China Military Watch

SanjibGhosh · Post by **SanjibGhosh** » 12 Nov 2009 10:10

Indian Army to deploy more troops along Arunachal border
http://www.hindustantimes.com/special-n ... 75434.aspx

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Nov 2009 11:54

Location is Jukhama for 56th
The other division is the 55th and is based in Shillong.

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 12 Nov 2009 20:46

SanjibGhosh wrote:Indian Army to deploy more troops along Arunachal border
http://www.hindustantimes.com/special-n ... 75434.aspx

A second division will be deployed in Arunachal Pradesh in the next 12-18 months, the official added.

Are we getting another Division other than 56th in Arunachal Pradesh ?

Ankit

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Nov 2009 22:28

Ankit Desai wrote:
SanjibGhosh wrote:Indian Army to deploy more troops along Arunachal border
http://www.hindustantimes.com/special-n ... 75434.aspx

A second division will be deployed in Arunachal Pradesh in the next 12-18 months, the official added.
Are we getting another Division other than 56th in Arunachal Pradesh ?

Ankit

The one mentioned in my previous post (55th Mountain Division) is the second mountain division raised for North East.

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 13 Nov 2009 10:52

In 4 weeks it will be Dec 10. Why move 15,000 troops to the mountains after Dec 10, when the winter snows will set in and the likelyhood of a war will not be there for another 4 months? These troops should have been moved there last month, or better a few months back.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 13 Nov 2009 11:10

those theaters aren't affected that much by winter. do check at what time the '62 war took place.

ss_roy · Post by **ss_roy** » 13 Nov 2009 11:32

China's biggest problem are socio-economic. I would not worry about them dominating the world with their current mindset.

I would however be concerned about them resorting to military adventures for insuring cohesiveness at home.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Nov 2009 11:52

rajrang wrote:In 4 weeks it will be Dec 10. Why move 15,000 troops to the mountains after Dec 10, when the winter snows will set in and the likelyhood of a war will not be there for another 4 months? These troops should have been moved there last month, or better a few months back.

It takes times to put together a formation as big as Division. Battalions and assets will have to be drawn from across the country and put together as a cohesive unit. They need to be provided with locations to base themselves. Hell lot of logitics involved. And please remember, all this can happen only whenthe permission to raise new formations has been received.

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 13 Nov 2009 19:11

Rahul M wrote:those theaters aren't affected that much by winter. do check at what time the '62 war took place.

Roughly October 20 - November 20

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 13 Nov 2009 19:23

rohitvats wrote:Location is Jukhama for 56th
The other division is the 55th and is based in Shillong.

If 56th is based in Nagaland and 55th in Meghalaya, then will troops from those divisions be based in AP or will they be rushed to AP in event of an emergency? These locations seem far away from the PRC border, especially given the infrastructure.

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 13 Nov 2009 19:49

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/340ebc32-cfc4 ... abdc0.html

Obama should speak up for India in Beijing
By Brahma Chellaney [Source: Financial Times]

.......Yet the Obama administration is reluctant to take New Delhi’s side in its disputes with Beijing. Washington has also shied away from cautioning Beijing against attempts to change the territorial status quo forcibly.

Mr Obama is committed to the partnership with India as part of which New Delhi has placed arms-purchase orders worth $3.5bn last year alone. But he has also signalled that any relationship will not be at the expense of fast-growing ties with Beijing.

Washington now intends to abandon elements in its ties with New Delhi that could rile China, including a joint military drill in Arunachal or a 2007-style naval exercise involving the US, India, Australia, Japan and Singapore. Even US naval manoeuvres with India and Japan are out. Washington is charting a course of tacit neutrality on the Arunachal issue.

As his secretary of state did in February, Mr Obama has started his Asia tour in Japan and will end in China – the high spot – while skipping India. But playing to India’s well-known weakness for flattery, he will honour it with his presidency’s first state dinner later this month.

Left to fend for itself, New Delhi has steered clear of confrontation with Beijing. It has sought to damp down military tensions and cut off all information to the media on the Himalayan border situation, including Chinese intrusions.

.......But India cannot afford to be isolated. With Mr Obama pursuing a Sino-centric Asia policy, and with China-friendly heads of government in Australia, Japan and Taiwan, New Delhi’s diplomatic calculations have gone awry. But the hardline Chinese approach reinforces the Indian thinking that engendered Chinese belligerence: that India has little option other than to align with the US.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 13 Nov 2009 19:56

3 little rules :

> don't use large fonts. people will read it even without it.

> always post the link

> do not post whole article, only snippets, preferably within quote tags.

last two points are due to copyright issues and have to be taken seriously in order to keep us out of the CP firing line. therefore, please edit the above post !
thanks for cooperating.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 14 Nov 2009 01:02

rajrang wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Location is Jukhama for 56th
The other division is the 55th and is based in Shillong.
If 56th is based in Nagaland and 55th in Meghalaya, then will troops from those divisions be based in AP or will they be rushed to AP in event of an emergency? These locations seem far away from the PRC border, especially given the infrastructure.

Well, you see, the troops (apart from some) are not always sitting on the border. They move from their peace time locations to forward areas as the situation hots up. This is what they mean by mobilization. As it is, we maintain formations close to the LAC to prevent any hanky-panky by our peaceful neighbors.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 14 Nov 2009 01:43

Hi,

I have a suggestion - I think it might be a good idea to have a separate Chinese border watch thread dedicated to monitoring and discussing developments from Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh, on both sides of the border - deployments, exercises, infrastructure developments, command appointments, statements, etc by both China and India.

These tend to be buried under more general reporting on PLA modernisation, arms trade, etc.

I would also suggest a similar bifurcation for the Pakistani thread, with an IB-LoC thread separate from the general Pak mil watch thread.

sum · Post by **sum** » 14 Nov 2009 11:29

Obama should speak up for India in Beijing
By Brahma Chellaney [Source: Financial Times]

Errr...what is this obsession with Amrika batting on our behalf in all forums?

Have we outsourced our MEA to them since we seem to run crying to them for any dispute involving India!!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 14 Nov 2009 21:06

Paging one and all:

Does any one have list and co-ordinates of Chinese airfields in Tibet? Thank you in advance

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 14 Nov 2009 21:24

Oh but Dr Kopp does,

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-AFBs.html

the above link gives it by military region ( including chengdu of course)

also has kmz files for each airbase.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 Nov 2009 23:33

rohitvats wrote:Paging one and all:

Does any one have list and co-ordinates of Chinese airfields in Tibet? Thank you in advance

I think there was a post in the google earth thread a while ago.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 Nov 2009 23:34

^^^
Added later:
Found it http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 77#p705877

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 15 Nov 2009 06:06

Stride 2009 and other exercises

While elements of units from all services in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) were preparing for the military parade on October 1st, a much larger slice of the PLA was conducting routine unit training. Following several months of individual skill and small unit training, late summer/early fall is the peak season for unit evaluation training, often culminating in relatively large force-on-force exercises and live fire drills.

The following sections address the much-publicized, mainly ground-oriented exercises “Stride-2009,” “Airborne Movement-2009,” and “Vanguard-2009.” These were only a few of many exercises in 2009 from which the PLA seeks to identify shortcomings in order to improve capabilities in future training.

“Trans-regional mobility” focuses on moving units within China from one of its seven Military Regions (MR) to another. Multi-mode movements (by ground, rail, water and/or air) have been reported in the PLA press for at least a decade including some cross-MR movements. These exercises do not represent armed invasions of foreign countries, but the lessons learned in trans-regional mobility exercises could be used outside of China if countries permit movement of PLA units through or over their territory.

After “Stride-2009” was completed, the Air Force’s 15th Airborne Corps conducted a similar 20-day, large-scale, multi-modal transportation, trans-regional exercise called “Airborne Movement-2009” beginning in mid-October. “Airborne Movement-2009” paralleled the tasks Army divisions performed in “Stride-2009,” but with the addition of personnel parachute jumps and long-distance foot marches.

Beginning on October 21st, the joint exercise “Vanguard 2009” got underway at the Queshan Combined Arms Training Base. The main participants were the armored brigade of the 20th Group Army, the 1st Army Aviation Regiment, an element of the 15th Airborne Corps, and aircraft from units in the Guangzhou and Jinan MR Air Forces. The key to “Vanguard-2009” is that a group army headquarters formed the exercise’s joint headquarters incorporating both ground and PLA Air Force officers.

An important element of “Vanguard-2009” was helicopter and fixed wing air support to ground operations: “We will adopt the method of having planned fire power playing the leading role, supplemented by impromptu requests for fire power; meticulously organize the overall coordination of air, ground, and air defense fire power…” (China News Service, October 11).

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 Nov 2009 07:48

a reasonably accurate orbat of PLAAF, rather than the paper orbat of 3000 fighters we are used to seeing.

courtesy : quantumfx of keypubs.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showth ... 101&page=6

again I'll exclude all earlier versions of J-7, J-8, Q-5, H-6.

PLA-AF : Losses due to various reasons not counted. 24 per regiment (Sometimes 20)
J-7E : 240 (10x2x, 10x4x, 10x5x, 20x0x, 20x5x, 21x5x, 30x2x, 40x1x, 41x8x, 60x8x)
J-7G : 72 (10x8x, 20x3x, 40x8x)
J-8H/G/F : 144 (11x2x, 40x8x, 6009x, 30x2x, 41x0x, 81x9x)
Su-27SK : 78 (Batch-1 : 26, Batch-2 : 24, Batch-3 : 28)
J-11/11A : 105 (4 batches)
J-11B : 20 - 24? (10x2x)
Su-30MKK : 78 (Batch-1 : 38, Batch-2 : 38)
J-10 : 96? (50x5x, 10x4x, 10x3x, 10x2x)
J-10S : ?? (Not sure about this)
JH-7/7A : 60? (30x9x, 11x6x, 20x2x)
Q-5L : 20 - 24? (10x6x)
H-6G/H/M : 60? (40x7x, 18x9x, 20x1x)

Surveillance type - KJ-2000 : 4, Y-8W (KJ-200) : 3, Y-8G : 4, Y-8T : 3, Y-8XZ : 1, Tu-154M/D : 4, Y-8CB : 3

Thats around a 1000 planes.....

of course, due to the height at which they will have to operate from against IAF, the J-7's and Q-5's have little relevance against India.
that means, effectively PLAAF strength is around 660 vis-a-vis the IAF.

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 17 Nov 2009 12:01

China's new missile may create a "No-Go Zone" for US fleet

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... bk7A&pos=9

China’s military is close to fielding the world’s first anti-ship ballistic missile, according to U.S. Navy intelligence.

The missile, with a range of almost 900 miles (1,500 kilometers), would be fired from mobile, land-based launchers and is “specifically designed to defeat U.S. carrier strike groups,” the Office of Naval Intelligence reported.

Scott Bray, who wrote the ONI report on China’s Navy, said China has made “remarkable progress” on the missile. “In little over a decade, China has taken the program from the conceptual phase” to “near fielding a combat-ready missile,” he said. Bray’s report, issued in July, was provided to Bloomberg News on request.

China has ground-tested the missile three times since 2006 and conducted no flight tests yet, Navy officials said.

The missiles are intended for launch to a general location where their guidance systems take over and spot carriers for attack with warheads intended to neutralize the ships’ threat by destroying aircraft on decks, launching gear and control towers, Giarra said.

The Pentagon, in its latest annual report on China’s military, for the first time included a sketch of the notional flight profile of the new Chinese missile but gave little additional detail.

China also is developing an over-the-horizon radar network to spot U.S. ships at great distances from its mainland, and its navy since 2000 has tripled to 36 from 12 the number of vessels carrying anti-ship weapons, Bray, the ONI’s senior officer for intelligence on China, said in an e-mail.

Bray said China has the initial elements of its new over- the-horizon radar that can provide the general location of U.S. vessels before launching the new missile.

Stokes said the so-called Sky Wave radar can spot U.S. vessels as far away as 1,860 miles (3,000 kilometers).

Unlike traditional radar that fires radio waves off objects straight ahead, over-the-horizon radar bounces signals off the ionosphere, the uppermost layer of the atmosphere, which can pick up objects at greater distances.

The radar is supplemented by reconnaissance satellites, another Navy official said, requesting anonymity. There are 33 in orbit and that number may grow to 65 by 2014, 11 of which would be capable of conducting ocean surveillance, he said.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 17 Nov 2009 12:07

Patent BS. Target ships using BM's. I suppose the SM-3's and SM-6 will be used for fleet week only

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 17 Nov 2009 12:18

US says Tibet belongs to China, Beijing smiles

TimePublished on Tue, Nov 17, 2009

Beijing: Chinese President Hu Jintao hailed US President Barack Obama's recognition of sovereignty issues dear to China, after a bilateral meeting in Beijing on Tuesday.

''China approves of President Obama's repeated reiteration of the one-China principle,'' Hu told reporters.

Hu referred to China's ''sovereignty over Taiwan and other matters'' during a state visit in which some Western analysts had predicted that China would also demand an explicit declaration by Washington of China's sovereignty over the restive frontier regions of Tibet and Xinjiang.

Washington switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei, capital of self-ruled Taiwan, to Beijing in 1979 but remains the island's main arms supplier.

Obama did not meet Tibet's exiled spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, when he was in Washington in early October. But the Dalai Lama has said they may meet after Obama returns from China, which condemns the Buddhist monk as a separatist for demanding Tibetan self-determination.

The Dalai Lama fled into exile in India after an abortive uprising in 1959, nine years after Chinese troops marched into the Himalayan region.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/us-says-tibe ... ml?from=tn

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 17 Nov 2009 18:04

RahulM

whilst I am cheered by the Orbat figures, what is to stop PLAAF fielding large numbers of MiG19's and other obsolete types to launch massive saturation attacks? we need to factor that in too

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Nov 2009 19:46

LM, performance characteristics at high altitudes is one of the reason.
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 86#p453086

do note that the person who made the ORBAT (quantumFX, a sri lankan quite up to date with PLAAF affairs !) did not take that into consideration. he just gives the numbers that are still realistically flying. in line with my own readings on PLAAF, IMHO the huge numbers of q-5 to J-7/J-8I 's are simply retained in the ORBAT by non-chinese sources simply because PLAAF never made an official announcement about withdrawing them. as matter of fact I think PLAAF hasn't officially retired any fighter from its service till date !

that does not mean all are in service.

as for the fleets I mentioned, it's hard to see the PLAAF putting them in any combat capable condition after 30-40 years of service, not to mention they are absolutely incapable of operating in any demanding environment, which the Indo-tibet border areas certainly are. most of those are limited day fighters with no terrain following capability or modern radars.

given the money and effort both the over-stressed chinese aviation industry and the PLAAF is spending after the modern projects it is difficult to envisage them giving enough support for up keep of absolutely obsolete aircraft at the end or beyond their design life. (the mig-19 had a design life of 100 hrs, how much more can the Q-5 have ?)

I mean these aeroplanes are one or even two generations older than the Mig-23MFs IAF retired sometime back ! I don't think they are still capable of flying for any extended period of time, let alone combat flying.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 17 Nov 2009 19:48

don't dispute anything of what you say, however in an emergency, any half way flyable plane may be sent up, just to act as a decoy

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Nov 2009 19:55

true, always provided they can fly in the first place which I doubt all of those can.

secondly, even then useful only in the defensive AD role, not attacks.

truthfully, I don't think most of these are in service at all.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 17 Nov 2009 20:02

some of them have indeed been converted into radio controlled suicide drones and decoys.

BTW the PLAAF is not permanently stationed in Tibet.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Nov 2009 20:06

^^^
that would be the JJ-6 ? that's a bigger threat IMO.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 17 Nov 2009 20:21

yes and J-7 converts as well. the oldest variants that is.

However the PLAAF will be nowhere near saturating the skies over tibet.

there is no logistics available for such activity , forget about using obsolete aircraft. they have difficulty maintaining even proper CAP over tibet.

These converted drones could probably be zero length launched from trucks , but i doubt if there will be that many in number.

The chinese can't do much conventionally against us. they will rely on nukes.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 17 Nov 2009 22:44

Hi Lalmohan,

The J-7 was intended for point air defence, particularly over strategic areas. Its induction was very much a reflection of the devastation the USAF and US naval aviation wrought on the PLA in Korea.

Most of the oldest versions of the J-7 have already been turned in to target drones from my understanding.

While its possible that they could be used as decoys in a PLAAF strike, that still doesn't mean that they should be counted as part of its normal orbat.

Their redesigned J-7Es and J-7Gs are still largely intended for the air defence role, but with improved flight performance and modern avionics to give it all-weather and day-night interception capabilities. However, given its sensor suite and short range missiles, its still a point defence system tied to the larger air defence network.

Their greatest value would be to provide an additional layer of defence against stand-off attacks on strategic targets deeper within the PRC, as well as discouraging interdiction attacks on PLA logistical convoys.

They are going to probably soldier on for another decade I'd guess. Given the kind of imaging available to the IAF, I'd say they should have good notice if the PLAAF suddenly moved large numbers of J-7s to the Tibetan plateau.

Whatever they do, they are *not* going to be used to establish air superiority over Assam. The real threat are the very large numbers of conventional missile units that would probably be used to keep IAF bases, air surveillance networks, command HQs and logistic nodes under attack.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 17 Nov 2009 22:49

yes, i recall we discussed the missile problem on BRF with the Canadian Colonel a few years back. however, do we have a proper assessment of the terminal accuracy of these ballistic weapons that are likely to be fielded? And then there's the babar-parent cruise missile... are their terprom capabilities good enough for a trans-himalaya attack?

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 18 Nov 2009 11:35

Oh by the way gentlemen,

The PLA has started making noises about their next generation fighter. Apparently this fighter will take to the air soon.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... %20Fighter

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 19 Nov 2009 02:55

NOT military related.. but it is China specific which can have military usages.. If it needs to be deleted then Mods please do the needful..
Chinese Solar Profits Catch Market's Eye

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Nov 2009 09:13

PLAAF to Fly 5th Generation Fighter

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 20 Nov 2009 09:41

It is doubtful that the Chinese so called -5th generation aircraft would truly be 5th generation vis a vis the F22 or the estimated capabilities of the PAK-FA considering that the Chinese are still years behind the Russians in fighter design and especially in the areas of turbojet and turbofan engines. Also, its hard to believe that their AESA program is on par with either European or even American AESA systems despite their massive espionage attempts to acquire AESA technologies. The J-10A and the J-10B claim to have AESA radars on them but their true potential still remains a mystery. It would be an incredible feat should they be able to make operational their 5th generation aircraft before 2020.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 20 Nov 2009 09:44

They cannot make their own engines before 2016 but yeah a 5th Gen fighter is on the cards.

VijayKumarSinha · Post by **VijayKumarSinha** » 20 Nov 2009 09:50

Brando wrote:It is doubtful that the Chinese so called -5th generation aircraft would truly be 5th generation vis a vis the F22 or the estimated capabilities of the PAK-FA considering that the Chinese are still years behind the Russians in fighter design and especially in the areas of turbojet and turbofan engines. Also, its hard to believe that their AESA program is on par with either European or even American AESA systems despite their massive espionage attempts to acquire AESA technologies. The J-10A and the J-10B claim to have AESA radars on them but their true potential still remains a mystery. It would be an incredible feat should they be able to make operational their 5th generation aircraft before 2020.

Talking about espionage: http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =AME&s=SEA

sunny y · Post by **sunny y** » 20 Nov 2009 12:07

Didn't know where to post. Moderators can delete it if they think it's irrelevant.

Mirwaiz gets an invite, says will go to China

http://in.news.yahoo.com/48/20091120/81 ... ll-go.html

Now another twist in this sorry tale. Suddenly China seems to be interested in solving Kashmir problem. As if these hurriyat leaders & pakistan was not enough, we have to satisfy china too.