China Military Watch - August 9, 2014

[NRao]

However they are already spending a lot on R&D and have made advances in many sectors technologically. Never underestimate the lizard especially now their economy have grown substantially over last two decades which will give them the necessary tools and resources catch up.

Spending heavily *only* helps relative to oneself. UNLESS your opponent reduces spending - and the worst case there is (your opponent) stop spending. So, you can spend as much as you want, but if your opponent *also* spends as much as he wants the relative gap will always remain.

China closed the "gap" by stealing, so her R&D is still weak - you cannot buy your way into R&D. And there are no short cuts for R&D, you have burn your fingers many a times. So, Chinese spending is good, but her present situation is because of stealing technologies and not based on her own R&D. And, of course lying about everything - that never helps.

Secondly, there is this little issue of collaborative spending. Or pooling. Keep a very close watch on the Indo-US interaction - especially with NaMo at the helm. The outcome may surprise most. (#Strategic!!)

It is getting to be really interesting.

[brar_w]

i don't know much about RADOR,but F22 flys over S.Korea from time to time,to warn N.korea

Of course, and they also visit Europe and the ME from time to time (even being based a few minutes flight time from Iran). The point was that the US aircraft during peacetime usually wear a radar reflector and degrade the RCS when traveling abroad. What I also said was that VHF, and UHF radars have flooded US stealth radar test ranges for years if not decades. SOC has meticulously kept up with some of them but if you neglect those radars at the ranges, you just have to look at the E-2D and its Lockheed designed radar which is a state of the art UHF radar on a flying aircraft...Plenty of testing opportunities exist and have existed against all sorts of bandwidth. The problem is that a lot of folks in the media don't get the fact that stealth designs have now accounted for these "peaks" that their designs will likely generate in certain frequencies..As long as you cover your collective A$$ over the most widely used, and the best Targeting-freindly freqs you can develop workarounds for the others...No F-22 , F-35, B-2 or LRS-B is going to go and fight its battle as a modular system in a bubble..they fight together with the other resources that have been built up to support them..The threat to Stealth aint the UHF or VHF radars that have existed in the past and will proliferate in the future, but A2AD buildups, that is things like the DF21 that go after the launch platforms, be it ships, carriers, or air bases..Hence you'll see stealth very heavily factored into the design of the LRS-B, but it will have the sort of range that can bypass a lot of the A2AD capability outside of the "B" word.

[Victor]

after all, the main locked target on CHina's screen is always the sole superpower on the earth, USA....

Would China actually 'target' its main source of income as in cause it harm? What would you do without USA? Or do you hope that you will remain friendly with the USA?

No, I believe that China wants to be the sole superpower on earth as quickly as possible and is copying the USA as much as it can (monkey see monkey do) but can't understand that it will not be allowed to by the countries around it. Too many countries, some very small, can and will do serious damage to China in a very short time if they are pushed to the wall and have no other recourse. This is happening in the South China Sea right now and shows an absurd, almost childish Chinese short-sightedness perhaps blinded by sudden wealth. What would China do if India claimed the whole "Indian Ocean"? The best 'offense' for China is to play good with its neighbors. At most it will be one of the emerging poles of a multipolar world and it will have to find a way to accept it.

[Austin]

In the run-up to the day after the opening of Zhuhai air show, China shows Medium Transport Aircraft Y-30

[Viv S]

No strictly military related - but this could also serve as a base for PLAAF AWACS, refuelers and/or ELINT aircraft.

Russia, China to jointly develop wide-body aircraft

Russia and China may team up to mass produce wide-body aircraft jointly developed by the two countries by 2025, according to Aleksandr Tulyakov, executive vice president of Russia's JSC United Aircraft Corporation.

The development of the aircraft can help Russia get around the economic sanctions of the West and can be remodeled into military aircraft, reports the website of China's nationalistic tabloid Global Times, citing a report from Russian state broadcaster the Voice of Russia.

The company has signed an agreement with Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China in May this year to produce the aircraft. Russia was forced to act after sanctions launched against it by the West in the wake of the Ukraine crisis, Global Times said.

The Russian budget airline Dobrolet was forced to shut down after its aircraft leases were revoked by European companies. Since similar treatment could be extended to other Russian airlines, Moscow has proposed building its own civilian aircraft. China has been motivated to work with Russia as it is trying to develop its domestic civil aircraft industry.

Over the next decade, the two countries will mass produce the Russian fly-by-wire Superjet-100 and the Chinese twin-engine regional airliner ARJ-21 as well as narrow-body jet airliners such as Russia's Irkut MC-21 and China's C919. The decision to produce the wide-body jet could enhance cooperation between the aviation industries of the two countries and allow them to compete in new markets.

China will benefit from the cooperation deal since the JSC United Aircraft Corporation is experienced in manufacturing various types of aircraft and Russia is the world's largest titanium producer. An alloy of the metal is widely used in manufacturing aircraft, ships, spaceships and missiles. Russian state-run VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation, the world's largest titanium producer, has signed a deal with China to supply titanium parts for China's C919. The collaboration could mean the two countries will export aircraft to countries such as Iran which are also under sanctions from the West.

Global Times said the two countries could remodel wide-body aircraft into military transportation aircraft, as Western countries have done to civilian aircraft. Currently Russia and China have installed long-distant radars on military transportation aircraft but civilian aircraft would be more economically viable and can fly for longer and faster, as well as having built-in fuel and detection systems.

Brief history here -

COMAC C929 / COMAC C939

By 2013 the Commercial Aircraft Corp of China Ltd was doing market research into the wide-body market and was waiting for authorities' approval of its own project. The entire wide-body fleet in China will reach 1,062 by 2032, COMAC said in its market outlook. The Chinese airframer had initially planned on developing a 250-seat jet, but discussions with various airlines found the demand for a 300-seater to be stronger. The plan was for a wider use of composites instead of aluminium. It is also studying what range the aircraft should have, with options in the 6,500nm and 8,000nm range.

Russia and China will complete the design for a new long-haul aircraft by year end, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said 23 October 2013. During a visit to the Irkutsk aviation hub in the East Siberian region, Rogozin said the design for a new wide-body, long-haul aircraft "should be completed by the end of 2013," and the business plan is currently being prepared.

"By the end of this year we should have a high degree of readiness to have a conversation with manufacturers," Interfax news agency quoted the official as saying. Rogozin highlighted the necessity for both China and Russia to build such an aircraft, urging the two partners to gain market share currently dominated by Boeing and Airbus in the long-distance air travel market.

Russia has all the necessary technologies but lacked large-scale serial production ability, while China has ambition to acquire the necessary competencies, as well as a huge market. The partnership on the airliner project "has been given real direction," Rogozin once said.

Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang on 25 October 2013 urged China and Russia to promote the joint development of long-range, wide-body aircraft and heavy-lift helicopters. Wang made the call at the 17th meeting of the joint commission for the regular meetings of heads of government of China and Russia, which he and Rogozin co-chaired in Xi'an, capital city of northwest China's Shaanxi Province.

The target for entry into service is 2023-25. The widebody studies focused on an aircraft rather like the Airbus A330. Comac thinks airlines will need a replacement for that Airbus type next decade. That implies competition with the 787.

[manjgu]

i think we are making too much abt chinese 'stealing' or 'copying' etc. the fact is that all countries do industrial espionage and more than honourable means to obtain technology though the scale may vary depending on capabilities and national will. this whining abt stealing/copying will get us nowhere.. india should be focussin on how to counter the threat and how to get its own R&D effort in place...

[Liu]

after all, the main locked target on CHina's screen is always the sole superpower on the earth, USA....

Would China actually 'target' its main source of income as in cause it harm? What would you do without USA? Or do you hope that you will remain friendly with the USA?

No, I believe that China wants to be the sole superpower on earth as quickly as possible and is copying the USA as much as it can (monkey see monkey do) but can't understand that it will not be allowed to by the countries around it. Too many countries, some very small, can and will do serious damage to China in a very short time if they are pushed to the wall and have no other recourse. This is happening in the South China Sea right now and shows an absurd, almost childish Chinese short-sightedness perhaps blinded by sudden wealth. What would China do if India claimed the whole "Indian Ocean"? The best 'offense' for China is to play good with its neighbors. At most it will be one of the emerging poles of a multipolar world and it will have to find a way to accept it.

well,Russia/soviet wants to break the current world order led by USA,and created one completely new order. China wants to keep the current world order,except to replace USA with China as the world leader. china is a challenger to USA different from SOVIERT/Russia.

[Zynda]

Over the next decade, the two countries will mass produce the Russian fly-by-wire Superjet-100 and the Chinese twin-engine regional airliner ARJ-21 as well as narrow-body jet airliners such as Russia's Irkut MC-21 and China's C919. The decision to produce the wide-body jet could enhance cooperation between the aviation industries of the two countries and allow them to compete in new markets.

I thought the Russians were interested in assembling the Sukohi SSJ in India? Was the offer prematurely withdrawn?

I am glad the Chinese are going ahead with the development of their own civilian aircraft. Our NAL spearheaded NCAD is a languishing even on paper with no news of resurrecting the same.

[member_28756]

Size comparison

[NRao]

check around 1:35. Interesting. The missile avoids an anti-missile.

[kit]

looks like the Russkies have sold Yakhont technology to the Chinese, which now has unveiled a Brahmos like ASCM, the CX-1..or else the Chinese have managed to obtain detailed designs of the Yakhont or Brahmos through industrial espionage activities..either way those bloody SOBs will eventuall sell a Brahmos copy/analogue to the Pakis.

Zhuhai surprise- 3rd Russian supersonic ASCM

Already, scores of images of its full-size display mock-up show an uncanny resemblance to another famous supersonic ASCM, the Mach 2.8-3.0 speed Russian-Indian BrahMos. Both share the distinctive cone-inlet air intake, a two-stage structure and similar dimensions.

..
While there is no confirmation that Russia’s NPO Mashinostroyenia sold CALT the technology from its Yakhont supersonic ASCM as it did to India to provide the basis for BrahMos, this should not be surprising. India and Russia have Russian-made NPO Mashinostroyenia 3M-54 Club supersonic terminal-stage ASCMs and Zvezda Kh-31 supersonic anti-radar/ship missiles. But China has also purchased or otherwise acquired the technology to produce its own versions, the larger and longer-range YJ-12, now in Chinese service, is based on Zvezda technology and the YJ-18 is believed to be a shorter range version of the 3M-54. So CALT’s CX-1 is likely China’s third “Russian” supersonic ASCM.

the can very well sell a much longer range version to the Pakis ..actually they did flout MTCR in case of Babur . Anyway more reason for India to have a tiered ADS . The French will be next in line of the Russians to supply China the goodies. Money talks and India better get its house in order !

[alexis]

BTW, it is not that Indians did not think along these lines.

The competitor to the "LCA" was a the drastic modification of the MiG-21 - by no less a person than a Prof at IIT-B. Without Soviet permission if I may add.

There have been plenty in India who have wanted to make derivatives of various engines too - on the side.

And, India does have a more thought out R&D. What India did not have was political will and therefore the associated funding needed for such efforts.

Copying was a phase through which China passed in the last century. They are now designing their own systems. J20/31 and the Y series transport aircrafts seems to be original designs. They are also progressing in naval designs.

[alexis]

http://www.voanews.com/content/chinese- ... 14104.html

[member_28756]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gilbert-r ... 40358.html

The Sino-Russia Partnership Is Stronger Than the West Thinks
Posted: 11/11/2014 2:46 pm EST Updated: 11/11/2014 2:59 pm EST 458683678
Gilbert Rozman Professor of Sociology, Princeton University and editor of The Asan Forum

WASHINGTON -- Some American pundits are calling for new overtures by the West that would distance China from Russia. In Japan, voices are urging the government to step up diplomacy with Russia to draw it away from China. In these appeals we can discern an assumption that divergent national interests leave either Moscow or Beijing susceptible to enticement by the U.S. and its ally in Tokyo.

These attempts to split Russia and China from each other as they grow closer together are bound to fail because they misunderstand the nature of the challenge the West faces. The true nature of the challenge is best understood through the lens of national identity. How the regimes in Moscow and Beijing see themselves -- "regime self-image" -- is critical to grasping their anti-Western stance today.

[NRao]

With that meeting with Obama, China sees itself as the top dog with the US.

In other words, the rest of us are below on the pecking order, that includes Russia and of course India.

No two ways about that.

Part of this was brought about by the GoI in the past 10 years or so. Time to deal with the situation and move on.

[NRao]

Report: China hacks into U.S.weather satellite network

[member_28722]

Copying was a phase through which China passed in the last century. They are now designing their own systems. J20/31 and the Y series transport aircrafts seems to be original designs. They are also progressing in naval designs.

1. They essentially copied 4G aircraft Russian Sukhoi tech
2. Majority here believe that Russian Sukhoi tech inferior to equivalent Western tech and also costly w.r.t lifecycle
3. Chinese are yet to resolve issues with 4G engine issues
And yet we are supposed to believe that without developing a single 3rd or 4th gen fighter from scratch , they have developed a 5th gen comparable to F-22 and F-35
If FGFA project goes on time, I don't think PLAAF will be ahead of IAF w.r.t 5th Gen ...

[Liu]

Copying was a phase through which China passed in the last century. They are now designing their own systems. J20/31 and the Y series transport aircrafts seems to be original designs. They are also progressing in naval designs.

1. They essentially copied 4G aircraft Russian Sukhoi tech
2. Majority here believe that Russian Sukhoi tech inferior to equivalent Western tech and also costly w.r.t lifecycle
3. Chinese are yet to resolve issues with 4G engine issues
And yet we are supposed to believe that without developing a single 3rd or 4th gen fighter from scratch , they have developed a 5th gen comparable to F-22 and F-35
If FGFA project goes on time, I don't think PLAAF will be ahead of IAF w.r.t 5th Gen ...

you still think so even when Chinese now is marketing J31 in Zhuhai aircraft show now?

[NRao]

you still think so even when Chinese now is marketing J31 in Zhuhai aircraft show now?

That plane is based on stolen technologies. It does not mean that this plane is hollow, it is potent. BUT what it does mean that China will not be able to get to the next level without more stealing.

The engine is a good example. China is having problems, even though they have all the information. But there is no experience in designing and building an engine ground up, result: problems.

Enjoy the J-31 while it lasts. It will not be too long.

Of course we still have no idea how good these planes are.

[member_28722]

you still think so even when Chinese now is marketing J31 in Zhuhai aircraft show now?

I would not call J31 an original plane. And it is completely unproven. It is impossible to believe the Chinese overcame all the problems which a 5th gen plane like JSF faced when they have zero originality in 3rd and 4th gen design.
Even as early as school and college level we know how far copycats go and how far actual brainys go ...

[Liu]

you still think so even when Chinese now is marketing J31 in Zhuhai aircraft show now?

That plane is based on stolen technologies. It does not mean that this plane is hollow, it is potent. BUT what it does mean that China will not be able to get to the next level without more stealing.

The engine is a good example. China is having problems, even though they have all the information. But there is no experience in designing and building an engine ground up, result: problems.

Enjoy the J-31 while it lasts. It will not be too long.

Of course we still have no idea how good these planes are.

behind the rolling out of J31 and J20 are many billion-dollar R＆D infrastructure ,besides decades of experiment data. stealing might help the accumulation of experiment data,but it can't help the construction of Billion~dlloar R＆D infrastruction. it is always the lack of R&D infrastructure ,instead of talent,that stops the R&D of developing countries like india. however,china now have world best R&D infrastructure,as well as its highspeed rail. as long as china owns Enough R＆D infratructures that can match USA,it is just matter of time for china defence tech to catch up with Usa. since Usa is cutting off is R&D budget due to its poor economy, the time for china to catch up will be shortened.

[NRao]

Nope.

Neither the J-31 or the 20 are a result of Chinese R&D. China does not have one single plane that is hers.

Neither is Chinese railway. That too is stolen and copied.

Civilian planes too.

Chinese R&D is, for sure, based on great funds. But it is too young to produce anything world class.

India does spend far less, but China has nothing like the LCA to show for her billion dollar R&D. Paper stuff.

Catching up with the US? In what? Pollution, yes. Which is why the population of the capital had to be sent on vacation last week.

[NRao]

With the local demand declining China is even more dependent on exports. Fun times.

[NRao]

besides decades of experiment data

Man!!!

I missed that gem.

[vinod]

Nope.

Neither the J-31 or the 20 are a result of Chinese R&D. China does not have one single plane that is hers.

Neither is Chinese railway. That too is stolen and copied.

Civilian planes too.

Chinese R&D is, for sure, based on great funds. But it is too young to produce anything world class.

India does spend far less, but China has nothing like the LCA to show for her billion dollar R&D. Paper stuff.

Catching up with the US? In what? Pollution, yes. Which is why the population of the capital had to be sent on vacation last week.

There is a reason why they don't reveal too much about their products. Any third party verification is not allowed. That would be catastrophic in terms of the façade they are putting up with. Everything would crumble. So, it can be anything from cra*p to super duper. Depends on who you ask and not based on any evidence. Even Pakistan doesn't want any more their trains.

[member_23370]

Chinese R&D is real enough. Unfortunately it seems still most of the products actually come from russia design houses.

[NRao]

What is "real"?

Broadly speaking R&D has three components: Funds, the product of research (in the form of readily available and highly dependable data) and marketable products.

china has the first one done - plenty of funds.

Their R&D is too young to claim they have the data. Not even possible. Granted some of their efforts go back to the 50s, but they never really produced anything original. They always borrowed "stuff" (which is fine, that is one to make immediate progress when your boss is breathing down you back).

As far as marketable products, the jury is still out. Their own infrastructure is lacking. Culturally they seem to have a penchant to show off - so they do that on the world stage. But not many realize that this showing off comes at a huge price. Just look at what all they had to do to keep the their capital pollution free for the duration of the meeting last week. Amazing. That is absolutely not progress. At best it is one arm being that of a great wrestler and the other polio-ed.

For every achievement they can claim (and some are really great), there is one that is equally bad. And the best they can do to counter this argument is to say how bad you are - which in the first place was not a part of the discussion.

[Liu]

What is "real"?

Broadly speaking R&D has three components: Funds, the product of research (in the form of readily available and highly dependable data) and marketable products.

china has the first one done - plenty of funds.

Their R&D is too young to claim they have the data. Not even possible. Granted some of their efforts go back to the 50s, but they never really produced anything original. They always borrowed "stuff" (which is fine, that is one to make immediate progress when your boss is breathing down you back).

As far as marketable products, the jury is still out. Their own infrastructure is lacking. Culturally they seem to have a penchant to show off - so they do that on the world stage. But not many realize that this showing off comes at a huge price. Just look at what all they had to do to keep the their capital pollution free for the duration of the meeting last week. Amazing. That is absolutely not progress. At best it is one arm being that of a great wrestler and the other polio-ed.

For every achievement they can claim (and some are really great), there is one that is equally bad. And the best they can do to counter this argument is to say how bad you are - which in the first place was not a part of the discussion.

well, in order to fix the missing sectors of its R&D infrastructure, china's investment on R&D has aleady supassed the combined one of EU annd is catching up with Usa before 2019.china now even can invest 2billion RMB(350m USD ) just on one wind tunnel while the total R&D expenditure of LCA is no more than that.

[member_23370]

I agree china catching up with US or even russia is far far off, but it doesn't mean that they are not pursuing or trying to copy and learn from russian and western products. India needs to step up R&D and reduce dependence on imports.

[NRao]

well, in order to fix the missing sectors of its R&D infrastructure, china's investment on R&D has aleady supassed the combined one of EU annd is catching up with Usa before 2019.china now even can invest 2billion RMB(350m USD ) just on one wind tunnel while the total R&D expenditure of LCA is no more than that.

Perhaps in some areas. Dish washers, air conditioners, etc.

Defense? Not even close.

You yourself are stating the obvious: "china now even can invest 2billion RMB(350m USD ) just on one wind tunnel". Such wind tunnels are a dime a dozen in US Universities. And, like I posted earlier, to make yourself feel good then you say: "while the total R&D expenditure of LCA is no more than that".

While that may be true (that the wind tunnel costs more than the LCA cost of development) it *also* exposes the obvious: that India can develop ground-up a world class plane with a very small budget, foreign governments that tried to slow if not sabotage the project and in world class time (some in India too are ignorant about thsi aspect).

And, *again*, I am not saying that China does not have funds - on the contrary I am saying China has HUGE funds (which is good).

What I am saying is:
1) That the funds China is investing in right now will see the fruits of that around 2040 or so, not earlier,
2) A nation like the US - which invests FAR larger sums - will continue to spend more than China and therefore will retain the agp between the US and China, AND
3) No amount of stealing technologies will help your R&D. Stealing only helps you to fix the current set of problems, NEVER R&D

[NRao]

I agree china catching up with US or even russia is far far off, but it doesn't mean that they are not pursuing or trying to copy and learn from russian and western products. India needs to step up R&D and reduce dependence on imports.

"Learning" from R&D *includes* every failure out there. R&D is about what-not-to-do as much as what-to-do.

There is nothing to learn from stolen data. Stolen data allows you to tackle a the "how" aspect of a problem, not the "why". It is the "why" that allows one to learn.

And, throwing money at a problem takes time ............ simple .................. one fails 97%+ of the time. So, yes, it is great that China is funding R&D, but it will take a long time to market stuff. R&D can solve problems, but then there are other steps, how to make it economically, adapt to changes, sales, marketing, etc.

What I can agree to is that US >>> China >>>>>>> India.

[Liu]

well, in order to fix the missing sectors of its R&D infrastructure, china's investment on R&D has aleady supassed the combined one of EU annd is catching up with Usa before 2019.china now even can invest 2billion RMB(350m USD ) just on one wind tunnel while the total R&D expenditure of LCA is no more than that.

Perhaps in some areas. Dish washers, air conditioners, etc.

Defense? Not even close.

You yourself are stating the obvious: "china now even can invest 2billion RMB(350m USD ) just on one wind tunnel". Such wind tunnels are a dime a dozen in US Universities. And, like I posted earlier, to make yourself feel good then you say: "while the total R&D expenditure of LCA is no more than that".

While that may be true (that the wind tunnel costs more than the LCA cost of development) it *also* exposes the obvious: that India can develop ground-up a world class plane with a very small budget, foreign governments that tried to slow if not sabotage the project and in world class time (some in India too are ignorant about thsi aspect).

And, *again*, I am not saying that China does not have funds - on the contrary I am saying China has HUGE funds (which is good).

What I am saying is:
1) That the funds China is investing in right now will see the fruits of that around 2040 or so, not earlier,
2) A nation like the US - which invests FAR larger sums - will continue to spend more than China and therefore will retain the agp between the US and China, AND
3) No amount of stealing technologies will help your R&D. Stealing only helps you to fix the current set of problems, NEVER R&D

ok.....all made in china are "stolen" ………hehe....keep such a good feeling on………… hehe. after all, china defense tech is proven always by its rival' s fear,instead of your comment. BTW, a complete group.of wind tunnels for aircraft R&D are not a dime a dozen in US Universities. china spend billions of dollars and decades ,but manages to finished only one. in fact, only russia,USA,EU had one before china finished it,simply because no other county would spend billons od dollars on such "uneconomical infrastricture"

[NRao]

ok.....all made in china are "stolen" ………hehe....

Up to you to keep that feeling, not me.

The planes are there to see AND track all planes that were designed in China starting in the 60s. None are original chinese - they all have components based on Russian and now US or Israeli.

IF China had developed original planes we should see the alternatives (the F-22 had 10 alternatives AFTER LM was selected). The AMCA from india you can see the alternatives (most of the failures).

So, IF Chinese R&D has been at it for decades, where are the failures to show for? Can you show me any? May be I missed something - that does happen.

BTW, a complete group.of wind tunnels for aircraft R&D are not a dime a dozen in US Universities.

In china that is true.

Not in the uS.

Which is the biggest points.

"China" means the Government of China.

"US" means all of us: Citizens, high schools, universities, corporations and the government. China cannot compete. No nation can. (BTW, that observation was made by a Russian, not me.)

china spend billions of dollars and decades ,but manages to finished only one. in fact, only russia,USA,EU had one before china finished it,simply because no other county would spend billons od dollars on such "uneconomical infrastricture"

Other nations do not have the need, else they would invest in it too. Funds are not the only thing there that is a determining factor.

India just visited Mars on a very low budget. Need.

India has not built a super wind tunnel because of a lack of need. Come the day when there is a need she will.

And, BTW, stealing is one way to reduce cost.

[Indranil]

Guys, you are going in circles.

[NRao]

Guys, you are going in circles.

I know, and will until the billions of dollars worth of funds, that the Chinese have invested, mature (into BR certifiable products) in 15-25 years.

Such is life.

Liu,

J-20. See the number of iterations they have had to go through (at least 3 I know of). *That* sir is the result of "development", for which I am sure they have had to do some R&D (now do not go off on a tangent and say - I told you. It is not teh same R&D you are talking about).

[NRao]

Oh no. One more can of worms to talk about.

Just how good is China's new 'stealth' fighter?

Editor's note: Reuben F. Johnson is a correspondent for IHS Jane's Defence Weekly, a publication devoted to defense and security intelligence and analysis. The views expressed are his own.

Zhuhai, Guangdong Province (CNN) -- Zhuhai's Air Show has always been a venue for surprises, usually first-time showings of advanced Chinese military hardware.

China's pathologically secretive defense industry normally shows nothing official of its weapons programs to anyone, which makes the biennial Zhuhai expo the only chance to see what its weapons makers have been up to.

Much has been written in the past few years about China's defense sector developing increasingly more capable weapons systems that approach the capability of their U.S. and European analogues.

Some Chinese weapons, such as a full range of anti-ship and air-to-surface missiles, seem to show that its military -- the People's Liberation Army (PLA) -- is equipped to challenge U.S. Navy carrier battle groups and potentially deny the U.S. the ability to operate in certain areas of the Pacific. But questions remain about how battle-ready the PLA is and whether it can function in a modern, network-centric warfare environment.

Battlefield autonomy

Today's battlefield operates on the premise that autonomy should be pushed down to the lowest level -- even down to the man in the field -- because time is of the essence. Getting inside of the enemy's "decision loop" is the key to victory. But, giving individual units the ability to make their own tactical decisions without their orders being delivered from several layers up the chain of command is an anathema to the "control uber alles" mentality of the Chinese leadership.

China's Shenyang FC-31 fighterChina's Shenyang FC-31 fighter
Images: China takes flight Images: China takes flight
Inside Chinese military aviation museum
'On China:' Will China use its military?
Chinese cyberthreat

READ: China's massive military machine goes on show

In terms of new weapons, the number one attraction at Zhuhai this year was the new Shenyang FC-31 fighter. It has generated a good deal of excitement as it's the first time a new Chinese military aircraft has been unveiled while still in the early stages of development -- we usually have to wait until after they start serving in the PLA's air force.

The FC-31 is designed to look like a stealth fighter aircraft in the class of the American Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It is also the second, but smaller, stealth-type design to be developed by China. The FC-31's "Big Brother," the Chengdu J-20, first flew in January 2011 but has been shrouded in secrecy ever since.

The FC-31 "looks" stealthy and its shape mimics that of the F-35 in some respects. But it is impossible to tell just how successful the Shenyang design team has been in developing an aircraft with a low radar cross section without knowing the materials used, the placement of the engines inside the aircraft, and how well the heat signature from the engines has been suppressed by the design of the exhaust nozzle section.

Flawed design?

Like other PLAAF fighter aircraft, the FC-31 is powered by Russian-made jet engines, in this case two Klimov RD-93 models, which are a specialized variant of the same engine that powers the famous Mikoyan "MiG-29." There have been rumors that a team of renegade designers from the Mikoyan bureau in Moscow assisted Shenyang in the development of the aircraft, but a senior MiG official stated "no, as far as I know they [the Chinese] completed this design themselves, and they seem to have done a good job on their own."

The MiG official may be correct. An aircraft of this type designed with Russian assistance would probably perform better.

The FC-31's flight routine shows that it "bleeds" too much energy -- so when it enters into a turn it begins to lose altitude. Even during straight and level flight the pilot has to engage the engine's afterburners in order to keep the aircraft from sinking to a lower altitude. These are defects in the aircraft's aerodynamic design that a Russian design team would not have made.

READ: China lands first jet on aircraft carrier

Western aerospace analysts point out that the FC-31 flown at Zhuhai is a "clean" jet in that it is not armed, which means that an aircraft configured for a real mission and fitted with weapons would be even heavier and would perform even worse.

Timing a coincidence?

So, why has the PLAAF chosen to exhibit an aircraft that is either overweight, underpowered or both?

It could be an oblique signal to Washington timed to coincide with President Barack Obama's visit to Beijing for the APEC summit. The underlying message: "China is stronger than you think."

This would not be the first such example of China trying to use its defense industry to flex its muscles. In January 2011, when the J-20 first flew, then-U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was in Beijing for an official visit. His read was that the timing of the two events was in no way coincidental.

Unfortunately for the PLA, the gesture falls flat.

Many would have been more impressed by the FC-31 in photos posted on Chinese websites than after seeing it actually fly at the air show.

Looks can be deceiving, as they say.

[Singha]

have they displayed models and publicity videos of the CJ10 long sword GLCM in Zhuhai?

thats the one we should be really interested in and likely to be used against our prime targets.

[rkhanna]

The planes are there to see AND track all planes that were designed in China starting in the 60s. None are original chinese - they all have components based on Russian and now US or Israeli.

China has spent over $100bn in their Aerospace and Missile Industries since 2000. That is serious hard currency and have done a steller job of closing the Gap with even the Russians. I used to work for a Firm covering Def Tech in APAC and even most Russian Analyst grudgingly agreed with that.

We can smirk about their "un original" design and copy paste tactics all we want but reality is that they have lapped us across the Technology landscape many times over.

[member_28756]

Oh no. One more can of worms to talk about.

Just how good is China's new 'stealth' fighter?

Sloppy journalism they showed a Sukhoi and called it a J31 Chinese stealth fighter. LOL this journalis does not know what he is talking about...

[member_28756]

The planes are there to see AND track all planes that were designed in China starting in the 60s. None are original chinese - they all have components based on Russian and now US or Israeli.

China has spent over $100bn in their Aerospace and Missile Industries since 2000. That is serious hard currency and have done a steller job of closing the Gap with even the Russians. I used to work for a Firm covering Def Tech in APAC and even most Russian Analyst grudgingly agreed with that.

We can smirk about their "un original" design and copy paste tactics all we want but reality is that they have lapped us across the Technology landscape many times over.

Utlimately that is the point isn't ? With the advances they made the lizard can now start building and creating their own design. Its something we can emulate.