China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by NRao »

Sid,

That bulge, in your first picture, is the hinge for the rear door. The same as in the C-17:

Image
Image

Pathetic thing is that they have not figured out how to incorporate a winglet/fence?

Seems to me it is a clone of a C-17!!!!
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by NRao »

Chinese posters. Any chance of getting pertinent information and not just pictures here on out. So, if posting an engine pic, please include some good (reliable?) stats too. (May be I am asking too much. China is China.)
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Sagar G »

shiv wrote:Not only is there no door, even the fuselage where the door might be placed is rounded and not flat.
Was the C17's mush always tapered or has it been done gradually cause after seeing many pics for comparison of Y20 some of them looked rounded like here and here.

For further comparison with C17's mush click and another by Kedar.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

These are the C 17 doors
Image

Seen from another angle see how flat and straight the end of the ramp is
Image

This is the Il 76 version
Image

This is the A 400 cargo door
Image
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

People with experience in aircraft design who are also open and honest, tend to talk in a different language from the average frothing jingo. Transport aircraft development is not easy and the issues that crop up are a far cry from "Hey now we can carry heavy tanks to xyz and kick your ass"

From Wiki about C-5 Galaxy
Aircraft weight was a serious issue during design and development. At the time of the first flight, the weight was below the guaranteed weight, but by the time of the delivery of the 9th aircraft, had exceeded guarantees.[14] In July 1969, during a fuselage upbending test, the wing failed at 128% of limit load, which is below the requirement that it sustain 150% of limit load. Changes were made to the wing, but in a later test, in July 1970, it failed at 125% of limit load. A passive load reduction system, involving uprigged ailerons was incorporated, but the maximum allowable payload was reduced from 220,000 pounds to 190,000 pounds. At the time, it was predicted that there was a 90% probability that no more than 10% of the fleet of 79 airframes would reach their fatigue life of 19,000 hours without cracking of the wing.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by NRao »

I have always said that China has made progress only as compared to where they were, but future progress will be limited. How far they have yo go is given by the number of actuators they have on one wing of the Y-20. Even with the products they are building they seem to have a very long way to go. What to talk of future growth.
Selamat Pagi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 09:53

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Selamat Pagi »

NRao wrote:Chinese posters. Any chance of getting pertinent information and not just pictures here on out. So, if posting an engine pic, please include some good (reliable?) stats too. (May be I am asking too much. China is China.)
Y-20 gives air power a push
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013 ... 178675.htm
Carrying a payload of up to 55 tons, the Y-20 is able of flying to destinations 4,500 km away from China, such as Guam in the western Pacific Ocean or Egypt, and if accompanied by a tanker aircraft it can even fly 9,600 km to Angola in southern Africa or Sydney in Australia, military analysts said.
A much better video of the first flight. It shows the Y-20 tilting right and left as it fly past the crowd.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjP6_v5p6t0
[/quote]
Last edited by Selamat Pagi on 29 Jan 2013 07:31, edited 1 time in total.
Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 533
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Nick_S »

Arjun tank on CCTV:

andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by andy B »

I think the front section looks very similar to the AN70.
ashi
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 19 Feb 2009 13:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by ashi »

Selamat Pagi wrote:
NRao wrote:Chinese posters. Any chance of getting pertinent information and not just pictures here on out. So, if posting an engine pic, please include some good (reliable?) stats too. (May be I am asking too much. China is China.)
Y-20 gives air power a push
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013 ... 178675.htm
Carrying a payload of up to 55 tons, the Y-20 is able of flying to destinations 4,500 km away from China, such as Guam in the western Pacific Ocean or Egypt, and if accompanied by a tanker aircraft it can even fly 9,600 km to Angola in southern Africa or Sydney in Australia, military analysts said.
A much better video of the first flight. It shows the Y-20 tilting right and left as it fly past the crowd.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjP6_v5p6t0
The article also quotes a different stats:
The Y-20, with a crew of three, has a maximum payload of 66 metric tons and a maximum takeoff weight of more than 200 tons, China Youth Daily quoted military sources as saying. The high payload means the aircraft can fly the heaviest tank of the PLA — the 58-ton Type-99A2.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

Selamat Pagi wrote: A much better video of the first flight. It shows the Y-20 tilting right and left as it fly past the crowd.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjP6_v5p6t0
Click below to see a woman in the above video crying and saying "Damn Jews Hang all of them ah tchaah!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjP6_v5p ... page#t=98s
Last edited by shiv on 28 Jan 2013 10:06, edited 1 time in total.
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by rajanb »

"The test has reached the pre-set goal," the report quoted an unnamed Defence Ministry official as saying. "The test is defensive in nature and targets no other country."
What pre-set Goal, Ashi?
ashi
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 19 Feb 2009 13:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by ashi »

rajanb wrote:
"The test has reached the pre-set goal," the report quoted an unnamed Defence Ministry official as saying. "The test is defensive in nature and targets no other country."
What pre-set Goal, Ashi?
It is reported a successful interception by a direct hit on the target

Someone in XinJiang captured the fallen target in video after the interception.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNTA3NzU1MDA4.html

Added:

China carries out mid-course missile interception test
nits
BRFite
Posts: 1156
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by nits »

China Successfully Tests ‘Carrier Killer’ Missile In The Gobi Desert
The China Times is a 63 year old Taiwanese paper slightly slanted toward unification, but with a solid reputation and accurate reporting. The Times report originates with a Google Earth image published at SAORBOATS Argentinian internet forum. The photo shows two big craters on a 600 foot platform deep in China’s Gobi desert that Chinese military testers used to simulate the flight deck of an aircraft carrier. There has been talk of the DF-21 for years with estimates of its range, threat, and theater changing implications, but this could be the first known test of the rocket. The Dong-Feng-21D ballistic missile is expected to ring China’s coast on its truck-mounted launcher, posing a significant threat to U.S. Naval forces in the region. The 21D is particularly deadly in that it streaks to the atmosphere guided by satellites and possibly GPS enabled drones, and then drops faster than sound straight down on its target.
Image
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

nits wrote: Image

:rotfl:

Someone's got to be kiddin! This is serious Benis material. I mean the drop a bomb on a desert and maybe kill a few non Hans and then take a photo of the craters from the air. Then draw a red colored aircraft carrier shaped line around the crater in the photo and claim the bombs fell exactly there?

I mean who's going to fall for that? Why not sink a ship?
Ramius
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Ramius »

plus if you are aiming to validate a system for moving targets why not aim for some twin humped camels in gobi desert :lol:
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by rajanb »

Ashi:
It is reported a successful interception by a direct hit on the target

Someone in XinJiang captured the fallen target in video after the interception.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNTA3NzU1MDA4.html

Added:

China carries out mid-course missile interception test
Somehow, I am not very convinced.

Is someone a photchor?

At what height did the intercept take place?

And this is announced the day after we test our missile? Is Pakiness getting to you chaps also?
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by member_20317 »

shiv wrote:
nits wrote: Image

:rotfl:

Someone's got to be kiddin! This is serious Benis material. I mean the drop a bomb on a desert and maybe kill a few non Hans and then take a photo of the craters from the air. Then draw a red colored aircraft carrier shaped line around the crater in the photo and claim the bombs fell exactly there?

I mean who's going to fall for that? Why not sink a ship?

Isn't the target that white platform. Gives some ideas on approx. accuracy they expected. One hits the stern of the ship and one bang in the middle. That is if the picture is not cooked up, which really has been the case from China.

But how does one detect and target if this thing moves just that much. Surely both the missiles got the same target coordinates, even if the AC is simulated.

This ABSM seems more a headache for the Chinese then for Umrikhans.
Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Boreas »

Difference between what you have done and what you want to achieve is same as - sitting on a commode in your toilet than shitting right into it AND sitting in an airplane up in the air than dropping your shit such that it falls in a commode kept on a ship moving with 20knots speed in any random direction.
SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by SivaVijay »

^^^
<Dhoti shiver>
This AshBM is a serious capability. We ought to be concerned about it.
With just a single weapon system China has made the vast tibetan plateau unsafe for Vikramaditya. :(
</Dhoti shiver>
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

SivaVijay wrote:^^^
<Dhoti shiver>
This AshBM is a serious capability. We ought to be concerned about it.
With just a single weapon system China has made the vast tibetan plateau unsafe for Vikramaditya. :(
</Dhoti shiver>
:rotfl:
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Singha »

^ all part of their anti-access/area denial strategy. we seriously need to rework our plan to sail a naval invasion fleet up the Tsanpgo to launch Operation Chanakya on Lhasa

imo the white patch can also be constructed after the impacts to give the dhoti shiver to passing satellites. let google earth pick it up in next update and then have someone post it gently in internet forum..if the idea is to hit a ship, why not make something the exact shape of a CVN..the dimensions are very well known.
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by member_20317 »

I tried to think of how i would need to use such a weapon and concluded I need good sensor coverage on the seas. Then I will need radar sats with at least 10 minutes targeting window. Then I will also need more then just a few of these missiles. And despite all that with the accuracy on offer (hits are towards the edge of the platform, I am sure the mid point would have been targeted) and the fact that the ship would be maneuvering makes sure I never get to hit good enough. The GPS coordinates will have to be fed for the latest maneuver and then the missile itself should be able to maneuver that fast without overshooting and having to recorrect. Probably a 100 of these missiles would be needed just to kill one AC around 1400 km from Chinese mainland. Its more like a dumb artillery of yore trying to hit a rabbit. The rabbit will die for sure but only if you first hit it.

The only place Chinese can have that much resources available is nearer home.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by NRao »

I just do not think you guys realize how important and difficult this sinking of a ship painted on a dessert just is.

Let us visit the basics here.

At the equator, the circumference of the Earth is 40,070 kilometers, and the day is 24 hours long so the speed is 1670 kilometers/hour ( 1070 miles/hr). This decreases by the cosine of your latitude so that at a latitude of 45 degrees - Gobi is around 42 degrees (I am feeling lazy to compute the exact values here, so .......) , cos(45) = .707 and the speed is .707 x 1670 = 1180 kilometers/hr.

So, the Chinese have achieved hitting a ship that is actually traveling at 1180 Km/hr. Or 1180/3600 = 0.32 Kms/sec.

This is not our baail gadi. Serious stuff here guys.
member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by member_22872 »

^^^ deleted after having a tube light moment.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4635
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by hnair »

:rotfl: NRao-saar, classic.
eklavya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2159
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by eklavya »

Isn't a "carrier killer" just a very large anti-ship missile (kind of like an Exocet/Harpoon, just with a longer range and a heavier payload)? Given how big a carrier is, finding it must be 'easier' (from a radar/sonar/satellite image perspective) than finding a frigate? I understand that every possible jamming/defensive system will be carried on a carrier. But other than the ECM environment, why is such a big deal made out of carrier killer missiles? What's the technological hurdle?
Selamat Pagi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 09:53

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Selamat Pagi »

shiv wrote:
nits wrote: Image

:rotfl:

Someone's got to be kiddin! This is serious Benis material. I mean the drop a bomb on a desert and maybe kill a few non Hans and then take a photo of the craters from the air. Then draw a red colored aircraft carrier shaped line around the crater in the photo and claim the bombs fell exactly there?

I mean who's going to fall for that? Why not sink a ship?
They did.
Below is the decommissioned YW-4 space tracking ship seen here with radar reflectors (Arrowed) to make it bigger on radar.
Reportedly sank with DF21D in 2011. Later the same year, United States reported the missile as operational.
Image
ravi_g wrote:I tried to think of how i would need to use such a weapon and concluded I need good sensor coverage on the seas. Then I will need radar sats with at least 10 minutes targeting window. Then I will also need more then just a few of these missiles. And despite all that with the accuracy on offer (hits are towards the edge of the platform, I am sure the mid point would have been targeted) and the fact that the ship would be maneuvering makes sure I never get to hit good enough. The GPS coordinates will have to be fed for the latest maneuver and then the missile itself should be able to maneuver that fast without overshooting and having to recorrect. Probably a 100 of these missiles would be needed just to kill one AC around 1400 km from Chinese mainland. Its more like a dumb artillery of yore trying to hit a rabbit. The rabbit will die for sure but only if you first hit it.

The only place Chinese can have that much resources available is nearer home.
That is the reason the Soar Dragon UAV is for. The Soar Dragon can fly over 60,000ft and for long endurance. The Soar Dragon will be the targeting node for the DF21D.
Image
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

Selamat Pagi wrote:
I mean who's going to fall for that? Why not sink a ship?
They did.
Below is the decommissioned YW-4 space tracking ship seen here with radar reflectors (Arrowed) to make it bigger on radar.
Reportedly sank with DF21D in 2011. Later the same year, United States reported the missile as operational.
Sorry. Not good enough. Need proof. Simply reacting to my post means zilch. If they sank a ship why go though this silly drama of red line shaped like carried and two craters in the desert.

What I am trying to say here is not that there is no missile or that it will not work, but the Chinese are trying to achieve a psychological effect by doing this farcical drama. It also means that the Chinese will respond to similar psychological drama that is designed to show them (the Chinese) as vulnerable because they believe is this sort of public demonstration of power as being necessary for Chinese morale and detrimental to the morale of other nations.
PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by PratikDas »

Could it be that the lack of bushes and barbed wire fences out in the ocean for cameramen to hide behind and the lack of hazy polluted air for masking the staging area was so overwhelming an obstacle that no photos or videos of the destruction of the above ship could be taken?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Singha »

I had posted earlier about a trio of sats that china has launched that move in closely parallel orbits. I believe they have two such trios up now. their role is to track ships.
someone has estimate for real time 24x7 data on all the west pacific, it will need 100 such sats however.
but even with 20 they can achieve a scare effect because at some point any ship will be in range of these sats in the course of a day.

http://www.spaceflight101.com/yaogan-16-launch.html
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10195
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by sum »

PratikDas wrote:Could it be that the lack of bushes and barbed wire fences out in the ocean for cameramen to hide behind and the lack of hazy polluted air for masking the staging area was so overwhelming an obstacle that no photos or videos of the destruction of the above ship could be taken?
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by member_20317 »

Selamat Pagi wrote:
shiv wrote: That is the reason the Soar Dragon UAV is for. The Soar Dragon can fly over 60,000ft and for long endurance. The Soar Dragon will be the targeting node for the DF21D.

Selamat Pagi ji, There are manned crafts way more capable than that UAV. All are under threat from the AC itself if not from nearby land bases. These Umrikhan ACs you want targeted carry more capabilities then you would like to admit. The horizon at 20 km altitude for you guys would be around 350 km. The Hawkeye will come with a 600 km horizon then after that there will be those F-18s to extend that further to around 800 km energetic range + 200 km kill zone and to kill these UAVs, KJs etc. Within this 650 km (1000 km – 350 km) radius you have to find a dot less then a 1/3rd of a km long and a 1/10th of a km wide without getting yourself killed first and that to without having any detection capability. Well good luck.

If the airborne assets could do this detection and coordination then the PLAN is not needed hein ji. The space based assets are the only things you can realistically use to target an AC for a window period of about 10 minutes ie. if your space based assets are there still usable after the first 2 days (ref. Singha ji above), and that too only when some other asset has already done the scanning for the large areas of sea surface for which you most likely would not have the naval assets because everybody around you would be actively pinging for those PLAN ships.

And you are talking about targeting node applications. How the hell would you target a thing that you have not even scanned yet. And if you think those sats can do the scanning well let me tell you, you are sending your wife down the criminal infested alley. Virtually everybody is looking at ASAT capabilities. Why in ones right mind would anybody do that?

PS :
Coincidently we Indians carried out our Nuke tests twice even under the Umrikhan sats. 'What 2 today?' that was the chinese reaction to the second round of tests.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Free Tibet

Post by NRao »

Passport restrictions in Tibet
Freedom of travel, history has shown, is as much a means of diversion and entertainment as it is a tool of control. From Castro’s Cuba, where until recently Cubans needed an exit permit to travel outside the country, to Ahmadinejad’s Iran, where lawmakers are considering legislation limiting women’s right to travel, authoritarian regimes often employ stringent travel restrictions as a means of controlling a population.

The latest example comes from China, where authorities are cracking down on dissenters by refusing to re-issue passports to Tibetans.

According to a report by the Washington Post, Chinese authorities instructed Tibetans to turn in their old passports, ostensibly to be replaced by electronic ones during a paper-to-electronic conversion. But the new electronic passports never materialised, leaving many Tibetans without any passports and unable to travel. The move has severely limited Tibetan travel to Nepal, where Tibetans often travel for business, religious and political reasons.

“Since February or March of last year, there has been no issuing of new Chinese passports to Tibetans, and those in the TAR [Tibet Autonomous Region] were hit hard by the move," Office of Tibet in Taiwan researcher Sonam Dorjee told Radio Free Asia.

The Tibetan passport move follows a rocky year for Tibet-China relations. 2012 saw a slew of Tibetan freedom demonstrations followed by a crackdown by the Chinese government, including the confiscation of thousands of satellite dishes and the introduction of Chinese security forces to monitor activity in the region. Tibetans embarked on a series of self-immolations in protest of China’s increasingly tightening grip, a highly-publicised measure that gained overseas attention and sympathy – and further inflamed the Chinese.

China’s new official passport, released in 2012, also includes a small watermark map that includes Taiwan, disputed territory claimed by India as well as islands claimed by the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia – a move that stirred regional ire in more ways than one. The watermark has renewed fears of China’s heavy-handedness and brought about fresh diplomatic tensions, with Vietnam and India refusing to stamp the passports and Taiwan and the Philippines lodging formal complaints.

Even under normal conditions, Tibetans face more complicated and stringent travel procedures than their Chinese brethren. “They may have to wait for years for their applications to be processed and may have to pay bribes along the way,” Dorjee said.

What’s more, Tibetans must sign waivers agreeing not to engage in “illegal activity” or “activities harmful to the nation” while abroad, must surrender all travel documents to authorities within seven days of their return home and report to police upon return, where they may be subject to interrogations – restrictions not imposed on Chinese nationals.

“It shows that even though all are considered Chinese citizens, TAR passport applicants do not have the same rights as guaranteed in China for other applicants,” Dorjee said.

Thus far, Chinese authorities have shown no signs of lifting the passport restrictions, leaving many Tibetans stuck in the TAR. As it has in other countries, the travel restrictions will likely exacerbate existing tensions between China and Tibet.
Selamat Pagi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 09:53

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Selamat Pagi »

ravi_g wrote: Selamat Pagi ji, There are manned crafts way more capable than that UAV. All are under threat from the AC itself if not from nearby land bases. These Umrikhan ACs you want targeted carry more capabilities then you would like to admit. The horizon at 20 km altitude for you guys would be around 350 km. The Hawkeye will come with a 600 km horizon then after that there will be those F-18s to extend that further to around 800 km energetic range + 200 km kill zone and to kill these UAVs, KJs etc. Within this 650 km (1000 km – 350 km) radius you have to find a dot less then a 1/3rd of a km long and a 1/10th of a km wide without getting yourself killed first and that to without having any detection capability. Well good luck.

If the airborne assets could do this detection and coordination then the PLAN is not needed hein ji. The space based assets are the only things you can realistically use to target an AC for a window period of about 10 minutes ie. if your space based assets are there still usable after the first 2 days (ref. Singha ji above), and that too only when some other asset has already done the scanning for the large areas of sea surface for which you most likely would not have the naval assets because everybody around you would be actively pinging for those PLAN ships.

And you are talking about targeting node applications. How the hell would you target a thing that you have not even scanned yet. And if you think those sats can do the scanning well let me tell you, you are sending your wife down the criminal infested alley. Virtually everybody is looking at ASAT capabilities. Why in ones right mind would anybody do that?

PS :
Coincidently we Indians carried out our Nuke tests twice even under the Umrikhan sats. 'What 2 today?' that was the chinese reaction to the second round of tests.
Just basing it off these reports…That is all.
Posted by David A. Fulghum 1:25 PM on Jul 01, 2011
The latest unmanned aircraft pictures from China have revealed a new UAV with joined wing and tail that could considerably increase range and payload and produce better handling at high altitudes. The unmanned aircraft may be undergoing near-field radar-cross-section or antenna testing since Internet images show it on the ramp with the landing gear shrouded.

U.S. analysts are already suggesting that the new Chinese UAV design -- with its 60,000-ft. cruising altitude, 300-mi. radar surveillance range and, possibly, lower radar reflectivity if made from the right composites -- could serve as the targeting node for China’s anti-ship ballistic missiles.


Meanwhile, Chinese industry is working on active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar designs and is shopping in the international market for small, powerful, airborne fighter-size and smaller AESAs.

Boeing used a joined-wing configuration in its contribution to the USAF Research Laboratory’s SensorCraft project, aimed at developing an aircraft capable of carrying an airframe-integrated, 360-deg.-coverage, high-resolution radar and remaining on station for 30 hours at 2,000 nm range. A small, low-speed free-flight model known as VA-1, with a 14-foot wingspan, was completed by AFRL in 2003 and test-flown. A model of Boeing’s Joined Wing SensorCraft was tested last year in NASA Langley’s Transonic Dynamics Tunnel under the USAF’s Aerodynamic Efficiency Improvement (AEI) program.

The new Chinese UAV was likely photographed on the Chengdu Aircraft Corp.’s ramp. Photographs emerging from Chinese Internet sources show a new design featuring a novel joined-wing layout. In the same size class as the General Atomics-Aeronautical Systems Inc. Avenger, and powered by a single turbofan engine, the new UAV is the most advanced Chinese design seen to date and the largest joined-wing aircraft known to have been built.

The company also makes the J-10 strike fighter, the J-20 stealth fighter prototype and a Global Hawk-like maritime reconnaissance UAV called the Xianglong or Soaring Dragon, which flew in December 2009. CAC officials say it has a wingspan of 75 ft., 45-ft. length and a cruise altitude of 55,000-to-60,000 ft., Chinese sources credited it with a 7500 kg (16,500 lb) take-off weight and 3800 nm range. The forebody is bulged to accommodate a high-data-rate satcoms antenna.

Joined wings – a subset of closed-wing systems – comprise a sweptback forward wing and a forward-swept aft wing. In the new Chinese UAV, (as in many such configurations,) the rear wing is higher than the forward wing to reduce the impact of the forward wing’s downwash on the rear wing’s lifting qualities. The rear wing has shorter span than the front wing and its downturned tips meet the front wing at a part-span point.

Advocates of the joined wing claim that its advantages stem from the fact that the front and rear wings are structurally cross-braced. This allows higher aspect ratio while keeping down weight and staying within flutter limits. Higher aspect ratio reduces drag due to lift, and because the wings are both slender and short-span (relative to a single wing with equivalent lift) the wing chords are short, which makes it easier to achieve laminar flow. The joined wing can also reduce trim drag.

With Bill Sweetman
As for the Chinese answer you are looking for... here you are.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

new Chinese UAV design -- with its 60,000-ft. cruising altitude,
This is a lie. Not even one is flying.

I deliberately call it a lie because I see too many lies. Better proof of a UAV that flies at 60,000 feet is needed from multiple third parties. Again, for a useful UAV the engine is crucial. Selamat Pagi posted a typical Chinese lie when he linked and image of a CFM 56 engine and claimed it would be the next Chinese engine to power the Jinjing 20 transport aircraft.

This guy seems to have been appointed by the Chinese communist party to come and dump propagandu here.
ashi
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 19 Feb 2009 13:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by ashi »

shiv wrote: This guy seems to have been appointed by the Chinese communist party to come and dump propagandu here.
shiv wrote:
Any particular reason why this image is a mirror image of an original? With such an obvious feature it is difficult to tell that this image has not been manipulated in some way.

After much image manipulation and image enhancement I can see some faint lines that could possibly represent something. I don't think any working doors have been put in for this prototype although the space for them certainly exists. This is not a criticism - I think it is perfectly sensible not to add complexity to a prototype.

Were the wheels retracted for the first flight?
Shiv, not saying Selamat Pagi made a mistake, even if he did, you don't have to call him a liar. It is not like you are right all the time. When J-20 was out, you said J-20 has no weapon bays and working doors. When Y-20 is out, you say the same thing and I think you are wrong again. Why all the name calling?
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by shiv »

ashi wrote: Shiv, not saying Selamat Pagi made a mistake, even if he did, you don't have to call him a liar. It is not like you are right all the time. When J-20 was out, you said J-20 has no weapon bays and working doors. When Y-20 is out, you say the same thing and I think you are wrong again. Why all the name calling?
Simple. Chinese respond to taunts by releasing information or being shamed or laughed at.

If you hide you lie.

If you speak, you lie unless you can back it up.

This is a reputation that the Chinese have assiduously built up and they are going to have to live with it. Not my problem.
ashi
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 19 Feb 2009 13:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by ashi »

shiv wrote:
ashi wrote: Shiv, not saying Selamat Pagi made a mistake, even if he did, you don't have to call him a liar. It is not like you are right all the time. When J-20 was out, you said J-20 has no weapon bays and working doors. When Y-20 is out, you say the same thing and I think you are wrong again. Why all the name calling?
Simple. Chinese respond to taunts by releasing information or being shamed or laughed at.

If you hide you lie.

If you speak, you lie unless you can back it up.

This is a reputation that the Chinese have assiduously built up and they are going to have to live with it. Not my problem.
Thanks for your clarification. I think you are a liar, though.
Post Reply