities of China. With tons of cash in hand they can invest into research of new technology (no doubt they had help through espionage). Take a look at their Space research. They have made tremendous progress in their quest for Space dominance. No doubt with time, dedication & $$$ in hand they WILL catch up with the US in air dominance and eventually surpass it.


Vec June 27, 2012 at 11:31 am

That it mate.


macrossmark June 25, 2012 at 9:01 pm

expecting the 3rd and 4th stealth fighters are coming from China …….. Leung


Jason June 25, 2012 at 10:05 pm

Just in time for Sequestration to swoop in and cripple our national defense infrastructure. Contact your local political representatives and stress how important coming to a resolution is for this wonderful country.


Tellurian Mines June 26, 2012 at 12:13 pm

Well, just as long as the wealthiest 1% don't pay a penny more in taxes and we destroy social services for the elderly, food protection and inspection, infrastructure projects, and the aid for those most needy, we can continue to fund over budget and under performing systems and platforms. God bless America's "defense contractor first" priorities! One Chinese mock up and we're ready to declare hemispherical impotence…brilliant.


Praetorian June 26, 2012 at 8:12 pm

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.

……..Abraham Lincoln


blight_ June 26, 2012 at 8:18 pm
Praetorian June 26, 2012 at 9:46 pm

Point taken +1, I always thought it was Lincoln that said that.

Maxtrue June 25, 2012 at 11:02 pm

Whether this is real or not, it is clear the China made the Raptor program their model to copy. Its a lot harder than that, but it ought to make us re-examine why we went forward with the concept of an F-22 and an FN-22. Seems the same basic strategy is still in play. With 3/4 of Air Force budget spent on the F-22 and F-35, how is it we lost our way?

Its still not too late to improve the concept while a decade or more is required to finance the future alternatives…. Yes, let's ponder that as the Chinese circle the earth in their little space station.


Ben June 26, 2012 at 12:56 am

I think you're over-complicating things.

1) If you're going to copy an airframe, what better frame to copy than the world's premier fighter? It's proven to perform.
2) It's likely also part of a mental ploy on their part. They probably think that making a fighter that looks exactly like our best will intimidate us. It gives the illusion that they can match us.


blight_ June 28, 2012 at 11:40 am


"Hey look, the Allies have this Bazooka thing. It's kind of weak"

"Let's make a bigger one. We shall call it…Panzerschreck!"


Larryje25 June 26, 2012 at 4:01 am

Ultimately, Chnan still has serious troubles training a workforce to buidl and maintain a true 5th generation plane. Like much in Beijing, this is much to-do about nothing.


cs4 June 26, 2012 at 5:28 am

Until somebody gave you a kick in the buttom.


BAJ15 June 26, 2012 at 10:42 am

I am really getting sick of seeing these supposed knock offs of western designs. This outward theft of programs is beyond out of hand. Enough is enough. When I see them banging out x models faster than we can, including the mini space shuttle by the way, we are in serious trouble. Never underestimate a potential foe like China, especially when we seemingly 'give' them this technology on a silver platter.
A pissed off tax payer


deberardo March 22, 2013 at 10:56 am



superraptor June 26, 2012 at 11:10 am

there will be thousands of stealthy Chinese jets and ?how many US jets. We will be totally outmatched.


Ben June 26, 2012 at 10:39 pm

1) By the time China has "thousands" of J-20s (if they ever even break a few hundred) we'll be beginning to field our 6th generation air superiority fighters. You're assuming we started the 5th generation the same time the Chinese did.

2) You're also assuming that you can match our fighters to China's in a 1-to-1 ratio. That's bullshit, I don't care how much you hate our planes.


apachecav June 26, 2012 at 12:27 pm

China has stolen the F22 and F35 design plans at an estimated cost to the US tax payer of 1.2 trillion dollars. The Chinese own about 1.2 trillion dollars in US Debt., Problem solved, China just Bought those plans for 1.2 trillion dollars and we no longer have a debt to China, Now if only our Government would have enough intestinal fortitude to carry this out!


Tribulationtime June 27, 2012 at 12:14 pm

Yes, they need them to produce cheap spares. I suppose that it the price of business-man playing with fire. Blame Boeing, Loockeed Martin and part of goverment which watch for importations, security and spying, etc.


Woody June 26, 2012 at 12:43 pm

Back in the 40's when quanity was a quality all its own, they didnt have the ability to shoot down more than one at a time…..even if the Chicoms send 100 after a squadron of Raptors they will still lose….their tech is still 2-3 decades behind…as much as the Chicoms worry me, the US still dominates the worlds oceans and in the air. The US F-15, 16 and 18's with its advanced avionics would make short work of any Chicom threat…and China wont make thousands of these so called Stealth planes that will look like a bomber on US radar screens…


superraptor June 26, 2012 at 3:09 pm

Dream on. There are not many Raptors and the many hundreds of supercruising J-20s with its 12 internal long range AAMs will have the F-35 for breakfast. Now we could restart production of upgraded larger Raptors, but we instead decided, thanks to the Tea party, to go for sequestration and completely cripple our military.
Freedom is never free. If we want to compete with China's military, we have to cough up the money.


Tyvern July 10, 2012 at 12:13 am

there aren't that many J-20s…not by a long shot


Rob June 26, 2012 at 3:45 pm

To both of you:

Woody – it is never wise to underestimate your opponent in any aspect. With the amount of cyber espionage that exists, it wouldn't surprise me if they could produce Air to Air Missiles or advanced radars to compete with our fighters.

Superraptor – the US is in no position to play a money battle with China. The Raptor production will be dead until a rise in nationalism and anti-chinese sentiment occurs.


Maxtrue June 26, 2012 at 10:26 pm

Gee, and I thought our innovation, freedom, capitalism, smarts were a match for sheer spending by adversaries. There are numerous places the need for the Raptor program will surface, not just China. Hell, SA-22s would have really blown those Turks out of the sky.

I think we need to pierce the media veil before nationalism and fear shake us up. One plans based on real facts. The narrative for American security and leadership has sprung a leak. And the data loss is obvious in the surprises we see.


Tribulationtime June 26, 2012 at 4:06 pm

Thanks to you too, for the tip about intakes.


Eto Mora June 26, 2012 at 8:20 pm

This could not be possible without USA & the West Investment in China..


blight_ June 26, 2012 at 10:53 pm

Very true. But we made the investment. Now what?

In the long run, we should support the Chinese people's call for increased living standards-it will make American workers more competitive.


Rob June 26, 2012 at 11:06 pm

I say push Japan into a space based air defense system & demand Russia ,China, NK, Iran conform to the global system.

All stand to benefit from government unity. More focus and be made on improving trade, cooperating on international crime & corruption.

For as long as our countries stay at odds, things will not improve. WWIII is inevitable unless something changes for the better soon.


Vec June 27, 2012 at 11:28 am

Try and u be surprised at the response.


FmrMarine June 27, 2012 at 7:04 pm

Take them on now, or take them on when it's too late. They are after us. You know this to be true. On every level they are preparing to wage and win an all out war with us. This is where all the "made in China" labels will end up killing us.

Are you all glad all your hard earned money is financing the very toys they will use to kill us.

Can you imagine there are those here in the U.S.A that are happy to see all this happen.


tyvern July 10, 2012 at 12:17 am

Time to get the US combined militia formed then…

Every man and woman able bodied enough to do some degree of soldiering will get some degree of training and a weapon.

of course the US government will never allow it, even though the need of a standing militia is in the Constitution


TH June 28, 2012 at 7:55 am

Guys! Don’t forget that german is the first country to fly fighter jets and US get theirs first jets after germany lose and US captured their scientist n these people are the guy who helps US to get infront of others in the sky.


blight_ June 28, 2012 at 11:35 am

That's an overly simplistic picture. It was between the UK and Germany, and the US deployed their jet engines after license-building some UK jet engines. The UK got their prototypes out before the Germans did (who were delayed by engine problems), but Me 262s were issued to operational squadrons before the Allies.


TH June 28, 2012 at 8:04 am

Kole, buy ticket n fly to Tibet, stay for 1 week before u make ur comments otherwise you will just look like a stupid by others. Don’t think that u know everything correctly by living in Us. Its part of politics game play by US who want to discredit China in the international world. I works in China for 5 years n travel alot around China including Tibet. I would tell you… Come here man n u will hv ur eyeball popout


Davyd June 28, 2012 at 10:54 am

Seriously, how could these be a surprise? With just about everything we buy stateside marked 'Made in China' i'm pretty sure a lot of the parts in or on the F-22 are the same way. There's no need for espionage – they've already built it! I mean, look at that thing. They don't care that the world knows it's a knock off. Its camouflage is even the same pattern as seen on early F-22s (and to a lesser extent, current ones). Quite frankly i think they should keep showing copies like this off. Why not? It's one-upmanship on the rest of the globe. It shows that they can design and build aircraft right up with the rest of the world and quite probably in far greater numbers because nobody else has the dough or the industry.

China. The Next Only Superpower.


duuude June 28, 2012 at 12:14 pm

If only McDonnell Douglas, General Dynamics, Fairchild, Northrop, Vought, Republic and Grumman were still separate fighter making entities.


blight_ June 29, 2012 at 9:14 am

What difference would it make? Having more companies no longer seems to be able to increase the efficiency of any of the firms competing. Our experience with Wall Street demonstrates that as long as big government will bail you out despite your sins, there is no incentive to be fit to survive.

It would be seven companies competing for a very few platforms in the post Cold War era. Not sure if there would be enough business to go around…


duuude June 30, 2012 at 9:42 am

Well, there's no incentive for LockMart to do a decent job on the F-35 is there?


duuude June 28, 2012 at 12:17 pm

and what if it was actually just a decoy.


pcleech June 29, 2012 at 12:07 pm

I hope the Chinese copied the OBOGS and the toxic paint too?


bob June 30, 2012 at 8:28 am

Americans seem to have a obsession with taking credit for generic ideas, which would explain why the patent system is so broken.


Sai July 2, 2012 at 1:15 am

Looks like a shitty knock off of the F-22 Raptor. Probably wont ever be as good as the real thing. Take it from somebody who is actually in the US Air Force. Were the best in the world. China will never even come close.


Guest July 2, 2012 at 11:47 am

I'm sure we can thank the Clintons for a lot of this "lost" technology


Bob July 9, 2012 at 2:29 am

What it will come down to is that the US and allies will have X number of planes that have to Fly 500-800kms to the fight. China will probably have a similar number of planes operating in a SAM belt and only having to fly 100-200kms to the flight. The US and allies planes will have to turn for home while the Chinese will have field available to chase. The number of sorties and planes in the air would probably be over whelming in favour of China even of they had the same number of places available primarily due to the turn around time for each sortie. In addition the F22 can only carry 6 or 8 A2A missiles in Stealth and the F35 4. The Chinese designs all carry 10+ missiles and may not be as stealthy but will have an advantage in numbers of missile carriers and missiles in the air.


Ghenghis July 20, 2012 at 2:53 am

I hope China did not copy the white Elephant called F22 whose oxygen is toxic to the yankees only. And yes, don't copy the F35 which is extrapolated to cost U$1T but is as faulty as the exploded Challenger space shuttle, which has since been retired to a museum in U of S. California. Pathetic US products, no wonder their exports and economy is going down in a tailspin as fast as its F22.


blight_ July 20, 2012 at 7:52 am

…who still calls Americans Yankees?


Typhoon August 20, 2012 at 3:30 pm

Guys, I am from Singapore and we have access to both Western and Chinese media.
We got a lot of articles from China relating to their Scientific Research on new products. Never estimate them because their Govt. is putting a lot of emphasis on R & D and China is producing several hundred thousand of engineers a year.

When China first detonated their first Atom bomb in 1964, the US defence ridicule them as a primitive device.
However, within 3 years they had sucessfully detonated the Hydrogen bomb with a yield of 3.3 megaton whic can demolish the entire LA city.
A year later, they exploded another nuclear device using a DF-3 medium range missile.

Some of you Americans talk down on Chinese fighter pilot skill. Just think of how they train their Gymnasts and Divers and you can draw your own conclusion.


PaperDragon December 11, 2012 at 4:04 pm

they can build all the "stealth" fighter bodied planes that they want. They don't have the knowledge or the experience in even making a fighter jet engine with a decent thrust to weight ratio. Even their best engines are light years behind what GE and Pratt were making 30 years ago. They are behind the US period. Lets just hope the Israelis stop giving them what the US gives to Israel (lost f-16 engines, yeah right).


John Smith April 9, 2014 at 4:05 am

Is everyone in here dumb?? Have you ever owned anything Chinese? They can't make a common house fan that will last a year. That's over 100 year technology. If that was anything but a SHELL of a jet. Don't you think they would have flown it to where ever it is they are taking it. They can't even make a decent jet engine, with a stolen F16 engine sitting there staring at them. Relax, If you people would just vote republican and we cut off trade with them then they no longer have an economy. Better than a Nuke.


Geometrydashapk.com June 10, 2014 at 11:17 am

all the time i used to read smaller articles that as well clear their motive, and that is also happening with
this post which I am reading here.


Kole June 25, 2012 at 2:46 pm

I have seen this many times, and the front of the F-60 looks to have a bigger RCS (Radar-Cross-Section). Reminds me of the front of the MiG-29/ Super Hornet.


guest June 25, 2012 at 4:38 pm

just like the mr2 ferrari replicas. may look like a ferrari 360, but underneath its still an old toyota


SJE June 25, 2012 at 5:31 pm

All very true. But we see time and time again the Chinese making exact replicas of the "meat".


kim June 25, 2012 at 6:45 pm

China has a large middle class with good jobs, cars, computers and other stuff, as well as some incredibly rich and succesful businesspeople. And they have an enormous, poor working class and poor farmers.

As for Tibet, food is not the main issue, but rather exploitation of the area's natural resources, and the fact that the Han Chinese population is slowly, but surely crowding out the Tibetans, suppressing and ultimately destroying their culture. Native Americans know what that is all about.


majr0d June 26, 2012 at 3:25 pm

Kole – you got nailed for telling the truth. There are a lot of communists that visit this site and don't want the truth mentioned. In China your blurb would have been deleted or at a minimum your nale would be on "the list".


Tom September 23, 2012 at 3:12 am

Stop talking your making yourself sound stupider and stupider…China is a basically a capitalist country with a 1 party government. You still reading 4th grade books on communism?


WarPony June 26, 2012 at 8:42 am

China probably doesn't outsource it's code writing to 100 folks from India though.


SJE June 26, 2012 at 2:52 pm

China also doesnt buy chips from the USA that are able to be controlled externally.


kim June 26, 2012 at 7:10 pm

If Communists care enough about this site to visit it, it'll be to get real info, as they probably well know that their own governments aren't telling the truth.

The only rants I've read on this site come from people who are pissed off at the US in regards to Middle East policies.


majr0d June 26, 2012 at 7:45 pm

I was referring to the -11 kole has above


a chinese June 29, 2012 at 4:36 am

I am a chinese but not a communist,and this site can be visited.We get enough real info.We are not enemies or bad people.Instead ,US is the teacher for almost everything here.


Praetorian June 26, 2012 at 7:59 pm

Funny story : Hap Arnold in early 1942 requested the plans for the new British jet engine. He was given the plans of the engine and went to
General Electric to have them build it. By October 2, 1942 they were testing the P-59 in the air.


GungleGeorge June 27, 2012 at 6:44 am

… And Israel more than any other. They are the only Westerners working with the seriousness and dispatch brought on by an endless fight for survival.


Ben June 27, 2012 at 1:57 pm

Let me get this straight. You honestly think that Chinese weapon systems are on par with ours? You really think that their navy, their air force, or their armored divisions could hold up against ours?

There's a reason why they haven't begun taking over Asia already: Because they know we'd shut them down hard.

And btw, Japan buys most of their high end weapons from us. Germany hasn't much helped us since WWII. You're confused.


superraptor June 27, 2012 at 8:52 pm

get real. What happened to Churchill's blood, sweat and tears? Without having more revenue there will not be any increased defense spending in the real world we live in


cs4 June 27, 2012 at 11:15 pm

Oh sure, you will shut them down hard, but are you ready to fight another drawn out war? Do you think your allies has the stomach and resources to fight with you in such a war?


Ben June 28, 2012 at 12:40 am

You're original post was confusing. I simply broke it down a little more succinctly and added a point of speculation.

Also, I believe you're referring to the "FB"-22.


superraptor June 28, 2012 at 9:25 pm

but there will be no money, it will all go into healthcare. China is smart. They have avoided to have a public health insurance program in order to be able to plow trillions into an offensive underground nuclear and conventional weapons tunnel complex.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: