"China's copying of foreign weapons systems and subsystems" stuff

[Hanse]

Incredible copycat

Just China being China.

With current trade negotiations between the US and China and politicians and Trump commenting on stolen patents and IP, copyrights, etc. I don't put it past the Chinese to imply "We've stolen the 'plans' to your most high tech weapon system" to get a reaction.

As much as they've stolen, and put into service, I wouldn't put either past them.

 

[litzj]

Is that real copy cat of B-21 again or just piece of amateur's ?

 

[Michel Van]

If now the photo is real, congratulation China you got Stealth bomber program !
or just is photoshop or just wooden Mock-up

never mind, it got same effect on Pentagon and capitol Hill:

 

[sienar]

Pretty lazy of them to just mirror the 3d model - look at how the tarp has identical folds on the left and right side. Fabric simulation isnt that hard....

 

[Mike Pryce]

All stealth bomber designers just copy from this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-gmAloZDE8

 

[Deino]

Oh, come on guys. It is as much already a copied B-2 like the original image shows already the true B-21 !!!

It's just a CG, and IMO not really a good one, but it is a good joke to adapt NG's promotional and even more it is the first official confirmation that there is something similar in the making.

Otherwise I know that it merely fits nicely into the IMO quite simple minded view of certain members that China steals everything, copies everything, is unable to develop anything meaningful on their own ... in their world copying in aerospace is so much easy. Just let a Chinese pass by a row of aircraft or other hardware and it will be copied immediately.

Strangely that only Chinese are able to do so ... : ... or is there really not the slightest possibility that even Chinese engineers are able to design and develop and aircraft that is not called a "copy" simply since it uses a common configuration??

Surely impossible for some here...

Deino

 

[Hanse]

I know that it merely fits nicely into the IMO quite simple minded view of certain members that China steals everything, copies everything, is unable to develop anything meaningful on their own ... in their world copying in aerospace is so much easy. Just let a Chinese pass by a row of aircraft or other hardware and it will be copied immediately.

Strangely that only Chinese are able to do so ... :

How many examples do you need? Denial isn't going to change anything. Surely you wouldn't claim this Chinese knock-off of a RAM launcher is an original design? Instead of insulting forum members as "simple-minded" why not just accept reality?

"unable to develop anything meaningful on their own "

Where did anybody say this? IMO their conventional ballistic missile forces are second to none (and it's not close).

 

[TomcatViP]

With current trade negotiations between the US and China and politicians and Trump commenting on stolen patents and IP, copyrights, etc. I don't put it past the Chinese to imply "We've stolen the 'plans' to your most high tech weapon system" to get a reaction.

Is that a bis repetita of when we had the First alleged J-20 flight coinciding with Robert Gates visit? Maybe it has become a new Chinese tradition?

 

[Blitzo]

The two renderings are so comically similar that you can't pay me to say that it wasn't intentional. Funny enough, a number of people surmised that the B-21 configuration would be a cranked kite based on that rendering and we know how that turned out.

China loves US pop culture, that's why there's been a bunch of Michael bay esque action films in the last few years.

In this case, the end teaser was obviously made by someone who liked the NG superbowl ad, but as far as the H-20 goes, there are only so many ways to design a stealthy flying wing with the technology we have.

Even the B-21 itself looks like one of NGs earlier B-2 design proposals from decades ago, so don't be too surprised if H-20 looks similar to B-2, B-21, and/or a mix of the various stealthy flying wing UCAV demonstrators in the world.
If anything it would be contrarian to expect otherwise.

 

[seruriermarshal]

I think Chinese RAM missile copy from German , EU sold many technologies to China .

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

The two renderings are so comically similar that you can't pay me to say that it wasn't intentional. Funny enough, a number of people surmised that the B-21 configuration would be a cranked kite based on that rendering and we know how that turned out.

China loves US pop culture, that's why there's been a bunch of Michael bay esque action films in the last few years.

In this case, the end teaser was obviously made by someone who liked the NG superbowl ad, but as far as the H-20 goes, there are only so many ways to design a stealthy flying wing with the technology we have.

Even the B-21 itself looks like one of NGs earlier B-2 design proposals from decades ago, so don't be too surprised if H-20 looks similar to B-2, B-21, and/or a mix of the various stealthy flying wing UCAV demonstrators in the world.
If anything it would be contrarian to expect otherwise.

I personally can't stand the Chinese entertainment, maybe Mandarin Chinese just inherently comes across as incredibly cheesy and melodramatic? I know my Mandarin speech mannerisms differ from family members who grew up in China.

Regardless of the rendering, it's important to note that it may or may not reflect the actual H-20; just look at how many people thought the B-21 would be a cranked kite based on the NG Superbowl ad.

You're right though that it's not exactly a surprise that any stealthy flying wing would end up looking pretty similar to each other. The B-21 configuration is about as good as you can get without straight up going to a diamond which is its own can of worms in terms of aerodynamics and stability. Even so, you'd certainly bet that the Chinese will try to conduct IP theft regardless of their still remarkable homegrown innovation.

 

[Blitzo]

I personally can't stand the Chinese entertainment, maybe Mandarin Chinese just inherently comes across as incredibly cheesy and melodramatic? I know my Mandarin speech mannerisms differ from family members who grew up in China.

It definitely isn't the language overall obviously, but

Regardless of the rendering, it's important to note that it may or may not reflect the actual H-20; just look at how many people thought the B-21 would be a cranked kite based on the NG Superbowl ad.

Agree.

You're right though that it's not exactly a surprise that any stealthy flying wing would end up looking pretty similar to each other. The B-21 configuration is about as good as you can get without straight up going to a diamond which is its own can of worms in terms of aerodynamics and stability. Even so, you'd certainly bet that the Chinese will try to conduct IP theft regardless of their still remarkable homegrown innovation.

I fully expect China to have conducted espionage into relevant technologies, I mean over the years we've heard about failed attempts at trying to pass on B-2 related technologies and so forth. I can imagine there must be some cases where it's been successful.

But my issue is with people who will react to H-20's inevitable mix of B-2/B-21/flying-wing-ucav configuration and use that as proof for espionage or IP theft. There are cases where external similarities are a basis for suggesting reverse engineering or espionage, but this category of aircraft probably isn't one of them.

 

[LowObservable]

Surely you wouldn't claim this Chinese knock-off of a RAM launcher is an original design?

True, but odd - since that particular launcher was designed to fit a Phalanx mount - and the relative depth and width of the missile pack is not very relevant to system performance. Also note the Type 1130 CIWS in the Liaoning photo, which is a quite original design.

Also, whenever you can see similarity between Chinese and Western systems, it's (almost by definition) derived from open sources. Anything extracted by computer network exploits is on the inside, or concerns the processes by which things are made.

 

[dark sidius]

Cranked kite or not nobody know instead Northrop what is the real design of the B-21, if you look the shadow B-21 poster it seam that the shape have changing a little since the super Bowl tease.

 

[Hanse]

Surely you wouldn't claim this Chinese knock-off of a RAM launcher is an original design?

True, but odd - since that particular launcher was designed to fit a Phalanx mount - and the relative depth and width of the missile pack is not very relevant to system performance. Also note the Type 1130 CIWS in the Liaoning photo, which is a quite original design.

Oh, I agree in the case of the 1130. But then there's the Type 730 / Goalkeeper. And then there's the missile used in the RAM knockoff.

Also, whenever you can see similarity between Chinese and Western systems, it's (almost by definition) derived from open sources. Anything extracted by computer network exploits is on the inside, or concerns the processes by which things are made.

Yes and no. I'm sure getting their hands on, say, the CATIA files for the Mk41 VLS would certainly give them a leg up. (Even the bolt patterns are the same on the Chinese VLS.)

 

[martinbayer]

Oh, come on guys. It is as much already a copied B-2 like the original image shows already the true B-21 !!!

It's just a CG, and IMO not really a good one, but it is a good joke to adapt NG's promotional and even more it is the first official confirmation that there is something similar in the making.

Otherwise I know that it merely fits nicely into the IMO quite simple minded view of certain members that China steals everything, copies everything, is unable to develop anything meaningful on their own ... in their world copying in aerospace is so much easy. Just let a Chinese pass by a row of aircraft or other hardware and it will be copied immediately.

Strangely that only Chinese are able to do so ... : ... or is there really not the slightest possibility that even Chinese engineers are able to design and develop and aircraft that is not called a "copy" simply since it uses a common configuration??

Surely impossible for some here...

Deino

A little thought experiment - can you provide examples of original Chinese aerospace or weapon systems that appear to later have been emulated by Western countries?

Martin

 

[LowObservable]

Nobody's arguing that China doesn't engage in CNE on a large scale.

However, the bigger strategic picture is that, in defense technology, China is a "fast follower". It's a reasonable strategy when you're starting from nowhere. Think about the first Korean cars to be exported. Now look at a Genesis G90.

 

[Hanse]

Nobody's arguing that China doesn't engage in CNE on a large scale.

However, the bigger strategic picture is that, in defense technology, China is a "fast follower". It's a reasonable strategy when you're starting from nowhere. Think about the first Korean cars to be exported. Now look at a Genesis G90.

I don't disagree. That's why it annoys me to no end how lazy the US has been over the last 25 years when it comes to security. China learns and then RUNS with it. No navel-gazing over there.

 

[Blitzo]

So it shouldn't be a surprise that H-20 will look similar to the B-2, which was the pioneer of aircraft of that category.

In that both might be flying wings, sure. Aside from that gross detail there is no reason for them to look exactly alike. The, "same mission so it's logical for them to look like each other" excuse frequently gets trotted out as a fig leaf for a blatant rip-off but it's rarely applicable.

Well it's not only about form following function (aka same mission) but also about being able to do that mission in the most cost effective and often most proven means there is, all with a similar level of technology when developing it.

FC-31, KFX, TFX, AMCA, and the F-3 proposals all look like varying degrees of F-35+F-22 for a reason.

And even "exactly alike" is a matter of debate, because how exact is exact? J-20 and F-35 are the only fighter aircraft in the game with chin mounted stealthy facet EO sensors, does that make J-20's configuration an exact copy of F-35 in that regard on that level? Because if we go a bit closer we can see J-20's facet EO housing has a different geometry to F-35's EOTS.

And all of this is ignoring the software/avionics, and materials side of things as well.

 

[flateric]

...

 

[Hanse]

FC-31, KFX, TFX, AMCA, and the F-3 proposals all look like varying degrees of F-35+F-22 for a reason.

Sure - because they cribbed the design. They said, "it's working for the F-22 and F-35 so it'll work for us too". The F-35 followed the F-22 because they're both Lockheed products and LM already knew the F-22 worked. This should be obvious. There's nothing magical about the configuration though. The arguably better YF-23 certainly didn't look like it nor did MDD/NG's JSF entry look like the X-35.

 

[kaiserd]

May I suggest we put this somewhat spurious tangent to one side.
Specifically in relation to this topic we don’t know the design of the new Chinese bomber, we don’t actually know the design of the B-21, and beyond all likely being variations of the flying wing we don’t know how similar they will be to each other or to the B-2.
In that context the argument being pursued by some contributors appears to be more an exercise in trying to belittle the evident capabilities of the people of a particular country for less than objective or laudable reasons.
Following the same logic virtually all US jet engine/ aircraft development ripped-off the Germans and/or British. Or all modern airliners literally ripped off the 707 (rather than all being influenced by the 707 and what came before them).
But these arguments wouldn’t fit the specific agendas the contributors in question are interested in pushing.

 

[LowObservable]

And let's not even get started on business jets. If it wasn't for Gulfstream windows and Dassault cruciform tails you'd have a hard time telling any of them apart from the others.

 

[fredymac]

Some people have the fevered dementia to think that the HL-20 is a blatant copy of the BOR-4. Only those subject to puerile jealousies and sinister intentions could think that. Except for NASA saying they ripped off the design from Russia, there is no reason to think there is any connection other than simple physics.

 

[Hanse]

And of course the USSR NEVER copied the US Shuttle orbiter, no sir.

 

[Hanse]

And let's not even get started on business jets. If it wasn't for Gulfstream windows and Dassault cruciform tails you'd have a hard time telling any of them apart from the others.

Or like most modern commercial airliners are a twin, tube and wing. But those, like the business jets, are optimized for a single design point: cheapest seat/mile. So comparing that to, say, a fighter aircraft is apples to oranges. Shown below are two virtually identical aircraft demonstrating the physical law that all things designed to meet the same need must look the same:



(I could add many, many more.)

 

[donnage99]

I concur with this. Obviously the f-22 set the general direction of stealth shaping for this generation of aircraft. Had it been the yf-23 that won, you would see very different design coming out of korea, japan, europe, china, russia than what we have seen

 

[Hanse]

I concur with this. Obviously the f-22 set the general direction of stealth shaping for this generation of aircraft. Had it been the yf-23 that won, you would see very different design coming out of korea, japan, europe, china, russia than what we have seen

Yep. Just look at how many designs have F-16-like features, particularly in the wing/hstab/fuselage shapes and interfaces: F-2 (well, that pretty much is an F-16), the Taiwan F-CK-1, KAI T-50, JF-17.