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.
yantra
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 03:46

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby yantra » 13 Dec 2017 06:09

At Doklam, Chinese troop levels rise at feverish pace even as temperatures dip
Troop buildup near Doklam increased in November-end, fresh satellite images show; additional mortar positions, a gun position, vehicles, troop accommodation now visible.

A Chinese buildup of troops and military infrastructure near the contentious Doklam plateau has gained pace in November, with fresh satellite images showing new mortar positions, hardening of gun positions and evidence that more than 5,000 troops could be deployed within 5-10 km of the conflict point.

The buildup can be seen in latest satellite imagery of 3 December that has been accessed by ThePrint. The deployment seems to have increased since the resolution in August when both Indian and Chinese troops backed off from a road construction site in Doklam after a tense standoff that lasted more than two months.

The significant buildup is visible at several locations southwest of Yadong town, all within a 5-10 km aerial distance from the spot where Indian and Chinese troops had faced off earlier this year. This presence of almost nine battalions is in addition to the troops that China has deployed just 50 km behind in the Chumbi valley, as reported by ThePrint in October.

Over 300 heavy duty trucks, fresh tunneling into the mountains to set up gun positions and creation of several buildings to accommodate troops indicate a Chinese resolve to stay ready for action even through the winter.

Satellite images confirm that work is progressing at a feverish pace even in the winter. The images show at least nine three-storey buildings that are occupied and almost 300 large vehicles, suggesting that almost one division of troops are located in areas ahead of Yadong town.

Infrastructure developments

The People’s Liberation Army or PLA continues to develop infrastructure on a large scale in this area south and southwest of Yadong town.

The platoon and company posts have accommodation for more than a battalion of troops. The single-storey barracks have been replaced by massive three-storey buildings with possible underground and/or camouflaged parking.

The signal centre has been greatly improved with an earth receiving station, four large dish antennae, two huge aerials and a solid-wall fencing. It also has a slightly raised platform, possibly for future deployment of vehicle-based radars

Roads and tracks are being widened and developed all around. Large cranes, earth moving equipment and construction material can be seen almost everywhere. Certain areas defiladed from Indian defences are being leveled, probably for future constructions.

Troop buildup

There is also a massive buildup of troops just below the conflict area of Doklam. A large number of vehicles are seen parked near the riverside. In some areas, vehicles are seen hidden under camouflage nets. A number of tents have also been observed under camouflage nets.

A number of vehicles, including many small vehicles, are seen around the three-storey buildings, suggesting these buildings are also occupied.

Improvement of defences

The satellite images suggest that a continuous improvement of defensive positions has been on since June 2017. All previous posts and also the new positions have been connected with a maze of well dug communication trenches.

Most of the important positions have been afforded the protection of wire fences. Some posts can be seen to have infantry mortars positions.

At two places, mountain sides have been cut large enough to make gun positions, possibly for howitzers and/or multi-barrel rocket launchers (MBRLs).

Hardening gun positions

The old gun position has been improved to harden the shelters for guns. The shelters have further been provided with a layer of compressed earthen protection. Moving into the gun pit or scooting from the gun position would now be very easy. A second position is being constructed, albeit at a slow pace, possibly not to give out the direction of fire.
The satellite images confirm that work is progressing at a feverish pace even in the winter months. An additional infantry mortar position has been created in the second half of November. A comparison of November and December images also suggests that the troop buildup increased at the end of November.

https://theprint.in/2017/12/12/china-tr ... increases/

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 13 Dec 2017 16:20

Too bad we didn’t roll over them during the summer and fall. It will be harder now as they re-inforce and fortify in earnest. But the good thing is it will incur a cost for them as they had been defending their border with us on the cheap while pouring resources into the Indo-Cheen Sea to steal vast tracts there.

Still it would have been a victory for generations if we had simply flatten the rump force they had there while threatening us. Should have called their bluff and kicked their arse. The build-up means the next one would not be all bark and no bite.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2435
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby abhik » 13 Dec 2017 18:37

+1, IMO we were in a win-win situation, even a defeat would have had positive effect on the long term.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 13 Dec 2017 19:15

New Google Earth images with massive new constructions near Nathu La by Chinese - putting permanent positions on high ground that they never had before
27°22'11.96"N 88°51'52.42"E

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10773
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 13 Dec 2017 19:43

I feel the CHini Pakis are upto something with Elements of Sickular personal within this country are also involved.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19878
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Philip » 15 Dec 2017 16:47

I don't know whether it was earlier posted but a book has come out claiming that it was a long planned move by Mao to "teach India a lesson" and not Chacha Nehru's forward policy that sparked off '62.Mao was having serious problems at home and wanted a diversion.The Chins were also p*ssed off with our growing stature in NAM and assuming a leadership role amongst the former colonies .The military buildup took some time.It was impossible for it to have been carried out at such short notice.

In the light of that evidence, we must expect a milspat at a moment when we are engaged with elections, etc.
The Chins and Pak want Modi out at any cost.Disgracing him on the battlefield in a swift action, claiming " victory" is one option for XI Gins.The longer it is delayed the more improved will India's defences be as modernisation and replacement and the MSCorps is deployed with improved border infrastructure.Hence the rapid winter deployment at Doklam.The next time it won't be pushing and shoving but bullets and grenades.
Last edited by Philip on 15 Dec 2017 18:38, edited 1 time in total.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 15 Dec 2017 17:55

Their large aircraft industry is being built up before our eyes. With a nice assist from Russia.

Three new Y-20s at XAC, powered by 12 Russian D30KP engines:
Image

On both the military and civilian fronts they go full speed forward with firangi engines while concentrating on the airframe. Indigenous engine programs are running simultaneously — in Y-20’s case, they are the WS-18 and WS-20 — but they do not wait for them.

Without the Russian engines, they would be crippled for years if not decades waiting their own powerplant. But with a steady Russian supply they can build and refine their airframes so that the Y-20 would be a mature system by the time a chini engine is ready.

We’ve always put a lot of misplaced pride in our relationship with the Russians. We like to think that Ivan is willing to help us “more” than Cheen. But the steady and seemingly ironclad Russian supply of engines for their strategic programs — including the biggest Paki aircraft program the JF-17 onlee because the PRC is involved — makes that a delusion.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7474
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 15 Dec 2017 18:38

China is an established economic giant that shares a common geopolitical adversary with Russia. Russia on the other hand is a much much smaller economy where nearly a 5th of the manufacturing jobs come from the A&D sector. With a domestic slowdown in economic growth it is all but natural for Russia to look to expand and sustain this vital sector via foreign sales and partnerships. This is true across the A&D sector both commercial and military and one should fully expect an increase in Joint Ventures, and outright sales to China over the next 10-20 years as the Chinese economy grows further. While S400 and Su-35 get much limelight it is often the JVs that are likely more long term sustainable projects. It also wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that sometime down the road the Russians would fancy a Chinese PAKFA variant to replace the Flankers they sold earlier. It may not be as capable or may be different than the FGFA but it would be unreasonable to expect the Russians to just stop seeling fast jets to China if China falls behind on the J-20 mass production or wishes to diversify. There will be plenty of opportunities to expand this relationship with India as well but for now Chinese pockets are deeper and there is strategic alignment vis-a-vis the Chinese adversarial relationship with the US in a geopolitical sense.

Russia, China partner for PD-35 engine; Jane's International Defence Review, 13-Dec-2017



Russia’s Rostec State Corporation will jointly develop the PD-35 aircraft engine with China. Confirmed at the Gulf Defense & Aerospace 2017 exhibition in Kuwait City, the announcement also provided details on the facilities tasked with development of the engine.

Work on the engine – which is expected to develop up to 35 tons of thrust – began at the United Engine Company (UEC)’s Perm Engines and Saturn (Rybinsk) plants in the summer of 2016. While China’s AECC Commercial Aircraft Engine Company (AECC CAEC) will contribute work to the gas-turbine engine, the majority of development work will be undertaken by the two Russian plants.

Intended to power wide-body aircraft, the PD-35’s ‘statement of work’ is scheduled for 2019. The project also forms part of the joint Chinese-Russian CR929 airliner project, but could also be adapted for military applications. The workshare for this will be split between Russian design and Chinese manufacture.

While the announcement of joint development took place in September, this is the first time the location of the development facilities has been announced. Known as the C929 programme in China, the same programme is known as the Long-Range Wide-Body Aircraft (LRWBA) in Russia.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19878
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Philip » 15 Dec 2017 18:47

What about France setting up a huge A-320 plant in China? The Chinese will beg, borrow and steal to get their way.However, Russia is v.wary about giving them their very latest eqpt.like stealth fighters- offered to us in the FGFA JV instead.They're not getting Akulas and N-sub assistance of the kind we're getting not to mention BMos and hyper BMos to come.Even their J-10
was supposed to have benefited both from the Israeli Lavi fighter. and Russian assistance.

But one cannot admire their single-minded focus on achieving results, with the IN total support from the party and govt.Here India is left far behind. We have too many selfish and vested interests. How we still manage to progress despite the bureaucratic, politic , financial and scientific hurdles is a mystery.It is perhaps the humble scientist doing his best like Kalaam and many others in the past and now those in the present.

Good strong political leadership produces results.We saw this even from Nehru's time with Krishna Menon and desi defence industrialisation, Indira's determination and guts, RG and ABV's vision down to Modi's " make in India" mantra.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7474
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 15 Dec 2017 19:00

Philip wrote:What about France setting up a huge A-320 plant in China?


What about it?

Russia is v.wary about giving them their very latest eqpt.like stealth fighters- offered to us in the FGFA JV instead.


The Chinese are as we speak likely training to operate the Su-35, which is the most capable Russian fighter aircraft currently in serial production. The Chinese are also in the process of inducting the S400 air-defense system which also is the most capable Russian system in its class. As we speak, the PAKFA program is in prototype testing stage which then transitions to low-rate initial production (the factory is expected to be ready next year and 12-20 squadron aircraft may be delivered by 2020, which imho is extremely ambitious) and years down the road the Russians themselves will field an operational unit. The FGFA contract is not yet signed but even if it is in the next couple of years the FGFA is still a mid-late 2020s platform. Meanwhile, the Chinese continue to advance their own 5th generation program and to speed it up have sought assistance from Russia on propulsion because that seems to be one area where they are running behind.

It will be interesting to see how the J-20 plays out once its production is boosted and front line squadron pilots give their feedback. It wouldn't be surprising at all to see additional propulsion advances being purchased from Russia to make it better and of course if the program does not meet expectations the Chinese can always look at a Su-57 variant as a stop gap or to diversify their fleet. China is the second largest defense spender, and Russia has only produced one new clean sheet fast jet to replace the Flanker family that it has sold very well, including sales to China. It will unreasonable to expect China to be denied the Su-57 in the 2020s if the Chinese Air-Force looks to buy a foreign 5th generation aircraft for whatever reason.

Also, the argument that one nation is getting XYZ while the other is getting something different (and it is therefore an indication of one relationship enjoying superior perks to another) is flawed at many levels since what one has to consider is what they are getting and how that lines up with what they are interested in buying. China has many supersonic anti-ship missiles, and short-medium ranged ballistic missiles that it has configured for the anti-ship role. Do they need to JV up for a Brahmos like weapon? or rather JV up for a Gas Turbine engine where they are lacking? Which one is of bigger strategic importance to them? They have two 5th generation aircraft projects, one in Low-Rate production. Do they need to all of a sudden jump in and spend $4-5 Billion to bank roll the Russian PAKFA or can they wait it out, let the Russians develop it and analyze it vis-a-vis how their own programs have shaped up in half a decade to a decades time and see if they need to procure the Su-57 as a hedge? Which is a smarter strategy from their perspective?

Are the Russians willing to completely shut off (to 5th generation aircraft) one of their largest customers, the second largest defense spender in the world, and a flanker operator from the successor of the flanker?? One doesn't need to make a very BIG leap of faith to assume that the only reason the Chinese will not be a future Su-57 operator is if their own domestic products lead to satisfactory results and they can rapidly advance their ability to meet their propulsion needs for the same. If they can't, expect them to buy a set quantity of Su-57's in the next decade or so and then a series/variants of its J series clone will likely appear in the years that follow that purchase. The Russians will likely not mind as long as these don't compete with the PAKFA for export orders.

Of course none of this takes away that the Indo-Soviet/Russian relationship has resulted in great benefits to India in terms of Military hardware and of late the Brahmos JV, the MKI program and the strategic programs stand out. This will continue to benefit India in the coming years but the same is also true for the Russia-China relationship which as I mentioned earlier is rooted in a common adversary. China keeps asking for, and getting what it wants from that relationship so it works out for them as well. In the end Russia benefits since A&D is very vital economic sector for it given the number of jobs and its contribution to the economy which is even more so at times of low energy prices and slow economic growth where they will look to reduce domestic spending and increase foreign sales to compensate.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 17 Dec 2017 19:25

The second C919 just took off. Note two-tone primer nacelles of the LEAP-XC engine from SAFRAN.
Image

Frenchies are usual suspects in Cheen’s aerospace drive along with Rooskies.

The chini engine programs running in parallel for the C919 are the SF-A and CJ-1000A. Frenchies in particular are fueling a competitor to their duoploly but I guess take the money now and worry about the competition when it arrives.

Between the Y-20 and C919, Cheen’s military will solve a lot of their issues involving suitable airframes for AWACS, re-fueling tankers and long range MPAs (they do not have a P-8 class which is a huge advantage for us.)

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 17 Dec 2017 19:29

Great post, Brar. I have little doubt that like the Su-35, if and when Cheen asks for 24 of the Su-57 they will get them or at least a variant of it if not the same as the FGFA (if we go through with the program.)

Obviously there had been a lot of good things from our collaboration with the Russians. The MKI program alone makes us one of the major air powers in Asia. Boosting nearly 300 of one of the top heavy fighter platforms in the world.

That said, there is also a lot we let the Russkies get away with because we repeat the mantra that we have a “special” relationship with them. We ignore yhat they allowed the PRC to build variant after variant of the Flanker without end in sight while the MKI, as good as it is, is strictly controlled by contract in numbers and is not afforded tinkering for variants. We even ignore that they are supplying engines to Pakistan’s critical JF-17 program.

Hey, the US and French help TSP too. But we do not afford them the same leeway as the Russians. If the C-17 or M2K had suffered the same issues as the IL-76 and MiG-29 we would offer far less excuses for them.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1379
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Thakur_B » 17 Dec 2017 21:44

rkhanna wrote:China is replacing the QBZ95 with a new rifle.

Image

And following the trend looks like there is going to be a 10"-11" PDW/Carbine version as well for SOF/MOUT troops

Image


chola wrote:^^^ That is pretty funny. The chinis were among the earlier advocates for the bull-pup (along with the Brits and the Frenchies.) They issued it into their regular infantry. Unkil and Ivan, though, hated it.

Now the PLA is going back to a conventional design lol. Glad the IA missed that so-called technological leap.


This new rifle (NAR) is further evolution of QBZ 03 or Type 03 rifle which was the design competitor of Type 95 rifle, which itself was based on Type 81 rifle. The type 95, though a adequate design is an evolution dead end as accessory rails cannot be added easily to it without cutting off the iron sights.
Bull pup configurations are hard to perfect, for every Steyr AUG and Tavor, you have FAMAS and SA-80. The modern trend of weighing heavily on ergonomics is definitely favouring conventional layouts with all modern rifles adopting eugene stoner's ergonomics philosophy where all controls (magazine release, bolt catch release and safety) are done with the firing hand.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Austin » 18 Dec 2017 00:11

Chola, Chinese have also copied a host of US technologies including Black Hawk helicopter Rip OFf called Z-20

Meet China's Blackhawk Helicopter, the 'Copyhawk'

Recent report of Nov 2017 on Chinese Stealing US Technoloigy including F-35, C-17 etc the espionage is quite wide spread and they would have to be now worried what the chinese stole and are not aware of ......remember the W88 design stolen from Los Almos

On May 25, 1999, the House's Cox Committee reported that China stole classified information on the W88 and six other U.S. nuclear warheads


Chinese theft of sensitive US military technology is still a 'huge problem,' says defense analyst
At the same time, China is pressing its domestic tech firms to help the country's military "to speed up" the application of advanced technology.

For example, when China wanted to build the J-20, a new stealth fighter jet, they were reportedly helped by industrial espionage. The J-20 became operational in September.

There were said to be several prototypes of the plane, but the final sleek design resembles the F-22, a stealth fighter made by Lockheed Martin. China's smaller stealth fighter, called the FC-31 Gyrfalcon, in development is seen as a knockoff of Lockheed's F-35.

"What Beijing has been very good at is targeting U.S. defense contractors, getting into their computer systems through various types of essentially cyber warfare and stealing the designs of some of America's best military assets," said Harry Kazianis, director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest, a think tank founded by former President Richard Nixon.


Although a U.S.-Chinese cyber-hacking truce was announced in 2015, Kazianis and others remain skeptical it will matter over the long term. He says China could have agents in other countries still doing hacking or "camouflage" such activity through various methods.

"So we don't even have a good idea if they stopped," he said. "It's obviously a huge, huge problem."

According to Kazianis, the Chinese have been able to hack into computer networks to steal designs and other information on U.S. carriers, advanced defense systems as well as the F-22 and F-35 jets.

Indeed, a federal grand jury in 2014 indicted a Chinese national for a computer hacking scheme that involved the theft of trade secrets from Boeing's C-17 military transport aircraft. The individual, who last year entered a guilty plea, also was accused of working with two co-conspirators based in China to steal military data about the F-22 and F-35 jets.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7248
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 18 Dec 2017 12:20

Until tiananmen square, US aircraft makers helped out the Chinese quite a bit. An american (from lockheed i think) pilot flew their an-12 copy and told them how to exploit it.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7345
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Rakesh » 19 Dec 2017 03:35

Look Long, Look Deep: China’s Airborne Warning and Control Systems
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... l-systems/

China, it seems has major long-term plans for future AWACS. Future Chinese AWACS are going to be very cost competitive since major development work has already been done. Dr Wang says, “The KJ-2000 costs billions of RMB and some new systems will spend only thousands or even millions of RMB. Being a large country, in future, China will need more AEW&C systems. We can develop lots of variants or upgraded version from present systems.” With such competitive pricing, China is sure to capture the export market for AWACS. Many countries who would not like to get into the high costs and political strings attached to an American or European AWACS or the costs of a Russian or Israeli system may find the cheaper Chinese AWACS a better option.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 19 Dec 2017 08:15

Bull pup configurations are hard to perfect, for every Steyr AUG and Tavor, you have FAMAS and SA-80.


Good post and analysis, Thakur ji. But I would go one further and say it is not only hard but impossible to perfect a bullpup as a standard rifle for a large army. The FAMAS and SA-80 along with the QBZ-95 represents the largest three armies going to the bullpup. Now both the chinis and the French are going back to conventional designs after a single generation of bullpups.

The Tavor is an exception but again the Iraelis are an exceptional armed force.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 19 Dec 2017 08:36

Austin wrote:Chola, Chinese have also copied a host of US technologies including Black Hawk helicopter Rip OFf called Z-20

Meet China's Blackhawk Helicopter, the 'Copyhawk'


Austin, there is a huge difference in getting your stuff RE’ed or stolen versus selling your expertise and technology to them directly. I am sure the chinis have stolen some or all of the designs from the F-22, F-35 and C-17 and incorporated them into the J-20, J-31 and Y-20. But stolen designs or not, NONE of those three critical PRC planes would be flying without a Russian engine!

The Copyhawk is actually a prime example of RE versus ToT. The Chinis received the Blackhawks in the early 1980s before the Tianemen Massacre. Today after three decades of “reverse engineering” they have two known prototypes identified for certain in photos. At MOST the CopyHawk might be in LSP. After 30 years.

They received the Super Frelon and the Dauphin as licensed production around the same time as the Blackhawks. Today there are hundreds of Z-8 Super Frelon rip-offs and Z-9 Dauphin rip-offs in many variants versus the two CopyHawk prototypes. The difference in RE and ToT is night and day.

If the chinis had actually RE’ed the Flanker, which is arguably even more complicated than the Blackhawk, instead of a ToT contract we might be seeing just two chini prototypes today too. Just like the CopyHawk.

Considering the deep relationship between the PRC and Iran, wouldn’t you think they would have attempted a F-14 clone in conjunction with the Iranians? I think they probably did try but it was beyond them. I think the MiG-21/Tumansky and the F-5/J-85 are the last combinations that can be RE’ed and cloned. Any of the Teen series and the Fulcrum and Flanker were no longer clonable by anyone except the originating nation because of the complexity.

If the Russians hadn’t helped with ToT and engines, I am willing to bet that the PRC will be flying mainly uprated J-7s and maybe two RE’ed F-15 like prototypes on their unreliable WS-10 which they don’t trust on a SEF. Stealing technology and attempting to RE off of it would have taken them decades.

No, it was direct injection of Russian technology, expertise and propulsion that got the PLAAF to where they are today. Reverse engineering is myth. It is not doable in a reasonable timeline. The answer was and is simple well-negotiated/leveraged TOT contracts.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 19 Dec 2017 08:51

Rakesh wrote:Look Long, Look Deep: China’s Airborne Warning and Control Systems
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... l-systems/

China, it seems has major long-term plans for future AWACS. Future Chinese AWACS are going to be very cost competitive since major development work has already been done. Dr Wang says, “The KJ-2000 costs billions of RMB and some new systems will spend only thousands or even millions of RMB. Being a large country, in future, China will need more AEW&C systems. We can develop lots of variants or upgraded version from present systems.” With such competitive pricing, China is sure to capture the export market for AWACS. Many countries who would not like to get into the high costs and political strings attached to an American or European AWACS or the costs of a Russian or Israeli system may find the cheaper Chinese AWACS a better option.


Yes, read my earlier post on the time-lapsed satellite pictures of the mass of Y-8 variants, especially the KJ-500 AWACS, at the CAC airfield. This old An-12 clone is a workhorse for them after the chinis ended up with the same problem for the KJ-2000 AWACS that we had with the Phalcon — the unavailability of IL-76 airframes.

With the Y-20 or C919 they’ll have a new platform to restart their Phalcon equivalent.

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

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 19 Dec 2017 10:10

a mass of AWACS platforms in small lots indicates confusion and problems encountered after production neither of which is a sign of great expertise or domestic ability.

the E3 sentry and its EW variants like RC135 , with suitable updates is in decades of service now. so is the P3 another ancient design and the E2 and B52, F-solah, C130 , apache, blackhawks. all these designs are decades old.

lesser powers thrash around copying and stealing and building small lots without understanding the true thought process of the design.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 19 Dec 2017 10:56

Singha wrote:a mass of AWACS platforms in small lots indicates confusion and problems encountered after production neither of which is a sign of great expertise or domestic ability.

the E3 sentry and its EW variants like RC135 , with suitable updates is in decades of service now. so is the P3 another ancient design and the E2 and B52, F-solah, C130 , apache, blackhawks. all these designs are decades old.

lesser powers thrash around copying and stealing and building small lots without understanding the true thought process of the design.


Eh, the thought processes for systems are pretty well known in today’s world. Pretty sure we, the chinis and maybe even the Pakis know what it takes to create a good AWACS platform per se — it is something the size and arrangement of a Phalcon. An all-directional radome on something the size of Boeing 707 or a IL-76. But the difference between the US and the three I mentioned above is the actual ability to build an aircraft of that size.

Take Cheen’s example: they wanted to standardize on the KJ-2000. We know this because not only did they built five of them but also in 2011 signed a contract to move production of the IL-76 to the PRC for the KJ-2000s.

But that contract hasn’t panned out so they couldn’t build an IL-76 sized AC at the time. So they ended up experimenting with a smaller platform, the Y-8.

Image

Image

Two satellite pictures of Xian, the first from May and the second from September. New aircraft are in yellow primer.

The ones with the circular radome is KJ-500 is their mass produced AWACS. Basically a smaller weaker version of the KJ-2000. The other variant in numbers in the photos is the Y-8Q which is MPA/ASW - again, because the chinis had no 707/IL-76 equivalent build capacity.

Without a Boeing 707, the chini Y-8 AWACS and MPA are at a disadvantage to the E-3 and P8. But at least they have the Y-8 in numbers so they were able to sell the Pakis six of the export version of the KJ-500, the ZDK-03. We had to make do with an imported regional liner from Brazil for a total of exactly one NETRA so far.

Worse, the Y-20 and C919 will solve their large platform dilemma going forward.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1698
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Vips » 23 Dec 2017 06:45

Up-close with Yulin, China’s most vital nuclear sub base that’s a big threat to India: Col Vinayak Bhat

New images from Google Earth show that Yulin has become China’s most critical naval base for its nuclear subs and has consequences for India.

Yulin Bay in China’s Hainan Island in the south is the only base from where Chinese submarines, especially the nuclear ones, can move into the deep ocean without being detected or intercepted.

An analysis of Google Earth images of 1 September 2017 shows how this base has grown in importance since its construction began in 2001 to become one of the most critical for the Chinese Navy with strategic implications for India.

Yulin is a strategic nuclear ballistic missile-carrying submarine base with an underground tunnel facility for storage and maintenance. This base provides China’s nuclear subs ease of access to the South China Sea and thus to the Indian Ocean region (IOR) and in turn to the Indo-Pacific waters without being detected.

It is, at present, the only base with a permanent deployment of Chinese nuclear submarines of Type 94 Jin class and Type 91 Han class and/or Type 93 Shang class.

The unchallenged access to IOR will allow the PLA Navy (PLAN) to closely monitor all Indian Navy traffic, especially India’s second-strike capabilities at sea, and an opportunity for interception whenever the need arises.

Yulin is also significant because of the ease with which it allows PLAN to launch its boats against Indian targets, both at sea and on land.

The importance of Yulin Bay became known when a signals intelligence (SIGINT) aircraft of the US Navy force-landed at Lingshui airport on 1 April 2001. The plane was monitoring the construction work of a tunnel at the strategic Yulin Bay.

The AN/APS-115 navigation radar scanner of the aircraft was damaged in a collision with a Chinese fighter plane, forcing the former to force-land in Chinese territory.

The crew was returned after diplomatic deliberations but the aircraft was retained apparently for reverse engineering. China’s SIGINT programme gathered pace after this incident.

The Yulin Bay submarine base is about 15 km east of Yulin Harbour and Sanya city on the southern tip of Hainan Island. Construction started somewhere in 2000 and continued until 2007. Expansions and additions continued until 2010.

The area confined by two breakwaters has a submarine tunnel, four main submarine piers, one large support pier and two long piers for support fleet parking. There are seven high-bay garages with revetments in between, probably for maintenance and repair of missiles.

There is also an administrative and residential complex making it a completely independent entity.

There is a submarine tunnel with an entrance of 16-20 m width. The construction of this tunnel, probably based on a Russian design, had started in 2000.

There are at least 30 ground tunnels, possibly interconnected with each other, and the submarine tunnel. A track of 7 m wide (overall) and 1,450 m long rail in between these tunnels has been provided with overhead protection. These tracks are probably for transshipment of munitions.

The openings of the three tunnels on the opposite side of the entrance are at different levels from ground, suggesting a huge internal area cleared for various activities of maintenance of submarines and missiles.

The openings on the opposite side indicate that internal length of this tunnel is approximately 900-1,000 m, suggesting a space for at least five or six nuclear ballistic missiles carrying submarines.

Every submarine has a certain amount of magnetic field as it is constructed with metal, which becomes accentuated during deployment. This attracts magnetic mines and also makes it easier to identify the location of the submarine. The only way to evade mines and detection is to de-magnetise (degaussing) the submarine before its deployment.

The degaussing facility at Yulin was constructed somewhere between 2007 and 2008 when the Type-94 nuclear ballistic missile carrying submarine (SSBN) of the Chinese navy visited the base for the first time. Until then, the Chinese navy was using ship-based equipment for demagnetisation of submarines.

Satellite images received on 23 October 2017 show airborne early warning aircraft and KQ-200 or Y-8GX6 aircraft with magnetic anomaly detector or MAD boom at the airport. These are probably used for surveillance and detection of any aerial, surface or underwater threat that may emerge against Yulin base.

Also seen are five satcom vehicles, part of ground controls systems (GCS), for controlling unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1379
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Thakur_B » 23 Dec 2017 07:38

chola wrote:
Bull pup configurations are hard to perfect, for every Steyr AUG and Tavor, you have FAMAS and SA-80.


Good post and analysis, Thakur ji. But I would go one further and say it is not only hard but impossible to perfect a bullpup as a standard rifle for a large army. The FAMAS and SA-80 along with the QBZ-95 represents the largest three armies going to the bullpup. Now both the chinis and the French are going back to conventional designs after a single generation of bullpups.

The Tavor is an exception but again the Iraelis are an exceptional armed force.


I did some further googling on this new chinese rifle. Apparently, PLA authorities put both type 95 and type 03 rifles under intense testing and they both came up short of expectations, hence a new design has been ordered.

Interestingly, the PLA uses two grades of ammunition, 64 grain bullet for rifles and carbines and heavier and hotter 77 grain bullet for LMG variant.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7248
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 23 Dec 2017 17:32

Not specific but an overview -
PLA to make strides in new era

Looks like drone delivery with C2 from fighters & new bomber are among things to watch out for.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17940
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 23 Dec 2017 18:12

^^ some indian dude on high quality afghan weed is busy in the comments section. 4th gen warfare no doubt.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7248
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 23 Dec 2017 18:49

:rotfl: :rotfl: hes as crazy as the others 'never again. china! vorwarts!' type chicom comments.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Dec 2017 00:09

Chini mil watching is so much fun onlee! (With or without quality weed. lol)

Some of biggest talking points among the “big shrimps” (their mil sites sahibs) these days are the following CARTOONS :shock: :

Image
Image

The drawings come with cryptic chini poems about the new petal blossoms (euphemism for butthole) on the J-10 and J-20. They are supposed to be a new variant (or variants) of the WS-10. On the cartoon J-20, white ceramic petals; on the J-10 a serrated TVC nozzle.

Whether by coincidence or design, leaks like this drive a pretty active community of military watchers including many goris — beyond the usual Amreeki China watchers. Two of the most prominent are a German and a French.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DavidD » 24 Dec 2017 12:39

Minor additions/corrections, the J-20 one is the serrated, non-TVC nozzle. The Chinese words say "Taihang's peak", with Taihang being the name for WS-10, indicating an upgraded, possibly final version of WS-10. The J-10 one is supposed to be the white TVC nozzle, of the Chinese words on there, the phrase of interest is "white chrysanthemum swaying". As you said, chrysanthemum is a euphemism for butthole, which is online military forum slang for jet engine, and swaying of course for TVC.

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

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Dec 2017 15:37

http://www.news18.com/news/world/worlds ... 13389.html

giant amphibian with 12 hour endurance takes wing. should serve a good link to the various smaller islands and camps being put up all over SCS.

perhaps a shallow water LRMP is also viable. it could carry a lot of sonobuoys and plenty of internal processing.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DavidD » 25 Dec 2017 00:30

Real picture today:

Image


Testing pic from a few years back:

Image

Also, another minor addition to my previous post. The J-20 cartoon isn't meant to show the serrated nozzled WS-10s on them, real pictures of those engines on the J-20 were already released a while back. It was meant to show that there are now 2 J-20s with those engines.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Dec 2017 01:26

DavidD wrote:Real picture today:

Image


Testing pic from a few years back:

Image

Also, another minor addition to my previous post. The J-20 cartoon isn't meant to show the serrated nozzled WS-10s on them, real pictures of those engines on the J-20 were already released a while back. It was meant to show that there are now 2 J-20s with those engines.


Thank you, David. That is better info than opining abiut putting battalions on Africa :D

Both are for certain WS-10 variants? Or do the cryptic messages leave possibility that the ones on the J-20s could be WS-15 or a new variant of the Al-31 or 117S from Russia?

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DavidD » 25 Dec 2017 02:11

Np. The J-20 cartoon specifically mentions TaiHang, the name for WS-10. Previous photos also clearly show that it's a TaiHang variant. The J-10 one doesn't specifically mention WS-10, but it doesn't look like the 117S or Al series. We don't have clear enough pictures or even specific rumors about what it is to say for sure one way or another.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16238
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby NRao » 25 Dec 2017 03:17


VishalJ
BRFite
Posts: 992
Joined: 12 Feb 2009 06:40
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby VishalJ » 25 Dec 2017 11:25


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Dec 2017 16:50

DavidD wrote:Np. The J-20 cartoon specifically mentions TaiHang, the name for WS-10. Previous photos also clearly show that it's a TaiHang variant. The J-10 one doesn't specifically mention WS-10, but it doesn't look like the 117S or Al series. We don't have clear enough pictures or even specific rumors about what it is to say for sure one way or another.


The J-20’s new engine is not TVC?

I have to say that whatever they are testing on the single-engined J-10 it is something they have to have supreme confidence in. But all of the production J-10s including the latest C variant uses the Al-31. This could be another engine or maybe just a standard Russian Al-31 with a TVC nozzle. The endless tinkering and improvements of both engines and airframes are definitely a major plus of the industry regardless.

David, what do you know of this F-414 equivalent WS-19?
https://mobile.twitter.com/xinfengcao/s ... 1749949440

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DavidD » 25 Dec 2017 23:56

chola wrote:
DavidD wrote:Np. The J-20 cartoon specifically mentions TaiHang, the name for WS-10. Previous photos also clearly show that it's a TaiHang variant. The J-10 one doesn't specifically mention WS-10, but it doesn't look like the 117S or Al series. We don't have clear enough pictures or even specific rumors about what it is to say for sure one way or another.


The J-20’s new engine is not TVC?

I have to say that whatever they are testing on the single-engined J-10 it is something they have to have supreme confidence in. But all of the production J-10s including the latest C variant uses the Al-31. This could be another engine or maybe just a standard Russian Al-31 with a TVC nozzle. The endless tinkering and improvements of both engines and airframes are definitely a major plus of the industry regardless.

David, what do you know of this F-414 equivalent WS-19?
https://mobile.twitter.com/xinfengcao/s ... 1749949440



Nope, it's not TVC. The J-10 one is, and a new cartoon came out indicating first flight just occurred today. The U.S. tested TVC on the F-16 so it's not that unusual. I can't say for sure that it's not an Al variant, it could be. Supposedly the issue with the WS-10 on the J-10 had been electrical power dip during high G maneuvers, which isn't an issue on twin-engine aircrafts since with two engines even with the dip they provided enough power. Who knows if it's been resolved by now, they've been testing it on the J-10 since the J-10A days.

As for the WS-19/17/13IPE or whatever it's called, it's supposed to be a brand new engine as the PLA's found the RD-33/93 or its Chinese copy WS-13 unsatisfactory. It has a long way to go before it's ready and any specs you see online is at most a goal (e.g. F-414 class) but most likely speculation.

As far as Chinese engines, the WS-20 seems to be the one closest to finishing. It's been undergoing testing on the IL-76 testbed for a few years now, and supposedly it's ready for testing on the Y-20.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 26 Dec 2017 17:20

I would say they would have an easier time testing the WS-20 since with four engines the Y-20 won’t so easily fall out of the sky as the J-10 historically has.

David, who is creating these professional looking CGI/cartoons? Just an artistic fanbase experienced from years of photoshopping? Or official Chinese military propaganda?

I was floored by the volume of immaculate artwork when I started following chinese mil in earnest. We have very few examples of the same quality for works of art to make our systems as appealing to casual non-aligned observer. Kudos to your fans (or propaganda department!)

Image
Image
Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7474
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 26 Dec 2017 17:36

The US developed and flight tested the AVEN some 20+ years ago using technologies and capabilities based on the late 1980s-early 90s era. The Russians likewise had tested a true 3D TVC nozzle quite a while ago. It shows that while China has come far in many areas there are gaps in other areas that are still quite wide which they are still working on. Propulsion as others have pointed out is one such area. Likely many other vital domains still have some work to do but this one really stands out.

GE's Axis-symmetric Vectoring Exhaust Nozzle (AVEN), designed for a simple retrofit to the F-110-GE-100 engine, required no modifications to the airframe and hydraulic system. In order to handle the increased hydraulic flow demand due to the AVEN nozzle, the capacity of the hydraulic pump was increased from 16 to 24 gallons per minute. The new nozzle is very similar to the production F-110 exhaust nozzle and is almost indistinguishable from a production F-16 nozzle. Engine oil powers three actuators, located 120 degrees apart, that in turn drive a vectoring ring. The actuators are independently controlled by the Vectoring Electronic Control (VEC). Since the vectoring ring can be tilted in any direction, vectoring is available in pitch, yaw, or any combination thereof. The AVEN provides up to 17 degrees of thrust vectoring in every direction. Slew rates of the nozzle are 60 deg/sec but limited to 45 deg/sec by the flight control computer software.

The proto-type nozzle adds 450 pounds to the engine, however, GE estimates a production nozzle would add only 250 pounds.The AVEN has two major modes of operation -- "Kill" and "Active"."Kill" enables the pilot to quickly disengage thrust vectoring hydraulics to the nozzle, independent of MATV or AVEN electronics, and return the aircraft to the baseline F-16 flight control laws and non-vectored nozzle condition. "Kill" could be selected by either pilot or automatically by the flight control computer in the event of a failure. "Active" activates the thrust vectoring system by commanding the nozzle control valve in accordance with commands from the VEC.

While the production F-16 is one of the world's most maneuverable fighters, directional stability is lost between 30 and 50 degrees AOA when most of the vertical tail is blocked by the fuselage. (The rudder losses effectiveness at 35degrees AOA.) Flight control limiters help prevent departure/spins, but restrict commanded AOA to 25.5 degrees--well short of the 32 degrees angle required for maximum lift. With yaw stability provided through thrust vectoring, the 25.5 degree restriction is eliminated maximizing inherent aircraft aerodynamics.

With MATV bringing almost unlimited high angle of attack performance, the jet was able to perform such maneuvers as the "cobra" and "J-turn". Equally important, MATV gives the fighter pilot a jet that is almost impossible to depart from controlled flight--the added safety capability will save aircraft and lives.


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3569
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 26 Dec 2017 17:47

^^^Yes, we have examples of the Russian one in production with the MKI’s AL-31FP.

Thanks for the description of how the thing works. The US never went with TVC in the F-16 or any of the later Teen variants. The trade-off in complexity and, I assume, maintenance versus more maneuverability is not worth it?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 26 Dec 2017 17:49

brar_w wrote:
While the production F-16 is one of the world's most maneuverable fighters, directional stability is lost between 30 and 50 degrees AOA when most of the vertical tail is blocked by the fuselage. (The rudder losses effectiveness at 35degrees AOA.) Flight control limiters help prevent departure/spins, but restrict commanded AOA to 25.5 degrees--well short of the 32 degrees angle required for maximum lift. With yaw stability provided through thrust vectoring, the 25.5 degree restriction is eliminated maximizing inherent aircraft aerodynamics.

Interesting and crystal clear though it should be in the US tech thread


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, mridulmm, nash and 67 guests