China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 30 Jan 2013 10:20

No one cares.

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 30 Jan 2013 12:14

Hi,

All those reports of 11,000+ PLA personnel in PoK.... is there any info on their ORBAT? Bases and staging areas ityadi? The Pakis themselves are stretched thin out there, in a defensive posture perhaps. At least up north they are hanging by their fingernails.The territory is also rather foreboding for more TFTA military infrastructure, no? So where exactly are the Chicomms at and what exactly are they doing? Forward positions near the LoC to bulwark TSPA defenses? Or somewhere far behind the front lines simply to tell us that they are invested in PoK as well.... or perhaps along the KKR stretch guarding those happy-ending-massage parlor supply trucks?

Plij to phorgive if I am a Late Latif..... didn't find this info when I RTFFed.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Jan 2013 12:30

estimates say mainly civil construction 'troops' to improve and maintain roads and hydro projects. this also plays into cheen's penchant for building caves, though not sure why the pakis would need caves there.

the terrain is indeed very bad but cheen is spending money to improve it. perhaps idea is when they industrialize the wild west, TSP is the only populous market next door - CAR states have a combined very low population. and shipping cost to the east coast will be high. so nothing better than a captive 200 mil market next door? stuff like food and imports could also be sent from TSP cheaper than overland via the tractless corridor south of the gobi.
http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/china ... 830-2.html

it seems due to a landslide 22km of the road is now under a lake and boats are used to transfer this stretch!
http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/china ... 30-10.html

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Jan 2013 16:09

ashi wrote: Thanks for your clarification. I think you are a liar, though.

I am glad to be able to emulate a Chinese characteristic. I owe it to you guys.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 30 Jan 2013 16:36

Selamat Pagi wrote:
ravi_g wrote: The horizon at 20 km altitude for you guys would be around 350 km. The Hawkeye will come with a 600 km horizon then after that there will be those F-18s to extend that further to around 800 km energetic range + 200 km kill zone and to kill these UAVs, KJs etc.
Just basing it off these reports…That is all.
Posted by David A. Fulghum 1:25 PM on Jul 01, 2011

U.S. analysts are already suggesting that the new Chinese UAV design -- with its 60,000-ft. cruising altitude, 300-mi. radar surveillance range and, possibly, lower radar reflectivity if made from the right composites -- could serve as the targeting node for China’s anti-ship ballistic missiles.

With Bill Sweetman

Selamat Pagi ji, I am sure the horizon is different for Umrikha and Cheen.

But in India these are the rough calculations for horizons.

Do you realise what 300 miles radar surveillance requires?

Added later:
The figures I had put up were already very generous for PLA and stringent for US Navy. The report you have quoted is more like double edged sword. Umrikhans are praising you chinese to basically fool you and have your advantage, by way of securing better traction with lay umrikhan public, for their own military industrial complex. This way the chinese can be kept chasing a mirage.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 30 Jan 2013 21:12

shiv wrote:
ashi wrote: Thanks for your clarification. I think you are a liar, though.
I am glad to be able to emulate a Chinese characteristic. I owe it to you guys.

A-o-A!!

Deep penetrating Comrade Shi Wu gets outed by drones that kinda look like US ones

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Jan 2013 21:53

The Global Hawk has humongous intakes suggestive of a large faced turbofan. The Soar eagle has a much smaller intake (relative to fuselage diameter) suggesting a lower bypass turbofan or a turbojet. Since both are/will be subsonic, fuel efficiency is likely to be much lower for the Soar Dragon. The other issue of course is power supply for avionics.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 30 Jan 2013 23:50

China to conduct naval drills in Pacific amid disputes over maritime territory

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 01 Feb 2013 02:58

Good call about that drone Comrade Shi Wu. However, any conflict between the US Navy and the PLAN will probably not be that far out into the briney deep. It will probably fairly close to the Chinese coast. I just don't see a full scale Chinese attack out in the middle of the Pacific unless they plan a Pearl Harbor type thingy on Sunday morning while we're at church, so to speak.

Don · Post by **Don** » 01 Feb 2013 19:23

ashi wrote:China carries out anti-missile test

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... z2JelbuNnN
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Inside the Ring: Chinese missile defense test

By Bill Gertz

The Washington Times

U.S. intelligence agencies are closely monitoring China’s missile facilities in anticipation of a test of China’s missile defense interceptor, which also doubled in the past as an anti-satellite (ASAT) missile.

The officials commented in response to reports that China is set to conduct another potentially destabilizing anti-satellite missile test in space. In 2007, China fired a missile that destroyed a weather satellite and resulted in tens of thousands of dangerous pieces of debris that threaten manned and unmanned spacecraft.

The Washington Free Beacon reported in September on new intelligence reports that indicate China is preparing to fire its Dong Ning-2 missile into space, this time at a high-earth orbit target.

Then last week Gregary Kulacki, a specialist with the Union of Concerned Scientist, reported on his blog, “All Things Nuclear,” that Chinese officials recently circulated an internal notice of an upcoming anti-satellite missile test in space,

A U.S. official said a test at this point does not appear imminent. However there are signs an interceptor flight test is being prepared.

After the vehement international reaction to the 2007 space weapon test, China has sought to mask its anti-satellite missile program as a less controversial missile defense program, specialists say.

That is what took place in 2010, according to a classified State Department cable made public by WikiLeaks.

The Jan. 12, 2010, cable reveals that China’s military a day earlier had launched an “SC-19 missile from the Korla Missile Test Complex and successfully intercepted a near-simultaneously launched CSS-X-11 medium-range ballistic missile launched from the Shuangchengzi Space and Missile Center.

“An SC-19 was used previously as the payload booster for the January 11, 2007, direct-ascent anti-satellite (DA-ASAT) intercept of the Chinese FY-1C weather satellite,” the cable says. “Previous SC-19 DA-ASAT flight-tests were conducted in 2005 and 2006. This test is assessed to have furthered both Chinese ASAT and ballistic missile defense technologies.”

Chinese state-run media reacted to reports of a coming anti-satellite missile test with optimism. The Communist Party’s nationalist and anti-U.S. newspaper Global Times reported Sunday that “hopefully, the speculation about China’s anti-satellite tests is true.”

Claiming Chinese space policy is “peaceful,” the newspaper then stated:

“It is necessary for China to have the ability to strike U.S, satellites. This deterrent can provide strategic protection to Chinese satellites and the whole country’s national security.”

Richard Fisher, a China military affairs specialist, said China is developing its second anti-ballistic missile program after a Mao-era effort was halted in the 1980s. The current program is “directly linked to the ASAT program,” he said.

“China’s successful development of missile defenses would only accelerate its ability to undermine Asian confidence in the extended U.S. nuclear deterrent, on top of its already troubling thousands-of-kilometers-long ‘Underground Great Wall,’ hiding an unknown number of missiles,” said Mr. Fisher, who is with the International Assessment and Strategy Center

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 01 Feb 2013 20:38

ashi wrote:China carries out anti-missile test

More importantly,

It did not specify whether any missile or object had been destroyed in the test.

Don · Post by **Don** » 02 Feb 2013 04:54

T-99

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 02 Feb 2013 05:45

India irked as China gets Pakistan's strategic Gwadar port

NEW DELHI: Pakistan's cabinet formally agreed to hand over the operation of its strategically located Gwadar port to China on Wednesday. This puts in place China's famed "string of pearls" strategy which may have significant implications for India.

On Wednesday, the Pakistan cabinet, in one of its last decisions, transferred the operations responsibility of the Gwadar port from Singapore's PSA (Port of Singapore Authority) International to China's Overseas Port Holdings. This had been agreed some time ago as PSA International and Pakistani navy fell out over land transfers, security issues and lack of infrastructure. PSA had asked to withdraw from the contract and Pakistan had agreed.

In 2011, the Pakistani defence minister had announced in Beijing that Islamabad would transfer ownership to a Chinese company. China had demurred then, but despite the worsening security situation in Balochistan, the Chinese have apparently agreed to take it over.
:
:
:

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 02 Feb 2013 07:40

Uncle Don is back

Ni Hao

AmitG · Post by **AmitG** » 02 Feb 2013 08:30

Why pink flags on the tank? It is usually white for surrender!

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 02 Feb 2013 09:18

It's breast cancer awareness and support week

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 02 Feb 2013 10:14

^^^ NO NO

They were red Chinese flags that have faded to pink. The flags will become white by the time the tanks reach Indian border.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Feb 2013 11:47

seems to have no wedged armour plates or add on armour in the sides at all

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 02 Feb 2013 15:13

look more like storage boxes on the side, perhaps even with ERA?

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 02 Feb 2013 15:24

Which variant of T99 is it ??

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 02 Feb 2013 15:41

Don wrote:T-99

Any specifications available?

Chinese tanks have no gun depression in 'World of Tanks' (a game i play

)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Feb 2013 16:27

the pics are dark. but this one makes it clear there is some era (flat) down the side upto where the storage boxes start
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/type_99.jpg

this pic makes it seem they are not storage boxes, but two layers of ERA - one thick and one thin with a small gap in between.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/type_99_l1.jpg

by using many types of bricks (shape and size) they have got a smooth look. onlee problem in battle conditions is you need not 1 or 2 replacement types but 10 looking at the unique sizes and shapes of many of the tiles on frontal arc.

Don · Post by **Don** » 02 Feb 2013 19:24

Singha wrote:the pics are dark. but this one makes it clear there is some era (flat) down the side upto where the storage boxes start
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/type_99.jpg

this pic makes it seem they are not storage boxes, but two layers of ERA - one thick and one thin with a small gap in between.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/type_99_l1.jpg

by using many types of bricks (shape and size) they have got a smooth look. onlee problem in battle conditions is you need not 1 or 2 replacement types but 10 looking at the unique sizes and shapes of many of the tiles on frontal arc.

Those are older version of T-99. This version is the updated ones much heavier different armour.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Feb 2013 19:34

Top attack is what these tanks need

Don · Post by **Don** » 02 Feb 2013 19:35

Third 52C

The fourth one fitting out

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Feb 2013 21:10

Habits die hard.

Chinese hackers suspected in attack on The Post’s computers

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 02 Feb 2013 22:33

Cross-Posted from Raffy Wins -Go Katrina thread:

Reduced F-35 performance specifications may have significant operational impact

By: Dave Majumdar Washington DC

11:25 30 Jan 2013

...The Pentagon's decision to reduce the performance specifications for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will have a significant operational impact, a number of highly experienced fighter pilots consulted by Flightglobal concur. But the careful development of tactics and disciplined employment of the jet may be able to mitigate some of those shortcomings..

...The US Department of Defense's decision to relax the sustained turn performance of all three variants of the F-35 was revealed earlier this month in the Pentagon's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation 2012 report. Turn performance for the US Air Force's F-35A was reduced from 5.3 sustained g's to 4.6 sustained g's. The F-35B had its sustained g's cut from five to 4.5 g's, while the US Navy variant had its turn performance truncated from 5.1 to five sustained g's. Acceleration times from Mach 0.8 to Mach 1.2 were extended by eight seconds, 16 seconds and 43 seconds for the A, B and C-models respectively. The baseline standard used for the comparison was a clean Lockheed F-16 Block 50 with two wingtip Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAMs. "What an embarrassment, and there will be obvious tactical implications. Having a maximum sustained turn performance of less than 5g is the equivalent of an [McDonnell Douglas] F-4 or an [Northrop] F-5," another highly experienced fighter pilot says. "[It's] certainly not anywhere near the performance of most fourth and fifth-generation aircraft."

Time for the Khans to start stealing from the Chinese designs of J20 and J31 to bring the F35 back on track!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Feb 2013 23:39

Don wrote:T-99

Nice upgraded T-72, with the 125mm gun, carousel autoloader and all.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Feb 2013 01:07

Google boss Schmidt labels China an 'IT menace'

I am not too sure what took him so long to state what we knew:

Google Chairman Eric Schmidt uses a new book to call China an Internet menace that backs cyber-crime for economic and political gain, reports say.

The New Digital Age - due for release in April - reportedly brands China "the world's most active and enthusiastic filterer of information".

China is "the most sophisticated and prolific" hacker of foreign companies, according to a review obtained by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ).

Don · Post by **Don** » 06 Feb 2013 19:54

dhoti shivering ?

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/India_c ... t_999.html

India 'concerned' over China running Pakistan port
by Staff Writers
Bangalore, India (AFP) Feb 6, 2013

India's defence minister said Wednesday that New Delhi was concerned by Pakistan's decision last month to transfer management of a strategically located deep-sea port to China.

"In one sentence, it is a matter of concern for us," A.K. Antony told reporters in Bangalore where he inaugurated the Indian air show. "My answer is very straigtforward and simple."

On January 30, Pakistan approved a deal transferring management of Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea from a Singapore company to China, which provided most of the funding to build the facility in the province of Baluchistan.

China has been extending its influence with traditional allies of New Delhi around the Indian Ocean as well as in neighbouring Pakistan, where it is the country's main arms supplier.

Beijing also funded a port in Sri Lanka and has been approached to help build a similar facility in Bangladesh.

A high-level Chinese delegation from Beijing is attending the Aero India show for the first time in a sign of improving relations between Asia's two biggest countries, which renewed their military cooperation last September.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Feb 2013 21:15

Don wrote:dhoti shivering ?

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/India_c ... t_999.html

India 'concerned' over China running Pakistan port
by Staff Writers
.

Yes.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 06 Feb 2013 23:01

PLANAF 2nd Specialized Division has added KJ-200s to its asset holdings, going by this picture.

Something to keep in mind for future.

-Vivek

kish · Post by **kish** » 06 Feb 2013 23:05

shiv wrote:
Don wrote:dhoti shivering ?

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/India_c ... t_999.html
Yes.

Shiv ji,

Just noticed your "location" update. "Terrorists have no religion"

Conversely, "People without religion are Terrorists". Ju arr bery rude to communist biladels.

Misraji · Post by **Misraji** » 07 Feb 2013 03:38

vivek_ahuja wrote:PLAAF 26th Air Division now is steadily increasing its asset holdings within the 76th ACCR, going by this picture.
-Vivek

Actually the link says that they belong to 2nd Specialized Division, PLANAF. Above.
Wouldn't that make a difference in their roles/areas of responsibilities?

There is some discussion about their numbers in Sino-defence forum.
Some junior poster mentions that Chinese have "4 kj2000, 10 kj200, 4 y8j."

--Ashish

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 07 Feb 2013 04:02

Misraji: thanks for the correction. 2nd Specialized Div. it is. That makes it two known Divisions operating AWACS/AEW within the Chinese military.

Expect one more PLAAF ACC Division to come up as well: it will augment the 26th Air Division.

So the numbers of the KJ-200s are being rapidly increased even more than what I had thought previously. Putting aside the capability of each aircraft vis-a-vis other western counterparts, the numbers being added is rapidly becoming significant.

-Vivek

amit · Post by **amit** » 07 Feb 2013 06:26

Don wrote:T-99

I'm surprised you guys didn't comment on the two guys in the front tank!

The guy on the right is pointing a sword in the way (horse) cavalry commanders used to point their swords and shout: "Charge!" - at least that's how all the Hollywood movies depict them!

The other guy has taken up a typical Commie pose of "benevolence" with his right hand upturned as if holding goodies to pass on to the struggling proletariat.

Gosh there's so much stupid symbolism in Chinese military photos, it begs the question: "Whom are they trying to impress, the world (including dhoti shivering guys like us) or their own proletariat?"

I think in their hearts the Chinese military photoshop jarnails would love to get the easy TFTA looks that the US Army always gets in its brochures. But somehow along the line too much "re-education camp" propagandu take over.

Misraji · Post by **Misraji** » 07 Feb 2013 06:27

Vivek Saar,

What exactly is it about the AWACS numbers that is concerning?
What is the highest impact that the increasing numbers of AWACs would have on the battlefield?

1. Better surveillance that prevents tactics like
- nap-of-earth flying.
- Cruise missile
2. Better management of fighter packages
Feeding data to such packages.
3. Better control/co-ordination over other assets like UAV, Tankers etc
4. Mobility as a protection as opposed to fixed ground-based radars.
5. Real-time electronic intelligence
6. Superior co-ordination response time to fast-developing situations like ground-support

An ordering of the above list would be great.(I would think I am missing some critical missions too.)

Its also the case that increasing number of AWACs also demands increased protection for such AWACs.
Thus there is a limit to how many such platforms will be in air at a given time.

The answer to more Chinese AWACs cannot be more Indian AWACs.
Fighting surveillance with surveillance seems odd ...

Wouldn't OTH radar away from the borders give us significant return-on-investment?

--Ashish

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Feb 2013 07:04

more awacs means better early warning of indian movements and plugging of all gaps where we could sneak through earlier.

in parallel I am sure they are working on GMTI sensor on same an12 platform - everyone is .

Misraji · Post by **Misraji** » 07 Feb 2013 07:10

Singha wrote:more awacs means better early warning of indian movements and plugging of all gaps where we could sneak through earlier.
in parallel I am sure they are working on GMTI sensor on same an12 platform - everyone is .

Are these "gaps" pre-planned or easily extra-polatable?
Given that the borders run in thousands of kilometers vs 400 KM range of an AWACS, I presume they would have specific locations in mind to concentrate such platforms on?
Mountain Ranges + Valleys would be an ideal starting point?
Or they would deploy their AWACs in a fashion where they could easily monitor IAF airfields?
Have absolutely no clue as to how they do required force projections.

--Ashish

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 07 Feb 2013 08:09

Misraji wrote:Its also the case that increasing number of AWACs also demands increased protection for such AWACs.

So let's put to rest a few questions in your head: my concern is not at seeing swarms of airborne-radar aircraft behind Chinese lines. There is no need for that. The concern is that as Singha said: gaps that would normally exist over a vast battle-space that would have otherwise allowed us some tactical advantages will be removed by higher numbers of such aircraft. The patrols can be extended and crews can be rotated over shorter times (reducing crew fatigue), allowing the PLAAF to operate longer (days/weeks) in continuous combat if required. It also builds up sufficient attrition reserves and allows them to preserve a reserve force of these aircraft for another front in case one presents itself: Such as keeping Taiwan, Japan etc at bay.

The answer to more Chinese AWACs cannot be more Indian AWACs.
Fighting surveillance with surveillance seems odd ...

So this is also not about dhoti shivering on our end thinking just about their numbers: The size of China is much bigger than India and their enemies spread more diverse. They need a lot more of these aircraft than the IAF ever would.

At the same time, having more surveillance assets in play reduces our tactical options and makes air dominance more costly for us: taking down AWACS/AEW are not cost-free affairs and pivot your attack to it, giving the enemy more flexibility. Increasing Chinese AEW aircraft is therefore nothing to scoff at.

Wouldn't OTH radar away from the borders give us significant return-on-investment?

Not on our northern borders with the Himalayas blocking views and the Tibetan plateau sheilding visibility. In the Indian context, there are no ground based substitutes for AWACS/AEW/Aerostats.

-Vivek