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.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 11 Oct 2018 14:25

A bomber of b2 size and elo systems will be 500-1000 mil even made in china when cost of r&d and ip theft is counted
A more democratic system like usa could afford 20

Question is how many could ussr have built and china will build

Will there be a smaller cheaper tactical platform to build in numbers and 5t internal payload (4 missiles) i think so and that will be made in numbers thats the one most useful to support the j20 in day1 anti carrier strikes and punish the yindu plan

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1589
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 11 Oct 2018 15:26

The difference between USSR & China is the economic size. USSR was never the GDP size what China is today. The issue with China is West has never faced an adversary with a powerful economy and large human population. Icing on the cake, it is a manufacturing powerhouse.

So even if tech wise Chini may not have the sharp edge of the sword, they can produce in numbers. Their defence budge is 1/4 of US. If they get o 50%, that is sizeable resource for putting in numbers.

Despite being smaller economy, USSR was able to roll out enormous numbers. Even if Chinis do 50% of what Soviet did, that is quite huge.

The fact is we now need numbers. We are going for shiny end expensive toys with no numbers. Behaving like Germany in WW2.


A khan B2 may never be detected. A Chini B2 would probably be detected at 20-30KM. At that distance it can fire off tons of PGM and scoot off. Having lower tech, does not reduce the threat.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6803
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 11 Oct 2018 17:12

Singha wrote:A bomber of b2 size and elo systems will be 500-1000 mil even made in china when cost of r&d and ip theft is counted
A more democratic system like usa could afford 20


It wasn't like the US could only afford 20. The US bought 20. The B-2 was designed to replace a large legacy bomber fleet but the decision to scale back was taken because the threat went away. Much of the ballooning Unit cost (a measurement metric) was a result of that decision i.e. the policy makers traded away overall spend for a higher unit spend. Had the cold-war not ended, and the B-2 would have been put into rate production you would have had the same learning curve efficiencies and economies of scale impact its unit cost resulting in a more reasonable Program Acquisition Unit Cost of more traditional programs of the scale and capability.

Imagine if the JSF was terminated at Lot-2, you would have had a URF of 250 Million per aircraft, and an R&D spend of tens of Billions resulting in a hyperinflated PAUC. Fast forward to today, you have produced nearly 350 aircraft and URF has dropped down to 89 Million and is on the way to 80 Million by 2020. Produce 3000 aircraft and the PAUC will be closer to predicted cost because the huge R&D sum got spread over 3000 production aircraft.

When you hold demand constant you can drive prices down - One reason that Northrop Grumman agreed to a fixed price contract for the first batches of B-21's @ or below $550 Million (2010 dollars) per copy was because they were guaranteed an order size at the time of contract signing which clearly was not the case with the B-2. Essentially, the US Government signed a contract agreeing to purchase a set no of LRIP and FRP aircraft upfront along with the development contract and are bound by it under penalty.

A khan B2 may never be detected. A Chini B2 would probably be detected at 20-30KM. At that distance it can fire off tons of PGM and scoot off. Having lower tech, does not reduce the threat.


Things are more dynamic in real life though, as in China has to face a different type (quantitative and qualitative) threat compared to the US. The US ability to detect-target a stealth bomber may be very different from China's given the former's decades long experience of pioneering low-observable technologies and getting real-world experience of using it since the early 1990s.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 11 Oct 2018 18:06

I think he was referring to china punishing india scenario.

when you cannot thrash the #1, why not beat up the next biggest enemy?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6803
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 11 Oct 2018 18:30

My point was in reference to the capability that their new bomber is likely to possess as in they will likely also lol at other aspects such as perhaps speed or keep it as a long range high speed munition delivery platform

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6983
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 11 Oct 2018 19:29

They might most likely put it in use in the East first and move the older bombers to the west. SCS is their main threat area.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 12 Oct 2018 14:40

Singha wrote:I think he was referring to china punishing india scenario.

when you cannot thrash the #1, why not beat up the next biggest enemy?


We can only hope that happens. Because never mind our superiority in gori equipment and training, we own MASSIVE and OVERWHELMING numerical advantages across the whole chini border and the IOR. Yes, please come punish us with two brigades (14000 men) and two dozen J-11s and J-10s in Tibet versus our 250000 on the border with 6 divisions (72000) in Arunchal Pradesh alone.
https://m.timesofindia.com/india/india-slowly-building-military-muscle-from-ladakh-to-arunachal-on-the-china-front/amp_articleshow/63560844.cms
Four infantry mountain divisions (each with over 12,000 soldiers) under the 3 Corps (Dimapur) and 4 Corps (Tezpur), with two more divisions in reserve, are for example tasked for the defence of Arunachal Pradesh alone.


I lost all hope of war after Doklam though. We had simply overwhelming advantages everywhere — up to 20-1 in manpower along most of the border and hundreds of IAF aircraft versus literally a handful of PLAAF fighters. But no war after all that talk. We could have and should have rolled into Tibet.

Anyhoo.

All this dhoti shaking fear and preparation regarding the next cheen attack is a punishing thing. While the chini MIC pumps ships and aircraft into its eastern seas to face off Unkil and its allies, we gut our own MIC by spending billions (and we are the poorer nation to begin with) on firang gear because of this fear of imminent action by two pissant PLA brigades versus our countless divisions and corps situated on highly advantageous grounds (at breathable altitudes) on the border.

So please come and punish us, Lizard. With your underwhelming forces.

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1854
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby AdityaM » 13 Oct 2018 13:17

HOW THE US FORCED CHINA TO QUIT STEALING—USING A CHINESE SPY


Longish article but talks of how China leapfrogged to making its latest stealth plane and C17 ripoff

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 13 Oct 2018 13:54

AdityaM wrote:HOW THE US FORCED CHINA TO QUIT STEALING—USING A CHINESE SPY


Longish article but talks of how China leapfrogged to making its latest stealth plane and C17 ripoff


We like to disparage Cheen as a Xerox copier. But the reason they are half-way successful while the rest of the turd world is mired in aerospace turd-worlddom is the bloody determination and effectiveness of their intelligence arm.

They steal chit because the gori will NEVER give them or anyone else their jewels willingly.

Right now, there are only the whites (with their honorary white members the Japanese) — and chinis — who hold the crowning jewels of production turbofans, stealth fighters and large aircraft.

But the chinis were not allowed willing into the club. They broke into it.

Copy, cheat, steal.

Being a gentleman does nothing for your national security.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1589
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 13 Oct 2018 14:05

AdityaM wrote:HOW THE US FORCED CHINA TO QUIT STEALING—USING A CHINESE SPY


Longish article but talks of how China leapfrogged to making its latest stealth plane and C17 ripoff


Stealing some industrial secrets is not going to help anyone build a C17 or F35 ripoffs. It just reduces design decisions.

The Chinis are here today, because they put the money where their mouth is. Investment of Hard Currency and determination to get a version, no matter how bad it is, in to a production variant. It is by "showing the money".

The Chinese had Blackhawk chopper for decades. How long did it take them to reverse it? Wouldn't it be much easier to clone a chopper on hand versus a F35 by stealing it's secrets? Yet it took them decades.

Same with the engine. They put money on the design, used their manufacturing base, steal, beg and brought a inferior engine. Worked on it, poured more money and got a decent version out.

Meanwhile we pass hot air, begging the Americans and French and being delusional they will share their crown jewels. To top it all up... we spend peanuts and spend the remaining time blaming GTRE.


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 19 Oct 2018 11:23

I like chini mil watching. But the carrier race is really damn painful to observe. Because I grew up with the Vikrant and Viraat as the sole carriers in Asia. It was the one thing we always owned over them in a big way.

They have a plan for carrier aviation. We? Not so much. Cheen can possibly have four carriers by 2022 while we’ll be lucky to see the (new) Vikrant inducted then. Even if we had started IAC 2 yesterday it would have taken until 2030 to see commission. But we haven’t even agree on a plan yet.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/chinas-navy-verge-becoming-aircraft-carrier-superpower-33131

China's Navy: On the Verge of Becoming an Aircraft Carrier Superpower?

Coming soon: 4 PLAN carriers?

Kyle Mizokami

...

Today, China has two aircraft carriers: the ex-Soviet carrier Liaoning, and a second unnamed ship, Type 002, currently undergoing sea trials. Liaoning is expected to function strictly as a training carrier, establishing training, techniques, and procedures for Chinese sailors in one of the most dangerous aspects of naval warfare: naval aviation. Despite this, Liaoning’s three transits of the Taiwan Strait and visit to Hong Kong show the PLAN considers it perfectly capable of showing the flag.

...

Type 002 will be the first combat-capable carrier, although the lack of a catapult means its aircraft must sacrifice range and striking power in order to take off from the flight deck.

...

A third ship of yet another class is under construction at the Jiangnan Shipyard at Shanghai, with credible reports of a fourth ship of the same class under construction at Dalian. This new class, designated Type 003, is the first Chinese carrier constructed using a modern, modular construction method. The modules, known as “superlifts” each weigh hundreds of tons, are assembled on land and then hoisted onto the ship in drydock.

...

Although there are few hard details on Type 003, we do know some things. The new carrier will forgo the ski ramp method for CATOBAR, or Catapult-Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery. The use of catapults will allow the carrier to launch heavier aircraft with great fuel and weapons loads, making the carrier more effective as a power projection platform. China has reportedly conducted “thousands” of test launches of a new electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS).

...

At the same time, Chinese designers are believed to be hard at work on a fourth class of carrier, Type 004. According to Popular Science, a leak by the shipbuilder claims the new class, “will displace between ninety thousand and one hundred thousand tons and have electromagnetically assisted launch system (EMALS) catapults for getting aircrafts off the deck. It'll likely carry a large air wing of J-15 fighters, J-31 stealth fighters, KJ-600 airborne early warning and control aircraft, anti-submarine warfare helicopters, and stealth attack drones.”

...

Meanwhile, the PLAN is looking forward a next-generation carrier aircraft. The PLAN has twenty-four J-15 multirole fighters, with at least two aircraft lost and two damaged during accidents attributed to the J-15 itself. That’s not enough aircraft to equip two carriers, land-based training units and carriers currently under construction. A future aircraft could be a carrier-based version of the Chengdu J-20 or the J-31/FC-31 , China’s two new fifth-generation fighters. An interim solution could be the so-called J-17, an improved J-15 roughly comparable to the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler.

The People’s Liberation Army Navy carrier fleet is a rapidly growing force shaping up to be a powerful, flexible tool of statecraft and war. Beijing could realistically have four aircraft carriers by 2022—a remarkable feat of military construction.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 21 Oct 2018 11:54

Chini spruce goose taking off from water.

Looks a bit wobbly pulling its arse from the grip of water.


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 21 Oct 2018 12:42

beautiful and useful for their new island bases. note the crossed swords welcome by the fire tenders.

was Bereiv involved via track2? how is your first effort a 4 engine heavy amphibian?

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 21 Oct 2018 14:34

Singha wrote:beautiful and useful for their new island bases. note the crossed swords welcome by the fire tenders.

was Bereiv involved via track2? how is your first effort a 4 engine heavy amphibian?


First effort was actually the 25 000 Ton MTOW Harbin SH5 which first flew in 1976 and introduced to PLAN service in 1986. It was biult to replace the Be-6's the PLAN service and will be replaced by the AG600

Image

Image

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2668
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 21 Oct 2018 14:39

AdityaM wrote:HOW THE US FORCED CHINA TO QUIT STEALING—USING A CHINESE SPY


Longish article but talks of how China leapfrogged to making its latest stealth plane and C17 ripoff


So they quit stealing ? :mrgreen:

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 21 Oct 2018 17:06

Singha wrote:beautiful and useful for their new island bases. note the crossed swords welcome by the fire tenders.

was Bereiv involved via track2? how is your first effort a 4 engine heavy amphibian?



Not first as AGI pointed out. But still seems fairly slow in development compared to many of their other projects:

According to wiki, it’ll be 13 years by the time it goes into production. Long execution probably means less help on this one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVIC_AG600

The AVIC AG600 (Kunlong, 鲲龙) is a large amphibious aircraft designed by AVIC and assembled by CAIGA. Powered by four WJ-6 turboprops, it is one of the largest flying boats with a 53.5 t (118,000 lb) MTOW. After five years of development, assembly started in August 2014, it was rolled out on 23 July 2016 and it made its first flight from Zhuhai Airport on 24 December 2017; it should be certificated in 2021, with deliveries starting in 2022.


Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1248
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Thakur_B » 24 Oct 2018 08:32



With Canadian help? Can't be militarily useful in anyway.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1599
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Manish_P » 24 Oct 2018 11:11

^ :rotfl:

And the chinese are actually paying the Canadians for this?

Looks like all that influx of Pakis has made the Canadians display Paki whorish traits.. and the Chinese are well being Chinese (delusions of Granduer)

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Oct 2018 15:40

Satellite intel: Large aircraft production in Cheen. Looks like production of airframes is outstripping engines in the Y-20. Seven newly painted craft on factory grounds but only two with engines.

The amount of AEW craft being pumped out is a far more dangerous gap than those with their stealth fighters and carriers, IMHO.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1053898255225049090
Y-20A production at XAC. Image taken on 29. September 2018.
Image

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1054285111406088192
Shaanxi AC facility at Hanzhong
Image

Rishi_Tri
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Rishi_Tri » 24 Oct 2018 16:39

We are not too far behind in helicopters, fighters, space tech but large fixed wing aircraft is a glaring hole. MTA is an opportunity lost. Hopefully people still wake up, and with Ukranian help at least create replacement for An 32s or platform for AEW or civilian use. Almost every large wing Chinese aircraft has had Russian or Ukranian help. All details in public domain.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Oct 2018 17:35

Rishi_Tri wrote:We are not too far behind in helicopters, fighters, space tech but large fixed wing aircraft is a glaring hole. MTA is an opportunity lost. Hopefully people still wake up, and with Ukranian help at least create replacement for An 32s or platform for AEW or civilian use. Almost every large wing Chinese aircraft has had Russian or Ukranian help. All details in public domain.


I wrote about our need to get ahold of Ukrainian tech for years. Especially the An-32.

But alas not only Cheen, even Saudi Arabia had beaten us to the punch. Yes, Saudi Arabia.
http://www.rusaviainsider.com/saudi-arabia-launch-antonov-132-series-production-2021/
Production of the An-132 light multirole transport aircraft is to be launched in Saudi Arabia in 2021, Ukraine’s manufacturer Antonov has announced. Work to build an assembly plant for the type is due to start at a technology park in the Middle Eastern country’s Ta’if City in 2019.


This would have been a perfect aircraft for our chapatis and many other missions.
Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Oct 2018 18:09

>>This would have been a perfect aircraft for our chapatis

too low ceiling, transit speed, endurance for that mission. even the US border patrol uses only P3 chapatti to snag smugglers

this will have way more payload and range than the AN32
Image

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1462
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kakarat » 24 Oct 2018 19:19

Our GoI & MoD lack vision, even now India can buy the An-70 completely as replacement for MTA. with no customers they will be happy to sell complete licence and IP to anyone willing to pay, if negotiated properly we could even by its engine design also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-70

Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Oct 2018 21:10

Cheen has paid ukraine since around 2000 for design help and AN70 technology to use for the Y20. it was a good a.c , better than the IL76.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Oct 2018 23:29

Singha wrote:>>This would have been a perfect aircraft for our chapatis

too low ceiling, transit speed, endurance for that mission. even the US border patrol uses only P3 chapatti to snag smugglers

this will have way more payload and range than the AN32
Image


Unkil’s stuff is too TFTA onlee, Singha ji.

The An-32/132 is a plane that we have experienced with and well within our ability to make. And compared to the HS 748 and the ERJ-145 that we had put our chapatis and rotis on, the An-132 is a better compromise with more range than the first and more load than the second.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 25 Oct 2018 05:29

Cheen is putting roti on their 4 engine an12 model

We can put roti on an32 but iaf is unlikely to accept such a solution

For other uses i agree we dropped the ball bigtime on MTA trying to piggyback on russian hard work and free hal workshare than design pur own or look to other oem like mitsubishi or embraer

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Oct 2018 16:27

According to French china watcher Henri Kenhmann, an article in an aviation periodical said a “pulse line” had been in place at XAC since 2017. It will force the international watchers community to re-evaluate rate of production.

https://mobile.twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1055156465013424128

La Pulse line de Xi'an Aircraft Industrial Corporation pour produire les Y-20 est passé en gestion par station depuis Août 2017, selon un article de l'avionneur chinois. Il est temps de ré-évaluer la cadence de production de XAC ainsi que le besoin de l'armée de l'air chinoise...

Image

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1589
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 25 Oct 2018 16:51

Singha wrote:
We can put roti on an32 but iaf is unlikely to accept such a solution



One of the requirement would be to track Pak/China BM launches. For it, propellers/ ERJ 145 types are not going to cut it. We need proper Airbus/Boeing high flyers with extra power for long range monitoring.

However for other business as usual, propellers would be great. We have enough requirement for it.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6983
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 26 Oct 2018 11:08

Well we've got an OK to build the C-295 here but we don't really have any news of any movement on it.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 26 Oct 2018 11:34

Paisa nahi hai. that too would just be licensed assembly though.

we needed both the MTA and RTA on similar design lines as Y20 and C919 to kickstart the large aero design and manufacturing segment. so our aerospace parts makers like maini, taml or wipro can make structures for airbus and boeing but no domestic project.

predictably we are flat on the mat.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 27 Oct 2018 13:53

Singha wrote:Paisa nahi hai. that too would just be licensed assembly though.

we needed both the MTA and RTA on similar design lines as Y20 and C919 to kickstart the large aero design and manufacturing segment. so our aerospace parts makers like maini, taml or wipro can make structures for airbus and boeing but no domestic project.

predictably we are flat on the mat.


The chini industry built a light utility (Y-12), a 2-engines prop (Y-7), a four-engined prop (Y-8/9) before finally a four-engined turbofan in the Y-20.

They also had experience with the Boeing 707 clone Y-10 and a manufacturing plant from MD for the DC-8 (and the ARJ-21 ripoff) before the C919.

Our Y-12 equivalent is Saras. We’ve deployed and maintained over 130 An-32s for decades so IMHO we really should attack the twin-engined prop space next based on our experience and resources.

Going directly to large aircraft in Y-20 and C919 classes will be like the Kaveri where we tried to make a world-class turbofan when we were never able to mass produce even a piston. The MTA and RTA never took off for a reason. We had no experience to bring to the table.

So the C-295 is still important. Going through the smaller classes is not wasted effort. Even if we could leapfrog into the C-17/Y-20 and Boeing 737/C919 spaces, we will still need two-engined and four-engined props.

But at our stage of development, a C-295 or An-132 is a far more achievable goal that in turn can form a foundation for the larger classes. We need to negotiate better terms of IP transfer and control.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1589
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 27 Oct 2018 14:17

C295 is not coming. HAL as usual wants no competitor and after delaying the deal by lobbying in MoD has now a sudden proposal to upgrade the engine on Avro, as it says airframe still has lot of life left!

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4666
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Neshant » 28 Oct 2018 03:53

Not a word from Muslim countries..

How long till they start locking Pakistanis up and tasering them with cattle prods for non repayment of debt.

-------

Inside China's internment camps: Tear gas, Tasers and textbooks.

Read more at:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/wor ... 342546.cms

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1350
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 28 Oct 2018 14:15

Kakarat wrote:Our GoI & MoD lack vision, even now India can buy the An-70 completely as replacement for MTA. with no customers they will be happy to sell complete licence and IP to anyone willing to pay, if negotiated properly we could even by its engine design also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-70

Image



One bloody missed opportunity !!

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1462
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kakarat » 28 Oct 2018 14:56

Khalsa wrote:
Kakarat wrote:Our GoI & MoD lack vision, even now India can buy the An-70 completely as replacement for MTA. with no customers they will be happy to sell complete licence and IP to anyone willing to pay, if negotiated properly we could even by its engine design also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-70

https://cdn.airplane-pictures.net/image ... 283184.jpg



One bloody missed opportunity !!


I wont say its lost yet, we can still join them and get a good deal if properly negotiated. But i don't think it will happen

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 28 Oct 2018 15:15

we will rather import more C130J :oops:

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 28 Oct 2018 18:07

^^^ Compared to the chinis we have scattershot aircraft industry with a few lab projects and screwdrivergiri subcontracting deals here and there.

Ours is not a broad and deep industry like Cheen’s. Not even close. Whether it is trainers, fighters or transports our first inclination is for best on the phoren market. Theirs is to make do with what they can produce locally. We end up with a better quality air fleet but they end up with an actual aircraft industry and eco-system.

We win if we go to war with Cheen because of the better (imported) fleet. They win if we don’t. After Doklam, I despair of us ever actually fighting Cheen. We are bith short rice-eating races more inclined to jaw-jaw than war-war.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 28 Oct 2018 18:25

Intel tweets:

Their new carrier is off to another sea trial (third).
https://mobile.twitter.com/dafengcao/status/1056408131289407488
Image

J-20s are massing in southern Guangdong province (next to Hong Kong) for the bi-annual mecca in chini watching, the Zhuhai Airshow beginning on Nov. 6th:

J-20A seem with Il-76 tanker possibly refueling enroute to Zhuhai.
Image

J-20A reported landing in airbase near Zhuhai.
Image

Formation of J-20s filmed flying over Zhuhai.
Image

These were posted on @dafengcao and @RupprechtDeino timelines.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w and 29 guests