China Military Watch

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Apr 2010 22:30

Juggi G wrote:China's War Plans For India
Open Magazine April 16, 2010.
Suman Sharma

Electronic at: http://www.openthemagazine.com/emag/2010-04-10

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Apr 2010 23:24

Avik wrote: 1) I thought 39 Mountain Div is tasked for the Pakistan Front , either Samba or Rajouri. But, I take your point on 6 MD. I had missed that one. Now, given that 6 MD is for Uttarakhand/ sugar sector, i guess there is still gap in Himachal?

2) I accept your point on query no. 2

3) Well, actually, I meant 54 Div. Nevertheless, thanks for clearing that up. The new query (surprise..surprise), is that if 4 ID is being 'rapidised' and 33 Armr Div is too heavy to deploy to Nepal/ South Tibet, where does that leave I Corps wrt the China front (other than possibly two inf bdes from 4 Div)? There isnt much too deploy from I Corps...

Many thanks for your post..it was very helpful.

1) I don't have any knowledge of planned deployment sector of 39MD. But the fact that you yourself bring up the 'either' in the argument, shows that it is reserve formation - to be used in defence or offense, as the case may be. Point is, in a shooting match with PLA, nothing stops us from orienting the 39MD to LAC - infact, given its location, it will most likely be the first one to be inducted. Also, Sugar Sector is the HP-Tibet LAC - don't use the same in respect with Uttarakhand-Tibet Sector. Just as a tid-bit, 4 ID was deployed along the HP-Tibet Sector (Sugar Sector) after 1962 debacle and was then a Mountain Division

2) 4ID being converted to RAPID is something I picked up from Suman Sharma's blog...as for the number of brigades with 4 RAPID, we'll need to see if one has been removed to make way for Armored Brigade. What you say about number of Divisions with I Corps is what I had also commented on earlier...but the thing is, in a shooting match with PLA, IA can transfer say, 22 ID from II Corps and 54 ID from 21 Corps, to be under the control of I Corps. II and 21 Corps will still retain strong offensive capability to deter any PA adventure...

Ashutosh Malik · Post by **Ashutosh Malik** » 08 Apr 2010 23:57

Rohit

Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt 9 Div, based out of Meerut, also a part of I Corps? And, if so, could be deployed as well under I Corps- again, do correct me if I am wrong.

Both, 22 and 9, I think are based out of Meerut - RAM and PINE, as I understand they are called, or vice-versa. 22 as you say with II Corps and probably 9 with I Corps.

Best.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Apr 2010 23:58

sum wrote:^^^ Rohitvats-ji,

Kindly comment on the above linked article by Juggi G. The author( am guessing she is one of BRs favourites ) seems to have deep contacts and has given exact ground situation ( 6-Su-30s flying in Tezpur etc). Is the situation as grim as projected?

The article is full of inaccuracies and bombastic in nature...so. she has access to 'classified documents' and she displays them in the article...yeah sure!

...

I don't know anything about the PLA WZC Concept to comment on the same. However, some fundamental question are these---PLA will deploy 4 RRF against 5th Mountain Division in Tenga Valley and overwhelm it? Basic question, does geography allow for deployment of 4 Division sized formations in that area? And are these RRF some phantom formations (like the 'Army of Dead' on Lords of Rings) that can somehow overnight appear on India's border?Are 60,000 men that easy to conceal?

Another thing - Sinodefence.com tells me this about RRU - Rapid Reaction Units:

Driven by this initiative, the PLA began to experiment with the concept of RRU in the late 1980s. This process was speeded up in the early 1990s, following the Tiananmen Square demonstration incident in June 1989. By the mid-1990s, the PLA had created a 100,000-strong RRU, responsible for responding to regional conflicts as well as domestic incidents such as demonstrations and rioting. By the late 1990s, this was said to have expanded to 300,000 men. As well as ground forces divisions, the airborne forces subordinate to the PLA Air Force and the marine corps subordinate to the PLA Navy were also designated as RRU.

Organisation

So far, the following units have been identified as RRU:

Lanzhou Military Region

61st Motorised Infantry Division (21st Group Army)

Jinan Military Region

127th Mechanised Infantry Division (54th Group Army)
162nd Motorised Infantry Division (54th Group Army)

Nanjing Military Region

86th Motorised Infantry Division (31st Group Army)

Guangzhou Military Region

123rd (Amphibious) Mechanised infantry Division (41st Group Army)
124th Motorised Infantry Division (42nd Group Army)

Chengdu Military Region

149th Motorised Infantry Division (13th Group Army)

PLA Air Force

43rd Airborne Division (15th Airborne Corps)
44th Airborne Division (15th Airborne Corps)
45th Airborne Division (15th Airborne Corps)

PLA Navy

1st Marine Brigade
164th Marine Brigade

Which of the above formations are sutiable for assault in the mountains against IA? And is it a joke to mobilize and deploy a division worth of airborne troops without IAF not knowin anything about it? And is the AP terrain conducive to airborne insertion?

I'm not underestimating the PLA threat. But we don't need to loose sleep because of this stupid article...even basic facts are not correct.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Apr 2010 00:00

Ashutosh Malik wrote:Rohit

Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt 9 Div, based out of Meerut, also a part of I Corps? And, if so, could be deployed as well under I Corps- again, do correct me if I am wrong.

Both, 22 and 9, I think are based out of Meerut - RAM and PINE, as I understand they are called, or vice-versa. 22 as you say with II Corps and probably 9 with I Corps.

Best.

9 ID is with XI Corps - Jullundhar. RAM and PINE are correct formation signs for 22 and 9 ID.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Apr 2010 00:17

the article heavily underestimates the task of deploying and supplying such large formations
using the 'weak' infra in arunachal because the 4 lane panda highways are going to change into 1 lane jeep tracks at the border

people could maybe carry 3 days packed rations, heating fuel and ammo and paradrop in.
but after that what? use 737 and A320s to drop in sacks of noodles and rice ? with a waiting
screen of bisons just waiting to release AAMs on them.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Apr 2010 00:17

Kanson wrote:Rohit,

I'm talking abt High altitude + adverse climate area of NE only. I think it was made as much as equal to that of Siachen allowance, if i'm not wrong. Previously it want not so to my knowledge even thou' situtaon in areas near China border is as much harsh as that of Siachen.

Second, as per the information available, the first two mountain div raised for NE were from the exisitng pool without overall increase in man power strength of IA. You say this is not correct?

Kanson, the allowance for Siachen will be matched for those locations where same conditions are obtained...does not matter if it is in NE or Western Border. And if by any chance, you're under the impression that this increase in allowance in NE is an indicator of increased focus on the area, then you're incorrect in your assumption. These things are not goverened by such parameters.

As for the earlier divisions, some raising of new battalions of certain infantry regiments had occured and was captured in the news (was posted on BR also). And hence, my assertion. Of course, it would have not compensated for the overall number of troops and weapon systems required - that too from different arms.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Apr 2010 00:19

Singha wrote:the article heavily underestimates the task of deploying and supplying such large formations
using the 'weak' infra in arunachal because the 4 lane panda highways are going to change into 1 lane jeep tracks at the border

people could maybe carry 3 days packed rations, heating fuel and ammo and paradrop in.
but after that what? use 737 and A320s to drop in sacks of noodles and rice ? with a waiting
screen of bisons just waiting to release AAMs on them.

With a complimentary set of chop-sticks - courtsey the High Command

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 09 Apr 2010 00:42

BRFs Mil Scenario dhaga attracts high profile vijjitors

China's War Plans For India
Open Magazine April 16, 2010.
Suman Sharma

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Apr 2010 05:41

A very, very interesting article and especially the associated picture:

Vietnam puts Paracel row on summit agenda

No points for guessing "row" with whom.

However, the picture:

Talk of grabbing stuff!!!

Indian subs will be entering Chinese waters even before they apply their brakes coming out of Malacca Straits!!!

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 09 Apr 2010 11:55

rohitvats wrote: Kanson, the allowance for Siachen will be matched for those locations where same conditions are obtained...does not matter if it is in NE or Western Border. And if by any chance, you're under the impression that this increase in allowance in NE is an indicator of increased focus on the area, then you're incorrect in your assumption. These things are not goverened by such parameters.

Rohit, as i said before, i'm talking about China border in general as simply NE border means BD too.
As you are from fauj family, i let you answer these two questions:
1. When was Cat-III under High altitude allowance introduced and what was the cover story behind this ?
2. While Cat-I under High altitude allowance deals with 9000 ft to 15000 ft and Cat-II deals with 15000 ft and above, why was a seperate category, Cat-III that deals with 14000 ft and above for harsh climate introduced and why this Cat-III alone has the compensation paid in terms of Siachen allowance? Does Kargil deputation makes elligible for this Cat-III compensation ?

As for the earlier divisions, some raising of new battalions of certain infantry regiments had occured and was captured in the news (was posted on BR also). And hence, my assertion. Of course, it would have not compensated for the overall number of troops and weapon systems required - that too from different arms.

Overall what i thought was situation along the land border is like multiple pressure valve. You cant keep the pipe(border) safe by just reinforcing only one side of the pipe so the explanation from Orbat.com made sense. Dont know abt the final Orbat but I wish to have Strike Corps at every pressure valve point.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Apr 2010 14:11

Rohit, as i said before, i'm talking about China border in general as simply NE border means BD too.
As you are from fauj family, i let you answer these two questions:

1. When was Cat-III under High altitude allowance introduced and what was the cover story behind this ?

2. While Cat-I under High altitude allowance deals with 9000 ft to 15000 ft and Cat-II deals with 15000 ft and above, why was a seperate category, Cat-III that deals with 14000 ft and above for harsh climate introduced and why this Cat-III alone has the compensation paid in terms of Siachen allowance? Does Kargil deputation makes elligible for this Cat-III compensation ?

Kanson, I do not have the necessary knowledge to comment on this...please give me some time. Will check and revert.

Overall what i thought was situation along the land border is like multiple pressure valve. You cant keep the pipe(border) safe by just reinforcing only one side of the pipe so the explanation from Orbat.com made sense. Dont know abt the final Orbat but I wish to have Strike Corps at every pressure valve point.

I could not get this...

biswas · Post by **biswas** » 09 Apr 2010 15:45

I was wondering if some of the gurus here could reply to "below freezing" in the defence.pk forums

http://tinyurl.com/y2zz3jq

His words are worrying.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Apr 2010 15:56

biswas wrote:I was wondering if some of the gurus here could reply to "below freezing" in the defence.pk forums

http://tinyurl.com/y2zz3jq

His words are worrying.

Don't bother with nonsence from such di#$ H#@*&...not worth you time and blood pressure....

biswas · Post by **biswas** » 09 Apr 2010 16:09

rohitvats wrote:
biswas wrote:I was wondering if some of the gurus here could reply to "below freezing" in the defence.pk forums

http://tinyurl.com/y2zz3jq

His words are worrying.
Don't bother with nonsence from such di#$ H#@*&...not worth you time and blood pressure....

But he does have valid points?

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 09 Apr 2010 16:33

not really.

Anti-radiation missiles are only any good if the radar is switched on and fixed to a position i.e non-portable. Besides, it's folly to think that we don't have anti-radiation missiles in good numbers ourselves. China is known to have many more S-300MPU systems than us so their air-defence is as vulnerable as ours.

AWACS have a 450Km range and Phalcon is the best in it's class, it cannot be taken out easily even by a large group of fighters, although the need for more AWACS is obvious.

Incase of the situation heating up we would expect a a large deployment of Akash in and around major airfields, bridges, canals etc etc and information and live feed will be fed to these batteries via an AWACS which would fly a safe distance away, when the hostile aircrafts are close enough the Rajendra will go active , paint the aircraft , engage and launch a salvo atleast 2 missiles per aircraft. The whole process should take less than a minute at 25Km range and Mach 2 + speed of the akash. Fair enough we may loose the radar too because of anti-radiation missiles but the cost a losing an aircraft worth atleast 15-20 million USD + a pilot is far greater. Besides the launcher will remain ready for a quick reload as it is seperate from the radar , just replacing the Rajendra will get the system back online for another wave.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 09 Apr 2010 20:54

http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/?p=5921

China and Israel have begun to revive military cooperation.

chipanda is getting desperate, because google search engine isnt giving enough results ,
and chipanda cant make ORIGINAL piece from a copy ..

also fram the same vibrant forum another link on chipanda

Better media links help China, India

BEIJING - Strengthened media cooperation between India and China will help improve understanding and promote more beneficial bilateral ties between the two countries, officials from both sides proposed on Tuesday.

"China and India are enjoying a relationship which is deepening and broadening," S. Jaishankar, the Indian ambassador to China, said at the 2010 India-China Development Forum in Beijing.

that relationship wont get taller anymore

sum · Post by **sum** » 09 Apr 2010 21:30

Which of the above formations are sutiable for assault in the mountains against IA? And is it a joke to mobilize and deploy a division worth of airborne troops without IAF not knowin anything about it? And is the AP terrain conducive to airborne insertion?

I'm not underestimating the PLA threat. But we don't need to loose sleep because of this stupid article...even basic facts are not correct.

Rohivats-ji,

The article is not by Suman Sharma per-se but she has only quoted what the IDSA+DIA wargamed and found out.

Does it mean that IDSA/DIA do not take ground realities into considerations before arriving at conclusions?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 09 Apr 2010 21:39

Rohit,

I was referring to the raising of only 2 divisions for NE alone doesnt offer much against Chinese threat. Recent news of 2 more and further development on Strike Corps along the entire China border seems to make the situation more balanced. That's what my perceived understanding.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Apr 2010 23:17

sum wrote:
Rohivats-ji,

The article is not by Suman Sharma per-se but she has only quoted what the IDSA+DIA wargamed and found out.

Does it mean that IDSA/DIA do not take ground realities into considerations before arriving at conclusions?

Why has suddenly every one taken to the fancy of refering to me as 'ji', hain ji ?

...'perk' of post count increase

sum, nothing of the sort about the IDSA/DIA - they are professionals and far more qualified than an arm chair general and internet warrior like me...

My problem is with Suman Sharma - No one knows the parameters of war game as envisaged by IDSA Team. And I don't trust the faculties of our favorite reporter to get things right...what we have is a 'khichdi' of disparate things thrown together...unless we know the complete details of scenarios and 'ifs & buts' in IDSA paper, it is not advisable to comment...

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Apr 2010 23:22

Kanson wrote:Rohit,

I was referring to the raising of only 2 divisions for NE alone doesnt offer much against Chinese threat. Recent news of 2 more and further development on Strike Corps along the entire China border seems to make the situation more balanced. That's what my perceived understanding.

OK.But even the initial increment of 2 Mountain Divisions restores the balance that much more...Chinese, in their infinite wisdom, have managed to push even the Indian political class and babus to take cognizance of the threat...no mean feat...

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 09 Apr 2010 23:34

2 Mountain Divisions are just a Hold on solution ,where order will be maintained in those hilly areas infested with naxals,maoists,ulfa etc and chinese incursions at large scale,.
These are to create a standoff before further thrust is given . already two more mountain divisions are being planned .
emphasis is not to let the chinese penetrate too much as in 62
but still the numbers look inadequate with the size of the terrain

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Apr 2010 00:03

Samay wrote:2 Mountain Divisions are just a Hold on solution ,where order will be maintained in those hilly areas infested with naxals,maoists,ulfa etc and chinese incursions at large scale. These are to create a standoff before further thrust is given . already two more mountain divisions are being planned. Emphasis is not to let the chinese penetrate too much as in 62 but still the numbers look inadequate with the size of the terrain

Samay, lets not get into inanities and put some facts and proper analysis on the table...a Corps with 3 Divisions is not some joke...in 1962 PLA overwhelemed a grand total of one ill-equipped and led mountain division and claimed victory....

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Apr 2010 00:52

2010 IA is NOT 1962 "IA".

IF PLA has whatever-borne capability, so does IA. Besides IA did demo it in real. I suspect PLA did learn from that one incident and have done some great things, no two ways about that. BUT, I have to doubt that IA is sleeping to the extent that PLA can take over ArP just like that.

The problem IS Indian politicians. Not the IA.

Ashutosh Malik · Post by **Ashutosh Malik** » 10 Apr 2010 11:09

rohitvats wrote:
Ashutosh Malik wrote:Rohit

Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt 9 Div, based out of Meerut, also a part of I Corps? And, if so, could be deployed as well under I Corps- again, do correct me if I am wrong.

Both, 22 and 9, I think are based out of Meerut - RAM and PINE, as I understand they are called, or vice-versa. 22 as you say with II Corps and probably 9 with I Corps.

Best.
9 ID is with XI Corps - Jullundhar. RAM and PINE are correct formation signs for 22 and 9 ID.

Thanks Rohit.

Best.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 11 Apr 2010 03:44

Link to the Article in Regular Format

China's War Plans For India
Suman Sharma

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Apr 2010 06:53

Juggi G wrote:Link to the Article in Regular Format

China's War Plans For India
Suman Sharma

Good article. The mil scenarios folks might want to read to get better understanding of PRC force dispositions.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 11 Apr 2010 07:08

ramana wrote:
Juggi G wrote:Link to the Article in Regular Format

China's War Plans For India
Suman Sharma

Good article. The mil scenarios folks might want to read to get better understanding of PRC force dispositions.

a lot of it is badly inaccurate. I don't deny the need of some fear mongering but to do so with less than accurate info and figures lowers the credibility.

sawant · Post by **sawant** » 11 Apr 2010 08:55

The chinese can overrun Arunachal...but can they sustain the occupation...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Apr 2010 09:55

That Suman Sharma article is no net gain for anyone.

Chicom seems to have done some good, India has done some good. The delta seems to be about the same - give and take a little.

On running over - I doubt they can do it.

And, why does IA have to fight them in India?

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 11 Apr 2010 13:46

sawant wrote:The chinese can overrun Arunachal...but can they sustain the occupation...

Will we be munching on our rice-noodles with recycled chopsticks when the grolious lepubric hairless army of superhuman lilliputian cheneys of Mao overrun us poor SDRE army in AP ?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 Apr 2010 13:52

NRao wrote:That Suman Sharma article is no net gain for anyone.

Chicom seems to have done some good, India has done some good. The delta seems to be about the same - give and take a little.

On running over - I doubt they can do it.

And, why does IA have to fight them in India?

If any one can mobilize faster and win the dash to border/LAC - it is the Indian Army and not PLA. Before PLA decides to pull in troops from other Military Region, IA would have enought troops in the area...There was earlier imbalance, especially in the Eastern AP sector - 2 Mountain Division had huge AOR; the same has been corrected with these two new raisings in NE.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 18:06

China wants to become 'mutual friend' of India, Pak: China Daily

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Apr 2010 22:23

shukla wrote:China wants to become 'mutual friend' of India, Pak: China Daily

The original (small) article:

Gnawing issues in China-India relations

(Nothing new - they want AP.)

First, China and India share about 2,000 kilometers of border, and the boundary has never been formally delineated. The famous poet Robert Frost said in a well-known poem that "Good fences make good neighbors." Many confrontations between countries have been ignited by disputes in their border area. The two sides should quicken their steps on demarcation consultations that began in the 1980s.

Of course, this "fences", I am sure they want to build along the Bay of Bengal.

Why not. India is a great fiend.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 11 Apr 2010 22:37

Simply by virtue of much larger resources and unrestricted ability to execute plans/projects on ground, China has built a huge advantage over India in almost every field. From economy to military to infrastructure to diplomatic power, to literacy to health to "you name it" the gap is huge and still widening. It'll take sustained efforts on India's part for decades just to ensure that the existing gap doesn't keep widening to a point where a hopelessness starts to sink in.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 11 Apr 2010 23:44

shukla, wrong thread for that news, this is the mil forum.

rohitvats wrote: If any one can mobilize faster and win the dash to border/LAC - it is the Indian Army and not PLA. Before PLA decides to pull in troops from other Military Region, IA would have enought troops in the area...There was earlier imbalance, especially in the Eastern AP sector - 2 Mountain Division had huge AOR; the same has been corrected with these two new raisings in NE.

rohit, that's what I'm not sure they need to do.
the PLA ground forces are organised in MR's as you know, which are roughly equivalent to our commands. each command usually has 2 or more group armies (GA) which are more or less equivalent to an army corps in IA with around 3 divisions each of a combination of inf, motorised inf and armoured. in addition there may be independent bde's and support units. I'm sure you know all that.

as things stand, there are 2 MR's bordering India, chengdu MR from the NE to the western end of nepal. beyond that, up to ladakh is the domain of the lanzhou MR.
the MR's are further divided into military districts. much of our 'area of interest' would be the 'tibetan military district'. incidentally, other than one inf bde (it's in the map I posted earlier and if the info is true, is located very close to the AP border), I've not managed to locate any information regarding the location of larger formations in tibet.

the point is, do you know where this relatively massive ORBAT is located confidently enough to make the statement above ? does PLA need to bring in forces from far away places in order to put them against us ?
___________________

to put suman sharma's article into perspective, china's airborne force is the 15th airborne army comprising of 3 divisions, which incidentally is controlled by the PLAAF, not the army.

they do not have the aerial assets to move more than one complete division with its supporting stuff, one division is still a lot of soldiers but we should also keep in mind that these forces are pretty light, the airborne armoured vehicles for example would have difficulty stopping anything larger than a pistol round.

Misraji · Post by **Misraji** » 12 Apr 2010 00:27

EDIT.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 12 Apr 2010 00:35

EDIT.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 13 Apr 2010 20:42

Facts about the Chinese air force

China gave a rare public showing of an air base to military attaches and foreign reporters on Tuesday, as it seeks to modernise its own forces and build export markets.

Here are some facts about China's air force.

- The People's Liberation Army Air Force grew out of aircraft left behind by retreating Nationalist forces at the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. Soviet aid then bolstered its ranks, enabling China to start manufacturing its own versions of Russian aircraft like MiG-15s, MiG-17s and MiG-19s.

- The air force has not been engaged in serious, large-scale combat operations since the 1958 Taiwan Straits crisis, when its planes and pilots were outflown by those of Taiwan, which operated U.S.-made jets with far-better-trained crew.

- Today, China boasts the world's third-largest air force, with about 400,000 personnel and some 2,000 combat aircraft. That compares to more than 2,300 for the United States, and around 400 for Taiwan.

- Along with the development of its aeronautics industry, China has developed a more formidable design capacity. Its most advanced aircraft currently in service, and for the United States and Taiwan the potentially most threatening, are Russian Su-30 and Su-27 fighters. China is now developing its fourth-generation J-11.

- Last year's Oct. 1 parade marking the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic of China featured bombers, unmanned aircraft, reconnaissance and rescue helicopters.

- Modernisation has included developing an inflight refuelling capacity, to give its fighters a greater reach, and early warning aircraft.

- China also exported planes, mainly to Pakistan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Iran, North Korea and Zimbabwe, and it is starting to promote the J-10, a more modern fighter produced in China.

- China has air bases throughout the country, with many in southern and eastern provinces facing Taiwan. At least seven ring the capital Beijing. Some bases share runways with civilian airports, while others have tunnels hollowed out of mountains to protect aircraft from aerial bombardment.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 14 Apr 2010 14:07

PLAAF Deployments in Tibet ---- Manish Girdhar

While the lay of the land gives advantage to the PLA for surface operations, the runway elevations hinder air operations. The PLAAF capability in TAR is severely restricted but this disadvantage can be offset to some extent by taking-off with full armament and minimal fuel loads and carrying out in-flight refuelling to extend radius of operations of its combat fleet. However if diplomatic relations between Myanmar and China continue to improve and Myanmar allows PLAAF to operate from its bases, PLAAF shall pose a serious challenge.

http://claws.in/index-new.php?action=ma ... 0&u_id=112