China Military Watch

Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 03 Nov 2007 22:57

[quote="Mihir.D"]A few links to start of : ... -final.pdf ... blasko.pdf

With respect to India :

China is rapidly setting up a massive road and rail network in the Tibetan plateau, a listening post in occupied Aksai Chin, and repositioning likely nuclear missiles against India, in moves not only aimed at overwhelming India militarily, but to enable Chinese coercive diplomacy in respect of the border dispute.

Using the plea of socio-economic development, China has commissioned the construction of a $3.5-billion western highway network linking Lhasa with Urumqi in Xinjiang province that is infested with Islamic separatists, terrorists and fundamentalist groups.

The fully metallic highway will be extended to Kasghar bordering Central Asia and Hotan, and it will be capable of carrying loaded battle tanks and heavy armoured carriers, while selective commercial activity will be allowed on it to flood neighbouring countries, including India, with cheap Chinese products.

Besides the highway, China will operate the 1,236-kilometre Golmund-Lhasa-Quinghai-Tibet Railway (QTR) network next year, even after Swiss mountain tunnel experts gave up the project as unviable. In the next twenty years, the QTR network will reach the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region.

QTR will bring Tibet under China’s iron grip but simultaneously triple the PLA’s offensive power against India, with reinforcements reaching from the Beijing and Shanghai military regions in eighteen instead of the earlier eighty hours. Besides, the PLA’s Rapid Response Group could be deployed in less than twelve hours to carry out surprise raids on Indian territory from Gansu and Shannxi provinces.

The Indian response is to upgrade the Daulat Beg Oldi outpost in Ladakh with advanced communication systems, but this won’t match the PLA’s military responses, which, on the strength of the QTR network and western highway, will deploy two divisions of troops complete with support systems.

In addition to the troops and rapid deployment strengths, China also plans to resettle five lakh mainly Han nationals in Tibet, both to increase social and commercial activities, and to counter Uighur separatism in Xinjiang and keep down Tibetan uprisings. The Xinjiang region saw three-hundred-and-sixty incidents of anti-Chinese activities last year alone mainly spearheaded by East Turkistan groups. China is reorganising its military responses in Tibet in case the situation goes out of control.

In addition to the road and rail networks, China is building a listening facility in occupied Aksai Chin, under the cover of two massive helipads that can station four helicopter squadrons. Sources say the listening stations will monitor Indian deployments in the region, eavesdrop on forward and intelligence communications of the army, and even intercept US radio traffic in anti-terror operations in Afghanistan and Russian border reconnaissance in the Central Asian republics.

But the helipads on their own will give extraordinary heli-mobility to the PLA, and the PLA airforce already bolstered with four big airstrips is getting two more. “The infrastructure and force build up to neutralise India’s military preparedness is enormous,â€

Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 03 Nov 2007 23:00

JaiS wrote:
Chinese J-11B Presages Quiet Military Revolution

China is in the midst of a critical period of testing an "indigenous" version of the Russian Su-27 Flanker, known as the J-11B, with propulsion, radar and weapons system integration underway.

The nationally developed systems now in various stages of the J-11B test program potentially provide performance improvements over the various Su-27 models now in PLAAF service.

Air Show China, held here Oct. 31-Nov. 5, included the first official detail about the Shenyang Tai Hang engine. This turbofan powerplant is being developed for the Flanker, and is also sometimes referred to as the WS-10A. A handful of J-11B airframes are now likely being used for development testing, including at least one J-11B engine-integration aircraft.

Design and development of the Tai Hang has been underway for nearly two decades, says one senior Chinese aero-engine executive. He admits the program has proved challenging: "We hit difficulties in developing the engine."

Chinese industry executives attending the show remain reticent to discuss the J-11B program. The executive would say only that the Tai Hang has "similar applications to the Al-31 [the present Su-27 engine]. It's of a similar thrust and is of the same technology generation." The J-11B program also includes the integration of Chinese-developed planar array pulse-Doppler radar replacing the Russian N-001 cassegrain radar, at least two versions of which are fielded by the PLAAF.

Also associated with the J-11B is the Luoyang PL-12 active radar-guided medium-range air-to-air missile. While the Chinese air force already has the Russian R-77 (AA-12 Adder) in service with the Su-27, the PL-12 offers a big performance increase over the present export standard of the Vympel R-77. Officials from the company were unable to discuss the
PL-12 project.

The initial development test-firing program for the overall PL-12 program now appears complete, with the missile at least close to service entry. It was integrated first on the J-8II for the development program. Trials of the PL-12 on the Chengdu J-10 also have been carried out.

The PL-12 does benefit from Russian technology, with the seeker and inertial guidance system provided by Moscow. A variant of the Agat 9B-1103M radar seeker is the most likely candidate for the missile. This seeker was intended initially for an improved version of the R-77, but appears to have been sold to China first.

The country is also moving to fill gaps in its tactical weapons capability, and to bolster its ability to support combat aircraft export proposals with credible guided-weapons packages. The show included the presentation of several previously unseen air-launched tactical systems. Luoyang showed the LT-2 laser-guided bomb, along with the LS-6 precision-guided glide bomb (middle photo). Rival China Aerospace and Technology Corp. unveiled its FT-1 and FT-3 satellite-guided weapons family. Both are aimed at potential exports of the FC-1 light fighter, including Pakistan, and likely national requirements.

Meanwhile, China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp. (Casic) showed the C-704 antiship missile (bottom photo), along with the C-802KD air-to-surface version of the C-802 antiship weapon.

The LT-2 has been in service with the Chinese air force "for more than three years," says a Luoyang executive. The 500-kg.-class (1,100-lb.) weapon resembles the Russian KAB family. The official suggested that the laser-guided bomb has a range of up to 20 km. (12.4 mi.) from high altitude, with an average accuracy of about 2 meters (6.5 ft.).

The LS-6 appears, in effect, a successor system, with a family of weapons planned. The official says "about a dozen" launch tests of the LS-6 precision bomb kit have been carried out using a Shenyang J-8II as the test aircraft. The program was begun in 2003, with testing now complete.

He identifies the JF-17--the Pakistan air force designation for the Chengdu FC-1 now in development--as the next intended aircraft for integration of the weapon. Guidance is provided by an inertial package coupled with satellite navigation. The official says the weapons family will be capable of using three systems--the U.S. GPS, the Russian Glonass and China's own Beidou system. The architecture for this system eventually foresees using five satellites in geosynchronous orbit (GEO) and up to 30 non-GEO platforms.

The 500-kg. LS-6 has a maximum launch range of 60 km. from medium altitude. A 1,000-kg. kit has also been considered, although this requires a larger wing. A 250-kg. variant is in the pipeline as well. Also under study is the addition of a laser seeker.

The two weapons shown by Casic cover the 250-kg. and 500-kg. class. The FT-1 bears a resemblance to the U.S. Joint Direct Attack Munition. Development began in 2001, according to a company executive. Tests have been carried out from a Xian JH-7. Range of the FT-1 is given as up to 18 km., depending on the release altitude and aircraft speed, with an accuracy of "30 meters, or less." Casic subsidiary China National Precision Machinery Import & Export Corp. is responsible for the C-704. At least a small batch of the antiship missile has been produced.

The design is strongly reminiscent of the Hongdu JJ/TL-6 antiship missile, although dimensions and performance figures for the two vary slightly. Data provided for the C-704 give the monopulse active-radar-guided missile a maximum engagement range of 35 km.

The company is also offering a further variant of its C-802 antiship missile. The air-launched C-802KD is claimed to be capable of engaging ships in harbor or some fixed land targets. Given that the missile is fitted with a radar seeker only, land targets would need to provide a high radar contrast.

An electro-optically guided medium-size air-launched weapon in a similar class to the C-802 is under development in China. This program almost certainly corresponds to the KD-88 designation.

The first indications of a measured shift in Sino-Russian relations could be detected in the outcome of the ongoing "push and shove" between Beijing and Moscow over the provision of a Russian engine for the FC-1 light fighter. The aircraft is a joint development between China and Pakistan.

Chinese and Russian aerospace executives are maintaining China's FC-1 light fighter will be provided to Pakistan with a Russian engine, though this is still pending political approval from Moscow. The Russian government has yet to approve the release, with suggestions that Moscow might nix a deal to avoid jeopardizing sales to India.

ksmahesh wrote:
China's Military Capabilities

June 2000

The evolution of China's military policy and military doctrine
Military Thought, April-June, 2005 by A.F. Klimenko

Link for links on Chinese Security/policy/general

sunilUpa wrote:Some serious reading material on PLA reorganization, Brigade reform, Changes in Doctrine. I have chosen 3 chapters from 'The People’s Liberation Army in the Information Age' by By: James C. Mulvenon, Richard H. Yang (A Rand Publication). Those who are interested can read whole publication. The article on PLA Brigade reform is by Xinhui, sourced from CDF.

Note - All Rand articles are PDF, hence I have provided only links.


Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 11 Nov 2007 11:58

Posts: 406
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 11:31

Postby Vriksh » 11 Nov 2007 22:58

As far as I am concerned all these submarine sightings are psy-ops that enable USN to blackmail more money from USGov.

If the chinese sub actually managed to sneak in undetected then it could have escaped undetected too with its secrets intact. More likely the sub was detected and forced to surface and identify itself by the USN with many guns/torpedo tubes held to its head incase it tried any funny business.

BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Postby ArmenT » 12 Nov 2007 00:10

The headline should really say "Chinese Sub Catches US Supercarrier by Supplies!".
Sorry, couldn't resist :D. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

OTOH the Navy could have just depth charged the heck out of it and claimed that they'd misidentified it as a target drone. Methinks it is a ploy to get more funding.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 12 Nov 2007 12:58

Chinese Sub Pops Up Undetected in U.S. Navy Exercise
Submitted by Julie on November 10, 2007 - 11:11am. Asia Government News Politics US News World News World Politics

Recently, when a Chinese submarine popped up undetected in the middle of a Pacific Ocean exercise, dangerously close to the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk, American military chiefs were left dumbfounded and red-faced, according to UK newspaper, Daily Mail.

When the Navy deploys a battle fleet on exercises, they take the security of the aircraft carriers very seriously. At least a dozen warships are used to provide a physical guard, and using advanced technology they are able to detect and deter any potential intruders.

By the time the Chinese sub surfaced, the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missles at the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk, a 1,000ft. supercarrier with 4,500 military personnel onboard.

According to senior Nato officials, the incident caused a sense of sudden fear in the U.S. Navy, as officials realized the seriousness of the encounter. The U.S. apparently had no idea just how sophisticated China's fast-growing submarine fleet had become, or that they even posed such a threat.

Reportedly, one Nato figure said that the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik". The Sputnik, if you remember, was the Soviet Union's first orbiting satellite launched in 1957 which marked the beginning of the space age and kicked off the space race.

The U.S. Navy's brush with the Chinese Navy's submarine occurred in the Pacific Ocean between southern Japan and Taiwan. The one sub was able to slip past at least a dozen other U.S. warships that were in place to ward off any hostile aircraft or submarines. Two submarines were also in place, along with other advanced technology, which also failed to detect the intruding watercraft.

The U.S. Navy and Nato are now forced to re-think their strategy, and reconsider the level of threat posed from potentially hostile Chinese submarines.

While China insists that the incident was a simple coincidence, others are not so sure about that. The run-in led to some intense diplomatic exchanges, with rattled American diplomats demanding to know why Chinese subs were shadowing the U.S. fleet.

Analysts believe that China was sending a message to the United States and the West by demonstrating their rapidly growing military capability to threaten foreign powers that might try to interfere in their own "backyard."

As a citizen of the United States, it may leave you wondering if we are really as safe as we think we are.

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 13 Nov 2007 04:21

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 20 Nov 2007 18:55

Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 21 Nov 2007 03:26

Op-Ed Dccean Chronicle, 21 Nov., 2007
The Jin in China’s bottle
By Arun Kumar Singh

The Chinese Navy began sea trials on its first Han class nuclear attack submarine way back in 1974. It laid the keel of its first nuclear strategic ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) in 1978. Thus the Chinese Navy has had many years of experience operating nuclear tactical and strategic submarines.

In 1991, after the collapse of the USSR, a large number of that country’s defence scientists, designers and professionals were rendered jobless. It is understood that some 5,000 of these specialists in various defence fields were employed in China. In 1994, work commenced on the first of the second generation 6,000-tonne Shang class (Type 093) nuclear powered attack submarines at the Bohai shipyard, Huludao (400 km east of Beijing). This design was based on the earlier Soviet Victor 3, twin reactor 30-knot SSN (nuclear powered attack submarine), of Seventies’ vintage.

A few years later, the keel of the new 8,000-tonne Jin class SSBN was laid in the same shipyard. These strategic submarines had the same twin reactor power plant of the Shang class, but being larger in size, and with a different, less streamlined hull shape to accommodate 12 submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), their top speed is estimated to be below 25 knots. On June 12, 2005, China successfully fired its new SLBM — the 8,000-km range JL-2 missile — from a modified conventional Golf class submarine.

Recently, photographs have appeared in the media of the two new second generation Chinese Navy Shang class SSNs (Type 093) which are expected to gradually replace the older five Han class submarines which have been in service for over two decades. The reports indicate that these units have completed sea trials, and may have achieved operational status.

[color=darkred]These submarines, armed with multi-role torpedoes, mines, anti-ship and cruise land attack missiles will provide the fast modernising Chinese Navy with a sustained blue water tactical capability and the ability to exercise “sea denialâ€

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 22 Nov 2007 04:43

BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 22 Nov 2007 11:58

The massive Chinese build up,where several classes of nuclear and conventional subs are being simultaneously produced,is a huge threat to India in the near future.we haven't yet got the Scorpene programme off the ground,neither have we taken any decision about the second line of subs,the ATV's prolonged birth pangs and continue to be behind Pak in sub construction! At the Chinese rate of construction,the IN will be grossly outnumbered and outflanked in quality too with the Sino-sub surge.Here is a US report about US intelligence caught napping at the Chinese surge."

"China could launch upto 10 Shang class subs next year!" ... _11_21.asp

U.S. report finds U.S. intel consistently wrong on China buildup

A congressional commission on China reported last week that U.S. intelligence agencies have failed to properly assess Beijing's military buildup and capabilities and were taken by surprise on key developments, including new submarines built in secret.
“The pace and success of China’s military modernization continue to exceed U.S. government estimates,â€

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 23 Nov 2007 18:19

Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Analysis: China seeks new Russian technology

Postby sunilUpa » 24 Nov 2007 05:24

Analysis: China seeks new Russian technology

Andrei Chang on China's quest for Su33/Su35 technology. Has interesting titbits on Su-35 radar.

Dr. Yury Bely, a general designer at Russia's NIIP Radar Design Bureau, agreed to discuss the question. "It is impossible to import the Su-35's radar system only," he said. Bely stressed that it would be more feasible to import brand new Su-35s than to try upgrading the Su-30MK2.

The Su-35 is equipped with the H035 passive phased array radar system, which has extremely powerful detection capability, Bely pointed out. The average output power of this radar is 5 kW, with peak output at 20 kW; thus the output power of the Su-30MKI and Su-30MK2 would be insufficient. When the H035 radar was tested on Su-30MK No. 503, the detection range was as far as 290 kilometers with 1 kW power output, he said.

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 26 Nov 2007 03:16

It was a matter of time before this happened. The cards have been dealt. Watch France try their best to try and convince EU to lift the military embargo on China.

French trade-off may give China military boost

Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Postby PaulJI » 26 Nov 2007 04:08

ramana wrote:Op-Ed Dccean Chronicle, 21 Nov., 2007

I dont see how they can carry such a boatload of armaments. I think different versions carry different weapons. My point is if it carries BMs then it wont have room for the Klubs and axes and still be 8000 tons displacement.

The British Resolution-class SSBNs were about 8000 tonnes, & carried 16 Polaris SLBMs, plus torpedoes fired from 6 torpedo tubes.

Apart from 12 SLBMs, the weapons listed for the Jin- class fit in torpedo tubes. I see no reason why they couldn't have several torpedo tubes, loaded with mines, torpedoes, anti-ship or land-attack cruise missiles. They may not have room for any reloads, however.

Posts: 101
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 23:04
Location: A point in three dimensional space

Postby bhavin » 27 Nov 2007 03:32

Are you guys having trouble with the formatting in this thread ?? halfway down the page, the formatting gets all screwed up for me...

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16946
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA

Postby Rahul M » 27 Nov 2007 23:17

same for me.

Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan

Postby JaiS » 01 Dec 2007 08:12

China eyes new Russian tech


UPI Energy

November 23, 2007 Friday 8:37 AM EST

A Chinese military source based in Beijing has said the People's Liberation Army Air Force is negotiating with the Russian Sukhoi Aircraft Company on three new projects.

Military observers based in Moscow and Beijing say they believe the recent nadir of military cooperation between China and Russia is only temporary. China will have to rely on Russia to develop its military technologies, as Beijing has no other alternative.

The first new project involves Su-33 shipborne fighters. Experts from the Russian aviation industry are convinced that China is about to start the construction of an aircraft carrier.

"Up to the present, on the issue of the Su-33, China and Sukhoi have had three rounds of negotiations and have reached some agreement," said the source.

Nonetheless, he did not disclose what specific progress has been made in the negotiations, merely confirming that additional rounds of talks will be held. A high-level source from Sukhoi confirmed his company is most interested in discovering whether the Chinese want to purchase whole Su-33 fighters or only require Su-33 parts, and whether they will request the transfer of production technology or design blueprints.

Other sources from the Chinese military industry said that several plans were involved in the negotiations on the Su-33. One of them is that China will buy a small number of Su-33, say 10 to 24, and later request that production technologies be transferred. However, the Chinese strategy is to use some of the Su-33 technology to develop their own shipborne fighter based on the J-11B assembled domestically.

The second project under negotiation involves the newest Su-35 fighter. At the MAKS 2007 International Aviation and Space Salon held at the Zhukovsky Air Base near Moscow in August, Chinese delegates took photos and videos of the Su-35 virtually every day.

"Several Chinese delegations have visited Sukhoi and raised technical questions," the Sukhoi company representative said. He said the two sides have reached a consensus and are now working on export plans.

"At least in the foreseeable future, China's indigenous aviation technologies will not be able to produce combat aircraft similar to the Su-35," he said. "Our attitude on this issue is the same as the case of the Su-33; that is, we are only interested in exporting whole Su-35s. This is not what the Chinese delegates hoped for. They hoped to import only certain subsystems, for instance the radar systems or the engines."

The third project concerns the PLA Navy's plan to import more Su-30MK2 fighters, or upgraded variants of the aircraft. No progress has been made on this as yet, however. A plan for China to import Su-30MK3 fighters, which was negotiated earlier, has not been carried out so far.

The possibility that the navy will continue importing Su-30MK2s or Su-30MK3s appears slim, mainly because it has already started to receive China-made JH-7A fighters.
Meanwhile, the upgrade of the J-11B fighter aircraft has been very comprehensive. The fighter is now capable of launching precision attacks on battleships, and can basically meet the combat requirements of the navy fleet. China may not resume the import of Su-30MK2s unless the cost of the J-11B remains too high or comes close to the cost of the Su-30MK2.

Is there any possibility that the PLA Air Force may upgrade its existing Su-30MK2s and J-11s, or the Indian Air Force's Su-30MKIs, to a combat platform close to the Su-35 standard?

Yury Bely, a general designer at Russia's NIIP Radar Design Bureau, agreed to discuss the question. "It is impossible to import the Su-35's radar system only," he said. Bely stressed that it would be more feasible to import brand new Su-35s than to try upgrading the Su-30MK2.

The Su-35 is equipped with the N035 passive phased array radar system, which has extremely powerful detection capability, Bely pointed out. The average output power of this radar is 5 kW, with peak output at 20 kW; thus the output power of the Su-30MKI and Su-30MK2 would be insufficient. When the N035 radar was tested on Su-30MK No. 503, the detection range was as far as 290 kilometers with 1 kW power output, he said.

(Andrei Chang is editor-in-chief of Kanwa Defense Review Monthly, registered in Toronto Canada.)

Posts: 666
Joined: 23 Jan 2007 19:35
Location: Hyderabad

Postby SSSalvi » 02 Dec 2007 16:40

Attatching Location Map and Satellite images of the ' Destroyed Bunkers' by China as reported in earlier post.

Location Map Image

General view of the Area

Two Huts near the Border ( Not necessarily the Bunkers/Huts mentioned in the above post. )


A nearby Heipad and some fortifications

All images from Google Earth.. ( Thanks GE for a wonderful database )
All placemarks on these images are by S S Salvi


Posts: 191
Joined: 26 May 2007 17:22

Postby gopal.suri » 02 Dec 2007 18:30

:lol: The Kerala Achhayan is surprised
Poor infrastructure along Sino-Indian border: Antony

2 Dec 2007, 1901 hrs IST,PTI

NATHU LA: Upset over the poor infrastructure along the Sino-Indian border in Sikkim, Defence Minister A K Antony on Sunday said he will vigorously pursue for taking urgent steps to develop the frontier areas to match China.

"It is an eye opener for me. There is no comparison between the two sides. Infrastructure on the Chinese side is far far superior. They have gone far in developing their infrastructure," Antony said after visiting this border post located at an altitude of 14,140 feet.

Antony said one should not grumble over the lack of connectivity on the Indian side and do the needful to improve them.

"As I have personally seen the lack of infrastructure and the difficult conditions in which the soldiers are protecting the border, I will vigorously champion the cause of the armed forces," he said.

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 02 Dec 2007 18:33

Its good they are realising that China has better infrastructure in these areas. But how quickly will be build it. Or is this just talk in the air. All the signs are pointing to China catching us by surppise.

Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan

Postby JaiS » 05 Dec 2007 05:01

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 09 Dec 2007 19:01

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3417
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31

Postby Aditya G » 18 Dec 2007 22:54


[quote]12 December, 2007
Eye on China, troops relocating to Bengal
(The Telegraph, by Sujan Dutta)
The Indian Army is relocating a division of troops to North Bengal from Jammu after the security establishment has taken stock of a Chinese move into a high plateau in Bhutan named Dolam.

Major elements of the 27 Mountain Division have already moved out and among these are units of the 164 Mountain Brigade based in Kalimpong, an army headquarters source has confirmed to The Telegraph.

A Chinese move into Dolam means that India’s border with China gets distorted at Sikkim’s tri-point with Bhutan. It also means that Chinese forces move a few kilometres south from where they originally were. It brings them closer to North Bengal’s Siliguri Corridor. China has always laid claim to Dolam. There is a suspicion that it has now extended its claim line.

But the Indian Army does not want to ring alarm bells. This is the season of confidence-building measures with China. Defence minister A.K. Antony posed for happy pictures with Chinese soldiers in Nathu-la on December 2, minutes before he took off from the Sherathang helipad for an aerial survey of the area that is disputed.

The move to relocate the 27 Mountain Division to Kalimpong is also based on an assessment of lowered threat perceptions along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir.

At least three flag meetings between Chinese and Indian Army officers have taken place in Nathu-la since August this year.

In the last flag meeting on November 27, days before Antony visited Sikkim, the Indian side showed pictures and video footage of perceived transgressions to the Chinese. The visuals were also shown to the defence minister during an operational briefing in Nathu-la.

The decision to relocate the 27 Mountain Division was taken following consultations involving the Eastern Command, the Northern Command and briefings for Antony, national security adviser M.K. Narayanan and army chief General Deepak Kapoor.

Antony was taken on a helicopter survey of the frontage of the border with China in Sikkim. Indian troops manning posts along the ridgeline that defines the border were asked to light smoke-emitting candles from their bunkers for the defence minister to be able to distinguish the positions during his visit to Nathu-la.

Antony was given a detailed appreciation on the India-China-Bhutan tri-junction (bordering Sikkim). It was pointed out to him that the Dolam Plateau in Bhutan lay immediately east of the tri-junction. A stream called the Torsa Nullah flows west to east across it.

On the east the Dolam Plateau is skirted by the Amo Chhu stream that flows north-south from the Chumbi Valley to Bhutan and then enters Bengal at Jaldhaka where the state government has a hydel project.

The tri-junction was identified as roughly equidistant from the two Indian posts at Dokala (bordering Bhutan) and Batang La (bordering China). Dokala overlooks Dolam which is at a lower altitude.

The relocation of troops comes ahead of an Indian Army contingent’s visit to Kunming in China for a first joint drill next week. The Prime Minister is scheduled to visit China in January.

The army emphasises that the movement of the division is a defensive measure. The 27 Mountain Division is moving to its original base, about seven years after it was deployed under the Northern Command.

But the army’s Eastern Command is disconcerted that the Dolam Valley — a largely-barren 20sqkm plateau that an officer in the capital described as “less than the size of Lutyen’s Delhiâ€

Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 20 Dec 2007 03:05

China’s New Military Elite

The study of Chinese military elites represents an essential starting point for any assessment of civil-military relations in China. As today’s Chinese civilian leadership has increasingly focused its attention on issues of economic development and socio-political stability, little headway has been made in the task of building up civilian competency in military affairs. In theory, the CMC reports to the Politburo and its Standing Committee. Since 1992, only Presidents Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao have served on the CMC, and they have held the posts of chairman and first vice-chairman of the body largely to symbolize the Party’s control over the gun. Paradoxically, Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin both sought to avoid turning over the CMC chairmanship to a relatively untested successor by holding on to the seat even after they had stepped down from their political posts. As a result of the transition strategies adopted by previous Chinese top leaders, the CMC itself has grown in importance, though without any increase in participation from civilian leaders other than the top Party leader. Sometime in the future, this could conceivably lead to practical challenges in exerting civilian control over the military, a long-standing goal of the CCP. This would especially be the case if the next generation of Chinese political elites come to be perceived as too ignorant about modern warfare to effectively manage the PLA.

I can think of two sides to that equation.
CMC being lead by a techno-strategist from within the PLA would take away the rabid ideological motivation to counter an indic influence in SA. But on the other hand, it also takes away the tempering influence of a considerations (influence on the economy, mass appeal for violence etc.,) which the Communist leadership would have had to consider.

Should make for interesting reading to the Chinese military watchers among BRF. From our, or basically a NON-chinese view, how good is it to let a person extremely qualified to do the job, get the job.

Forum Moderator
Posts: 7904
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 30 Dec 2007 20:54

Fuel needs limit China's combat ability
The hard fact is that China has only 7 million tons of oil reserves available for a period of conflict. The country has set its 30-day oil reserves at 10 million tons for civilian consumption, an average of 330,000 tons per day. During a 15-day assault, the country would require 4.96 million tons. The conclusion is that China's current oil reserves could sustain a high-intensity assault operation against Taiwan for no more than 15 days.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 4846
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 02 Jan 2008 04:06

the page formatting is screwed up but nevertheless

Picture : Chinese UAVs attacking tanks on ground ... kTanks.jpg

they are firing unguided rockets.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Postby vivek_ahuja » 02 Jan 2008 04:53

Neshant wrote:the page formatting is screwed up but nevertheless

Picture : Chinese UAVs attacking tanks on ground ... kTanks.jpg

If I didn't know any better, I would have thought the PLAAF had come on hard times and their pilots were flying Cessna machines and dropping flares on their army comrades. :rotfl:

Even so, this is not something new or revolutionary. The Iranians had managed to fire guided anti-tank missiles from aerial drones as far back as the Iran-Iraq war. In this day and age of fire and forget missiles, firing unguided rockets at that altitude is akin to sending them on kamikaze missions.

That flight-altitude is also crap. Most of these missions would end up hitting the dirt when their pilots would have to comprehend with the ton of lead coming up at them fired from everything from MANPADs to the enemy General's sidearm.

Even if they don't fly into the ground, the UAVs themselves will not make it to the target. I believe the size comparison from the Pic suggests that it is bound to be picked up by the radar of a Modernized Shilka or a Tunguska.

The more I see the Chinese propaganda, the more I am beginning to find the humor in what I see.

Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Postby p_saggu » 02 Jan 2008 15:53

Check this video out
At 0:31 Seconds you see a picture of a Yakhont /onyx missile. Is this a mistake by whoever made this video; China has the sunburn, not the yakhont.

Added Later:
At 0:45 seconds, this looks like a trident.
OK looks like some kid's work.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 6823
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Postby shyamd » 04 Jan 2008 05:00

Okay folks! Some interesting news from some reliable sources.

India and China have started co-operation in the field of Intelligence for the first time. They have started trading notes on intelligence. As a first measure, China's state security ministry is to set up a joint intelligence centre with India’s Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW). More info awaited.

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 05 Jan 2008 14:24

Juggi G
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Postby Juggi G » 08 Jan 2008 12:51


The Dragon has Now Got WINGS
The Dragon has Now Got WINGS
Pranab Dhal Samanta

Posted online: Saturday, January 05, 2008 at 0000 hrs

Latest Govt estimate shows China, thanks to new rail-road network, can move 10,000 troops to Indian border in just about three weeks — down from 3-6 months a decade ago

NEW DELHI, JANUARY 5: As Prime Minister Manmohan Singh prepares to leave for China in less than two weeks, the government’s high-profile China Study Group, which includes the Foreign Secretary, Defence Secretary and heads of intelligence agencies, has been given an urgent brief. It has been asked to come up with recommendations for the Cabinet Committee on Security to counter China’s much-improved ability to amass troops along the border at short notice.

This was prompted after the Army revised its estimate on how soon China can move troops along the Line of Actual Control, particularly across Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim. According to this fresh estimate, China can move up to two divisions (over 10,000 troops) in 20-25 days — a huge leap forward from the earlier decade-old estimate that it would take a season or two (a season is three months) for China to amass such a large number of troops.

India had carried out a detailed exercise two decades ago on the Chinese threat and categorized threat levels into low, medium and high depending on the number of troops Beijing could move given the difficult terrain.

This assessment remained valid until 2000, after which questions were raised on a regular basis and now a fresh estimate is on the table. This has been officially conveyed to the China Study Group last month.

Consider the revised assessments:

• Low-Level threat: This is an offensive with about two battalions. India’s earlier estimate was that it would take China 15 days to plan such a strike. This is now down to 7 days.

• Medium-Level threat: This is an offensive with about two brigades. Earlier estimate was that this would take about 30 days for China. This is now down to 15 days.

• High-level threat: This is what has got the government most concerned. This involves moving troops from hinterland China and about two divisions in total, which could take even up to two seasons (three to six months) depending on weather. This is now down to 20-25 days.

This reassessment, sources say, had to be done in view of the improved road and rail infrastructure in Tibet, connecting it to mainland China.

It’s learnt that security agencies have shown pictures of luxury cars coming right up to few kilometres from the Sino-Indian border. Also, the assessment states that China has greater flexibility and troop availability having settled its border dispute with Russia.

An initial assessment shows that India has to construct 72 roads urgently to come anywhere near addressing the Chinese challenge. The China Study Group is looking at ways to kickstart construction of these roads as well as reactivate airfields like Chushul in Ladakh, besides setting up new airfields to ward off Chinese dominance. Incidentally, Chushul is used only for chopper operations despite having a runway while China is said to have built new airfields in and around Tibet.

A set of eight strategic roads have been cleared for construction under the Special Accelerated Road Development Programme for the North-East, besides over 3000 km in Arunachal Pradesh. But sources say a much more concentrated effort will be needed. For this purpose, the Defence Ministry is moving to get Border Roads Organisation freed from all other road projects in the country, particularly those going on in Naxal affected areas.

It’s learnt that an urgent construction and deployment will be initiated soon based on CSG recommendations. In fact, sources say, the increased incidents of transgression being reported by the ITBP along the Sino-Indian border is a result of more aggressive Chinese patrolling due to better connectivity and improved infrastructure.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 10018
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Postby sum » 08 Jan 2008 13:33

How far is the rail link from the border??
Wont the rail line be a easy target to put out of action with few well directed brahmos/prithvi if it is close to the borders...???
it will be a nightmare to repair at those altitudes....

Posts: 161
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Shrewsbury, MA

Postby Babui » 09 Jan 2008 01:00

Rail infrastructure is easy to disrupt but its also easy to repair.

Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Postby hnair » 09 Jan 2008 01:46

Babui wrote:Rail infrastructure is easy to disrupt but its also easy to repair.

Not that this is an extremely alarming development(chinese buildup), but rail infra in most of the hilly areas contain a lot of culverts, tunnels, gulch-ravines etc in "avalanche prone areas". Pulling out fishplates etc are passe ;)

Though a bit costly, the late Gen Sundarji had it all figured out, but we seem to have forgotten him.

Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 12 Jan 2008 07:48

Chinese Submarine Patrols Rebound in 2007, but Remain Limited
China's entire fleet of approximately 55 general-purpose submarines conducted a total of six patrols during 2007, slightly better than the two patrols conducted in 2006 and zero in 2005.

The 2007 performance matches China's all-time high of six patrols conducted in 2000, the only two years since 1981 that Chinese submarines conducted more than five patrols in a single year.

The new information, obtained by Federation of American Scientists from the U.S. Navy under the Freedom of Information Act, also shows that none of China's ballistic missile submarines have ever conducted a deterrent patrol.

BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 75
Joined: 29 May 2007 15:32
Location: Mumbai

Postby gauravjkale » 12 Jan 2008 08:33

any guesses how many patrols have indian subs carried in the past????

BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Postby vivek_ahuja » 12 Jan 2008 08:43

gauravjkale wrote:any guesses how many patrols have indian subs carried in the past????

I doubt that this will be a number known publicly.

Submarine Patrols are amongst the most guarded of all Naval secrets. Their patrol routes, durations and frequency are all the kind of things that you don't want to be talking about openly.

However, given our small strength in submarines, I have to say its going to be very much less than our Red Comrades, even though this is an oversimplification of matters. Also, I doubt that the current fleet of subs has as long an endurance as compared to western contemporaries. We will have to wait until the arrival of the next generation of Subs like the Scorpene, Akulas and the ATVs before we can think about extended, autonomous, long range patrols in potentially hostile waters.

But, given the location of the islands in our hands in the Indian Ocean, we should be maintaining a pretty active patrol roster even with our current fleet for the time being. Keeping my fingers crossed on this. I hope you are too...

Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 12 Jan 2008 11:48

>>However, given our small strength in submarines, I have to say its going to be very much less than our Red Comrades, even though this is an oversimplification of matters.

I am pretty sure we would have conducted far more patrols than the PRC. They are still getting to grips with sub ops, we have a lead time over them in respects of training and processes, though the technology gap has closed significantly, and will probably swing our way decisively in the short term when the Scorpene joins our fleet.

Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests