China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23412
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby SSridhar » 06 May 2019 19:31

Guys, take these discussions elsewhere.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17662
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2019 19:37

Cleaned up thread.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1644
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Bart S » 06 May 2019 22:05

x-posting from the other thread, relevant here as companies like Huawei are deeply linked with China's military.

Very good insight on Huawei and it's ownership structure:
https://freebeacon.com/national-securit ... ns-huawei/
Worth a read.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 06 May 2019 22:19

Bart S wrote:x-posting from the other thread, relevant here as companies like Huawei are deeply linked with China's military.

Very good insight on Huawei and it's ownership structure:
https://freebeacon.com/national-securit ... ns-huawei/
Worth a read.


then Huawei may be deemed effectively state-owned

so is all of chinas major corporations, they are all private ..in name only., they serve as extensions of the state , much like the Hydra

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1138
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby rkhanna » 07 May 2019 11:20

Some Interesting Stats on Chinese BARF (Belt and Road Forum)

- 37 heads of state attended, up from 29 last year, with expanded commitments to international infrastructure investment;
- total value of projects nominally in place estimated at over… $3 trillion
- chinese government is well aware of international backlash from projects signed with "friends" who were outed from power
- Actively restructuring deals as more "win-win" - China is now less inclined to get investments profits to flow back to china but more interested in getting an international architecture focused towards Beijing (ala All roads lead to Rome)
- Flexibility in negotiations are actively being witnessed in a number of countries including ethiopia, the philippines and malaysia
- Xi has delcared officially at BARF 2019 to improve standards of management and transparency of investment
- The Idea is to make BARF a parallel to the UN General Assembly in 5 years (but all geared and looking towards China)
- 2 important trends
a) we’re now seeing data and surveillance deals becoming a core component of many of the belt and road relationships
b) China is offloading all fossil fuel energy production (80% of their energy investments till date) to their BARF counterparts even as China goes renewable to continue ensuring their Energy Companies remain Profitable


- Above insights is from a Very Senior Global Political and Economic Strategist who was there at BARF and spent sometime interacting with a host of the players

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23412
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby SSridhar » 07 May 2019 17:05

Please take these discussions to an appropriate thread. Do not belong here.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 07 May 2019 18:18

LOL. This thread is all chini MIC since Cheen doesn't actually do anything "military" like fight.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 07 May 2019 18:27

https://reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1SD0CP

Exclusive: Analysts: Images show construction on China's third - and largest - aircraft carrier

Greg Torode, Ben Blanchard

HONG KONG/BEIJING(Reuters) - Construction of China's first full-sized aircraft carrier is well under way, according to satellite images obtained and analyzed by a U.S. think tank.

The images from April, provided to Reuters by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, reveal considerable recent activity during the last six months on a large vessel at the Jiangnan shipyard outside Shanghai.

China has not formally confirmed it is building a third carrier, despite recent hints in state media, and the timing and extent of its carrier program remain state secrets.

...

Image

...

The CSIS images show a bow section that appears to end with a flat 30-metre (98-foot) front and a separate hull section 41 meters wide, with gantry cranes looming overhead.

That suggests a vessel, which China has dubbed Type 002, somewhat smaller than 100,000-tonne U.S. carriers but larger than France's 42,500-tonne Charles de Gaulle, analysts say.

Fabrication halls the size of several soccer pitches have been built nearby, and work appears to be continuing on a floodable basin, possibly to float the finished hull into the nearby Yangtze River estuary.



chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 08 May 2019 09:52

^^^ Anyone wanna guess the size of this thing? A beam of 41M at the waterline with the same proportions in length would make it the size of the Nimitz (100K tons)?!?

Obviously some error built into measuring from a satellite with angle and pixels but safe to guess it would be over 80K tons at least?

I hope this forces the MoD to okay some plan on the Vishal pronto.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10611
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 08 May 2019 11:08

Quite frankly we should always be building 2 or carriers concorently, before IAC 1 is launched some sort of IAC 2 should have been in construction by nowl, we should having a new carrier every 5 or 6 years. The experience and equipment of IAC1 should not be lost, if required start buildign an IAC 2 or even Vishal class, cant wait forever to have the cranes DRY dock which was invested to Build IAC1 to be expanded for a 65000 tonne warship. Wonder what is the Cochin shipyard doign with those investments after IAC 1 Launch?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 09 May 2019 16:36

Large aircraft sausage making at Xian: 13 new Y-20s and 8 H-6s on factory grounds.

Airframes are probably outstripping engines and PLAAF crews.

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 09 May 2019 16:52

@Aditya ji, yes if our ambitions are for multiple CBGs we should at the very least have a plan being executed (funding in place) for a second carrier while the first is being built/fitted out. Cheen now has one carrier in sea trials while a second is in modules near the point of assembly in Shanghai and there are signs that a third one will begin in Dalian. That is serious planning for a carrier fleet.

We are haphazard in our pursuit. No decision by MoD. No funding. No clear path. No fault of CSL though. They are in the midst of building out a 310m dock that can make a 80K behemoth if only the order came down. It takes years to design, find and organize the supply eco-system and other preliminary leg-work before the keel is laid down in a yard. Right now there is no order because MoD rejects the Navy's plan quarter after quarter.

We were the pre-eminent naval aviation power in Asia for 50 years. Now we will allow ourselves to be lapped by a chini navy who first flew from a carrier in 2012 onlee with nary a challenge.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 10 May 2019 14:26

Intel tweets:

First Copyhawks in service.
https://twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1126448076342870016
@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
Images of the first two operational Z-20s were posted today with full PLA serial numbers. With the numbers LH953201 & LH953205 they are assigned to the 161st Air Assault Brigade within the CTC.

Image
Image


Building of Bismark's Fleet Redux. Double launching of the 19th and 20th Type 052D destroyers.
https://twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1126716780984946688
East Pendulum
@HenriKenhmann
Le chantier naval Dalian a mis à l’eau aujourd’hui deux nouveaux destroyers Type 052D. Il s’agit du 19e et du 20e de série.
Image
Image
Image


The 60th launching of the Type 056 corvette.
https://twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1126532247564107778
East Pendulum
@HenriKenhmann
La 60ème corvette Type 056 de série a été mise à l'eau le 9 Mai au chantier naval Huangpu. Il s'agit d'un bâtiment de variante ASW. C'est le 6ème depuis le début de l'année, et le 17ème de classe construit dans ce chantier naval.
Image


Construction of the 8th Type 71 LPD and possibly the 1st Type 75 LHD.
https://twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1126452568220106758
@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
And what do you think of this image?? Allegedly another Type 071 LPD and the first Type 075 LHD being built concurrently at HDZH.
Image
Image
Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 11 May 2019 14:37

Recent sat photos of Shaanxi factory grounds. Y-9 (AN-12 ripoff) sausage making. Most are in primer and many are in chapati configuration.

AEW would be KJ-500 or variants. Pakis fly the ZDK-03 variant. Its absence from the Feb. 27 furball gives an indication of what the PAF think of its (in)ability.

Still, the number of airframes we are seeing means the Chinis had hit on a cheap AWACS/AEW platform that can saturate the skies by the scores in the coming years.

All courtesy of an ancient all-purpose turboprop they can poop out in large numbers.

Image

Image

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 11 May 2019 16:08

chola wrote:@Aditya ji, yes if our ambitions are for multiple CBGs we should at the very least have a plan being executed (funding in place) for a second carrier while the first is being built/fitted out. Cheen now has one carrier in sea trials while a second is in modules near the point of assembly in Shanghai and there are signs that a third one will begin in Dalian. That is serious planning for a carrier fleet.

We are haphazard in our pursuit. No decision by MoD. No funding. No clear path. No fault of CSL though. They are in the midst of building out a 310m dock that can make a 80K behemoth if only the order came down. It takes years to design, find and organize the supply eco-system and other preliminary leg-work before the keel is laid down in a yard. Right now there is no order because MoD rejects the Navy's plan quarter after quarter.

We were the pre-eminent naval aviation power in Asia for 50 years. Now we will allow ourselves to be lapped by a chini navy who first flew from a carrier in 2012 onlee with nary a challenge.


CSL does already have the capability to build 100000 dwt ships ?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 12 May 2019 15:59

^^^ CSL can repair and maintain ships up to 100K tons in their current facilities restricted by dimensions with length of 270m, I think. So construction-wise it needed to build out a larger dock in preparation for the expected 65K carrier. For example, the 65K-ton Kuznetsov class ships are 305m. CSL is building a dock that is 310m.

Though with the latest news a 65K ton carrier should no longer be an expectation. Still CSL's new dock will be a great asset for the nation's capacity. I just hope we can fill it with projects.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 13 May 2019 15:49

Speaking of carriers, their Kuznetsov ripoff had its runway repaved a few weeks ago and now the takeoff, landing and foul lines are painted.

The J-15 and Z-8 mock-ups are there again.
Image
Image

Along with an unknown clown car.
Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 15 May 2019 14:43

Type 71 LPD, they have 8 launched or building. 25K tons holds up to 800 troops and 15-20 assault vehicles or 4 LCACs. Four Z-8 transport helos.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

A flexible class of ships. We are supposed to be building four LPDs (or Multi-Role Support Vessels) of the same size. But as usual things has stalled with Reliance suing over L&T.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66124
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 15 May 2019 15:05

they are of no use to us. useful for them in SCS.

we need sleek fast ASW LPH ships of the Izumo class, not LPDs or san antonia class types.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 15 May 2019 15:38

^^^ Singha ji, the Navy's requirements for the MRSV came directly from our experience with INS Jalashwa, ex-USN Trenton, which is a classic LPD.

Saar, the Izumo class is $1.2B per unit!!! The MRSV project is $2B in total for four ships.

Obviously, I want LHDs too but those are just one step below carriers in size and complexity. (I can imagine running those as VSTOL escort carriers with F-35Bs.)

The L&T project (Reliance looks DOA) will be tied up with Navantia who builds the Juan Carlos class LHD so maybe we'll get our wish. But I doubt it.

Four LHDs? That would be too much to hope for. But maybe. Either type will be extremely useful. The difference is in the air wing.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2660
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby tsarkar » 15 May 2019 15:52

Singha wrote:they are of no use to us. useful for them in SCS.

we need sleek fast ASW LPH ships of the Izumo class, not LPDs or san antonia class types.

Please read up on the 1971 Cox Bazaar landings in Bangladesh to prevent Pakistanis from retreating to Burma.

Also we regularly practice Amphibious landings in Andamans, Lakshadweep, Goa, AP, TN, Maharashtra etc.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 15 May 2019 16:11

Also, IN had a first hand look at the San Antonio class LPD:

Image
Image
An Indian Navy UH-3H helicopter is secured to the deck of USS Anchorage (LPD-23) in the foreground during a cooperative deployment in the Indian Ocean with Indian Navy guided-missile destroyer INS Rajput (D51) in the background.

Look at that pack of Sea Cobras in front of our Sea King! These ships are just flat out useful for a wide range of things from assault to evacuation to humanitarian work. They are fast too, 22-25 knots.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7617
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby rohitvats » 15 May 2019 18:08

Indian Army has two amphibious brigades in its order of battle. While one is dedicated to A&N, other is more of a reserve, to be used as desired. Exercises with Indian Navy in TROPEX exercise.

If we're to be serious player in IOR, and also give teeth for operations against Pakistan, such LPDs, with dedicated attack helicopter wing and amphibious assault vehicles are required. As of now, we rely on BMP-2.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66124
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 15 May 2019 18:18

nobody is going to invade bangladesh

>> Also we regularly practice Amphibious landings in Andamans, Lakshadweep, Goa, AP, TN, Maharashtra etc.

none of these places is remotely under threat of a armed invasion.

the biggest threat is chinese subs prowling the IOR and basing themselves in gwader in a decade

for that ASW task forces led by izumo types and more LRMP and our own subs is the answer. not amphib brigades

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2660
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby tsarkar » 15 May 2019 19:24

Singha wrote:nobody is going to invade bangladesh

An intervention in Maldives was imminent some time back. Other Islands like Coco Islands may need amphibious landings.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 477
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby souravB » 15 May 2019 19:25

chola wrote:Saar, the Izumo class is $1.2B per unit!!! The MRSV project is $2B in total for four ships.

Saar just a correction.. the project budget is $3B.
and as the name suggests, It is supposed to be used as an ASW LHD during peacetime too. Also none of the contenders were LPD types except one.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7338
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 15 May 2019 22:12

Izumo runs in at around $1.8 - $2 Billion built. We don't know whether that is with the GFE or not.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66124
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 15 May 2019 22:43

Izumu is 1.2B oe 2B per unit DELIVERED and WORKING.

the budget for the 4 LPD carries no real meaning beyond a initial target . we all know how fast and smooth our large warship projects go. if even a P15B costs close to a billion, how does one cater to a ship 2.5X that size + LST + LCAC + SH60 helis at 500 mil a pop. its impossible.

is the vikrant on price target or time ?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7338
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 15 May 2019 22:56

Singha wrote:Izumu is 1.2B oe 2B per unit DELIVERED and WORKING.


For something to carry helicopters, it costs around $1.8 Billion. But envisioned in an aircraft carrying role the costs would rise given the ship needs of the more capable aviation component, more defensive capability (ESSM instead of just SeaRAM) the ability to turn STOVL aircraft around and most importantly, the ability to sustain sorties . Essentially, a ton of GFE. For all practical purposes, kitting it out as a swing role vessel that can double up as a very light AC you are looking at a cost in the $2-3 Billion range. Added capability isn't free.

http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201811280064.html

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 16 May 2019 17:08

The MRSV proposal had been around for years. It was always a call for LDPs at 20K tons. Four ships of that massive size is already a tremendous task when you consider that we onlee built (building) the one carrier greater than 7K tons.

DDM, because of the inclusion of Navantia, began imagining LDHs at 30-40K tons and then began rounding up to a 200 crores figure for budget.

LHDs like the Izumo and Wasp are $billion plus ships. With the MoD cutting the Vishal/IAC2 proposal to 50K tons why we would ever imagine that they would increase the original specs of the MRSV proposal from 20K tons to near carrier sized LHDs?

Again I do have hopes for Navantia's Juan Carlos class with L&T which is a smaller LHD in all but name. But with the Reliance pretty much out of the picture -- ABG was dropped early, the contract should be awarded already and work begun. Still there is delay. So I'm not counting my chickens yet.

If we can simply get this project off the ground, it would be a massive lift in our capacity.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 17 May 2019 15:56

The CopyHawk is probably more relevant to India than most of the other whizzbang chini systems because they are highly deficient in high altitude helos. Work in Tibet and along our borders had to be carried out by ancient S-70Cs they bought from the US over three decades ago.

https://www.janes.com/article/88573/images-suggest-z-20-helicopter-has-entered-service-with-china-s-plagf


Images suggest Z-20 helicopter has entered service with China’s PLAGF

Andrew Tate, London - Jane's Defence Weekly
16 May 2019


Production versions of the Harbin Z-20 helicopter appear to have entered service with the aviation units of China’s People’s Liberation Army Ground Force (PLAGF), as evidenced by photographs published on Chinese online forums.

Although images of the Z-20 had previously emerged online, they had shown the platforms with either no serial numbers or only three-digit numbers, indicating that these were development or pre-production aircraft. The latest photographs, however, show two helicopters featuring serial numbers LH953201 and LH953205: the serial number format for aircraft in service with PLA Army Aviation.

The Z-20 is a medium utility helicopter in the 10-ton class. There have been many comments that the design is derived from the Sikorsky S-70C/Black Hawk, in part due to similarities in appearance but also because China bought 24 S-70C helicopters from the US in 1986: three years before the Tiananmen Square-related arms embargo was imposed.

There are, however, notable differences between the US and Chinese helicopters, at least in the use of a five-bladed main rotor in the Z-20 rather than a four-bladed one in the S-70. The Z-20 is thought to be powered by two WZ-10 turboshaft engines, each developing 1,600 kW, which would mean an increase of about 200 kW over that provided by the General Electric T700-701A turbines used in the exported S-70Cs.

Notwithstanding their age – and China’s inability to acquire spares from the US – the S-70C helicopters have been an important aircraft for the PLAGF because of their ability to operate at high altitudes. This is an important requirement for transporting and supporting troops along the Sino-Indian border and operating on the high plateaus in Tibet and Xinjiang.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 20 May 2019 14:32

https://twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1128983098530631680
@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
Interesting artist impression of the PLAN Naval Aviation's future carrierborne AEW type, the KJ-600 (also sometimes known as the KH-600) in comparison to the JZY-01 testbed. Also shown are a dedicated COD- and ASW-variant.

Image via LKJ86/PDF


The JZY-01 testbed is a Y-7 (AN-24 ripoff) while KJ-600 looks like a new platform or at least a heavily redesigned one from the Y-7.
Image

COD and ASW variants. Combined with the J-15 variants, they have a very complete program with Growler/Viking/Hawkeye/Greyhound equivalents. In short, aping an Amreeki carrier wing in detail.
Image


Full-sized model of the KJ600 on their carrier mockup in Wuhan.
Image
Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 20 May 2019 15:53

On the other hand ...

https://twitter.com/defencealerts/status/1130364931994525696

IndianDefenceUpdates
@defencealerts
Video Footage : A #Chinesenavy fighter jet type JH-7 crashed during a training in Hainan province, killing both pilots.
A similar crash took place in January 2018 & 2015 killing both pilots. Carrier-based J-15 fighter crashed in April 2018 resulting in the death of the pilot.

...

Dagr2013
@Dagr_2013
Replying to
@defencealerts
They’re not gonna get that many carrier aircraft operational at the rate they’re losing naval pilots.



The JH-7 is land-based onlee. But still.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66124
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 20 May 2019 17:31

why exactly do they need a full size carrier mockup, that too in the open instead of inside a shed.
its posturing imo. none of the carrier building nations built such a land mockup.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 21 May 2019 11:13

Singha wrote:why exactly do they need a full size carrier mockup, that too in the open instead of inside a shed.
its posturing imo. none of the carrier building nations built such a land mockup.


There is not only the mock carrier but another one for their large destroyer/cruiser program.

https://news.usni.org/2015/01/26/chinese-carrier-land-facility-adds-destroyer

Both mock-ups at the China Ship Design and Research Center, or 701 Institute of the China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation (CSIC) at the Wuhan University of Science and Technology, according to Jane’s. The sites are almost certainly test sites for new Chinese radar capabilities, like the so-called U.S. “cruiser in the cornfield,” SPY-1D radar facility at the Vice Adm. James H. Doyle Combat Systems Engineering Development Site in New Jersey.

The carrier-on-land itself – widely known since 2009 – made a stir this month in China after new Google Earth pictures made the rounds on domestic online networks, prompting a response from the PLA-backed China Military Online.

“China’s ‘carrier on land’ recently exposed by the Google earth photo is not new. The only difference is that a suspected model of 055 is added,” read a posting last week.


It might be posing but because it is at a known naval institute and apes an Amreeki facility (as far as the cruiser is concerned) it is also functional.

First noticed in 2009, it would be before they had a real carrier to work with since their Varyag refit entered service in 2012. Kind of a cheap way to train and work out issues for carriers in a navy that didn't have one before.

Image

Note the integrated mast mockup next to the "carrier."
Image

This cruiser mockup in 2015 gave the chini watching community a hint of the Type 055 coming down the pike.
Image

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10611
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 21 May 2019 11:40

How are the Chinese building up the logistics for such a rapid fleet expansion, Fuel, stores, trained men, repairs , electronics updates etc. the more you think about it more they seem like the Imperial Japenese Navy, with similair Bushido code type exceptional superiority like the Nazis. One day uncle will cleverly put some sanctions which hots this logistics and they will go on a first Pacific conquering and then land invasions. Lets see how this plays out.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 21 May 2019 11:56

Interesting tweet from a Japanese watcher on chini mass-produced AEW&C KJ-500.

https://twitter.com/jpg2t785/status/1116348255980228608

mssn65
@jpg2t785

KJ-500 AEW&C機の機内の様子が公開
(link: https://jbbs.shitaraba.net/bbs/read.cgi ... 086155/749) jbbs.shitaraba.net/bbs/read.cgi/s…
>KJ-2000と比べてもレーダーの探知能力が向上しており、探知距離は40%以上向上

>各種装備を搭載した状態でも連続10時間以上の滞空時間を可能とした

(続く)

40% longer detection range than the larger IL-76 based KJ-2000.
Image

Consoles in exposed racks. These are covered in the West.
Image

Priority to maintenance and frequent retrofits in rapidly changing electronic developments.
Image



Looks kind of cheap. The Walmart version of AWACS.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3430
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 21 May 2019 12:32

Aditya_V wrote:How are the Chinese building up the logistics for such a rapid fleet expansion, Fuel, stores, trained men, repairs , electronics updates etc. the more you think about it more they seem like the Imperial Japenese Navy, with similair Bushido code type exceptional superiority like the Nazis. One day uncle will cleverly put some sanctions which hots this logistics and they will go on a first Pacific conquering and then land invasions. Lets see how this plays out.


From what I read, the US Navy (which employs the largest training program for sailors in the world and that for decades) think it is impossible for the PLAN to properly train crews for such a massive and sudden deployment. For example, sixty (60) Type 056 corvettes alone since 2013.

But training is no issue when your purpose is to overwhelm a region like the SCS without actual kinetic warfare. The purpose is creating fait de accompli by putting more of your assets into gray zones or commons than your opponents could. So if your vessels float and your crew can drive it to a spot then that is all you need. Once you are there, your numbers deter retaliation. No one is willing to test the your combat capability short of open warfare.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/south-china-sea-deterring-fait-accompli-56777

The US FON deployments try to disrupt chini fait accompli.

Very different from the Japanese or Germans who at the beginning of WWII had highly trained and elite battle units (IJN carrier strike fleets, Wehrmacht panzer divisions) that were better than anything in the West. The Bushido/Prussian cultures produced some of top warrior races known to history.

Cheen on the other hand is a rice-eating culture of merchants and industrialists with an aversion to actual fighting. Their idea of warfare is not between combat units, but between the MICs which Cheen think they would win every time. They are right as long as there is no one willing to actually fight them.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chola, JayS and 35 guests