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.
member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_23370 » 29 Nov 2012 10:02

China has nothing in Bofors or the 155mm FH-77 light gun category. India license manufactures excellent guns china uses crappy home made guns that even pakis don't want.

ashi
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 19 Feb 2009 13:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby ashi » 29 Nov 2012 10:25

Bheeshma wrote:China has nothing in Bofors or the 155mm FH-77 light gun category. India license manufactures excellent guns china uses crappy home made guns that even pakis don't want.


We do. Just not much need of it.

http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Armour-and-Artillery/NORINCO-AH4-155-mm-39-calibre-Lightweight-Gun-Howitzer-China.html

And here is your Indian high quality manufacturing and design and your army is dumping it.

Click Click

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

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 29 Nov 2012 10:56

ashi wrote:And here is your Indian high quality manufacturing and design and your army is dumping it.

Don't let it worry you. Go get a drink to celebrate. When Indian stuff doesn't work we know about it and so do you. When your rust buckets fail, your Chicom bosses keep it secret. That is why everything looks like a success. You know that damn well but you will lose face it you admit it in front of Indians.

Selamat Pagi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 09:53

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Selamat Pagi » 29 Nov 2012 11:02

China Prepares To Replace Carrier Pilots With Software

http://www.asian-defence.com/2012/11/ch ... rrier.html

The U.S. Navy expects UAVs to replace most manned aircraft on carriers and the Chinese are aware of that. So the age of manned aircraft operating from Chinese carriers may be a short one. Chinese engineers are well aware of automatic pilot software and how it works. Now they will have feedback from Chinese carrier pilots and be able to do what the Americans have done.


If you have noticed those circle marks painted on the J-15, now you know what they are for !

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_22539 » 29 Nov 2012 11:05

^^Funny how no one buys these things even when they are of such high quality. The Chinese keep ejaculating about their hardware and stains our forum with pics and videos. All said and done, no one buys their stuff, save some African despots or the porkistanis who can only salivate about better things they can't afford. The way I see it, the generals get a cut from all the crap they buy from each other. Even the Chinese seem to think so these days. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... rom_within

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7979
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Indranil » 29 Nov 2012 11:09

shiv wrote:
ashi wrote:And here is your Indian high quality manufacturing and design and your army is dumping it.

Don't let it worry you. Go get a drink to celebrate. When Indian stuff doesn't work we know about it and so do you. When your rust buckets fail, your Chicom bosses keep it secret. That is why everything looks like a success. You know that damn well but you will lose face it you admit it in front of Indians.

If he lives in China, he would be lucky to just lose face.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby jamwal » 29 Nov 2012 11:10

'Shootering' Is the New Eastwooding: China's Aircraft Carrier Gets a Meme


Aircraft carriers are fearsome machines. The most powerful among them hold over 4,000 bombs and can hit 150 land-based targets a day, depending on the mission. China's lone aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, isn't quite as advanced -- but on Monday, the People's Liberation Army Navy surprised foreign observers with a major accomplishment: landing its first plane on the carrier's deck using an arresting cable. Learning how to perform the maneuver correctly is a major prerequisite to conducting maritime air operations, and Chinese state media have been enthusiastically reporting the success:

Video of the landing has, er, taken off online -- with viral results. Within hours of the initial broadcast, Chinese web users were taking photos of themselves emulating the iconic hand gesture used by flight deck officers in navies around the globe to release aircraft.

Image
:D

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_22539 » 29 Nov 2012 11:54

^^ :rotfl: :rotfl: Now the only question is which Chinese joker posting here took the pic.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_23370 » 29 Nov 2012 13:29

LOL chinese guns. Wonder why pakis are still wanting M-109 instead of these junks.Even the decision to go for the mediocre jokes like F-22p came after US turned down request fro 30 year old OHP's and they couldn't whip up 350 mil for 3 Type-22's. Now after begging around the world for new subs they seem to have decided buying low quality chinese subs is better than no subs. Thats is what chinese products stand for "Something better than nothing".

wong
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 27 May 2011 19:21

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby wong » 29 Nov 2012 16:59

^^^^

India is a very poor country (on average). Only the cheapest, lowest quality goods get exported to your country from China. This is stuff you can only find at Walmart and the Dollar Stores in the USA. Don't blame China your nation is essentially a giant Dollar Store. Work harder so you can buy Apple quality Chinese made goods.

As for Chinese guns, the AKs are considered above all the Eastern European ones and equal to the Russians. This is reflected in their pricing on gunbroker.com. In my opinion, since I own them all, only the Vz.58 is better, but that's only because it's not a true AK.

I would love to be able to buy an INSAS in the US. My friends and I can shoot my H&K MR556 and then shoot the INSAS for sh!ts & giggles. For even more giggles, I could field strip my FNC and field strip an INSAS and laugh at the tolerance differences. All I can say as a Chinese is please, please, please never abandon the INSAS.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 861
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby nash » 29 Nov 2012 17:30

wong wrote:^^^^

India is a very poor country (on average). Only the cheapest, lowest quality goods get exported to your country from China. This is stuff you can only find at Walmart and the Dollar Stores in the USA. Don't blame China your nation is essentially a giant Dollar Store. Work harder so you can buy Apple quality Chinese made goods.



So you were saying Because India is poor only cheap and lowest quality goods exported here, then according to you C-17,C-130,Rafale,P-8I,etc,etc....are low quality products, way to go.

And the cheapest and low quality goods from china is because in china only cheap and low quality goods are manufactured.
If any country need a cheap option and ready to compromise on quality they look towards china. But, in case of state-of-art high end product china is nowhere.

Even your pet Paki come to you if they don't get Quality product and ready to compromise just for sake of number,whether its a mig-21 copy or locomotive, for locomotive they buy yours only when my country refuse to give.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Singha » 29 Nov 2012 18:12

it seems a physicist has calculated Cheen will need around 100 LEO hunter satellites moving in 3 closely spaced orbital tracks to generate continuous naval targeting data for the south and east china sea alone. this is to aid their DF21D ASBM.

at last count they have around 6 "NOSS" sats, the 2nd trio being launched recently.

I have said it once and will say it again (despite being roundly pooh poohed the last time) - we need a mobile (which means ship based) ASAT capability to knock down satellites in the 150-450km altitude band which is where most of these hunter killers hang out. so perhaps 2 classes of missiles are needed - big and small. smaller is always cheaper.
perhaps a P15B sized hull with the specialized radar and the big n small missiles in silos instead of the two helicopters and 5" gun would suffice as the lead ship.

infact better to make the AD1 and AD2 as dual role ABM + ASAT weapons...the kind of speed and seeker technology + guidance radar is the same for both. infact even non-dedicated kit like SMART-L/APAR combo on LCF/Sachsen ships is said to be able to track LEO sats in orbit.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Boreas » 29 Nov 2012 18:51

wong wrote:^^^^

As for Chinese guns, the AKs are considered above all the Eastern European ones and equal to the Russians. This is reflected in their pricing on gunbroker.com. In my opinion, since I own them all, only the Vz.58 is better, but that's only because it's not a true AK.

I would love to be able to buy an INSAS in the US. My friends and I can shoot my H&K MR556 and then shoot the INSAS for sh!ts & giggles. For even more giggles, I could field strip my FNC and field strip an INSAS and laugh at the tolerance differences. All I can say as a Chinese is please, please, please never abandon the INSAS.


Why not you go on a long shooting trip and leave us to suffer in our misery. Pick a trip which can keep you away from this forum for 2-3 months.

------------------

If you know a little history, you may have came across incidents where a single Indian solider had slayed half a dozen of your PLA ancestors by using nothing but his khukri.. so, leave the INSAS.

Don't bother about us, we can take care of ourselves. If your prideful and dumb policymakers continue on pissing the rest of the civilized world by things like putting stupid maps on passport.. soon you will find yourselves in a closed box with no friends. I think your copy-pasted war equipment will never be tested in a real war and your nation will collapse in due coarse by its foolish policies.

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

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 29 Nov 2012 19:11

wong wrote:^^^^
India is a very poor country (on average). Only the cheapest, lowest quality goods get exported to your country from China.


Being unable to defend the quality of Chinese products you are now making silly excuses. LOL Only China manufactures the cheap stuff that poor Indians buy by paying Chinese workers nothing. Thank you. But how about talking about Chinese weapons rather than Indian poverty. You see you were quite happy to boast about Chinese weapons as long as Indians were ooohing and aahing and congratulating you on your newly painted copypasteware. Start calling you out on your empty boasts and you degenerate to this shameful blather.

Yeh dil maange more. Lets hear some specifications of your J 20. Weights. Armament. Range. Time to 10,000 meters etc All you are able to talk about is Indian poverty. What a joke.

rrao
BRFite
Posts: 125
Joined: 13 Feb 2007 22:17

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby rrao » 29 Nov 2012 20:33

OT:
Beware !!! If you are buying Chinese made electrical items. Last week i bought a Chinese made electric kettle (through on-line shopping),which came with a very short length power chord. so to reach out for the power socket , i had to use again a Chinese made , extension board (bought in china bazaar). I plugged the electric kettle which has a 230V,50Hz, 1000 watt rating , in to the extension board which has a 230V,10A,50 Hz rating, which supposed to have a 50 % safety margin. To the same extension board, a radio was also connected ,which was on. when i switched on the kettle,the water boiled for 5 minutes and suddenly the radio went off!!! Sensing something went wrong , i took a tester and tested for the presence of supply and the tester was not glowing ,indicating no power in the extension board sockets. while doing this , i casually touched the power chord of the extension board ,to my shock(not electric) ,the power cable was damn hot and the whole cable was rubbery and smelly and was hot as if it was about to catch fire!!! I opened the rear of the extension board and to my utter non electric shock and surprise , ordinary thin pvc wires were soldered to the socket, which can hardly carry 2 -3 amps and also even though the plug had a ground pin ,the earth wire was left open!! The on-off switch on the extension board melted away !!! Had i left the kettle unattended,there would have been a fire!!! So be watchful with Chinese made electrical items!!!!

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Singha » 29 Nov 2012 20:49

there is this famous pic of a USB memory key with nothing inside. bottomline is - a deep lack of ethics and honesty - they will cheat when they can and only deliver the goods when watched over like a hawk - which the MNC makers like apple do with their rotating "away swat teams" who camp in china.

their jungle capitalists truly dont even care for their own, as seen in monthly mining disasters in cottage industry coal mines and the repeated food adulteration scandals. so expecting them to show any concern for what they put in exported food or other products is a false hope. they will try to get away with cutting any corners they can.
Last edited by Singha on 29 Nov 2012 21:02, edited 1 time in total.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_23370 » 29 Nov 2012 20:54

:rotfl: LoL, Here in US also the chinese made products are the lowest quality available in the planet. I guess china is exporting their top quality stuff to mars. :mrgreen:


Indian companies never label their products as made in china unlike fake chinese products that get labelled as made in India. Just shows even china knows the value of made in china brand. :eek:
http://www.indiaafricaconnect.in/index. ... dustry/107

India can afford Rafale and C-17 while china is scrapping the bottom of the barrel trying to convince russia to sell them anything remotely capable of taking on an MKI (that was inducted nearly 15 years ago).

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

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 29 Nov 2012 21:46

Personally I would call a truce and try and stick to diss/cussing the Chinese military and not OT topics.

kulhari
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 66
Joined: 05 Feb 2010 21:13

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby kulhari » 29 Nov 2012 21:54

wong wrote:.......... All I can say as a Chinese is please, please, please never abandon the INSAS.

Tathaastu.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_20067 » 29 Nov 2012 21:55

Image

Chinese copy of Bajaj Pulsar..

Don
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 09 Dec 2002 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Don » 29 Nov 2012 22:12

Very Childlish.... :lol:

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_20067 » 29 Nov 2012 22:22

Don wrote:Very Childlish.... :lol:



no .. Very Chinese.. not Childish..... :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

more here..

Image

Image

Image

Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7979
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Indranil » 29 Nov 2012 22:45

ashi wrote:Reverse engineering which many of you call copy and paste, or buy/beg foreign techs/products and got screwed multiple times, which is better? :-)

1. We don't call reverse engineering copy-paste. You call stealing/cheating as reverse engineering.
2. In our country, buying is better than begging is better than stealing. India buys, China steals/cheats.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Will » 29 Nov 2012 22:51

Wong please take this discussion to the Preparing for Defeat by the Dragon thread. There we kowtow to all things Chinese and acknowledge that all things Chinese are superior. :evil:

For that matter are you even Chinese. Sound like a Paki to me :)
Last edited by Will on 29 Nov 2012 22:55, edited 1 time in total.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7979
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Indranil » 29 Nov 2012 22:54

Actually, I am very interested to know how good a copy J-15 is of the Su-33.

I am pretty sure that the avionics and radar are a step up from the legacy Su-33.

1. How much load can those foldable wings carry? Are they on par with the Su-33s? Russians claim that the J-15s are not as good.
2. How multi-role is J-15? I am sure A2A is well covered. What about Anti ship and A2G munitions?
3. I am yet to see a J-15 carry any load while take off or landing, they have been practicing it since 2010 onwards.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10342
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Vayutuvan » 29 Nov 2012 23:00

Singha wrote:...I have said it once and will say it again (despite being roundly pooh poohed the last time) - we need a mobile (which means ship based) ASAT capability to knock down satellites in the 150-450km altitude band which is where most of these hunter killers hang out.


Does this come under weaponization of space? Then this will not fly - no pun intended.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20419
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Philip » 29 Nov 2012 23:23

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/ ... 8K20121128

As China showcases carrier, global naval balance shifting

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_22872 » 29 Nov 2012 23:48

I find it strange that, inspite of Russia knowing China photoshops their hardware, it still sells it's aircraft engines. Isn't that the very reason not to sell Su 33 to Chinese? If only they are so scared and protective of their hardware being copied, why sell engines to Chinese in the first place? everyone knows the Chinese can't make their own engines, then what good are the airframes without a good fit Russian engines?

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Katare » 29 Nov 2012 23:50

kulhari wrote:
wong wrote:.......... All I can say as a Chinese is please, please, please never abandon the INSAS.

Tathaastu.


Wong, That INSAS review is accurate for the individual guns that he was looking at, and no doubt they look pretty poorly built. I think there are many pictures of INSAS on net that tell different story. IMO, those guns were rejects or hand made prototypes of older versions. Check this link for many close-up pictures and newer versions.

INSAS is India armed force's preferred gun with almost 2 million guns of many variants in service. INSAS has served indian armed forces for a decade and it'll remain in service for long time to come even if other imported rifels are also introduced. As usual a lot of great weapons are available in international market that offer a lot of different advantages and Armed forces lust after them.

Check this link for many pictures...

INSAS Pictures by Kunal Biswas

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3815
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby hnair » 30 Nov 2012 01:48

venug wrote:I find it strange that, inspite of Russia knowing China photoshops their hardware, it still sells it's aircraft engines. Isn't that the very reason not to sell Su 33 to Chinese? If only they are so scared and protective of their hardware being copied, why sell engines to Chinese in the first place? everyone knows the Chinese can't make their own engines, then what good are the airframes without a good fit Russian engines?


Leverage. They sell Tier II stuff to a grateful china and despite protestations against plagiarism, seem ok with a certain level of IP leakage. In return, they keep out other players. The Russian side are playing a good game of complaining, but still selling these things, so no one else encroaches this underground market. If the russians don't sell them, the chinese will be ready to shell out any amount of money for equivalent maal from players like EU etc. Since EU have extensive civilian contracts with China, the extra markups will be paid to EU through some civilian airliner deal or infrastructure contracts. And at that point, we will see EU and even Israeli restrictions getting loosened, because a needy and desperate china is ripe for profiting by all.

From an Indian POV, it is a complicated situation.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_22872 » 30 Nov 2012 02:08

Thanks hnair ji. Indeed, even now at one point EU will relent, given their not so good economy. For now Israel may not, looking at the Russian support of Syria and assuming this time Russia might oppose any Chinese moves to appease Israelis through Hardware squeeze. But the only way to get around the problem for us is to keep in mind that no one is a permanent friend. Keep Russians happy anyway, but build our economy and military all by ourselves. US is too untrustworthy for us to depend on it.

Leonard
BRFite
Posts: 157
Joined: 15 Nov 2000 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Leonard » 30 Nov 2012 05:50

Interesting article was posted earlier -- Just reposting with for Clarity, and also adding comments from "people" who have actually met "Fat" PLA generals ..

Rotting From Within
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... rom_within

Comments
>>
BingJou

I met several PLA officers from various parts of China in late 90s and throughout 2000's. Most of them are ranking officers, one-star generals or colonels. I had their business cards but never saw them in uniform. I was quite curious about PLA, but they wanted to talk about business with us, had no interest in discussing PLA. PLA enjoys all kinds of privileges in China. Their cars raced through toll stations without making an attempt to slow down, not to mention paying. All of them are boastful about their special status in China and lack intellectual and critical thinking. To them, everything is done through connections and personal relationship. I often wonder how capable these folks are of handling modern complex warfare. People outside PLA seem to be angry at the privileges PLA receive.



Only once in a late night drinking binge with a military police captain was I told about corruption within PLA. He a personable guy. The general we were dealing with sent this very friendly fellow to accompany us to tour the city. We really liked each other. The young captain was dissatisfied with PLA, called it the largest corruption machine in China, had some disdainful words to say about his superiors and wanted to quit. A few later a letter from him reached me in the US, telling me he left PLA and worked for a telecommunication company. I should, but did not reply. This FP report reminds me of that young captain.

<<

Wrong way & co -- I guess still could not copy the P-3 Orion even after dissassemby ..

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

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 30 Nov 2012 06:39

Katare wrote:
wong wrote:.......... All I can say as a Chinese is please, please, please never abandon the INSAS.


Wong, That INSAS review is accurate <snip>


Katare what Wong has done is to trap you in a classic torn shirt open fly tactic. He has successfully changed the topic from plasticky Chinese copypasteware to Indian hardware and he has made you defend Indian stuff in the China mil thread. India stuff can be discussed elsewhere. Here we discuss Chinese stuff.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Singha » 30 Nov 2012 07:29

matrimc wrote:
Singha wrote:...I have said it once and will say it again (despite being roundly pooh poohed the last time) - we need a mobile (which means ship based) ASAT capability to knock down satellites in the 150-450km altitude band which is where most of these hunter killers hang out.


Does this come under weaponization of space? Then this will not fly - no pun intended.


No it does not. deployment of weapons in space comes under weaponization of space (not that I think India signed any such treaty)

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1933
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby AdityaM » 30 Nov 2012 12:22

Image

what did i miss, no one is discussing this?
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/chin ... 35138.html

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

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 30 Nov 2012 13:58



Well. I tried - link below
viewtopic.php?p=1370105#p1370105

But with the media calling this a "scare" maybe I tried the wrong thread. The media lead us in our fear.

kish
BRFite
Posts: 960
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 23:53

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby kish » 30 Nov 2012 18:37

China says new jet not copied from US :lol:

China has rejected reports that its new aircraft carrier-borne fighter jet J-15 was copied from US technology.

Defence ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng said China had stuck to independent innovation and had the capacity to build and develop its own aircraft carrier.

"The assertion that China copied a foreign country's aircraft carrier technology is unprofessional, if not an intentional attack," he was quoted as saying by the Global Times Friday.


China should clarify where it copied the tech from US or Russia? :rotfl:

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

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby shiv » 30 Nov 2012 18:54

kish wrote:China says new jet not copied from US :lol:

China has rejected reports that its new aircraft carrier-borne fighter jet J-15 was copied from US technology.

Defence ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng said China had stuck to independent innovation and had the capacity to build and develop its own aircraft carrier.

"The assertion that China copied a foreign country's aircraft carrier technology is unprofessional, if not an intentional attack," he was quoted as saying by the Global Times Friday.


China should clarify where it copied the tech from US or Russia? :rotfl:


Hmm. Just curious. I have not seen anyone accusing China of copying the J-15 from the US. The only reason for China to come out with such a statement is for internal Chinese consumption - that is I am guessing that Chinese people have been critical of the way China is being shamed because the J-15 is a copy. So they are being given a balm by this white lie, or black truth. The J-15 is not copied (from the US). Ashwathhama (the elephant) is dead

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3815
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby hnair » 01 Dec 2012 02:35

AdityaM wrote:what did i miss, no one is discussing this?
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/chin ... 35138.html


You did not miss much, saarey. As per diagram, the PLAAF intercepted a PAKFA with "nuclear armed" SU30s... we are dhooomed :((

But it is nice to know (for more than one reason) that they indulge in cheongsam-shiver, whenever a takeoff happens at Tezpur :lol:

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10342
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Vayutuvan » 01 Dec 2012 02:58

Singha wrote:No it does not. deployment of weapons in space comes under weaponization of space (not that I think India signed any such treaty)

Yes, you are right on the first point, but India did sign and ratify the Outer Space Treaty.

Also another point of interest from wikipedia aunty article on Outer Space Treaty says that

Note that this treaty does not ban the placement of weapons in space in general, only nuclear weapons and WMD.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests