Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

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.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5999
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby vina » 06 Oct 2017 10:18

deejay wrote:^^^you missed the point. :)

Oh, I do agree with the "gist" ,but was just pointing out it wasn't due to the the turbo piston engine.
But then, like Archimedes said, give a rod, long enough and strong enough and a point to rest it on, and I will move the world.
So, if the chinese get a "long enough" runway built, maybe they can.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 06 Oct 2017 10:26

deejay wrote:
pravula wrote:...

Sorry, no special physics applies to IA or IAF. All combustion engines loose power will reduced air flow, compressors are there to address this issue.


You are talking of cruising at 25000 feet right and I am talking of take off from Tibet. I am sure Physics does not allow great PE performance from Tibet even for Chinese PLA or PLAAF.

Turbocharged or not, I don't see people doing well with even jets at those altitudes. Neither will Chinese UAVs.


Yes, that is why these Predator-clones are all over the Middle East and why even J-10s or J-11s are rare in Tibet never mind drones.

(Read my posts on why we should have gone to war with Cheen during Doklam in the “PRC Defanged” thread. A missed opportunity where we owned overwhelming air and ground strength exactly because of Tibet’s topography.)

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 06 Oct 2017 10:39

For a commie nation, the PRC manage their PSUs and private sector in a competitive environment pretty well.

I didn’t realize that the CH-4 sold to Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Egypt was never supported by their government and never sold to the PLA (they supposedly fly the Wing Loongs onlee.) Imagine if ADA/HAL or a subdivision of theirs had come up with something they can sell without begging from the MoD and ultimately the MoF? None of this stuff is beyond HAL (especially if we hadn’t skipped the piston, turboprop, turbojet foundational steps in the 1980s and 90s while shooting for the moon in a modern turbofan like the Kaveri.)

The moola the CH-4’s manufacturer CASC received from the Arabs allowed them to develop the CH-5 which will make even more muzzies who can’t buy Amreeki killer drones interested no doubt.

Image

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1797
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby AdityaM » 07 Oct 2017 11:54

If India threatens chinese sea lanes via Malacca, is Djibouti the Chinese counter?

Image

https://twitter.com/rajfortyseven/statu ... 3999527939
#China #PLA strategical mega fortress #Djibouti has unprecedented security.Massive storage base2feed Div+ for>3mnths


https://theprint.in/2017/09/27/china-me ... -pakistan/

massive
fortress is being constructed that can easily accommodate over a brigade
strength force, has an unprecedented four-layered security ring and can
handle a dozen helicopters.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2723
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Oct 2017 12:07

055 type launched. Massive destroyer this @ 13500 tons

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 07 Oct 2017 14:15

AdityaM wrote:If India threatens chinese sea lanes via Malacca, is Djibouti the Chinese counter?

Image

https://twitter.com/rajfortyseven/statu ... 3999527939
#China #PLA strategical mega fortress #Djibouti has unprecedented security.Massive storage base2feed Div+ for>3mnths


https://theprint.in/2017/09/27/china-me ... -pakistan/

massive
fortress is being constructed that can easily accommodate over a brigade
strength force, has an unprecedented four-layered security ring and can
handle a dozen helicopters.



No room for an air base or even an air strip so that limits its ability to patrol the ocean. Not much of a threat to India yet. A supply depot for PLAN ships transittimg the region.

The troops based here are more geared towards Africa and the Middle East. To protect OBOR should things go south? Once PLAN destroyers and frigates are in Gwadar or Iran (Iranians touted the PLAN visit this summer as a jab in Unkil’s eye) then they will have forces to contest a blockade at Malacca.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 07 Oct 2017 14:41

Cain Marko wrote:055 type launched. Massive destroyer this @ 13500 tons


I don’t think any of the four they have building in Shanghai and Dalian are actually in the water yet. But 13K tons DDGs being built in parallel in multiple shipyards are food for thought while we wait for four Visakhapatnams at half their size from MDL onlee.


chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 12 Oct 2017 02:29

Major piece of intel. Well respected chini mil watch site East Pendulum now says that the first launch of a J-15 from an EMALS device occurred in November of last year. It even mentioned the test pilot Cheng who has 2100 hours flying on naval aircraft.

The link is in French, use google translate if interested.

http://www.eastpendulum.com/armee-chinoise-confirme-le-catapultage-reussi-dun-j-15-sur-emals

The lizard has a fvcking EMALS catapult and the MoD had just put our carrier program on ice.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 17 Oct 2017 13:43

Clip of the J-31 opening its bay. Looks huge.

Image

Still no official support it seems. Probably will be hawked to Pakiland. An indication of the state of their industry when a chini PSU can design and build a prototype of a fvcking stealth fighter to pitch to the military.

This is what the American MIC does. And what HAL should do. Instead of waiting for funding from the MoF through the MoD for any new project, why not take some of that profit from the MKI project and invest in a new feasible design that it can propose to the MoD?

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3445
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby deejay » 17 Oct 2017 13:56

^^^Wow! Not a single control surface moved or changed position despite the huge bomb bays opening and closing. Steady, she goes. :shock: :shock: :eek:

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 993
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby rkhanna » 17 Oct 2017 14:46

chola wrote:Clip of the J-31 opening its bay. Looks huge.

Image

Still no official support it seems. Probably will be hawked to Pakiland. An indication of the state of their industry when a chini PSU can design and build a prototype of a fvcking stealth fighter to pitch to the military.

This is what the American MIC does. And what HAL should do. Instead of waiting for funding from the MoF through the MoD for any new project, why not take some of that profit from the MKI project and invest in a new feasible design that it can propose to the MoD?


Sirji HAL cannot reinvest Retained Earnings without approval of the board/shareholders. If GOI has no interest HAL has no interest.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9108
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 17 Oct 2017 16:07

Looking at Google earth, more and more facilities of PLA are coming up in Chumbi Valley, they are flooding the valley, see coordinates 27°31'13.4"N 88°58'17.1"E (27.520389, 88.971407 in decimals)

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 18 Oct 2017 12:39

rkhanna wrote:
chola wrote:Clip of the J-31 opening its bay. Looks huge.

Image

Still no official support it seems. Probably will be hawked to Pakiland. An indication of the state of their industry when a chini PSU can design and build a prototype of a fvcking stealth fighter to pitch to the military.

This is what the American MIC does. And what HAL should do. Instead of waiting for funding from the MoF through the MoD for any new project, why not take some of that profit from the MKI project and invest in a new feasible design that it can propose to the MoD?


Sirji HAL cannot reinvest Retained Earnings without approval of the board/shareholders. If GOI has no interest HAL has no interest.


Yes, I know. That is why there must be change. If it can’t come organically to the PSUs then it must be done through the private sector or competitive pressure from there.

Look at US competition of the past: F-14 vs F-111, YF-16 vs YF-17 (became F-18), YF-22 vs YF-23, F-18E/F vs A-12. Advances come heavy and quickly in competition where firms stake their future in developing advance yet achievable designs. A communist-type system where money must come from the state for every project can never be as efficient or innovative.

Seeing cheen PSUs and private sector companies putting forth prototypes without central funding or support to me is a troubling indication that the chinis are moving fast towards the the highly successful US way of doing things.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1563
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 18 Oct 2017 12:52

Top flight report on Cheen’s carrier training air station at Huangdicun from Col. Vinayak Bhat.

https://theprint.in/2017/10/17/satellite-images-reveal-china-naval-airbase/

The first airbase with possible ski ramps was noticed in June 2010 at Huangdicun near Xincheng. The airbase construction started in April 2009 and was operational by the end of 2011.

The airbase has two ski ramps and two wire traps with arrestor cables. It has 24 aircraft shelters with one shelter for possible UAV parking, three large hangars possibly for UAVs, one large hangar for airborne early warning and control (AEWC) planes and other administrative facilities.

The airbase was upgraded with two catapults between 2015 and 2016. The first catapult-assisted take off was observed on satellite imagery in October 2016. The two catapults (steam and electromagnetic) suggest that future carrier vessels of the PLAN will have catapult assisted take off but arrested recovery or CATOBAR.

...

The aircraft usually observed on this airbase are J-15, which are the basic naval aviation backbone developed based on Su-33 of Russian origin. It has features such as missile approach warning system (MAWS), glass cockpit, tail sting and WS-10H engines with improved thrust for ski-ramp take offs.

UAVs and JL-9s have also been observed on this airbase. The presence of JL-9, in addition to J-15 aircraft, on the airbase suggests higher pilot to aircraft ratio.

The UAVs seen on the catapults suggest the future Chinese carrier vessels will have UAVs with CATOBAR (a system used for the launch and recovery of aircraft from the deck of an aircraft carrier) version.

Image

Image

Image

There have been three accidents, two of them fatal. Both fatal accidents occurred in the month of April 2016. The first one was on the ground training facility at Huangdicun and the other was on board Liaoning.

Two of these accidents could be identified on the satellite imagery much before the official announcement. The first one was identified in the last week of June 2016 from the remains of burn marks on the grass, approximately 700 m from the first arrestor cable.

Image

nam
BRFite
Posts: 467
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 18 Oct 2017 14:22

Aditya_V wrote:Looking at Google earth, more and more facilities of PLA are coming up in Chumbi Valley, they are flooding the valley, see coordinates 27°31'13.4"N 88°58'17.1"E (27.520389, 88.971407 in decimals)


Good. We need to get the Han from their comfort zone in Shanghai in to the frozen heights of Tibet.

This will also let us scream "threat" and speed up modernization.

They can put all they want in the valley. We will pound them from the heights.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5773
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 18 Oct 2017 14:54

Look at US competition of the past: F-14 vs F-111, YF-16 vs YF-17 (became F-18), YF-22 vs YF-23, F-18E/F vs A-12. Advances come heavy and quickly in competition where firms stake their future in developing advance yet achievable designs. A communist-type system where money must come from the state for every project can never be as efficient or innovative.


In all those instances money came indirectly from the state since the defense industry in the US is largely a 1 customer set up. The difference is that what allowed private industry to secure shareholder and institutional funding for their IRAD projects was the prospect of state funded profit stream down the road. In other words they took some risk, Northrop and McD along spent just shy of $900 Million dollars of their own money on the failed YF23 project back in the late 80s and early 90s.

There are limits even in the private set up because profit margins in the DOD are closely monitored (unlike Apple or Google, companies most often cited by folks trying to peg them to defense contractors) and demand is cyclical, loosely based around replacement cycles. You will be hard pressed to find a firm that is spending more than 3-5% of revenue on IRAD because they have shareholder responsibilities.
Last edited by brar_w on 18 Oct 2017 17:51, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33464
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 18 Oct 2017 17:10

Aditya_V wrote:Looking at Google earth, more and more facilities of PLA are coming up in Chumbi Valley, they are flooding the valley, see coordinates 27°31'13.4"N 88°58'17.1"E (27.520389, 88.971407 in decimals)

Please consider this as choti mooh badi baat. This site was marked by rajfortyseven on Twitter and was cross posted on BRF but I have a real problem with accepting this as a regular military site for the following reasons. I say this after spending hours and hours looking for Chinese military sites.

I say this because
1. military sites usually have excellent road connectivity, this one does not
2. There are usually large parade or parking/training areas. Very little here.
3. It is usually a neat walled compound with guarded gate entrance. This has no such thing
4. If vehicles are seen they are olive green military and neatly parked in rows. In any case civil vehicles are not seen. This site has many likely civil vehicles haphazardly parked
5. There is often, but not always a helipad

This is not to say that the Chinese are not building up - but there are so many other sites. Even this image is from 2016 and is not new.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Lisa, srin and 40 guests