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.
chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 28 Sep 2017 15:29

rkhanna wrote:China just conducted its first live fire exercise. While there are reports that Japanese combat divers tested the defenses of PLAN ships in harbor.

Japan also has a base close to the Chinese


It would fun if we had a base there too. But I guess it would cost billions to build, rent and run.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 28 Sep 2017 15:41

Drones, drones, drones. They’re stinking mad for drones.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/china-unveils-worlds-first-commercial-amphibious-drone-that-can-take-off-land-water-1641132

Image

Can carry 200kg of cargo. Design bought from a Spanish company.

Nice video in the article. Private sector firm but without doubt this is duel use.

The concerning part is not the capability of this or that drone or aircraft but the volume and diversity of types from both their PSUs and their private sector. This shows a churning competitive environment that will over time lead to innovations. Yes, even chini innovations.

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1804
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby AdityaM » 29 Sep 2017 02:01

https://twitter.com/xinfengcao/status/9 ... 6003277824
PLARF missiles launch compilation. At 0:36, extremely rare to see the salvo launch of DF-10 LRCMs.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 01 Oct 2017 11:06

Was this posted here?
http://bharatshakti.in/countering-chinese-tank-threat/
bharatshakti.in
Countering Chinese Tank Threat | Bharat Shakti


The issue of inducting adequate tanks in certain sectors in high altitude areas to counter the Chinese threat has been debated for long. A few such areas already have tanks available to meet a critical eventuality with the enemy inducting armour that might come up. The issue was centre stage when we were coping with the Chinese at Doklam. The General, in his article debates the pros and cons of using armour in high altitude areas, in our context. He also evaluates Chinese tanks likely to be used in mountains, including the latest variants that they have produced.

COUNTERING CHINESE TANK THREAT

The recent standoff at Doklam had an interesting side show with considerable media hype on scary scenarios of Chinese war games in Tibet accompanied by reports of fielding of Chinese light tank optimised for high altitude and touted as a silver bullet for Himalayas. This naturally lead to considerable panic in ill informed media conjuring images of hordes of Chinese armour rolling down Chumbi Valley over Jompheri Ridge, all the way into Siliguri corridor. The narrative fitted in with lingering images of ruthless employment of tanks against helpless protestors in Tiananmein square. Earlier, Chinese had experimented with heavy drop and contingency of capture of mountain passes with tanks and have leveraged even such manoeuvres as part of psychological warfare to amplify the threat of tanks.

Issues and Challenges

While India reacted with maturity yet reactive deployment of armour had to be resorted to in critical areas thereby drawing on resources committed to other sectors, on the lines of pooling in of Bofors guns for Kargil operations, albeit at a much reduced scale. This has obviously thrown up a number of issues and dilemmas and it will be in order if instead of panic reaction, well considered response strategy is drafted in a time bound manner. Some of the important issues meriting examination are as follows:-

– What is the actual efficacy of tanks in high altitude areas?

– Which is the best tank for Himalayas – medium or light or a combination of these?

– Is the new Chinese light tank, Xinquingtan also referred to as ZTQ, indeed the

silver bullet for Himalayas?

– What is the recommended deployment and force level?

Efficacy of Tanks in High Altitude

Despite historical instances of tanks making their mark in mountains, Zozila and Chushul in our context, it will be pragmatic to surmise that unlike plains, where tanks are the ultimate arbiters, their effectiveness in mountains is limited to few gaps, narrow valleys and corridors. Relating it to Doklam crisis, it will be prudent to conclude that while tanks can be inducted into Chumbi valley and there have even been reports of Chinese tank trials in area of Yatung and Phari Dzong, yet considering the terrain, they just can’t traverse their way to Siliguri Corridor. The only possible way tanks can be inducted into corridor is by air, which in itself is a herculean task with no commensurate gains. Physical, electronic and thermal signatures of these mighty beasts are difficult to conceal and can be picked up by well coordinated surveillance devices including satellite imagery specially if there are used in large numbers.

Terrain in these areas dictates use of small combined arms integrated teams with a mix of tanks, infantry combat vehicles, missile launchers and combat support elements backed up by tailored logistics. It is also relevant to factor degradation in performance of various systems due to de-rating of engines, negative effect of external ballistics on armaments and weather on optronics.

Constraints of terrain and limited efficacy of tracked systems give rise to the dilemma of deciding between investing in enhancing tank fleet or relying on anti tank grid. The recommended way to counter mechanised threat in these areas is by laying out potent and effective anti-tank grid to block limited avenues backed up by optimum number of tanks.

A typical anti-tank grid includes layers of early warning and surveillance; mines and ditches; artillery fire both indirect as well as direct; accurate anti-tank missiles anchored by vectored tank manoeuvres and fire assaults.

In our context, there are very few such places and most of these so called gaps or funnels in Northern Sikkim and Ladakh can be converted into traps and killing grounds. Chinese forays may get bogged into Khemkaran type of reverses teaching them a bitter lesson like ‘Asaal Uttar’. While we have some concerns and challenges in Ladakh yet these are manageable. Our domination over Kerang plateau in Sikkim is real and effective, in fact the plateau combined with terrain across provides an opportunity for execution of effective quid-pro-quo option leading to possibility of blocking Chumbi valley at its head.

Recommended Tank for High Altitude

China has tried to build a hype around its latest offering from North Industries Group corporation (NORINCO) in the form of light tank ZTQ yet elite units deployed in high altitude areas continue to be equipped with front line medium tanks,Type 96 or ZTZ-96. This tank, in keeping with Chinese philosophy of over designating their tanks is an attempt to match up to T-90 though some experts rate earlier versions of this tank equivalent to T-72, especially improved version. Our existing fleet of T-72 tanks needs to be further optimised with a 1000 HP engine as the current 780 HP power pack suffers upto 25% de-rating due to rarified ambient conditions.

Image Courtesy: Tank Encyclopedia

An objective analysis reveals that Type 96 is a 45 tonne Main Battle Tank (MBT) equipped with 125 mm gun supplemented by missile and depleted Uranium round and is powered by 780 HP Diesel power pack, Most importantly, Chinese have not disclosed any plan for replacement of medium tanks of units in high altitude with new light tanks. In fact a large number of Chinese tank battalions are holding Type 80/85/88 tanks and will continue to be equipped with improved and retrofitted versions of these tanks. These tanks have 105 mm guns and lack missile firing capability.

Chinese are also engaged in development of an improved Type 99 or ZTZ-99 tank, which is an evolutionary design with major improvements likely to manifest in a 1000 HP power pack, improved optronics, better ammunition and enhanced protection; but in incremental proportions rather than a revolutionary quantum jump. Our improved T-90 is likely to match up to even Type 99 tank. Chinese opacity in weapon development, organisation and employment is well known and but it will be logical to presume that in near and midterm, Chinese are going to rely on medium tanks and only some specialised Rapid Reaction Forces or specialised elite units may be equipped with the latest light tanks.

In our context, while we may be tempted to opt for a simplistic solution of pure light tank regiment but it may be better to think out of box and attempt a mini RMA. The ideal mix should be a composite unit with two medium tank squadrons combined with a light tank squadron as they can complement each other. Light tanks can reach areas otherwise inaccessible and medium tanks can deliver the requisite punch. This model should be adopted for regiments in high altitude and also reconnaissance regiments. Thus a Regiment can have 28 medium tanks in two squadrons augmented by 23 light tanks-14 in third squadron, six in reconnaissance troop and three in regimental HQ.

Appraisal of Chinese Light Tank

Chinese light tank, ZTQ or w Xinquingtan weighs 33 to 36 tonnes, which is just two tonnes less than medium tank, T-54/55 and Chinese T-59. While characteristics and features of tank continue to be shrouded in mystery, yet most informed analysts estimate this tank to have 105 mm (probably rifled) gun and 1000 HP engine. It is certainly a non-amphibian tracked vehicle but probably with extra wide tracks to reduce nominal ground pressure to improve traffic-ability and wading capability through wet obstacles.

There is a question mark on missile firing capability but it is likely to be included as an upgrade. Though air transportable yet very limited numbers can be lifted even from air fields in hinter land and almost none from Tibet due to payload restrictions in rarefied atmosphere. It violates governing criteria for light tanks of weight ceiling of 28 tonnes and amphibian capability. Chinese seem to be laying down the new norm of 36 tonnes for light tanks, which militates against the well established norm of 24-28 tonnes.

The new Chinese tank is yet to be validated and essentially is still a work in progress. We need not re-define our criteria for light tank to ape Chinese parameters but on the contrary should opt for a real light tank with 800-1000 HP power pack, 125 mm low pressure gun, anti tank missile backed up by first rate optronics and protection system. EXtra wide tracks is a feature worth replicating to improve cross country capability. We have a ‘Jugaad’ type of prototype developed by TATA and DRDO on a wheeled configuration. It also opens up a concurrent dilemma of tracked versus wheeled as most advanced light tanks like Russian Sprut are tracked. Ideally, we should opt for for tracked variant and develop rubberised track shoes to enhance their mobility and limit damage to roads.

Recommended Force Level

Image Courtesy: Indian Defence News

A comparative evaluation reveals that there are glaring chinks in Chinese organisation with 35 tanks in a battalion and 10 tanks in a company against 45 tanks in our units and 14 in squadrons. Their mechanised infantry units are largely equipped with battle taxis unlike our BMPs, which are classified as genuine fighting vehicles. While they have 40 odd regiments arrayed against us yet large proportion of mechanised fleet is equipped with antique T-59/ Type 80/85/88 tanks, their application at chosen point of application is restricted by terrain and is likely to be sequential. While detailed force levels and deployments can be worked out, it is recommended that as a concept both in Ladakh and Sikkim, holding or pivot divisions should have an integral tank and mechanised battalion backed up by an Independent Brigade with three tank regiments and mechanised unit.

In Sikkim, an additional independent squadron would be required for East Sikkim for deterrence against Doklam type of situation and likely threat of Chinese tanks to capture passes like Nathu La and Cho La. Students of military history would recall about deployment of light tank troop in this area in 70s. Independent brigade for Sikkim could be located in plateau and position a mechanised battalion in Siliguri Corridor with another independent squadron. Both holding Divisions should be provided with additional staff to handle mechanised operations.

Considering that we may have five to six regiments in high altitude, three recce regiments in Strike Corps in plains and five recce/independent squadrons, we need about 15 squadrons or five regiment worth of light tanks. This recommendation is premised on a composite grouping of one light tank squadron for regiments in high altitude as also in recce regiments backed up by two medium tank squadrons.

It is also felt that independent squadrons should not be amalgamated but retained in their current configuration as they give flexibility, rapid reaction and augmentation capability in areas like Rann, Siliguri corridor, Mago-Chuna valley, East Sikkim and Ladakh. Considering terrain, these squadrons should be equipped with light tanks and get deployed for rapid reaction and as reserves. The profile suggested may result in marginal enhancement of over all armour profile but that may become inescapable if we are to build credible deterrent against Chinese and punitive deterrent to tackle Pakistanis.

In the end it is the man behind the machine who makes the difference as was proved by well-trained Centurion tank crews in the 1965 war, who put the message across technologically superior Pakistani Patton tanks; many of which are displayed as war trophies in our military stations. It will only be right if we develop a self-contained eco system of simulators, ranges, repairs and training facilities in these areas to hone our crews to exploit the capabilities of our equipment.

Lt Gen KJ Singh (Retired)

(Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BharatShakti.in)

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Oct 2017 12:19

Kartik wrote:China's CH-5 UAV conducts live fire trial of new precision weapon

Image

Key Points

The China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation integrated a new 80 kg precision guided missile on its Cai Hong 5 armed reconnaissance UAV
The latest test in northwestern China also enabled engineers to refine the CH-5's sensor systems as well as its payload release mechanisms

China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC) has successfully integrated and launched a new precision guided missile (PGM) on its Cai Hong 5 (Rainbow 5, or CH-5) strike-capable, medium-altitude long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (MALE UAV), Jane’s sources have confirmed.

The latest test was staged out of an undisclosed airport in the northwestern province of Gansu during the morning of 21 September, with CASC engineers successfully deploying a new 80 kg-class PGM – carrying a blast fragmentation warhead – via lock-on before launch (LOBL) targeting protocols from a production-model CH-5 at a launch altitude of 11,482 ft.

Further details of the new PGM were not disclosed, although it is understood that the latest effort also enabled engineers to further test and fine-tune the CH-5’s electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) payload as well as its weapons targeting and rail-mounted payload release mechanisms.

“We demonstrated the CH-5’s ability to win the initiative in any battlefield with its reconnaissance and strike ability, and our latest success exemplifies the maturity of our advanced products,” a company spokesperson told Jane’s .

Company sources also revealed to Jane’s that the 45 kg-class AR-1 semi-active laser (SAL) anti-armour missile was successfully integrated and certified for delivery aboard the CH-5 in August.


The CH-5 is not the only one.

The PRC has not just one but two rip-offs of the Predator.

Image
Image
Image

This one is called the Wing Loong II. According to the East Pendulum (French chini mil watching site) this copy was also exported to the Middle East and has fired 1000 missiles which allowed the manufacturer to collect data and feedback. It said 90% of the munitions were on target.

https://www.eastpendulum.com/wing-loong-ii-essais-de-tir-et-premiere-livraison-au-client

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Oct 2017 12:39

Yet another fvcking hunter killer. And from a chini company that seemingly appears out of nowhere.

The TB001, a heavyweight twin-engine drone with a ton of payload, made by a firm called Tengoen.

Image

Image

http://www.janes.com/article/74208/chinese-company-tengoen-unveils-several-armed-uavs

Again like the helo drones, I’m almost certain that most of these are not funded by their center but are prototypes built by bureaus or private sector firms as proposals or exports. This is uncomfortably close to the eco-system that the US employs and which can generate advances and innovations. Cheen as a gaddam commie MIC mirrors the US while we, through the fvcking PSUs, stick to the old Soviet model.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9679
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby sum » 03 Oct 2017 13:48

Very impressive in the sheer scale of designs coming out.
Looks like they have crossed that threshold beyond which floodgates open( while our one single program,Rustom drags along in the runway trials stage over past decade with no end in sight)

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 03 Oct 2017 14:15

sum wrote:Very impressive in the sheer scale of designs coming out.
Looks like they have crossed that threshold beyond which floodgates open( while our one single program,Rustom drags along in the runway trials stage over past decade with no end in sight)

agreed, to sum it up.
They have achieved confidence in their own manufacturing abilities and don't give a damn when the world laughs at their shoddy paint jobs or looong names.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Oct 2017 14:55

Khalsa wrote:
sum wrote:Very impressive in the sheer scale of designs coming out.
Looks like they have crossed that threshold beyond which floodgates open( while our one single program,Rustom drags along in the runway trials stage over past decade with no end in sight)

agreed, to sum it up.
They have achieved confidence in their own manufacturing abilities and don't give a damn when the world laughs at their shoddy paint jobs or looong names.


I think Sum’s idea of crossing a “threshold” is very appropriate. Once you cross it then things can grow exponentially.

I think the engineering threshold was crossed when they did the needful in developing a family of turboprops. From what I read all chini drones like the CH-5 and Wing Loong use variants of the WJ-9 which powers their Y-12 utility plane.

But more importantly, the demand threshold was crossed when the Saudis, Iraqis and Egyptians began buying chini drones to kill people which US laws disallow using drones for (by anyone except for themselves, of course.) Lizard as we know has no such qualms. The smell of $$$ is like blood in the water for the private sector. A frothy, churning feeding frenzy of entrepreneurial sharks is what you want in an eco-system.

So while the DRDO is importing engines and working at its ordinary state agency pace on the Rustom, the chini firms/PSUs have access to a local powerplant and the lure of Arab money (if not a PLA contract) to churn out many designs rapidly to chase sales.

We are one state entity dependent on the GOI to fund one drone. They are many state bureaus and private sector firms chasing after the filthy dollar by funding their own designs and prototypes to pitch.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4122
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Rakesh » 03 Oct 2017 19:23

Dhoti Shivering has already started on the Chinese side.... :rotfl:

US weapons won't give New Delhi an edge over Beijing: Chinese media
http://zeenews.india.com/india/us-weapo ... 47225.html

American weapons will not give New Delhi a 'bargaining chip' in handling its China relations because it is a US attempt to impose its Asia strategy on India, a state-run Chinese media said in an editorial on Monday. The US is trying to “tie New Delhi to its chariot”, but it cannot bring about “India's rise or act as a viable bargaining chip,” the Global Times said. India will have to rely on itself rather than a few weapons the US is trying to sell to it for its own ambitions, the article said, adding the progress of US-India relations is subtly connected to the development of China-US ties.

“New Delhi's status in Asia should not be determined by Washington's China strategy,” it said. “While Beijing has not considered India a factor in handling its ties with Washington, the Washington-New Delhi relationship has taken the need to contain China into account,” the opinion piece said. “But compared to New Delhi, Beijing is more determined and capable not to be manipulated when handling its relations with other countries.

“India would be more mature if it could view high-level exchanges with the US without regard for any perceived need to contain China, it said. Referring to the Doklam standoff, the article said India and China showed maturity in handling the crisis and proved both have the “capability to eliminate exterior interventions and diplomatically handle crises”.

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 575
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby yensoy » 03 Oct 2017 19:44

chola wrote:Yet another fvcking hunter killer. And from a chini company that seemingly appears out of nowhere.

The TB001, a heavyweight twin-engine drone with a ton of payload, made by a firm called Tengoen.


It's a subsidiary of the Guangxi railway construction company.
http://www.gxnews.com.cn/staticpages/20170912/newgx59b7e0c8-16520672.shtml

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 03 Oct 2017 19:45

To understand limitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping read
https://t.co/Laz4HBVEer

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 04 Oct 2017 06:10

Without detracting from the apparent achievements of the plethora of UCAV designs from China I am left with several questions which no doubt will never be answered. Sometimes I think the world is not taking China seriously. At other times I thing that the world is not taking Chins seriously because China is not all that serious about real capabilities. But I digress.

The CH-5 for example is powered by a "turbocharged piston engine". Piston engines, unlike turbine engines (like the Garett of the Reaper) undergo a performance degradation at high altitudes. We have been reading of how even tank engines show a 20-25% power loss at high altitudes, and we can expect the same from these UAV engines. This would throw into question the ability of these UAVS to take off with full loads or even fly at Tibet altitudes. Everything gets affected by power - the avionics, the fuel capacity, the payload, range, takeoff performance every dam thing - to the extent that it makes a difference whether the thing is flying in the early morning or afternoon

Even perfectly powerful jets - including Su-27s have problem taking off at full loads and Jaguars have an issue with manoeuvrability in valleys. UAVs are light and Spartan by design and the Chinese - aside from boasting and posting great photos are not saying anything about crucial aspects of performance.

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 110
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby pravula » 04 Oct 2017 08:22

shiv wrote:Without detracting from the apparent achievements of the plethora of UCAV designs from China I am left with several questions which no doubt will never be answered. Sometimes I think the world is not taking China seriously. At other times I thing that the world is not taking Chins seriously because China is not all that serious about real capabilities. But I digress.

The CH-5 for example is powered by a "turbocharged piston engine". Piston engines, unlike turbine engines (like the Garett of the Reaper) undergo a performance degradation at high altitudes. We have been reading of how even tank engines show a 20-25% power loss at high altitudes, and we can expect the same from these UAV engines. This would throw into question the ability of these UAVS to take off with full loads or even fly at Tibet altitudes. Everything gets affected by power - the avionics, the fuel capacity, the payload, range, takeoff performance every dam thing - to the extent that it makes a difference whether the thing is flying in the early morning or afternoon

Even perfectly powerful jets - including Su-27s have problem taking off at full loads and Jaguars have an issue with manoeuvrability in valleys. UAVs are light and Spartan by design and the Chinese - aside from boasting and posting great photos are not saying anything about crucial aspects of performance.


Turbos are not naturally aspirated and therefore retain their power to a certain altitude. Garett makes a popular line of turbos for Cars.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 04 Oct 2017 09:28

pravula wrote:
Turbos are not naturally aspirated and therefore retain their power to a certain altitude.

What altitude?

A series of army articles point out that even turbocharged internal combustion engines lose power at Tibet altitudes.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Austin » 04 Oct 2017 09:32

chola wrote:


The CH-5 is not the only one.

The PRC has not just one but two rip-offs of the Predator.

Image
Image
Image

This one is called the Wing Loong II. According to the East Pendulum (French chini mil watching site) this copy was also exported to the Middle East and has fired 1000 missiles which allowed the manufacturer to collect data and feedback. It said 90% of the munitions were on target.

https://www.eastpendulum.com/wing-loong-ii-essais-de-tir-et-premiere-livraison-au-client


The Iraqi Army has extensively Armed UAV of Chinese origin in its fight against IS and there are multiple video of them bombing IS location using these UAV

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3623
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby deejay » 04 Oct 2017 10:19

UCAV ops in Iraq and Syria are not going to be what either China / Pakistan will have in Indian context. In the Levant crisis all UCAV forces have complete/ total/ absolute air superiority with no aerial threat. Turkey did bring down Russian aircraft and has since become more of a Russian friend, meaning that was an exception and not a rule.

And Shiv ji is right, piston engines even with turbo chargers will not do well at higher altitudes. The HPT 32 suffered serious performance degradation by the time we climbed above 2kms with a very belaboured, slow rate of climb. The higher one goes the greater the effect.

Also, primarily for the UAV/ UCAV ops, the most important thing is the data link. How good and robust is the telemetry? Is it effective at the limits of the UAV/ UCAV envelop of ops? I suspect based on the ginger displays of helicopters and fighters made by China at airshows, they avoid the outer edges of envelope because they are not confident of the performance.

I agree that they have many UAV / UCAV programmes but if they are clones of the same original design, does it matter how many companies make it as long as the capability remains same?

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9679
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby sum » 04 Oct 2017 10:36

deejay wrote:UCAV ops in Iraq and Syria are not going to be what either China / Pakistan will have in Indian context. In the Levant crisis all UCAV forces have complete/ total/ absolute air superiority with no aerial threat. Turkey did bring down Russian aircraft and has since become more of a Russian friend, meaning that was an exception and not a rule.

And Shiv ji is right, piston engines even with turbo chargers will not do well at higher altitudes. The HPT 32 suffered serious performance degradation by the time we climbed above 2kms with a very belaboured, slow rate of climb. The higher one goes the greater the effect.

Also, primarily for the UAV/ UCAV ops, the most important thing is the data link. How good and robust is the telemetry? Is it effective at the limits of the UAV/ UCAV envelop of ops? I suspect based on the ginger displays of helicopters and fighters made by China at airshows, they avoid the outer edges of envelope because they are not confident of the performance.

I agree that they have many UAV / UCAV programmes but if they are clones of the same original design, does it matter how many companies make it as long as the capability remains same?

Sir you might be right on all the points but im sure they are not so terrible that the exported countries do not even protest since they have been extensively used

They might not hit the envelopes but should suffice for the day day normal ops( import the corner case reqt from outside in small numbers and use local less capable ones in other parts of country). They will surely build on the data points gathered from real world operations which are invaluable.

Isnt this approach better than wanting gold plated standards from word go and ending up with nothing and then spending massive $$€€ to import the best out there(like how we have managed to so far?)

They exported loads of these vanilla variety and will use these money to parallely fund the desired high performance systems which am sure they will achieve given the money manpower and focus being put on it
All this IMHO and armchair-giri of course

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 110
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby pravula » 04 Oct 2017 10:42

shiv wrote:
pravula wrote:
Turbos are not naturally aspirated and therefore retain their power to a certain altitude.

What altitude?

A series of army articles point out that even turbocharged internal combustion engines lose power at Tibet altitudes.


Turbo is just an air compressor driven off exhaust gasses and can even serialize them (twin turbos are common in BMW and Audis). Depending on the turbo and manifold design, its normal for turbo engines to maintain sea level performance at high altitude (IIRC they are called turbo-normalized engines).

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 110
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby pravula » 04 Oct 2017 10:43

deejay wrote:UCAV ops in Iraq and Syria are not going to be what either China / Pakistan will have in Indian context. In the Levant crisis all UCAV forces have complete/ total/ absolute air superiority with no aerial threat. Turkey did bring down Russian aircraft and has since become more of a Russian friend, meaning that was an exception and not a rule.

And Shiv ji is right, piston engines even with turbo chargers will not do well at higher altitudes. The HPT 32 suffered serious performance degradation by the time we climbed above 2kms with a very belaboured, slow rate of climb. The higher one goes the greater the effect.

Also, primarily for the UAV/ UCAV ops, the most important thing is the data link. How good and robust is the telemetry? Is it effective at the limits of the UAV/ UCAV envelop of ops? I suspect based on the ginger displays of helicopters and fighters made by China at airshows, they avoid the outer edges of envelope because they are not confident of the performance.

I agree that they have many UAV / UCAV programmes but if they are clones of the same original design, does it matter how many companies make it as long as the capability remains same?


IIRC, HPT32 is not a turbo piston, its naturally aspirated and therefore will have decreased performance with lower air density.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3623
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby deejay » 04 Oct 2017 10:50

Iraq/ Syria are mostly sea level. Most drones there are into grenade dropping and not missile firing though Iraqis have used some for those. The moment you get higher and put contestants in the airspace these drones are not very effective. Also, remember, UCAV drone attack is a threat for the enemy but does not take away its ability to fight.

Their approach is better for the objectives they have and not necessarily for the objectives we have. IMO, in a contested airspace , a high endurance high altitude UCAV floating for hours and loaded with a single BVR will be more effective for our needs than what these Chinese are serving.

I am aware that Rustom programme is going slow and it is frustrating. It may take time but we always try to make/get the best. When we get there (and we will) Chinese clone will be the JF 17 equivalent vs our Tejas equivalent. Till then we have those Searchers and Herons.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3623
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby deejay » 04 Oct 2017 11:19

pravula wrote:...

IIRC, HPT32 is not a turbo piston, its naturally aspirated and therefore will have decreased performance with lower air density.


True. My point was that PE see a drop in performance very quickly. A turbocharged PE also drops in performance very quickly and impacts are felt in sluggish climb, maneuvers and load carrying capacity.

Infact, with altitudes of Leh, Thoise and higher as that in Tibet even Jet Engine aircraft see sever limitations in load carrying capacity for Take Off and Climb though they are absolutely fine cruising at much higher altitudes.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
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 » 04 Oct 2017 11:45

shiv wrote:What altitude?

A series of army articles point out that even turbocharged internal combustion engines lose power at Tibet altitudes.


Upto 25000 ft? That is why you turbocharge. The turbocharger will boost the manifold pressure to sea level (in an ideal case)... WWII piston engine fighters had superchargers for this purpose (think Spitfire and Me 109 and FW190 etc.. Rolls Royce Merlin , DB and BMW engines..) . Turbo will be more efficient as it uses waste exhaust energy rather than using shaft horse power.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
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 » 04 Oct 2017 11:49

pravula wrote:
Turbo is just an air compressor driven off exhaust gasses and can even serialize them (twin turbos are common in BMW and Audis). Depending on the turbo and manifold design, its normal for turbo engines to maintain sea level performance at high altitude (IIRC they are called turbo-normalized engines).

Yup. Or even serial supercharger - turbo combo like the 1.2L petrol engine in the VW Polo and VW Vento GT TSi models sold in India (along with the DSG gear box). A sweet engine with an unreliable Kakoose of a gear box. They should sell that car with a manual gear box and reduce the price.. I would buy one if they do so.
Last edited by vina on 04 Oct 2017 15:25, edited 1 time in total.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Philip » 04 Oct 2017 13:01

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.p ... erges.html

Pictures have emerged in China of a new submarine-launched variant of the YJ-18 supersonic anti-ship missile. The pictures show two slides from a presentation given by a retired People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN or Chinese Navy) Rear Admiral at a Univertisty in August.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 04 Oct 2017 14:33

If army and air force users say that turbocharged engines show loss of power at high altitude then anything anyone else says including manufacturers is kakoose. I doubt if Chinese engines turbocharged piston engines will behave any better

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 04 Oct 2017 15:06

The speed of prototypes hitting the market and their variety are driven by demand. As I said before the two determining thresholds crossed were the WS-9 turboprop and the demand market from the Middle East.

Without the Arab market, all these different offerings would have little relevance and most likely would never have appeared at all. But the market is there and they are selling into this market by the hundreds. The Saudi Arabian purchase of the CH-4 alone is 400.

The speed with which the chinis were able to hit this market is they have readily available engines. (And it seems — from common mijjiles seen hanging on all UCAV models — a readily available suite of drone-sized weapons from the industry supplying the PLA.) As I said before, they did the needful in their foundational steps. The Rustom I had no domestic piston and needed to import a Lycoming. The Rustom II has no domestic turboprop so we are importing Saturns.

The earlier, smaller CH-X series might be powered by pistons. I’ll need to research that. But I’m certain that the later series (CH-4, CH-5) sold to or targeting the Middle East are powered by a turboprop with greater efficiency and performance, especially at higher altitudes, over a piston — turbocharged or not. The piston though will be far cheaper.

Even with a turboprop the horsepower generated by the WJ-9 family will be far less than a PW. But the US is the US and they are not selling an Arab a Predator.

The CH-4 used by the Iraqis seem to be using mostly mijjiles. There are videos of Iraqi CH-4 missile attacks all over youtube. The EastPendulum report on the Wing Loong II said a total of 1000 missiles were fired with 90% hit rate. The Iraqis and Saudis are not buying grenade droppers but fasimiles of Unkil’s Predator-Hellfire combo.

In business parlance, a positive feedback loop has already begun: sales to customer, customer uses product with degree of success thereby providing data and money to manufacturer to make product better, leading to more customers and more data and more money to make more and better products to get even more customers, etc.

The key is having products to sell into the market. Waiting till you have an engine that works in Tibet for the sea-level Middle East market is nonsensical. The chinis are doing the needful.

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 110
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby pravula » 04 Oct 2017 22:10

shiv wrote:If army and air force users say that turbocharged engines show loss of power at high altitude then anything anyone else says including manufacturers is kakoose. I doubt if Chinese engines turbocharged piston engines will behave any better


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.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 05 Oct 2017 06:57

pravula wrote:
shiv wrote:If army and air force users say that turbocharged engines show loss of power at high altitude then anything anyone else says including manufacturers is kakoose. I doubt if Chinese engines turbocharged piston engines will behave any better


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.

edited. OK.

Neither the T-72 engine nor the HPT engine are turbocharged and hence loss of power

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 06 Oct 2017 00:00

The lizard might finally have broken through its turbofan straitjacket and it was done with a major assist by a firm in their private sector:

https://www.popsci.com/china-stealth-fighter-new-engine

the WS-10X is believed to provide about 14-15 tons of thrust. This may be enough power to allow the J-20 to engage in low supersonic supercruise at Mach 1-1.2 speeds. The Eurofighter Typhoon has a similar low supercruise capability, which means it can hit supersonic speeds without using fuel-thirsty afterburners.

The gains in engine connect to broader news in materials. The Chengdu Aerospace Superalloy Technology Company, a privately held corporation, made a major breakthrough in superalloy research. CASTC, according to the Global Times and People's Daily, is producing world class single crystal turbine blades from rhenium-nickel superalloys; adding rhenium to nickel increases the superalloy's melting point, allowing for a hotter and more efficient engine. High rhenium content superalloys are used in light weight, high thrust engines like the F-22 Raptor's F109 turbofan. Previously, the development of Chinese engines like the WS-10 were delayed as they suffered from quality control issues regarding single crystal turbine blades. China's mastery of the rhenium superalloy (and by the private sector, no less) won't just help China build current fighter engines, but also quickly research more capable, higher tech models.


The 2021 prototype, supposedly the first with a high-thrust WS-10X variant instead of one from the Russian AL-31 family.
Image

Liu
BRFite
Posts: 824
Joined: 12 Feb 2009 10:23

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Liu » 06 Oct 2017 04:59

well, J20 is advancing faster than T50.

money talks.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 06 Oct 2017 06:58

Russians have no experience in making fighter aircraft, unlike the Chinese. Chinese designs like J-11 have been copied by Russia and sold to India. But what I find most fascinating is the economy of action of the Chinese despite having more money. The Russians are struggling - building how many? 6? 7 prototypes of PAKFA but the Chinese slambamthankeema'am - just 3 J-20 prototypes and its in service. Impressed.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3314
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby hnair » 06 Oct 2017 09:10

Liu wrote:well, J20 is advancing faster than T50.

money talks.


China, adi! Stop making "chatterboxes" with your money


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.


IIRC, there are variable geometry vanes for turbo charger's turbine part based on the exhaust velocity difference due to engine idling vs full throttle states, so the turbo-lag effect is dealt with. But how do they deal with the reduced flow caused by ambient low pressure at the compressor inlet that shiv seems to be pointing out via field reports? Is there some kind of air vessel to stabilize the pressure? Curious

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3623
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby deejay » 06 Oct 2017 09:46

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.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3623
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby deejay » 06 Oct 2017 09:47

chola wrote:Image


Why is the engine off?

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4077
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Murugan » 06 Oct 2017 09:48

Flying at '0' speed

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3314
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby hnair » 06 Oct 2017 09:56

old Bajaj Chetaks needed to be tilted to one side to start

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
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 10:04

hnair wrote:IIRC, there are variable geometry vanes for turbo charger's turbine part based on the exhaust velocity difference due to engine idling vs full throttle states, so the turbo-lag effect is dealt with. But how do they deal with the reduced flow caused by ambient low pressure at the compressor inlet that shiv seems to be pointing out via field reports? Is there some kind of air vessel to stabilize the pressure? Curious


Nairgolis. There are basically two kinds of turbo, the fixed geometry (like the Swift & Dzire, the 75bhp rated 1.3L engine) and the variable geometry (the Ciaz, Brezza, kind with 90bhp rated same 1.3L engine). Fixed geometry have a narrower operating range and variable geometry have wider operating range. Turbo needs to spool up quickly at low engine speed, so they typically are optimised to spin up quickly and reach operating condition at low rpm (in autos around 1500 to 1800 rpm), trouble is for fixed geometry ones, it overboosts at higher rpms and here there is a "wastegate" that opens and lets out some of the compressed air out. The variable geometry ones dont do it typically. The turbo lag is due to how low in the rpm range the turbo starts boosting. At low engine speeds the mass flow rate through the engine is too low to have the turbo spool up (hence some engines use supercharger.) .

Fundamentally the way turbo and super charging works is that they increase the mass flow rate through the engine . Power output ~ Mass flow rate. (the mass flow loss is one of the reasons why fixed geos get lesser peak power for the same engine in Dzire vs Ciaz) .The key is the designed manifold inlet pressure. The turbos are calibrated to keep the inlet pressure at a designed constant, so that is how they retain the power levels irrespective of altitude.

How so ? Well, unlike naturally aspirated engines, where the vacuum in the engine cylinder sucks in the air, and hence higher altitude, lower pressure and lower mass flow , the turbo engines are force fed a constant inlet pressure of air. Of course, the "boost" will vary for a given designed inlet manifold pressure between sea level and altitude. The waste gate will be open at low altitude at high rpm, it will be closed at high altitude.
Last edited by vina on 06 Oct 2017 10:13, edited 1 time in total.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
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 10:10

deejay wrote: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.

1. A propellor creates highest thrust at zero speed. As speed increases , thrust drops. Propellor thrust is also dependant on the density. So a propellor at sea level generates far higher thrust than t 25000 feet (for the same rpm and pitch setting.. let us assume both at max for take off thrust)
2. So a take off run at sea level will be far shorter than at 25000 ft.
2. The limiting factor here is the power absorbed by the propellor and not what the engine is capable of delivering. The prop will be absorbing less than the engine can theoretically deliver.

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

Jet engines too have the same characteristic. Max thrust at sea level at zero speed and thrust drop with altitude and increase in speed.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3623
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby deejay » 06 Oct 2017 10:14

^^^you missed the point. :)


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bijeet, brar_w and 25 guests