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_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_23455 » 03 Feb 2014 07:21

chola wrote:
RajitO wrote:[

This is how wars start...


Why? Because the chinis know they have a sh1tty military and would be annihilated were it to come down to war against any of the US-backed militaries -- Taiwan, South Korea and definitely Japan. With all the the single child little Emperors, the appetite for fighting any real war get even less as time and their economy progresses.

But I state again this is actually THE China military problem for India. The PLA never fights so the US and its allies will never get the chance to crush it . Without a full war, China stays on top as the predominant Asian power because the paper tiger is never exposed. They will continue to eat away at the margins like in Arunachal or Senkayus and use the weight of their economy to dominate.

We actually WANT China to start wars, especially against Japan. And we are kidding ourselves if we think Japan needs India or even the US to assist them in dealing with China. Japan is the one nation outside of Germany that one can say is a truly martial nation. The US is actually the only reason that keeps them from re-arming and wiping the floor with China like they did in WWII.


Very interesting phraseology. Since you seem to be wishing for a war, this is how wars are lost.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby amit » 03 Feb 2014 14:10

China’s Deceptively Weak (and Dangerous) Military


In April 2003, the Chinese Navy decided to put a large group of its best submarine talent on the same boat as part of an experiment to synergize its naval elite. The result? Within hours of leaving port, the Type 035 Ming III class submarine sank with all hands lost. Never having fully recovered from this maritime disaster, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is still the only permanent member of the United Nations Security Council never to have conducted an operational patrol with a nuclear missile submarine.

China is also the only member of the UN’s “Big Five” never to have built and operated an aircraft carrier. While it launched a refurbished Ukrainian built carrier amidst much fanfare in September 2012 – then-President Hu Jintao and all the top brass showed up – soon afterward the big ship had to return to the docks for extensive overhauls because of suspected engine failure; not the most auspicious of starts for China’s fledgling “blue water” navy, and not the least example of a modernizing military that has yet to master last century’s technology.



At one military exercise in the summer of 2012, a strategic PLA unit, stressed out by the hard work of handling warheads in an underground bunker complex, actually had to take time out of a 15-day wartime simulation for movie nights and karaoke parties. In fact, by day nine of the exercise, a “cultural performance troupe” (common PLA euphemism for song-and-dance girls) had to be brought into the otherwise sealed facility to entertain the homesick soldiers.

Apparently becoming suspicious that men might not have the emotional fortitude to hack it in high-pressure situations, an experimental all-female unit was then brought in for the 2013 iteration of the war games, held in May, for an abbreviated 72-hour trial run. Unfortunately for the PLA, the results were even worse. By the end of the second day of the exercise, the hardened tunnel facility’s psychological counseling office was overrun with patients, many reportedly too upset to eat and one even suffering with severe nausea because of the unpleasant conditions.


While recent years have witnessed a tremendous Chinese propaganda effort {we see that every day here} aimed at convincing the world that the PRC is a serious military player that is owed respect, outsiders often forget that China does not even have a professional military.


This may be one reason why China’s marines (or “naval infantry” in PLA parlance) and other amphibious warfare units train by landing on big white sandy beaches that look nothing like the west coast of Taiwan (or for that matter anyplace else they could conceivably be sent in the East China Sea or South China Sea). It could also be why PLA Air Force pilots still typically get less than ten hours of flight time a month (well below regional standards), and only in 2012 began to have the ability to submit their own flight plans (previously, overbearing staff officers assigned pilots their flight plans and would not even allow them to taxi and take-off on the runways by themselves).


For that reason, the PLA has to engage in constant “political work” at the expense of training for combat. This means that 30 to 40 percent of an officer’s career (or roughly 15 hours per 40-hour work week) is wasted studying CCP propaganda, singing patriotic songs, and conducting small group discussions on Marxist-Leninist theory. And when PLA officers do train, it is almost always a cautious affair that rarely involves risky (i.e., realistic) training scenarios.


China has also built the world’s largest army of cyber warriors, and the planet’s second largest fleet of drones, to exploit areas where the U.S. and its allies are under-defended. All of these capabilities make it more likely that China could one day be tempted to start a war, and none come with any built in escalation control.


Worth a full read. Also while reading the above do glance at this: Rotting From Within


Now get ready for a flurry of nandi droppings from the resident drones. :lol:

Jaeger
BRFite
Posts: 328
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Jaeger » 03 Feb 2014 14:13

raj.devan, will you please stop reducing this thread to Jeff Head levels? I actually wasted precious hours of my life D/Ling his book and reading it. He is a right-wing nutjob who is really worried that the nasty brown/yellow/black people are going to overrun his whitebread world.
He is a semi-literate Hacksaw Jim Duggan whose 800+ pages of propagandu essential boils down to walking around the ring in spandex undies carrying a Stars and Stripes and a 2x4 and chanting "No more immigration! No more abortion! White people FTW! USA! USA! USA!"
A small sampler - according to him or rather, according to the Republican Tea Bag wet dream that is his magnum opus:
*India's head of Govt. is the President.
*Abortion is finally criminalised when researchers discover a structure "at a molecular or atomic level" called Human Reasoning Structures, and therefore abortion will be outlawed. Amen, brother!
*Second amendment-style militias will help as response units against terrorist attacks.
*... you know what, there's just so much wrong, there's no point.

And to think you compared vivek_ahuja's incredibly detailed and thought-out scenarios to this ape's ramblings. SMH.

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby raj.devan » 03 Feb 2014 16:26

Jaeger wrote:raj.devan, will you please stop reducing this thread to Jeff Head levels?

And to think you compared vivek_ahuja's incredibly detailed and thought-out scenarios to this ape's ramblings. SMH.


I didnt compare Mr. Ahuja to Jeff Head. I compared him to Tom Clancy :)

Is your post meant to be in the Military Scenarios thread? It seems OT in this one.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby chola » 03 Feb 2014 18:10

raj.devan wrote:Actually the PLA did fight a devastating and bloody war with Vietnam in 1979. In addition there was the conflict with the Soviets in '69 and the conflict over the Paracel Islands in '74.

The conflict with Vietnam resulted in more than 7000 fatalities for the PLA, mostly because of their use of Marshal Peng Du Hai's human wave tactics. Following this ghastly war, the PLA began to undergo a metamorphosis - that ultimately halved its strength but increased its lethality.

So you may be right. The new PLA has not yet been tested in war. But as Sun Tzu said, the best general is the ne who can win the fight without actually fighting it.



How long ago is 1979? How is 7000 fatalities "devastating and bloody" for a nation that lost 1 million against the US in Korea? This is a militarily weak nation that had avoided war since economic reforms. And strategically for India that is actually the real problem. A war would expose them. No war and they continue to dominate by reputation alone.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby chola » 03 Feb 2014 18:25

RajitO wrote:
Very interesting phraseology. Since you seem to be wishing for a war, this is how wars are lost.


Yes, I do. I would like China to go to war with Japan, Taiwan or any one of the US backed nations.

Even if it is lost, so what? What do I care for Japan?

The benefits are major.

One, a Chinese war with Japan would lessen pressure on our north to start with.

Secondly, it would weaken East Asia as an investment attraction and also push over time global manufacturing from the Far East to the Indian subcontinent.

Third, it would end the Myth of the Mighty Dragon and our shivering dhotis once and for all.

Again, I wish for it but I do not think it will ever happen. The chinis know they have a sh1tty military, they know they are not a nation of warriors but of peasants and they know that as long as they do not really fight they can intimidate through size and reputation.

And again, the our real problem with the PLA is not that it is prone to war but that it is sneakily not. It hadn't fought in decades when any major conflict would have exposed the PRC as a paper tiger and my guess is it will continue to protect its paper tiger myth by avoiding war.

Though I do wish for a nice little war in East Asia.

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby raj.devan » 03 Feb 2014 18:56

Actually the Chinese lost between 1.5 lakh to 4.0 Lakh troops KIA in Korea. I agree that 7000 fatalities was small comparatively, but the Chinese leadership's expectations in 1979 was very different from that in 1953.

They took their experience in Vietnam seriously enough to completely overhaul their military structure and modernize it. They simply realized that if they could not prevail over even a country like Vietnam, they were leaving themselves at the mercy of a very hostile neighbourhood.

Your contention that the PLA is only a marketing tool, and not as effective a fighting force may have some truth to it. A LOT of what we know about the PLA is through a carefully crafted propaganda campaign masterminded by Beijing. Apart from reports of rampant corruption and nepotism that we get from groups like project2049, there is very little other information about the PLA's true war fighting capabilities.

I cannot agree with your idea that a war in East Asia will have economic benefits for India. What such an event will do is plunge the world's stock markets, including ours - and whether we do it do not recover from this economic shock is a question with no simple answer.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby TSJones » 03 Feb 2014 20:05

Secondly, it would weaken East Asia as an investment attraction and also push over time global manufacturing from the Far East to the Indian subcontinent.


Not necessarily.

Wish for your own war if you like but leave other nations out of it. Nobody's home land is safe in modern warfare.

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_23455 » 04 Feb 2014 09:41

chola wrote:Secondly, it would weaken East Asia as an investment attraction and also push over time global manufacturing from the Far East to the Indian subcontinent.


I see, so after all the warrior/peasant/martial nation business, it's really the pursuit of money that is the real agenda. And if the Chinese pursue limited conflicts and don't wage full scale wars so as not to disrupt their economic interests they are "paper tigers."

Got it.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby chola » 04 Feb 2014 18:16

TSJones wrote:
Secondly, it would weaken East Asia as an investment attraction and also push over time global manufacturing from the Far East to the Indian subcontinent.


Not necessarily.

Wish for your own war if you like but leave other nations out of it.


Now why is that? If they want to fight and especially if the one who will come out with its reputation crushed is a common rival of both India and the US then why the hell not hope for and if possible encourage it?


Nobody's home land is safe in modern warfare.


Let's see:

1. Grenada (invasion and regime change)
2. Panama (invasion and regime)
3. Gulf War I (invasion)
4. Afghanistan (invasion and regime change)
5. Iraq (invasion and regime change)

You can't get more more modern or total than an invasion and regime change where you had to take over a country and remove its entire leadership.

Tell me how the homelands China or Japan were made "unsafe" by these modern wars? So conversely, if China and Japan fought the India or the US would be made equally "unsafe".

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby chola » 04 Feb 2014 18:38

RajitO wrote:
chola wrote:Secondly, it would weaken East Asia as an investment attraction and also push over time global manufacturing from the Far East to the Indian subcontinent.


I see, so after all the warrior/peasant/martial nation business, it's really the pursuit of money that is the real agenda.



Idiotic. First of all, the pursuit of nation wealth and advancement should ALWAYS be at the forefront of a government. If not, then we will literally stay a sh1thole forever.

Secondly, as you even quoted, the "filthy" pursuit of lucre it is only secondary benefit. The primary benefit would be a weaken rival that could longer pressure on our northern borders.

And if the Chinese pursue limited conflicts and don't wage full scale wars so as not to disrupt their economic interests they are "paper tigers."


Now tell me which limited conflict the PRC pursued? The PLA had not fought for decades. A great power with a proper military would have fought somewhere. Look at the US, Russia or even the UK and France. It is the only member of the P5 with absolutely no war record since 1978.

Tell what has changed since 1978? Their damned economy had gone up 20-fold that's what. Couple that with a society of single-children then the PRC is about as much as a paper tiger as there can be.

Yes, a nice China-Japan war would be for our and the world's good. I see maybe a four-week affair with whole Chinese navy sunk and the chinis accepting a peace treaty and then going back to business. It will permanently knock them from any position of global power but it will still leave them trading and wealthy.

But I doubt it will come to pass because the PRC leadership know their military is sh1tty and as long as they never go to war, their reputation and their position as a power remains intact.


Got it.


No, I don't you do. Please read Chanakya.

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_23455 » 04 Feb 2014 20:00

chola wrote:
Please read Chanakya.


I spoke to him, He told me to tell you that that quote about Japan and Germany being the only two truly martial nations was epic. Both fought on the same side in WWII and lost to an alliance, comprising peasants, grocers, and dhoti shiverers.

Chankaya's words, not mine. :)

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Viv S » 04 Feb 2014 20:09

:rotfl:

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 14127
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Suraj » 04 Feb 2014 22:52

The discussion on this thread could use some of the material from a conversation in the Chinese Threat thread a few weeks ago. Specifically, DavidD mentioned more about the Chinese view of Japan: link
DavidD wrote:
Suraj wrote:The topic of China vs Japan has a lesson for us in as much as it reveals the Chinese psyche and view of their neighborhood. The problem they have with Japan is that Japan never subjected to China as a vassal. In fact they celebrate the typhoons that destroyed the Yuan Dynasty ruler Kublai Khan's invasion fleet as the divine wind (kamikaze).

The Chinese have a more rational view of the Mongols and Manchus because both those were Sinicized and absorbed despite being originally rulers. Mao conveniently helped eliminate Qing/Manchu-based cultural artifacts, along with a lot else. The Japanese were never Sinicized. That, combined with both their refusal to subject, and having had the audacity to invade the mainland, makes the Chinese extremely bothered by them.

The US carpetbombing the Japanese into submission gave China an opportunity to demand the Japanese also repent for their actions against China. Yasukuni is just a microcosm of a larger issue the Chinese have with Japan. Unfortunately, once the west flattened Japan, hung a few guys and they had little issue with seeing Japan rise again, especially since they went out of their way to maintain a pacifist policy of constructive engagement within their neighborhood. China on the other hand, retains its historical rancor, and finds it has no avenue to obtain it, or to force a subservient posture from Japan.

It speaks for a strategic worldview that places a great deal of emphasis on remembering and attempting to get even for slights. While it makes them dangerous to outsiders, it also provides an avenue to channel that societal tendency inwards, as demonstrated by their own frequent violent upheavals. This requires others to always avoid treating or addressing them as a unified entity, and apportion blame or praise for their actions only to some parties.



I think that's a pretty accurate view of the current situation. A few things I would add are these:

It would be an understatement to say that China is "bothered" by Japan. It sees Japan as an existential threat, and it seeks to subjugate Japan the way the U.S. has subjugated it, i.e. exert maximal military, political, and legal authority over it. It was not a priority for most of dynastic China because technology did not allow for much interactions between the two. The only two significant conflicts I can recall from the past couple thousand of years of dynastic China was Kublai Khan's invasion of Japan and the Japanese invasion of Korea in the late 1500's. The first wasn't even really Chinese considering that Han China were still fighting Kublai Khan themselves as a part of the Southern Song dynasty, and the second took place almost entirely on Korean soil. With advances in technology, successful invasions across the seas became possible as Japan demonstrated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and now China sees the need to confront Japan in earnest.

The history of China is not characterized by having allies around it. It is characterized solely by a tributary relationship - with the exception of India and more recently Russia, who were too large to ask. Japan *never* paid tribute. In fact they both held out against invasions on multiple occasions AND ransacked the mainland more than once. The Yasukuni issue is mere eyewash. In real life, there are Chinese hawkers selling curios outside Yasukuni.

China's aim is not an apology for some past wrong - they've hurt themselves far more than anyone else ever hurt them. Their aim is overlordship. The problem is that Japan never subjected to it. They could not even get Japan to do so at their lowest point post WW2, because the Chinese were busy killing each other and weakening themselves even more.

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

Chinese warships hold rare exercises in Indian Ocean

Postby Selamat Pagi » 05 Feb 2014 06:44

Chinese warships hold rare exercises in Indian Ocean

The ships conducted 10 exercises, including anti-pirate, joint search and rescue, and damage control drills in the Indian Ocean from January 29, state-run Xinhua news agency reported today.

Image

http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... dian-ocean
Last edited by Suraj on 05 Feb 2014 22:48, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Username changed from Selamat Pagi

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby raj.devan » 05 Feb 2014 12:30

"China's largest amphibious landing craft" participated in "anti piracy" operations? Are the Chinese planning to take their anti piracy operations to the Somali coast?

Or is just sabre rattling?
Last edited by raj.devan on 05 Feb 2014 12:37, edited 1 time in total.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12634
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Aditya_V » 05 Feb 2014 12:37

Or are they rying a Kargil on Andamans

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 » 05 Feb 2014 13:01

the anti-piracy mission gives them a good opportunity to rotate units on long duration deployments..its nearly a month sailing from their home ports to reach mission area. tankers, supply ships, marine units(like LCAC above), command & control staff can all be trained nicely.

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby raj.devan » 05 Feb 2014 13:37

Meanwhile, at Zengmu Reef, the Chinese are causing concern for the Malaysians by deploying warships neat disputed islands, calling them 'sovereign territory' and placing markers

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/sinosph ... incursion/

Note that the Changbaishan LC is supposed to have been present here (SCS) too. Maybe one of the reports is slightly older, or this is one fast ship.

sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 348
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby sarabpal.s » 05 Feb 2014 15:02

Soon chines become a Nazi of east. with there habit of picking dispute with every neighbor country.

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 » 05 Feb 2014 20:25

they are like a large dog peeing against every tree as a marker. and none of the ASEAN dare pick a fight with them. none have dared to send naval forces near disputed areas to pee against the same tree - except japan with whom their only slight overlap with the greater china co-prosperity oceanic zone.

philipines is the weakest - they will get rolled over first. next indonesia , thailand and malaysia will cave in.
the viets as is their tradition will put up a fight and hold out longest.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby chola » 05 Feb 2014 20:40

As long as no gunfire is ever exchanged, this will simply continue. It will be fait accompli on the ground. The PLA hadn't fought for decades because their entire philosophy under Sun Tzu is to win without fighting. A real war with Japan would change all of that.

It is in our interest to encourage real fighting in Far East.

BTW Rajitji, I appreciate the humor. lol

member_28448
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_28448 » 06 Feb 2014 10:39

Deleted
Last edited by Suraj on 06 Feb 2014 10:47, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Off topic. Use the report post function to report a post.

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_20292 » 06 Feb 2014 11:12

RajitO wrote:
chola wrote:
Please read Chanakya.


I spoke to him, He told me to tell you that that quote about Japan and Germany being the only two truly martial nations was epic


Don't laugh insolently RajitO.

You are forgetting our rather martial western Paki bros. Now there's a truly Martiallah Qaum!

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Brando » 06 Feb 2014 11:20

RajitO wrote: Both fought on the same side in WWII and lost to an alliance, comprising peasants, grocers, and dhoti shiverers.



LOL I don't agree with the "martial nations"/"martial races" tripe but if we had left the Japanese to these "peasants, grocers and commie academics", our friends in Lhasa would be worshiping the "divine emperor" along with the Buddha.

The small fact that the "alliance" that defeated the Japanese consisted of tens of thousands of US Marines, sailors and pilots who chased the Japanese across the entire pacific back to Japan should be mentioned as well.

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_23455 » 06 Feb 2014 11:35

chola wrote:As long as no gunfire is ever exchanged, this will simply continue. It will be fait accompli on the ground. The PLA hadn't fought for decades because their entire philosophy under Sun Tzu is to win without fighting. A real war with Japan would change all of that.

It is in our interest to encourage real fighting in Far East.

BTW Rajitji, I appreciate the humor. lol


Cheers! :)

Brando wrote:
RajitO wrote: Both fought on the same side in WWII and lost to an alliance, comprising peasants, grocers, and dhoti shiverers.



The small fact that the "alliance" that defeated the Japanese consisted of tens of thousands of US Marines, sailors and pilots who chased the Japanese across the entire pacific back to Japan has been omitted.


Boss the phrase "Iowa farmboy" was coined by the Yanks, not anyone else. :wink:

And isn't this the ultimate irony that the Americans were "isolationist" early on in WWII, thinking it was yet another European bloodfest before the Japanese took war to their doorstep.

I guess what I am saying is all well laid out plans to keep it neat and tidy turn upside down when fundamental power shifts happen, and we will have to do our bit to tame the Dragon.

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby member_20292 » 06 Feb 2014 11:40

^^ and how!
I was reading Laura Hillenbrand's "Unbroken" and Japanese cruelty in WW2 , as well as the scale of the US efforts to destroy them, are both breathtakingly awesome!

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Austin » 06 Feb 2014 22:11

Looking at this picture of J-20 , it appears that it has a slight FSW wing design ?
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 48.xml&p=1

Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8296
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Indranil » 06 Feb 2014 22:30

Austin wrote:Looking at this picture of J-20 , it appears that it has a slight FSW wing design ?

Nope that is just a rendering. The J-20 has a trapezoidal wing, though the sweep of the leading and trailing edges are not as matched as the F-22, YF-23 (and proposed AMCA). It is similar to the PAKFA in this respect.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Austin » 07 Feb 2014 09:07

Thanks for clarifying indranil

New Chinese submarine patrol puts Hawaii, Alaska within nuke range - report

The US Naval Institute (USNI) reported that the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has tapped the Jin-class nuclear ballistic submarines to begin patrols in 2014. The subs will carry intercontinental range missiles that are thought to have a range of no less than 14,000 kilometers (8,699 miles) and can deliver a single or multiple warheads.

“With a range in excess of 4,000 [nautical miles], the JL-2 submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM), will enable the JIN to strike Hawaii, Alaska and possibly western portions of CONUS from East Asian waters,” Office of Naval Intelligence Officer Jesse Karotkin wrote in his testimony last month to the US China Economic Security Review Commission.

The new Jin-class Type 094 submarines are a technological marvel when compared to the Type 092 class that the PLAN has traditionally relied upon. Weighing 11,000 tons when fully submerged, the Navy sees this development as proof that the Chinese “want to get more on par with Western countries.”

“The three JIN [ballistic missile submarines] currently in service would be insufficient to maintain a constant at-sea presence for extended periods of time, but if the PLA Navy builds five units as some sources suggest, a continuous peacetime presence may become a viable option for the PLAN,” Karotkin noted.

Karotkin explained in his report that a number of factors have forced China to modernize its Navy, which now has more than 60 submarines, 55 medium and large amphibious ships, roughly 77 principal surface ships, and nearly 100 other small craft.

“At the dawn of the 21st Century, the People’s Liberation Army Navy remained a largely littoral force. Though China’s maritime interests were rapidly changing, the vast majority of its naval platforms offered very limited capability and endurance, particularly in blue water. Over the past 15 years the PLAN has carried out an ambitious modernization effort, resulting in a more technologically advanced and flexible force,” he wrote, as quoted by USNI.org.

“This transformation is evident not only in the PLAN’s gulf of Aden counter-piracy presence, which is now in its sixth year, but also in the navy’s more advanced regional operations and exercises. In contrast to its narrow focus a decade ago, the PLAN is evolving to meet a wide range of missions including conflict with Taiwan, enforcement of maritime claims, protection of economic interests, as well as counter-piracy and humanitarian missions.”

China also proved it has updated other military forces last month when, according to the Pentagon, the PLAN flight-tested a hypersonic missile delivery vehicle capable of penetrating any existing defense system with nuclear warheads. The weapon is one that experts have hailed as a game-changer for its ability to hit a target with a nuclear warhead before defense systems can react.

The Pentagon confirmed to the Washington Free Beacon that the test flight had taken place but offered no further explanation. The US is the only country in the world known to have such a weapon in its arsenal.

“We routinely monitor foreign defense activities and we are aware of the test,” a spokesman said.

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby raj.devan » 07 Feb 2014 09:49

China also proved it has updated other military forces last month when, according to the Pentagon, the PLAN flight-tested a hypersonic missile delivery vehicle capable of penetrating any existing defense system with nuclear warheads


The report is dated 6Feb14, which means this test was conducted in the last week of Jan. Is this referring to the DF21D missile that had earlier been tested only in the Gobi Desert? If this missile is really capable of Mach 10 over a 1200km range, then it is something to be concerned about. Even with a conventional warhead, this could be used to launch a surprise strike to cripple an enemy fleet's prime vessels, leaving it at a severe disadvantage.

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby raj.devan » 07 Feb 2014 10:01

Sorry, it was not the DF21D, but a hypersonic glide vehicle called WU14.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014 ... le-vehicle

I do not believe that any ABM or CIWS can counter a hypersonic missile. The only defence would have to depend on EW.

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 » 07 Feb 2014 10:41

the J-20 if it gets internal bay 1000-500km type ASMs/LACMs will be a formidable threat compared to the current H-6 badger missile carriers - flying far higher, faster and with LO. it could also unleash LRAAMs using its big nose radar- no lack of aperture or volume there.
if it really is using AL-31 they could go for the latest FM2 version which powers the Su35 to impart a good t:w


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Austin » 10 Feb 2014 11:29

China has ambitious plans to upgrade naval fleet: U.S. report
Taipei, Feb. 7 (CNA) The Chinese navy has ambitious plans over the next 15 years to upgrade its fleet of surface ships as well as weapons systems, a U.S. Navy report said.

U.S.-based Business Insider said the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) found that China has evolved from a littoral force to one that is capable of meeting a wide range of missions and is "increasingly capable of striking targets hundreds of miles from the Chinese mainland."

According to the ONI's report, China has 77 surface ships, more than 60 submarines, 55 amphibious ships and about 85 missile-equipped small ships.

China laid down, launched or commissioned a similar number of ships in 2013, the report said, adding that a similar number is planned for 2014.

The U.S. navy report said that in the 1990s, China's ships and submarines were "essentially single-mission platforms and poorly equipped to operate beyond the support of land-based defenses."

But China's newest destroyer, the Luyang III, is equipped with a sophisticated phased array radar system that gives it "over-the-horizon targeting technology," according to Business Insider, citing the naval intelligence report.

The report also voiced concerns about the speed at which China's submarine force is growing, including the introduction of the Jin-class ballistic nuclear submarine to perform deterrent patrols this year.

The submarine "would mark China's first credible at-sea-second-strike nuclear capability," the report said.

Overall, the Navy's intelligence leadership believes that 85 percent of the Chinese naval fleet will be deemed "modern" by the U.S. by 2020, Business Insider cited the report as saying.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby merlin » 10 Feb 2014 12:54

And we as usual have that joker Saint at the helm. Along with assorted jokers in the IA/IAF/IN/MoD not to mention GoI.


Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12634
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Aditya_V » 12 Feb 2014 13:19

The above article makes a Kursk like claim which I haave never heard of

In April 2003, the Chinese Navy decided to put a large group of its best submarine talent on the same boat as part of an experiment to synergize its naval elite. The result? Within hours of leaving port, the Type 035 Ming III class submarine sank with all hands lost. Never having fully recovered from this maritime disaster, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is still the only permanent member of the United Nations Security Council never to have conducted an operational patrol with a nuclear missile submarine.


is this true. Since 2000 I thought the only subs to sink were the Kursk and INS Sindhurakshak, are there others?

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Viv S » 12 Feb 2014 13:42

Aditya_V wrote:The above article makes a Kursk like claim which I haave never heard of

is this true. Since 2000 I thought the only subs to sink were the Kursk and INS Sindhurakshak, are there others?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_submarine_361

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Postby Austin » 18 Feb 2014 19:15

UAC takes cautious approach to China Su-35 buy

“We have a good opportunity to work with China on [the Su-35] despite the success Chinese industry demonstrated [replicating earlier Russian fighters],” says Mikhael Pogosyan, chief executive of Sukhoi parent company UAC.

Pogosyan insists that copying an aircraft that was produced “four to five years ago” is “not an instrument of development.”

“I believe we and our Chinese colleagues have a clear understanding on this,” he says. “I do not know successful examples of copying. Aircraft are too complicated to make a good copy. Aircraft are constantly developing organisms. If you cannot see its [full development], you cannot understand what to do for the next three or four years. I believe we have more opportunities with joint development. We and our Chinese colleagues do not look back, but look forward.”


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests