Bharat Rakshak

Firstly, who tells you that WS10A has a same external dimensions with AL31/F?

Repeat once more,
- China has hundreds (each of them) Su-27, Su-30, J-11A, and J-10A flying. Even for their maintenance, the country needs to import Al31 at hundreds level.
- Mass production of both J10A and J11a would be finished within 1 or 2 years, thus no need to redesign them for a new engine
- J10b, J11b, J15,......, the new types of fighters will use domestic made engines. All of them.
- China will no longer import new types of aeroplane engines from Russia, in mass, any more. A time is over.

BTW, remember the story of Su-35 import? I declared similarly when somebody aroused the topic here. China will never import fighters in mass from Russia anymore. Lots of people jumped out to challenge me but now the truth has become more clear.

Please wait and see.

As for the engines, China won't truly catch up any time soon. Engine-making represents the very top cutting edge technology in manufacturing, and technology-wise, China isn't close to the top in any major field really. Maybe 10 years from now they'll have something resembling parity, but I don't expect true parity until perhaps decades from now. The WS-10 is a good start, but it's still struggling to compare with 30-40 year old designs.

Nice pic of the Varyag, can't believe that old hunk of metal has transformed into something like this:

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/2796 ... rt7cru.jpg

As for the engines, China won't truly catch up any time soon. Engine-making represents the very top cutting edge technology in manufacturing, and technology-wise, China isn't close to the top in any major field really. Maybe 10 years from now they'll have something resembling parity, but I don't expect true parity until perhaps decades from now. The WS-10 is a good start, but it's still struggling to compare with 30-40 year old designs.

Nice pic of the Varyag, can't believe that old hunk of metal has transformed into something like this:

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/2796 ... rt7cru.jpg

fogs come in banks, you can drift in and out of fog.

Shows how lots of money and 'dedication' (and of course some stealing ) can do .. Wonder if they made some design changes based on the newer british QE class carriers. Btw i am sure India can do a better job with its Vikrant class.

few questions:
1. why two "walls" on right side runway? i know it is there to absorb engine heat and flame but adding forward wall doesnt convince. if longer runway is available why cut it short? does it provide facility to queue up third plane for take off?

Why does the middle block also have divider lines ???

See from about 15 secs to about 24: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFk7kEQ5tVo

There is another vid where they test launching 4 aircrafts, could not find it this time around.

However, launching so many, so quickly seems sexy.

One 'lil problem: recovery. You launch 12 aircrafts and most will come back around the same time and there is just one recovery option.

...

...
Usually, two of the ten Rafales onboard the carrier were configured as buddy-buddy tankers, each with an in-flight refuelling pod under the centreline pylon and two to four drop tanks under the wings. One of them was systematically launched prior to any recovery cycle, ready to give away fuel to any fighter which might have encountered difficul- ties when attempting to trap back onboard the carrier. Another one was ready to be catapulted away, should the situation have got worse.

Japan on Saturday expressed concern over what it called a lack of transparency in China's massive defence spending, saying the secrecy posed a "threat" to Tokyo.

China's military budget jumped 11.2 percent year on year to $106 billion in 2012, a rise that has caused unease around the region and especially in Tokyo, Japan's Parliamentary Senior Vice-Minister of Defense Shu Watanabe said.

"There is expansion of the military budget and that is not transparent," he told defence chiefs and senior officials attending an Asia security summit, the Shangri-La Dialogue, in Singapore.

Because of the lack of transparency, Japan is in the dark about the details of China's military spending, he said.

"Chinese military budget growth, what sort of capacities they are trying to expand and what sort of purposes they have are not transparent and in that sense it is a threat," Watanabe added.

He said the unease generated by the issue contrasted with generally positive cultural and economic relations Tokyo has with Beijing.

"On the military front there are some concerns. I think all countries are the same on that front," he said.

China's growing military presence and assertive stance, especially in the South China Sea, where it has overlapping territorial claims with other Asian nations, have rattled nerves in the region as well as in Washington.

US Senator John McCain said in a press conference on the sidelines of the summit that China should be more open about its defence spending.

"What I would like to see is much more transparency on the part of the Chinese government as to how much money is being spent, what it's being spent on and what their overall strategy should be," he said.

"I don't view that China's military buildup is necessarily directed at the United States of America but I do worry when we don't know exactly how much money is spent, what it's on and we would also like to hear what their doctrine will be."

Addressing the conference, Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony said New Delhi was also concerned about China's military spending.

"Even though we don't believe in an arms race, since China has increased their military capabilities and spending more on defence, in our own way, to protect our national interest, we are also strengthening our capabilities in our borders," he said.

New Delhi: Defence Minister AK Antony on Saturday said that India was concerned about rise in China’s military spending.

China’s military budget jumped 11.2 percent year on year to 106 billion dollars in 2012.

What Dhoti shivering ??

http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/in ... 79324.html

In that Varyag pic. what are those Rope/cable like things hanging out of the ship near the Anchor?

June 4 Singaporean newspaper The Straits Times published an article where a given question - can the Chinese SSBNs to make long-distance patrols in the ocean.

In 1980, China built the first nuclear submarine with ballistic missiles. But the speed of the submarine was too small, the noise turned out to be prohibitive. To solve this problem, China has begun construction of a new generation of SSBN class "Jin" ballistic missile JL-2. It is believed that at least two boats have already been built for the PLA Navy. Nevertheless, with these subs Beijing faces serious difficulties. China can not organize a long-distance patrols and SSBN crews train away from their shores.

Two years ago the Pentagon released a report which said that the Chinese SSBNs have hidden communication system with shore-based command center, in connection with which the PLA can not print on a long patrol boats. To get in touch with the command post, the Chinese SSBN is expected to reach the ocean surface or raise a special buoy. Such tactics can lead to rapid detection of submarines and lead to the destruction of enemy ASW forces.

There is another problem - the political one. China's emphasis on the development of land of strategic forces. Head of Department for Nuclear Research, Federation of American Scientists, Hans Kristensen says: "If China wants to create a truly effective system of strategic submarine, he must make major adjustments in the nuclear policy and practice."

In addition, the new Chinese SSBN class "Jin" are equipped with JL-2 missiles, which have a range of 7400 km. If you use these missiles to the relatively sheltered coastal areas of China can not defeat the purposes of which are deep in the continental United States. To hit the target, SSBNs have to go out into the Pacific Ocean, which is not easy in view of poor communication and a high degree of vulnerability to enemy ASW.

Given the above considerations, sources say that China is far from a truly effective strategic submarine system. Christensen believes that the Chinese SSBN is more "vanity project". China may get a retaliatory nuclear strike by increasing the number of mobile land-based strategic missiles that can "hide in the vast territory of the country."