China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Kanson » 11 Jan 2011 13:07

wrdos wrote:Two new pics of J20:

Image



One can see the convergent exhaust nozzle.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch

Postby DavidD » 11 Jan 2011 13:09

I doubt Pakistan can afford the J-20!

Also, in the pics wrdos posted, it seems like the plane flew with domestic engines.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Indranil » 11 Jan 2011 13:12

Philip wrote:One must take one's hat off to the PRC and its single-mindedness of purpose.While we have just cleared our LCA of 4th-gen cpability-that too which will only get final clearance in service in 2013,China has tested its 5th-gen stealth fighter for the first time.We are at least a decade behind the PRC in terms of designing and building one's own aircraft,but are trying hard to close the gap/leapfrogging into the rarified atmosphere of stealth with the JV with Russia for the 5th-gen fighter,already being tested.This should enable us to put into service our 5th-gen stealth fighter first,followed in due course by the AMCA,ambitions which now seems to parallel the US's approach which has two stealth fighters for the future,the F-22 Raptor and the JSF.
The main challenge for the IAF will be the rapid induction of new PRC fighters into the PAF,as China can build aircraft far faster than we can-the LCA's production being only "10 a year",as mentioned officially yesterday.


Since you forgot to mention, I shall mention it. The officials said that they will be producing at "10 a year". This can be increased "considerably" if desired.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Kanson » 11 Jan 2011 13:13

Well its very nice to see the very well orchestrated J-20 introduction and its first flight. Goes into the aviation history as remember-able moment for more than one reason. Shows the Chinese persistence whether in exploding the nuclear bomb or the first flight of Stealth fighter to reach that status of one among of the firsts. Kudos!

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch

Postby DavidD » 11 Jan 2011 13:28

First video, shows the landing. The police didn't try to stop the onlookers at all, and a lot of people brought big SLR cameras. We should see many high res pics soon as well!

http://www.56.com/flashApp/56.10.12.03. ... 52755&ref=

wrdos
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 26 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: China Military Watch

Postby wrdos » 11 Jan 2011 13:29

The real hope of the Chinese Aero Industry

Image
mother and son witnessing the first flight of J20

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 13:32

DavidD wrote:First pics :)


Image



Can someone come up with a wing area estimate?

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3461
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch

Postby kit » 11 Jan 2011 13:34

*deleted * .. man this thread is moving fast and furious :roll:
Last edited by kit on 11 Jan 2011 13:40, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 13:34

Kanson wrote:
wrdos wrote:Two new pics of J20:

Image


One can see the convergent exhaust nozzle.


Check the convergent tailfins - presumably to act as airbrake.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3461
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch

Postby kit » 11 Jan 2011 13:37

looks that the J20 is a bomb truck with that wing span probably carry more than the MKI, and its headon rcs less as well ?

wrdos
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 26 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: China Military Watch

Postby wrdos » 11 Jan 2011 13:39


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20172
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Philip » 11 Jan 2011 13:44

If "watchers" were allowed,then it means that the aircraft has already been flight tested and this flight was well rehearsed,meant to "concide" with Gates' meeting with the PRC mandarins.The report below pours some cold water on the PRC achievemnent,but perhaps like many who have pooh-pooed China's "achievements",these may be famous last words too!

Kit,your analysis appears to be spot on with some western analysts.

http://the-diplomat.com/2011/01/07/chin ... dium=email


Over-hyped Stealth Jet
January 07, 2011

first fifth-generation, J-20 fighter plane could shake up the Pacific order, writes David Axe. But it probably won’t

(*Long article,read it in full)

*One key quote,applicable even to IAF future fighters.

Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the US Teal Group, told the Internet trade publication Defense Tech that a modern fighter requires at least 11 supporting systems to be effective, including but not limited to sound mission planning, a talented and disciplined pilot, good maintenance personnel on the ground, accurate weapons, an advanced radar and other electronic systems inside the aircraft plus ‘off-board’ radar detection provided by purpose-built command-and-control planes and the reliable ministration of an aerial tanker.

Of all the systems required by a modern fighter, Beijing has mastered just one, Aboulafia said—and that’s the airplane’s physical structure itself, minus the engines.


Still, according to Kopp and Goon the J-20 represents a profound shift in the Pacific balance of power. ‘Any notion that an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or F/A-18E/F Super Hornet (flown by the U.S. Navy and Australia) will be capable of competing against this Chengdu design in air combat, let alone penetrate airspace defended by this fighter, would be simply absurd,’ they wrote.

And even the more cautious Ding says he can imagine a near-future where the J-20 dominates.

‘If the technological barrier of a fighter engine is overcome, China will be able to produce advanced fighters indigenously,’ he says. ‘And, along with other capable aircraft, such as airborne early-warning and air refuelling aircrafts, the Asian Pacific's political landscape will be changed, as China's military capability can win over countries in this region.’

That’s precisely the position that many US commentators, particularly conservative hardliners, are sure to take as acceptance of the J-20 sinks in. After all, they’ve done it before. In 2004, Indian pilots flying Russian-made Sukhoi Su-30s (a predecessor of the T-50) reportedly ‘defeated’ US Air Force-flown F-15s (the F-22’s predecessor) in an aerial training exercise hosted in India. ‘Third world countries may be able to challenge US command of the skies,’ lamented Loren Thompson, an analyst with the Lexington Institute, a right-leaning Washington think tank.

Thompson and others used the Cope India example as an argument in favour of buying F-22s to replace the roughly 400 F-15s. Few revised their opinions when it came to light that the US pilots had apparently flown over India under restrictions—that is, using deliberately inferior tactics—meant to even the odds for the Indians and make the training fairer. As a result, the Cope India incident marked the birth of a theme—that America could no longer reliably win battles in the sky.


(Some blogs from the same link)

“A week after the J-20’s Internet debut, Vice Adm. David Dorsett, the director of US Navy intelligence, admitted the Chinese have been moving new weapons through the development pipeline ‘quicker than we frequently project…” The US experts underestimated the speed that China brought out new weapon systems because those experts and the people in Pentagon do not process the concept of compounding effect.

Compounding effect is hard to grasp for human beings, although the rate of increase is constant throughout the course, but after reaching a maturing point, the absolute number of increase becomes exponential. Compounding effect is like an ice hockey stick, it has a long straight shank, after turning the corner at the bent, and it goes straight up at the blade.

I think the technology growth of the MIC in China is similar to the ice hockey stick, in the last 60 years they were on the shank of the stick, developing infrastructure and building foundation, because of arms embargo, the progress is slow, it appears the MIC in China is not going anywhere, and it stays flat on the long straight shank of the hockey stick. Now all those foundation and infrastructure have come to materiality, combined they have reached the bent of the hockey stick. The quickness of China brought out new weapon systems is the result of the compounding effect of China’s MIC foundation and infrastructure that they were putting together in the last 60 years.

If the experts in the US continue to project China’s technology progress on the linear basis, they probably will be continue be suppressed by China’s technology achievement because China’s technology development probably has reached the bend of the compounding effect. It start to explode non-linearly. When Vice Adm. David Dorsett refines the US assessment model on China’s technology and military advancement, he better brings in some mathematicians to incorporate the compounding effect in their new assessment model.

Reply
Daksha Nyshadham January 10, 2011 at 4:48 am
China sells most of their Military Hardware to all the failed nations, Rogue Nations, such as, Pakistan, North Korea, Sudan, Venezuela, and Cuba. The second biggest buyers of Chinese arms are major terrorist organizations and Islamic Terrorists. Majority of terrorists in the world use Chinese make AK 47 Machine guns and Grandees made By Chinese Company NORRINCO. For China this is a huge market for their arms. Their Chinese biggest arms buyer is a known failed and rogue nation, that is, Pakistan. Pakistanis always complain about Chinese Planes fly like sick birds. If you want to know the efficacies of Chinese Arms please read Pakistani News Papers and expert comments from Pakistani analysts. Pakistanis complain about Chinese make Tanks which is technologically backward. I never came across any major democratic and civilized country buying arms from China. China buys most of the arms, such as, Anti ship missiles, Planes, War ships from Russia. China copied SU-27 from Russia and made a different version.
Last edited by Philip on 11 Jan 2011 13:55, edited 1 time in total.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch

Postby DavidD » 11 Jan 2011 13:45

shiv wrote:
DavidD wrote:First pics :)


Image



Can someone come up with a wing area estimate?


Seems like the wingspan is about 12.5m, last page I think has a better pic if you wanna analyze it. I'm kinda busy right now and really shouldn't be spending so much time on this :lol:

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3461
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch

Postby kit » 11 Jan 2011 13:46

Philip wrote:One must take one's hat off to the PRC and its single-mindedness of purpose.While we have just cleared our LCA of 4th-gen cpability-that too which will only get final clearance in service in 2013,China has tested its 5th-gen stealth fighter for the first time.We are at least a decade behind the PRC in terms of designing and building one's own aircraft,but are trying hard to close the gap/leapfrogging into the rarified atmosphere of stealth with the JV with Russia for the 5th-gen fighter,already being tested.This should enable us to put into service our 5th-gen stealth fighter first,followed in due course by the AMCA,ambitions which now seems to parallel the US's approach which has two stealth fighters for the future,the F-22 Raptor and the JSF.
The main challenge for the IAF will be the rapid induction of new PRC fighters into the PAF,as China can build aircraft far faster than we can-the LCA's production being only "10 a year",as mentioned officially yesterday.


Philip., the AMCA is not designed to be a stealth plane according to official info, livefist had a detailed article on it.But it should be., i dont think the official view has come around to it till now.Maybe the J20 will change the AMCA design charecteristics ?! .. lets wait and see.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch

Postby DavidD » 11 Jan 2011 13:52

Philip wrote:If "watchers" were allowed,then it means that the aircraft has already been flight tested and this flight was well rehearsed,meant to "concide" with Gates' meeting with the PRC mandarins.The report below pours some cold water on the PRC achievemnent,but perhaps like many who have pooh-pooed China's "achievements",these may be famous last words too!

Kit,your analysis appears to be spot on with some western analysts.

http://the-diplomat.com/2011/01/07/chin ... dium=email


Over-hyped Stealth Jet
January 07, 2011

first fifth-generation, J-20 fighter plane could shake up the Pacific order, writes David Axe. But it probably won’t

(*Long article,read it in full)

*Just one key quote,applicable even to IAF future fighters.

Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the US Teal Group, told the Internet trade publication Defense Tech that a modern fighter requires at least 11 supporting systems to be effective, including but not limited to sound mission planning, a talented and disciplined pilot, good maintenance personnel on the ground, accurate weapons, an advanced radar and other electronic systems inside the aircraft plus ‘off-board’ radar detection provided by purpose-built command-and-control planes and the reliable ministration of an aerial tanker.

Of all the systems required by a modern fighter, Beijing has mastered just one, Aboulafia said—and that’s the airplane’s physical structure itself, minus the engines.


That's actually not what he said. What he said was that there is only conclusive evidence that China has met one of the criteria(he didn't say "mastered" either). I agree with what he said, but if what you take from his statement, as the author of the article seems to have done, is that China can only meet one of the criteria, then that would be a mistake. The other criteria are largely unknown at this point as far as conclusive evidence goes, but that doesn't mean China doesn't possess the capability.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20172
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Philip » 11 Jan 2011 14:01

David ,I agree with you.How can he evaluate PLAF maintenance capability? What about weaponry? The PRC have made huge strides in missile tech from AWST and other western media reports,plus,the PLAF will soon have several of its own AWACS/AEW aircraft flying.To my mind,the PRC plans to overwhelm its opposition anywhere through superior numbers,in the air,on the ground and on and under the sea.Numbers DO matter and superior weapon systems by a PRC opponent cannot be everywhere at the same time.We've already had studies showing how vastly superior numbers of PLAF Flankers can neutralise USAF F-22s operating out of Guam in ops closer to the PRC coastline/Taiwan.Adding J-20s to its large numbers of Flankers will only complicate the US's task even more.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 14:02



Check the first comment after the article folks :rotfl:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 14:12

DavidD wrote:Seems like the wingspan is about 12.5m, last page I think has a better pic if you wanna analyze it. I'm kinda busy right now and really shouldn't be spending so much time on this :lol:


12.5 to 13 meters is what I am getting from 2 pictures.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch

Postby DavidD » 11 Jan 2011 14:19

A youtube version of wrdos' vid. It take off at about 3:30 mark:


Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Christopher Sidor » 11 Jan 2011 14:21

Moderator, this thread and discussion has crossed 100 pages. Can you please spin off a new thread and archive the current discussion.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 14:32

DavidD wrote:First video, shows the landing. The police didn't try to stop the onlookers at all, and a lot of people brought big SLR cameras. We should see many high res pics soon as well!

http://www.56.com/flashApp/56.10.12.03. ... 52755&ref=



That is one fast landing approach. :shock:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 14:33

Christopher Sidor wrote:Moderator, this thread and discussion has crossed 100 pages. Can you please spin off a new thread and archive the current discussion.


No please. Let people get a chance to see the news.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 14:37




Comments:
1) J-20 takeoff without afterburner as David pointed out
2) The ailerons can be seen working.
3) The two seat J-10 (not J-20) is in the air 12 seconds after the burner lights up.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20172
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Philip » 11 Jan 2011 16:57

If posted earlier,pl Xcuse moi.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... power.html

China: a force fit for a superpower
The technology and firepower of the People’s Liberation Army are growing so fast that observers are no longer curious but concerned, says Malcolm Moore.

Image 1 of 2
Chinese Navy live-ammunition training in the East China Sea Photo: REX Image 1 of 2

American plane-spotters have already begun speculating that China's first stealth fighter jet might be able to beat an F-22 in a dogfight

Xcpts:
It has been a month to remember for the top brass of China’s People’s Liberation Army. While other armies fret about their funding, China’s generals have unveiled three major new weapons that could challenge the military supremacy of the United States and provide the firepower to underline China’s superpower status.

In a dry dock in the northern city of Dalian, smoke has begun to billow from the chimneys of the Shi Lang, a hulking Soviet-era ship that China bought from Russia and has refitted to become its first aircraft carrier. Named after a Qing dynasty admiral, the carrier is slated to make its maiden voyage later this year, four years ahead of schedule. Five more aircraft carriers could bolster the Chinese fleet further over the next decade.

Meanwhile, at an air base in the central city of Chengdu, China’s first stealth fighter jet has been spotted taxiing along a runway. It has yet to take off, but American plane-spotters have already begun speculating that it might be able to beat an F-22 in a dogfight. Finally, at a command bunker in the north of Beijing, the Chinese Second Artillery Corps controls the jewel in the crown – a new missile that could sink a US aircraft carrier, the first such weapon in the world. The Dong Feng (or East Wind) 21D missile is now “operational”, according to Admiral Robert Willard of the US Pacific Command, which will now have to think twice before committing a $20 billion (£12.8 billion) aircraft carrier and its 6,000 crew anywhere within 900 miles of the Chinese coast.

The unveiling of the new weapons could not have been better timed. Tomorrow, the US defence secretary, Robert Gates, is due to visit the tall white skyscraper that serves as the Second Artillery’s headquarters. Mr Gates, who has admitted that US intelligence has underestimated the speed of China’s progress, will be able to see the PLA’s array of nuclear and ballistic missile options for himself.

The transformation of the PLA, from Chairman Mao’s Red Army into a modern fighting force, began in the wake of the first Gulf War, when America’s precision missiles impressed upon Beijing that modern warfare no longer depended on having the biggest army. Ever since then, the PLA has been shedding troops, from some three million during the 1990s to 2.3 million currently. Xu Guangyu, a senior military analyst, predicted that troop numbers would keep falling, to 1.5 million – “Around the same size as the US and Russian armies,” he said.

But while troop numbers have fallen, the quality of the soldiers has risen, said Mr Xu. Almost 80 per cent of officers are now graduates, and a full two-thirds of China’s defence budget is spent on salaries and training. Meanwhile, a stinging submission at the hands of the US in 1996, when Bill Clinton sent two aircraft carrier strike groups into the East China Sea to support Taiwan during a regional spat, has provoked the PLA into upping its firepower. According to the Pentagon, China has the world’s “most active land-based ballistic and cruise missile programme”. A battery of more than 1,100 short-range missiles faces Taiwan, while medium and longer-range missiles, many bought from Russia, can carry nuclear or conventional warheads to anywhere within 4,000 miles of China, giving Beijing the ability to knock out every US air base in the Pacific.

China’s economic miracle has paid for the munitions, with the PLA’s official budget increasing more than fivefold from $14.6 billion in 2000 to $78.6 billion this year. Unofficially, the spending is thought to be far higher, at $150 billion, with China’s leaders keeping many of the PLA’s deals off the books in order to avoid alarming the rest of the world. And while the sum is still just a fraction of the US budget – Mr Gates has allocated $588 billion for “non-war” military spending this year, after trimming $78 billion of cuts – China has spent the money prudently, focusing on areas of US weakness.

China’s submarine fleet now boasts 65 vessels, and by 2030, according to the Kokoda Foundation, an Australian think tank, the total could rise to between 85 and 100, more than the US and enough to establish an edge in the Pacific. China has also integrated the skills of its military and civilian computer hackers, launched several reconnaissance and guidance satellites, and installed arrays of new radars and underwater sensors to ring its territory.

“There are a number of areas where the PLA has adopted approaches that differ significantly from the US’s approach,” said a Pentagon report to Congress last month. “Examples include the heavy reliance on ballistic and cruise missiles, rather than stealth aircraft, to attack ground targets inside heavily defended airspace; an array of systems to attack intelligence, communications and navigation satellites [and] an emphasis on offensive and defensive electronic warfare.”

While the PLA’s generals have been careful to tone down their nationalistic rhetoric in recent years, dropping the suggestion of an imminent invasion of Taiwan, the army is behaving with more swagger, at least in its own backyard. China insists its only goal is to safeguard “regional peace and stability”, but it has dramatically increased its penetrations of Japanese airspace, resulting in Japanese fighter jets being scrambled 44 times in the past year, double the total for 2006, according to the Asahi Shimbun newspaper.

Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: “A gap as wide as what seems to be forming between China’s stated intent and its military programmes leaves me more than curious about the end result. Indeed, I have moved from being curious to being genuinely concerned.”

The PLA does, however, have a long list of fundamental weaknesses that have been pointed out by critics both in China and abroad. Its biggest failing is that it cannot, yet, produce the reliable jet engines it needs for its fighters, having to rely on Russia. That relationship was strained, in 2004, when Moscow discovered that China had copied one of the jets it had advance-ordered and put it into production. “China’s army should not have to rely on others or have to buy its equipment,” said Liang Guanglie, the defence minister, despairingly.

Meanwhile, the PLA’s Jin-class nuclear submarine is said, by the US Office of Naval Intelligence, to be noisier than the submarines built by the Soviets 30 years ago. China’s fighter pilots are no match for US Top Guns. A shortage of foreign naval bases makes it difficult for China to maintain ships on long missions. Sailors who took part in exercises against Somali pirates in the Gulf of Aden were reported to have run short of water and fresh food.

And perhaps most reassuringly, the new Dong Feng “carrier killer” missile is impaired by China’s undeveloped missile guidance system. While Beijing can launch the deadly missile, it is not clear it can actually hit a ship. Since US satellites would detect the missile upon launch, an aircraft carrier would have enough warning to move several miles out of the way.

For now, Beijing wields enough power to keep the US in check in the Pacific and to discourage Taiwan from relying too heavily on American support. In the future, the Pentagon believes that the PLA could extend further into the Pacific, using its fleet to control shipping lines and oil concessions. The “pace and scale” of the PLA’s modernisation has been “broad and sweeping”, the Pentagon said. But, for now, China’s modern army “remains untested”.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Christopher Sidor » 11 Jan 2011 16:59

Does India have the capability of detecting this 5th generation fighter of PLAAF once it starts flying over Tibet and/or attempts to enter our airspace in north east or north western Himalayas?


geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch

Postby geeth » 11 Jan 2011 17:32

I never knew it is that simple to make a stealth plane! How come the Russians with their vast experience were labouring for so long..?

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: China Military Watch

Postby RamaY » 11 Jan 2011 17:55

Ok! I see the fighter
Last edited by RamaY on 11 Jan 2011 18:06, edited 1 time in total.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: China Military Watch

Postby RamaY » 11 Jan 2011 17:57

Dileep wrote:
RamaY wrote:And shankarullah will have to rewrite his 1st military scenario where that Pakistani grandkid of that exiled military ruler would kill a Su-30MKI with J20 instead of F22. And that general dude wouldnt have to sigh!

AoA onlee.

Get the facts right! I wrote that!!



My bad, I thought it was mil-scenario 1

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 19:13

J-20
Image

Chengdu J-9 (cancelled)
Image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-9

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Kanson » 11 Jan 2011 20:18

^ There is connection with J-12 and J-20 as well, i guess.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Kanson » 11 Jan 2011 20:19


Looks more like CG.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: China Military Watch

Postby Kanson » 11 Jan 2011 20:27

shiv wrote:
DavidD wrote:First video, shows the landing. The police didn't try to stop the onlookers at all, and a lot of people brought big SLR cameras. We should see many high res pics soon as well!
http://www.56.com/flashApp/56.10.12.03. ... 52755&ref=


That is one fast landing approach. :shock:


Like airliner. Maybe becoz of the absence of air brake or its stall speed could be higher.

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby johnny_m » 11 Jan 2011 20:42

No weapon bays meaning there is some serious work to be done on that. I am with Philip we need to focus on the FGFA as of now and increase production capability at HAL.

The plane is just too big for PAF to even consider it.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 20:47

johnny_m wrote: I am with Philip we need to focus on the FGFA as of now and increase production capability at HAL.


You mean we must react to the J-20?

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2146
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Vivek K » 11 Jan 2011 20:53

Johnny_m - T-50 is already flying!! Why do you think that India signed up for PAK-FA?

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Gaur » 11 Jan 2011 21:10

No internal bay??? :-?

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby johnny_m » 11 Jan 2011 21:26

Not on this prototype no.

http://i.imgur.com/w8Ay5.jpg

Johnny_m - T-50 is already flying!! Why do you think that India signed up for PAK-FA?


Yes but we are not getting the Vanila T 50 the FGFA will only fly in 2017 and we are looking at 2020s for Induction. China can make Planes at a faster rate than both India and Russia, HAL will have its hands full with MRCA, LCA MK2 and a host of other programmes, serious measures are to be taken to increase rate of production as well as giving more emphasis to FGFA, Russians almost never deliver on time unless pushed hard.

ps: sorry inline pic removed.
Last edited by johnny_m on 11 Jan 2011 21:35, edited 1 time in total.

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Virupaksha » 11 Jan 2011 21:31

<rant>Why are the chinese threads the only threads with so many inline pics, inline youtube and discussion all gas? I want admins to ban inline pics on these threads. Opening at work place becomes problematic with all those pics</rant>

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2011 21:31

Gaur wrote:No internal bay??? :-?


Well - I just brightened that image and could make out no bay. But the space is there and I am sure this is a tech demonstrator, not a prototype combat aircraft. If that is a Chinese engine - the Chinese are flying new airframe with new engine - in a first that has not been done for some decades AFAIK. No rule that it should not be done - but it is risky because somewhere down the line if one fails (airframe or engine) - both may be lost. And no one may know which one was at fault by sifting through the telemetry data and debris.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests