China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Nitesh · Post by **Nitesh** » 07 Mar 2013 11:27

So now Russians designed the helis also for Chinese

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx? ... 2646b5a423

Don · Post by **Don** » 08 Mar 2013 12:29

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... es-383030/

IN FOCUS: China's defence budget hike to benefit key aircraft programmes

By: Greg Waldron Singapore

06:42 5 Mar 2013

China has raised its defence budget by 11% to CNY720 billion ($116 billion), but provided no details about how this will be apportioned among its service branches and various defence programmes.

The increase was revealed in brief story posted by official state news agency Xinhua. It adds that the value of the 2013 defence budget is 1.3% of the country's GDP.

"The military spending will be used to improve living and working conditions of service people, make the armed forces more mechanised and information-based, and to safeguard national security," says the Xinhua story.

"China's peaceful foreign policies and its defensive military policies are conducive to security and peace of Asia," says Fu Yin, a government spokesman quoted in the article.

In 2012, Beijing spent CNY651 billion, up by 12% from 2011. Experts have long conjectured that China's defence budget is actually far larger than the publicly disclosed amount.

Although China's defence spending is still a fraction of US defence spending, defence analyst Andrew Erickson said in his blog that the increase has important implications for security in the region.

"Regardless of exact numbers, the People's Liberation Army [PLA] already boasts potent capabilities vis-à-vis its outstanding island and maritime claims in near seas [Yellow Sea, East China and South China Sea], regarding which Beijing reserves the right to use force," he says.

"The USA enjoys, by far, the world's largest defence budget, but its military is dispersed worldwide to pursue ambitious global missions. China's defence spending remains a distant second in size, but is concentrated primarily around China's mainland, border regions and maritime periphery. It is how it might be used there that causes concern."

Over the 12 months since the announcement of the 2012 budget last year, there have been several major developments in regard to the future of Chinese air power.

In September 2012, a new fighter resembling the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was photographed at the Shenyang Aircraft Corp airfield. Designated the "J-31" by Chinese bloggers and defence observers, the type conducted its first flight on 31 October 2012.

The J-31 joined another advanced developmental fighter - the Chengdu J-20, which first emerged in late 2010. At least two J-20 prototypes are undergoing testing at Chengdu.

Another major aircraft to emerge since the last budget is the Xian Y-20 strategic transport, a large aircraft that appears to be slightly smaller than the Boeing C-17. Photos of the long rumoured type first appeared on Chinese defence enthusiast sites in late 2012, and the aircraft conducted its maiden flight on 28 January.

China's navy also conducted the country's first fixed wing flight operations from a warship on 25 November 2012, when a pair of Shenyang J-15 fighters - which are all but identical to Russia's Sukhoi Su-33 - commenced flight operations from China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning.

Although the 2013 budget announcement (as in years past) lacks transparency, Beijing was surprisingly open about the Y-20's development and Liaoning flights. After the appearance of the Y-20, it quickly moved to officially confirm the programme. As for the Liaoning flights, it allowed a television crew from a state-run media outlet to film flight operations.

Aside from high profile aircraft development programmes, Beijing is also likely to invest in key areas such as aircraft engines, sensor technologies and precision weapons.

Don · Post by **Don** » 08 Mar 2013 20:47

http://www.gpsdaily.com/reports/China_t ... 20_999.htm

China targeting navigation system's global coverage by 2020
by Staff Writers
Beijing (XNA) Mar 07, 2013

China's homegrown navigation system BeiDou is expected to achieve full-scale global coverage by around 2020, a leading scientist told Xinhua on Sunday.

The BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) will then be able to provide highly accurate and reliable positioning, navigation and timing service with the aid of a constellation of 35 satellites, said Ye Peijian, chief commander of Chang'e-3, China's lunar probe mission.

"So far, China has successfully launched 16 navigation satellites and four other experimental ones for BDS," Ye said.

China started to build up its own space-based Positioning, Navigation and Timing system in 2000 by launching the first satellite for an experimental version of the BeiDou.

BeiDou has since started providing licensed services for China's government and military users in transport, weather forecasts, fishing, forestry, telecommunications, hydrological monitoring and mapping.

However, it is estimated that more than 95 percent of navigation terminals sold in China are GPS terminals.

To compete with foreign rivals, the BeiDou terminal can communicate with the ground station by sending and receiving short messages, 120 Chinese characters in each, in addition to the navigation and timing functions that the world's other major navigation systems can provide.

BeiDou aims to take 70 to 80 percent of the now GPS-dominated domestic market by 2020, a spokesman for the system said in December.

"We hope that the industries based on BDS will hold 15 to 20 percent of the market share by 2015," said BDS spokesman Ran Chengqi, who is also director of the China Satellite Navigation Office.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Mar 2013 20:54

China’s J-20 Fighter Might Need Russian Engines

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 09 Mar 2013 09:20

China to finish Tibet rail line close to Indian border soon

BEIJING: China will finish its rail network in Tibet up to Xigaze city located close to Indian border by next year, allowing its military to move men and material with relative ease besides beefing up transportation in the strategically important Himalayan region.

The extension line of the Qinghai-Tibet Railway to link provincial capital Lhasa to Xigaze,(Shigaste), second largest city in Tibet is expected to be completed by next year, Chairman of the Tibet regional government Losang Jamcan said.

"Hopefully, the Lhasa-Xigaze rail line will be completed at the end of this year or the beginning of 2014," Jamcan said in a group discussion of the government work report at the annual session of the China's parliament here today.

He said the completion of the project would facilitate the development of an ecological tourism zone that covers Lhasa, Xigaze and Nyingchi cities.

Xigaze and Nyingchi are the Tibetan city located closest to Sikkim, Bhutan and Arunachal Pradesh.

Xigaze City is the administrative centre of the Tibetan prefecture of the same name, a 182,000 square km area that borders India, Nepal and Bhutan.

It is also famous for Qomolangma (Mount Everest in the West), which rises up from within it.

China began the construction of the 253-km line from Tibet's capital Lhasa to Xigaze in September 2010.

China has extensively developed road rail and air infrastructure in Tibet connecting remote parts of the the Himalayan region to the mainland, which in turn helped the development of Tibet.

China so far built five airports in Tibet at Gonggar, Lhasa, Bamda, Xigaze and Ngari, which is located close to Himachal Parades.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 09 Mar 2013 11:30

Chinese mental insecurities related to small size amongst many other things cause more damage yet again:

Russian satellite hit by debris from Chinese anti-satellite test

A small Russian spacecraft in orbit appears to have been struck by Chinese space junk from a 2007 anti-satellite test, likely damaging the Russian craft, possibly severely, SPACE.com has learned.

The space collision appears to have occurred on Jan. 22, when a chunk of China's Fengyun 1C satellite, which was intentionally destroyed by that country in a 2007 anti-satellite demonstration, struck the Russian spacecraft, according to an analysis by the Center for Space Standards & Innovation (CSSI) in Colorado Springs, Colo.

CSSI technical program manager T.S. Kelso reported that the collision involved the Chinese space junk and Russia's small Ball Lens In The Space (BLITS) retroreflector satellite, a 17-pound spacecraft. The Fengyun 1C satellite debris was created during China's anti-satellite test on Jan. 11, 2007, and has posed a threat to satellites and crewed spacecraft ever since.

Evidence of the space junk collision was first reported on Feb. 4 by Russian scientists Vasiliy Yurasov and Andrey Nazarenko, both with the Institute for Precision Instrument Engineering (IPIE) in Moscow. They reported a "significant change" in the orbit of the BLITS satellite to the CSSI

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Mar 2013 12:09

Polluting and crude display of ego massage is in their blood, even in space.

The rest of world had better respond in kind.

Don · Post by **Don** » 09 Mar 2013 18:13

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NH15Ad01.html

China's winning strategy in Africa
By Brendan O'Reilly

Contention between China and the United States is extending far beyond the current hot spot of the South China Sea. As China's economy continues its rapid expansion, a truly global realignment of power is taking place. Regions that were dominated by the West for centuries are now coming into China's orbit, challenging America's position at the top on a once-unipolar world.

This trend is particularly evident in Africa. The United States is now seeking to counter China's economic and political inroads in the African continent. The Africa policies of both the US and China are important not only in their own right, but also because these policies serve to indicate the significant differences in these two powers' general foreign strategies and world views.

US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has been quick to question China's relationship with Africa, and highlight the purported difference in Africa policy between the US and China. During her visit to Senegal (the first stop of her African tour), she promoted "a model of sustainable partnership that adds value, rather than extracts it". She went on to promise: "America will stand up for democracy and universal human rights even when it might be easier to look the other way and keep the resources flowing." [1]

These comments have been widely understood as thinly disguised swipes at Chinese efforts in the region. Chinese state media reacted swiftly, saying Clinton's words constituted "cheap shots". An editorial from the official Xinhua news agency, titled "US plot to sow discord between China, Africa is doomed to fail" stated:

China's booming economic relations with Africa have stemmed both from their time-honored friendship and complementary needs of development. Its genuine respect of and support for African countries' development paths are lauded and welcomed across the continent. The friendly and mutually beneficial interaction between China and Africa gives the lie to Clinton's insinuation. [2]

One must sift through the propaganda on both sides to arrive at an objective truth behind the motives of the US and China in Africa. Both act in Africa to promote the perceived self-interest of their respective nations. While the US speaks of human rights and democracy, counterterrorism and security are at the top of its agenda. Meanwhile, China's "friendly interaction" with African states has an almost entirely economic purpose.

The raw numbers reveal China's massive economic impact in Africa. Trade between Africa and China has more than trebled since 2006, passing US$166 billion last year. [3]

The majority of this figure comes from Africa's $93 billion of exports to China - most of which is raw materials, especially petroleum and copper. African imports from China consist largely of consumer and electronic goods. According to Beijing, the past decade has seen $15 billion worth of Chinese commercial investment in Africa. In 2009 China overtook the United States to become Africa's No 1 trading partner.

However, China's footprint in Africa extends far beyond the bustling trade in natural resources and manufactured goods. Last month, at the fifth Forum on Africa-China Cooperation, China promised to lend African governments $20 billion. This figure has consistently doubled at the last three forums - in 2006 $5 billion was pledged, and in 2009 $10 billion in loans were agreed upon. Inter-government ties between Africa and China were further solidified by China's building of the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa free of charge.

The Chinese government clearly expects dividends on its massive investment in the African continent. Many of the loans to Africa are focused on infrastructure. New roads, railways and ports, while obviously useful to the Africans themselves, will help facilitate the export of natural resources to China.

China's role in Africa reveals a singular economic focus. Beijing's emphasis on economic growth and increasing trade ties with other nations is the defining point of its foreign policy - not only in Africa, but also around the world. The current leadership earns its legitimacy largely on the capability to provide an improved standard of living to its citizens, and much of China's ongoing economic miracle is based on wealth created through international trade. Its dealings with various unsavory regimes in Africa are not a purposeful affront to Western sensibilities, but are rather based purely on economic self-interest.

Meanwhile, Western critiques of China's impact in Africa often overlook the opinions of Africans themselves. Undoubtedly, there are some concerns in Africa with China's increasing presence. At the fifth Forum on Africa-China Cooperation, South African President Jacob Zuma expressed mild reservations with Sino-African relations:

Africa's commitment to China's development has been demonstrated by supply of raw materials, other products and technology transfer ... This trade pattern is unsustainable in the long term. Africa's past economic experience with Europe dictates a need to be cautious when entering into partnerships with other economies. [4]

Zuma's misgivings regarding the pattern of trade represent a common concern among some African leaders. However, this by no means is indicative of a general anti-Chinese attitude throughout the continent.

According to a 2011 BBC World Service Poll, 82% of Nigerians and 77% of Kenyans believed that China's economic growth had a "positive impact" on their country. [5] These were the highest positive ratings of China's economic rise of any of the 27 countries polled, excluding China itself. This optimistic attitude was mirrored in Ghana (62%), but markedly less prevalent in Egypt (54%) and South Africa (52%).

Furthermore, the same study found an overwhelming majority of Africans to view China's trading practices as "fair" - from 88% in Nigeria to 61% in South Africa. According to the same poll, only 5% of Nigerians and 18% of South Africans viewed Chinese trading practices as "unfair".

China's image problem in Africa resides primarily in the minds of Western observers. Although there are significant concerns about unsustainable trading practices, these concerns do not constitute a continent-wide anti-China sentiment.

Charges of Chinese "neo-imperialism" in Africa are primarily based on a pattern of trade: importing materials and exporting finished goods typical is a formula typical of colonial powers. However, the major defining factor of imperialism - military dominance and use of force - is simply not present in China's Africa policy. This is not true of China's prime Western critics, especially the United States of America.

During the past decade of China's rapidly increasing trade and investment in Africa, the United States was primarily focused on "security" issues in the continent. US involvement in Somalia's long-standing civil war has been extensive, with numerous casualties from drone strikes targeting Islamist militias. Ethiopian and Ugandan soldiers, backed by American weaponry and intelligence, have intervened in Somalia to counter the Islamists. Furthermore, in 2007, the Pentagon established the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), with military jurisdiction over the entire continent. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization's bombing campaign in Libya (which earned China's disapproval) was strongly backed by US firepower.

The myopic focus of the US on security and counterterrorism gave China an important opportunity to make economic inroads in Africa. Nowhere in the world is the foreign-policy focus of these two nations better contrasted than in the African continent. While the US was busy been bombing and arming, China was buying, selling, building and lending.

Secretary Clinton's criticisms of China's Africa policy are likely to fall on deaf ears. China's cold hard cash has proved much more effective at winning friends in the region than America's military approach.

Furthermore, China by no means has a monopoly on dealing with oppressive regimes to promote self-interest. While championing "human rights" and "democracy", the US has made deals with the authoritarian governments of Ethiopia and Uganda to promote its counterterrorism and security agenda. Daniel Kalinaki of Uganda's Daily Monitor complains that the US push for good governance is "inconsistent and shifts with its interests". [6]

Both China and the United States have extensive interests in Africa. Where Washington focuses on combating a global jihadist tide (and ostensibly promoting democracy), Beijing sees a rich potential of natural resources and new customers for Chinese goods. Africa serves to highlight the stark contrast of Chinese and US foreign policy. Both nations have been willing to strike deals with unsavory regimes for the sake of self-interest, be it economic (in China's case) or strategic (America's).

As the US "pivots" toward Asia, it is only natural that China will seek strategic depth in areas that were once dominated by the US and its European allies. If the US becomes more openly determined to contain China's rise, the ensuing struggle will be not be confined to the Asia-Pacific region. China's extensive economic ties with Africa will eventually pay political dividends.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Mar 2013 20:27

Don wrote:http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NH15Ad01.html
China's winning strategy in Africa
By Brendan O'Reilly

About Brendan Oreilly
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/mych ... 402233.htm

I plan to move to a city in Guangdong province in the fall. I will be happy to further explore my life in China, but at the same time my heart is heavy to be leaving Jiujiang. This city has given me so many delightful memories and wonderful opportunities. I have had the chance to further my career, enhance my language skills, and make lifelong friendships. Jiujiang, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

This is not a "goodbye". Instead, I want to say "zai jian". We will meet again.

Brendan O'Reilly is an educator from Seattle.

[Please click here to read more My China stories. You are welcome to share your China stories with China Daily website readers. The authors will be paid 200 yuan ($30). Please send your story to mychinastory@chinadaily.com.cn.]

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Mar 2013 22:08

I wonder how recent are those stats. Seems old to me.

China is not doing as well - diplomatically - as she was a few years ago. With a new admin moving into place there is a lot of jocking going on too. So, let us wait and see what happens in about 3-4 years. They should have some new policies in place too.

Don · Post by **Don** » 10 Mar 2013 12:57

Painted black

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 10 Mar 2013 19:05

^Won't make it fly any better or any more chinese.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Mar 2013 19:23

but does give it a cooler 'stealth' /X-project look. like the SR71 , B2 and F117 were always black...creatures of the night or higher ceilings (looking up, higher we go the sky becomes dark blue and then black).

DRDO seriously needs to fix its photography and media handouts. while we may never reach the staged choregraphy of LM or Boeing soon, we can learn something from the chinese approach as well. they have for example photographed the Tejas from the most unflattering angle possible - ground level, head on......numerous times....rather than from wing level and from the side or weapons delivery HD videos uploaded to youtube.

Shankas · Post by **Shankas** » 10 Mar 2013 22:15

Moscow paraded dummy missiles

POSTING IN FULL as this is a cached article from 1998

Moscow paraded dummy missiles

MANY OF the huge strategic missiles displayed in Red Square parades during the Soviet era were only dummies, but they scared the West into an expensive response, a Russian magazine reported yesterday.
One such fake, GR-1, an acronym for Global Missile, showed during a parade in 1965, prompted the United States to build an anti-missile defence system worth billions of dollars, said the weekly Vlast (Power). In fact, the Soviets had abandoned the GR-1 project long before the parade.

Another two mobile ballistic missiles shown in the same parade were also fakes, their test launches having been a failure, the magazine said.

"Foreign military attaches were scared to death, triggering panic in Nato headquarters," it said. "A huge international uproar followed, and only those who prepared this demonstration knew they were dummies."

One of the authors of the Vlast report worked as a missile engineer and said he had worked on a support system for one of the fake missiles to prevent it from bouncing on the stone-paved Red Square in Moscow. The magazine said the Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev first bluffed the West with the legend of powerful Russian missiles, saying the Soviet Union was making them "like sausage".

"Such comparison sounded ambiguous for the Soviet people, because the sausage was in deficit, but it duly impressed foreigners," it said.

At the time of Krushchev's comment, the Soviets had only four intercontinental ballistic missiles on duty, while the United States had 60. "The myth about the Soviet missile superiority was convenient for both the Soviet leadership and the American military industrial complex, which was getting huge contracts," the magazine said.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Mar 2013 11:34

black painted a/c are sometimes used to test stress points. I saw a black EF once in AFM.

ike DA1, DA2 was upgraded in 1998 with new engines, ejector seat and avionics and rejoined the test programme in August. In 2000 the aircraft was covered with 490 pressure transducers; due to the fact that they were covered by black pads and had associated wiring the aircraft was painted in a gloss black scheme. The pressure transducers measured the effects of various weapons loads and external fuel tanks. In 2002 the aircraft undertook ASRAAM trials, completed carefree handling trials and commenced DASS decoy trials.

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 11 Mar 2013 14:03

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... gn-383147/

After Kamov completed the design, the Russian design bureau verified the design via testing. Kamov then delivered the design to China and the Project 941 concept was accepted by that country's government for further development, he says. Kamov did not participate in any further developmental work on the WZ-10, he insists.

Thereafter, to the country's credit, Mikheev says, the Chinese handled the rest of the developmental work. That includes the developmental prototypes and the operational aircraft that is currently in production for the Chinese military.

"So I wish success to the helicopter," Mikheev says.

Mikheev would not comment on the WZ-10's performance. "That is a question for the Chinese," he says. "I know what I have done."

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Mar 2013 14:07

The country that designs an aircraft is considered as the original maker of the aircraft , you can integrate engine , avionics etc from other sources but that has to be accounted into the design phase itself.

So essentially WZ-10 is a Russian chopper built for chinese. Even though the Chinese might have does the other important task of development and operationalising the aircraft.

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 11 Mar 2013 14:11

Austin wrote:The country that designs an aircraft is considered as the original maker of the aircraft , you can integrate engine , avionics etc from other sources but that has to be accounted into the design phase itself.

So essentially WZ-10 is a Russian chopper built for chinese. Even though the Chinese might have does the other important task of development and operationalising the aircraft.

It could be a consultancy job or a proof of concept that Russian has done. But the actual product could have been different. Note that WZ-10 has more western design influence on it.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 11 Mar 2013 14:13

After Kamov completed the design, the Russian design bureau verified the design via testing. Kamov then delivered the design to China and the Project 941 concept was accepted by that country's government for further development,

Is designing , testing and delevering a product a consultancy job ???

they are trying so hard to save their H&D

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 11 Mar 2013 14:23

krishnan wrote:After Kamov completed the design, the Russian design bureau verified the design via testing. Kamov then delivered the design to China and the Project 941 concept was accepted by that country's government for further development,

Is designing , testing and delevering a product a consultancy job ???

they are trying so hard to save their H&D

But the Russian didn't build a WZ-10 prototype to verify that design then hand it to the Chinese, right? There is no loss of H&D as you claimed. China is still playing catch up in some areas now. There is no shame of admitting that.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Mar 2013 14:53

Well they built WZ-10 according to Russian Specification and Design , which was verified before hand any post verfication will more have to do with fine tuning then validating the entire design ,which may or may not need Kamov assistance.

The loss of face has more to do with this news leaking from Russian side since chinese never claimed before hand that Russian consulted or they bought the design from Kamov ......had they had admitted that before hand it would have been more honourable.

I wonder why did the Russian leak it this late was there a clause not to revel before a certain period or something else ?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 11 Mar 2013 14:57

yes no shame in admiting it, india would have admited it, but chinese arent , for them its a shame in admiting that they got help

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 11 Mar 2013 18:06

there is a news of 24 su35 & 4 amur 1650 deal between china & russia .

no discussion here on BR-forum ??????

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 11 Mar 2013 21:41

ashi wrote:But the Russian didn't build a WZ-10 prototype to verify that design then hand it to the Chinese, right? There is no loss of H&D as you claimed.

For the loss of H&D to happen you need to have one for a start Chinese are known for copy-pasting, stealing, snooping, hacking so as to lay there hands on some kind of tech. People who steal around can't claim to have H&D.

ashi wrote:China is still playing catch up in some areas now.

A lot of areas.

ashi wrote:There is no shame of admitting that.

"Admitted" WTF ???? Kamov pulled down your panties in public and now you claim that you "Admitted" to the design being Russian

With each and every passing day I learn more about why Chinese and Pakis get along so well.

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 12 Mar 2013 09:40

Sagar G wrote:
ashi wrote:But the Russian didn't build a WZ-10 prototype to verify that design then hand it to the Chinese, right? There is no loss of H&D as you claimed.
For the loss of H&D to happen you need to have one for a start Chinese are known for copy-pasting, stealing, snooping, hacking so as to lay there hands on some kind of tech. People who steal around can't claim to have H&D.

ashi wrote:China is still playing catch up in some areas now.
A lot of areas.

ashi wrote:There is no shame of admitting that.
"Admitted" WTF ???? Kamov pulled down your panties in public and now you claim that you "Admitted" to the design being Russian

With each and every passing day I learn more about why Chinese and Pakis get along so well.

Sure. Whatever you say, don't bother me a bit. We have a lot to look forward to, J-20, J-31, Y-20, J-10B, J-15, the list goes on.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 12 Mar 2013 12:19

ashi wrote:There is no shame of admitting that.

Sagar G wrote:"Admitted" WTF ???? Kamov pulled down your panties in public and now you claim that you "Admitted" to the design being Russian
With each and every passing day I learn more about why Chinese and Pakis get along so well.

ashi wrote:Sure. Whatever you say, don't bother me a bit. We have a lot to look forward to, J-20, J-31, Y-20, J-10B, J-15, the list goes on.

I remember the paki boasting that they designed JF-17 bundars...
Looks like Chinese have inherited some Pakiness from their friendship.

Now I feel that someday some Russian firm will reveal that the J-20, J-31(list goes on

) design was Russian too...

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 12 Mar 2013 12:30

sameer_shelavale wrote: I remember the paki boasting that they designed JF-17 bundars...
Looks like Chinese have inherited some Pakiness from their friendship.

Now I feel that someday some Russian firm will reveal that the J-20, J-31(list goes on ) design was Russian too...

What you feel or hope don't matter a bit in the real world.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 12 Mar 2013 12:36

ashi wrote:
sameer_shelavale wrote: I remember the paki boasting that they designed JF-17 bundars...
Looks like Chinese have inherited some Pakiness from their friendship.

Now I feel that someday some Russian firm will reveal that the J-20, J-31(list goes on ) design was Russian too...

What you feel or hope don't matter a bit in the real world.

For you unfortunately it does matter mate,
Why for the sake of real world would you type a reply then?

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 12 Mar 2013 12:46

sameer_shelavale wrote: For you unfortunately it does matter mate,
Why for the sake of real world would you type a reply then?

Seems like you don't understand what I say. In the real world, what you hope or feel about where J-20 etc are designed, doesn't matter. Because it doesn't change a bit of the fact. And you can keep hoping that day the Russian claims credit for J-20 would come ...

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 12 Mar 2013 12:59

^^It only doesn't matter when China is caught with its pants down

).

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 12 Mar 2013 13:20

ashi wrote:
sameer_shelavale wrote: For you unfortunately it does matter mate,
Why for the sake of real world would you type a reply then?
Seems like you don't understand what I say. In the real world, what you hope or feel about where J-20 etc are designed, doesn't matter. Because it doesn't change a bit of the fact. And you can keep hoping that day the Russian claims credit for J-20 would come ...

Mate, By your logic, even whatever you yourself type or claim will not change the facts as well

Anyway I have my sympathies with you as you are quiet hurt by the revelation(although not ashamed publicly).
And I sincerely wish that the nasty naughty Russians don't reveal anything further.

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 12 Mar 2013 13:29

sameer_shelavale wrote: Mate, By your logic, even whatever you yourself type or claim will not change the facts as well

Anyway I have my sympathies with you as you are quiet hurt by the revelation(although not ashamed publicly).
And I sincerely wish that the nasty naughty Russians don't reveal anything further.

Sure you keep wishing and we keep churning out those machines. There is nothing to be ashamed of, at least we don't need to import rifles from foreign countries.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 12 Mar 2013 13:56

Don wrote:T-99

They look like outsized cardboard junk boxes. I wonder why Vivek_Ahuja ji gave the T-99s any bhav at all in his scenarios? They look like sitting ducks for T-90s. Arjuns of course will go through a entire regiment of these like hot knife through butter.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 12 Mar 2013 19:14

ashi wrote:Sure. Whatever you say, don't bother me a bit.

Oh don't flatter yourself I don't give a hoot for any of your country's copy pasted/stolen weapons you can keep jumping in joy each and every time your country manages to copy/steal something, take your sorry ass and your claims of "indigenization" to some place else.

ashi wrote:We have a lot to look forward to, J-20, J-31, Y-20, J-10B, J-15, the list goes on.

Yeah whatever

ashi wrote:There is nothing to be ashamed of, at least we don't need to import rifles from foreign countries.

We make our own attack choppers, you can shove your "indigenous" rifle up your's oh no wait the PLA already does that

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Mar 2013 19:47

China should have bought Xerox long back:

US official in China hacking call

So, there goes any enhancements for J-20/31/etc. China better buy plenty of paint.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 12 Mar 2013 19:57

Sanku wrote:
Don wrote:T-99
They look like sitting ducks for T-90s. Arjuns of course will go through a entire regiment of these like hot knife through butter.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 12 Mar 2013 21:20

The Nirbhay test was a mixed success.

OMg, it had a chinese electronic component on board.

Don · Post by **Don** » 14 Mar 2013 10:24

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... rt-383326/

China investing in destabilising UAV capabilities: report

By: Greg Waldron Singapore

09:09 12 Mar 2013

A report by the Project 2049 Institute contends that Beijing has made considerable strides in its development of unmanned air vehicles (UAVs).

"The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) appears to be fielding operational UAV capabilities that could have significant future regional security implications," says the 15-page report.

"In order to support China's efforts to become a world-class leader in unmanned technology, the PLA has developed an extensive and organisationally complex UAV infrastructure over the past decade."

It estimates that China fields 280 UAVs, with this number to "increase significantly" in the coming years.

The authors sourced information for the report mainly from materials that are publicly available in Chinese. Aside from detailing the various organisations involved in China's development of UAVs, the report forecasts possible UAV tactics, particularly the future role of UAVs in a conflict with the USA.

"This should be of particular concern to the US Navy because according to several military-technical materials reviewed for this study, PLA operational thinkers and scientists envision attacking US aircraft carrier battle groups with swarms of multi-mission UAVs in the event of conflict," says the report.

Chinese thinkers see long-range UAVs serving a number of roles in any anti-access/aerial denial campaign against the USA. Early in the conflict, decoy UAVs would be deployed, tricking US fighters and warships into expending valuable anti-aircraft missiles. This would be followed by waves of UAVs equipped for electronic warfare, jamming communications and radar. Simultaneously, other UAVs would mount kinetic attacks against both US airborne early warning & control aircraft and warships.

UAVs would play an integral role in guiding cruise missiles and anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) attacks against US naval assets. Although the status of China's DF-21D ASBM is unclear, it is a source of serious concern for US defence planners. The DF-21D would theoretically be able to strike a carrier (or other major warship) directly, or shower them with bomblets. A rain of high-explosive bomblets would be catastrophic on an aircraft carrier's deck.

At the Airshow China in Zhuhai in 2010 and 2012, the China Aerospace Science and Industrial Corp stand showed a model of a large UAV designated the WJ-600. A mural in 2010 showed a WJ-600 attacking US Navy Arleigh Burke destroyers with anti-ship missiles, as well as guiding missiles from shore-based batteries.

"The PLA has developed one of the largest and most organisationally complex UAV programmes in the world," says the report.

"This programme includes national-level organisations tasked with developing joint UAV mission requirements; a massive military-industrial design, research and development, and production infrastructure; and a growing number of operational UAV units spread across every service branch of the Chinese armed forces."

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Mar 2013 23:00

A U.S. Naval Blockade of China?

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 16 Mar 2013 11:10

Spotted: China's First Aircraft Carrier At Its New Homeport [Image Of The Day]

via http://www.aame.in/2013/03/spotted-chin ... er-at.html

Bredator MahulRji not posting now-a-days?