China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

[shiv]

When you need to shoot down an AWACS at 400 km which one do you shoot down in the image below

[Indranil]

I don't know exactly Hakeem. But, 1) Every airplane in this picture can be uniquely identified by the generator/tracker of this map and 2)The Russians have toyed with this idea for 3 decades now. Around 2004, we joined hands with them on one such effort. It was not completed due to lack of commitment, not technology.

[disha]

^^ When you condense several 1000s of kms into few pixels where one pixel represents several hundred kms., of course the entire map looks dense and confusing.

Rhetorically., how many jumbo sized planes are flying from kashgar to delhi daily? zero.

[shiv]

In fact the number of planes flying will be reduced in wartime - but the point is the only way to protect an AWACS is to have decoys flying at the same time each of which appears like an AWACS.

Also in war - where people are dirty enough to do this - one response to a long range missile would be to cause an old nearly written off civilian airliner to crash and claim that the Chinese shot it down with a misfired 400 km missile - and then proceed to take out their civilian aircraft and other such targets in revenge. Both the US and the USSR have shot down civilian airliners "mistakenly"

[brar_w]

There are ways to mitigate the risk of long range targeting on high value assets such as AEW, Tankers and other strategic transporters. Though the CONOPS plays a big role but you are likely to need both kinetic and non kinetic ways to defeat these threats once they become large enough. This is what many have opined the J-20 for example tries to reverse vis-a-vis the US AWACS and tanker fleet by trying to sneak in and launch long range interceptors (though not this one) at them.

The best way to target at such long range is still using an anti-radiation seeker which then becomes vulnerable to jamming/confusion and deception. Even if you use a medium diameter interceptor, and air launch it you will still have a fairly large kill box if you launch an active seeker from 200 nautical miles out so you need some sort of continuous tracking and you may also possibly need terminal guidance. Hence many have explored an ARM role or this targeting AWACS.

A good way to mitigate this threat is to spread the work your current high value assets do to more and more platforms and to make all more survivable. This could be done in a number of ways and the trade space here involves reducing the physical RCS, providing higher EW jamming onboard, distributed C2 and SA buildup, and kinetic interceptors to fend off the leakers. Deception and cyber definitly plays a role here...If you can have 6 aircraft in the air simulating an AWACS or P-8 you confuse the kill chain significantly...And you do not need an AWACS sized aircraft to confuse electronically.

But this threat, of long range targeting on high end assets is not new. It has just taken quite a long time to show up but it was and has been in the works for many years. This will be a major problem that designers of the next generation of C2 and AEW platforms would have to find a solution for.

[Neshant]

US would go into any war with China with 'unparalleled violence', warn experts

The Independent
Jon Sharman

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/us-war-china- ... 59241.html

[manjgu]

when the ballon goes up does anyone expect civilian aircrafts flying in such dense numbers in combat/war zone as shown in the pic? all aircrafts will be deemed hostile..

[shiv]

when the ballon goes up does anyone expect civilian aircrafts flying in such dense numbers in combat/war zone as shown in the pic? all aircrafts will be deemed hostile..

Not at all. But at 400 km - if 4-6 aircraft are visible on radar no one will know which one is an AWACS . That would allow the use of decoys. It would also allow "mistakes" to occur so that rules of war could be broken to cause terror. Of course these things could lead to nuclear war - but any war between any two powers with nuclear weapons could mean nuclear war - so there is a limit to the amount of "conventional only" discussion that can take place.

[Neshant]

Generally civilian aircraft are advised to keep out of a potential war zone.
That clears out a bunch of civilian air liners and cargo traffic.
For the ones that continue to operate, their insurance premium goes way up.

Any aircraft flying within range is at risk of being shot down as the downing of the airliner over Ukraine showed.
Ditto for ships.

That's why it costs more for a country to fight a larger more powerful adversary. The insurance costs and investment & trade loss is a killer.. even before any material loss.

[shiv]

The image shows two 400 km circles indicating theoretical regions that a fighter over Chinese airspace could cover. There will be a whole lot of Indian air activity over these areas - mainly military all of which will be used to hide an AWACS.That aside - once the threat is know to exit - every Chinese air base in the region will receive a sound beating ensuring that nothing takes off. I will leave it to anyone interested to see just how many bases are in the area - I have been looking at that

[shiv]

Generally civilian aircraft are advised to keep out of a potential war zone.
That clears out a bunch of civilian air liners and cargo traffic.
For the ones that continue to operate, their insurance premium goes way up.

Any aircraft flying within range is at risk of being shot down as the downing of the airliner over Ukraine showed.
Ditto for ships.

That's why it costs more for a country to fight a larger more powerful adversary. The insurance costs and investment & trade loss is a killer.. even before any material loss.

Plenty of military aircraft will be flying in the region - every one of which can be used as a decoy. That aside - the airspace over Tibet will be heavily contested with a view to sanitizing it and keeping it clear. Those Tibet air bases are all going to be a grave risk "if the balloon goes up"

The purpose of my posting the "busy airspace image" is to point out that at 400 km no one can be sure that a particular aircraft is an AWACS or a transport or a civilian jet that has wandered a wee bit off course. All air activity is NOT going to come to an end over India in wartime. It will be restricted and even civil airliners may be used for logistics.

[Sid]

Russian S-400 uses 40N6 which reportidly has 400KM range, which certainly means it's possible.

Also during wartime certain air corridors will be sealed for civilian use, and will be used only by military. An AWAC should be detectable due to its emissions as well. Civilian aircraft also fly with their transponders switched on, hence will be easy to identify among probable threats.

Now even if all above info is garbage, when an AWAC detects a missile launched in its general direction it will be forced to exit its area of operation.

[Austin]

If I am not wrong Civilian Aircraft uses a narrow corridor to fly which are fixed and known , If there is any hostility or rise on tension the country can also impose a Civil Aircraft flying restriction or outright ban something like NOTAM.

That itself would be a big pain for aviation business for aircraft flying over China or in vicinity of its border. An AWACS would still emit RF waves and could be identified by ELINT platform or perhaps even the RWR

The only way a Civil Aircraft could get shot down is when host country would not put an outright ban for aircraft flying over the affected area , Happened in Ukraine where aircraft were told to fly above certain altitude but was restricted flying below it which was effectively a war zone . While In Syrian , Civil Aircraft flying all over its airspace was just told to stop doing so ....I think its the same with Afghanistan airspace.

IIRC during 9/11 incident there was 4000 civil aircraft flying over its airspace and all of them were told to land immediately which was done in an hours time.

[Sid]

Chinese Naval Artillery

[Austin]

Are these stabalised platform where they fire from does not look like , If the ship is moving then they will have issues

[shiv]

Chinese Naval Artillery

Typical Chinese propaganda image getting all to fire at the exact same moment. Good photo trick.

Will analyse later for likely photoshopping...those shells emerging at same moment is suspicious

[hnair]

We should not under estimate cheen! Only they can make deflagration of an artillery charge so perfect, as to get three identical fireballs, down to the last flaming finger

[Ashokk]

Chinese Naval Artillery

Typical Chinese propaganda image getting all to fire at the exact same moment. Good photo trick.

Will analyse later for likely photoshopping...those shells emerging at same moment is suspicious

The flame & the smoke from the guns look exactly the same.

[brar_w]

Russian S-400 uses 40N6 which reportidly has 400KM range, which certainly means it's possible.

Also during wartime certain air corridors will be sealed for civilian use, and will be used only by military. An AWAC should be detectable due to its emissions as well. Civilian aircraft also fly with their transponders switched on, hence will be easy to identify among probable threats.

Now even if all above info is garbage, when an AWAC detects a missile launched in its general direction it will be forced to exit its area of operation.

For those ranges you are essentially looking at high flying targets with poor SA and no defense (electronic or otherwise). The radar horizon for that range is likely to be in excess of 30,000 feet, and you are not going to be putting up AWACS within those kinematic ranges until you have dealt with the long range interceptor threat at least at those distances. China has pure ARH variants of the their SAM as did the Soviets (even the US) back in the day.

On the Civil aviation side, if there is a conflict and it involves one of the large militaries, you won't have airliners flying around within 300-400 km of the hot zone. most nations and airlines will pull these out. Given the limited nature of the threat as it exists now, one is best suited by making targeting more complicated. EW and EA can confuse the targeting and feed false targets. Long term you probably need to eliminate single points of failures and reduce the reliance on high value assets by distributing both command and control/battle management and situational awareness, and the ones (aircraft) you have need to have organic protection.

[Singha]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/tech ... -well&_r=0

[ranjan.rao]

I can understand 400Km range from ground, as the size and weight of missile, and tracking radar size restrictions dont apply.

Brar warrior, I am not saying it is impossible, but based upon my little wiki/google search there are only three missiles in this range meteor, R37, and K-100.
The question a noob like me should research is
1. Does it vary by mode: Chase mode v/s head on mode
2. Kill probability: Again should vary by: ECM/ECCM survivability, maneouvrability,
3. Guidance/Seeker
would be thankful for any additional pointers in this search

[brar_w]

Brar warrior, I am not saying it is impossible, but based upon my little wiki/google search there are only three missiles in this range meteor, R37, and K-100.

The Meteor is an AMRAAM sized missile with VFDR. It's still AMRAAM diameter. The best analogy I've heard is that it get's ESSM range from an AMRAAM footprint though the former has a 30% larger seeker diameter. It won't get you 400km range. Plus it is designed for a maneuvering target..The new Chinese interceptor seems not to be given the control surfaces.

Does it vary by mode: Chase mode v/s head on mode
2. Kill probability: Again should vary by: ECM/ECCM survivability, maneouvrability,
3. Guidance/Seeker

Yes. Physics is physics, whether you are launching from the air or the ground. Of course air launched missiles don't need to be as large (for a given range) because they are launched from altitude and at a speed. They also fly ballistic profiles so you need to design an interceptor to climb very high and then extend range that way. It's much easier doing that when you are aiming for an anti AEW or tanker interceptor than designing interceptors that aim to neutralize the total air threat (including fighters).

The challenge is not designing an interceptor that go that far. That bit is easy and there are multiple solutions one can use (SRM, VFDR etc) . The problem is the kill chain and the operational construct. Against a more challenging target type (Cruise and ballistic Missiles) The ALHTK solution, which was a fairly easy modification, fell apart because of that i.e. missile conversion and platform integration was easy, but they couldn't justify the operational construct or put together a kill chain. Now, if you were going to change the mission set to an anti Chinese tanker or AEW aircraft it becomes different.

On the seeker, yes it's a challenge but more so towards lower RCS targets. Against an AWACS like target you wan't to navigate the missile to a spot where it can home in on the emissions. Essentially an anti-radiation missile but for air targets. Much like any seeker, jamming will disrupt it, and degrade performance and this applies to both the missile and the launch aircraft.

[brar_w]

HAS CHINA BEEN PRACTICING PREEMPTIVE MISSILE STRIKES AGAINST U.S. BASES?

[Sid]

There is a variant of HQ-9, called FT2000 which is allegedly their version ground launched anti-radiation mille against such high value assets.

My guess is that it's the same missile which is shown hanging from that J-11.

[NRao]

When you need to shoot down an AWACS at 400 km which one do you shoot down in the image below

Planes in the air are identified by a "Squawk code", one that is assigned to each plane as it takes of and is entered manually into the transponder of that plane. It is valid for that particular segment of the flight.

In the image you provided hover over any plane and it should provide you with the squawk code of that plane.

Also, when countries complain (as at times Scandinavian nations do about Russian military planes) that they cannot identify a plane, it is because the offending plane turns its transponder off. As a result when pinged the transmitter gets nothing back.



BTW, in a war zone, you are not going to find that many planes anyways. And, even if you do (I once visited the cockpit of a BA flight to Bombay, flying over Israel while the Israeli-Arab war was in full rage) the commercial flights are too far above the fray. Granted refueling will take place at higher altitudes.

[shiv]

When you need to shoot down an AWACS at 400 km which one do you shoot down in the image below

Planes in the air are identified by a "Squawk code", one that is assigned to each plane as it takes of and is entered manually into the transponder of that plane. It is valid for that particular segment of the flight.

I think I messed that one up. I did not mean identifiable aircraft. I meant that if you have a dozen aircraft seen in enemy territory on your radar in a 400 km radius which one is the AWACS. I am asking about identification I am not saying that civil airliners will be flying in swarms. That said what's to stop an AWACS from using a squawking jet as cover - with the latter being deliberately directed into dangerous airspace?

[brar_w]

While you could confuse and wrongly classify a tanker for a commercial airliner, an active AEW aircraft will be harder to confuse especially if you are lobbing a lofted, long range ARM at it. Generally speaking however, you are correct targeting at range is hard and confusing targeting is easier if you're adversary is planning to target at extremely long ranges. The kill chain there is large, complicated and gives room for an opponent to maneuver in the EMS to disrupt it.

[shiv]

While you could confuse and wrongly classify a tanker for a commercial airliner, an active AEW aircraft will be harder to confuse especially if you are lobbing a lofted, long range ARM at it. Generally speaking however, you are correct targeting at range is hard and confusing targeting is easier if you're adversary is planning to target at extremely long ranges. The kill chain there is large, complicated and gives room for an opponent to maneuver in the EMS to disrupt it.

Thank you. You have summarized what I wanted to say. Claiming to have a 400 km AAM and flaunting it is a boast meant to scare. It is a problem but not an insurmountable obstacle. I am particularly wary of boasts from China - they say and do a lot of things to scare the crap out of adversaries and Indians reside in the cutting edge of that group as we see ourselves as third/fourth rate or less and invariably behind the USA(SAW) and China (PBUH)

[Austin]

Hypersonics disrupt global strategic stability

http://www.janes360.com/images/assets/5 ... bility.pdf



Chinese HGVs

By incorporating nuclear weapons into a broad security framework that includes conventional and cyber capabilities, China shares similar concepts of strategic stability with Russia. Although Beijing has traditionally placed an emphasis on minimum deterrence, developments such as the nuclear capable DH 10/CJ 10 land attack cruise missile suggest a greater regional prominence for its nuclear weapons.

China has also made significant headway in its HGV programme. In April 2016 it conducted its seventh HGV test with the DF
ZF (WU 14) vehicle. Subsequent reporting suggests this was probably carried on a DF 21 CSS 5 medium range ballistic missile with a range of more than 2,000 km, although it may eventually be developed for longer range missiles such as the DF 31
with ranges of more than 8,000 km.

[shiv]

China Holds Massive Military Rallies in Xinjiang After Spate of Violence
https://sputniknews.com/asia/2017022010 ... -xinjiang/

China has again sent hundreds of troops to its far-west Xinjiang region, the restive heartland of its Uygur minority, this time for oath-taking rallies and a general show of force against terrorism.

In a mass anti-terror rally in Xinjiang's capital, Urumqi, hundreds of armed Chinese troops and police accompanied by armored vehicles marched through the streets. Ranked in front of a government building, they shouted pledges to fight terrorism.

Xinjiang deputy party secretary Zhu Hailun called the rally a sign of "real action" to ramp up the fight against terror, and said extremists would be "smashed and destroyed," the South China Morning Post reports.

"With guns by our bodies, knives unsheathed, fists out and hands extended, we must use thunderous power to strike hard against terrorist activities," Zhu said.

Before the rally in the capital, there had been displays in Kashgar and Hotan, in the south of the region. In Hotan, thousands of armed police and paramilitary officers marched to "show strength and intimidate," according to Reuters. The state-run Global Times called it an "oath-taking" rally, as soldiers pledged to fight terrorism and tighten security.

Hundreds have been killed in clashes between between the Muslim Uygur people of Xinjiang, who consider themselves native to the region, and the Han Chinese majority in the past few years. Language barriers (Uygurs speak a Turkic language) and curbs on religious and cultural activities important to the Muslim minority only aggravate tensions.

Five were killed in December when attackers rammed a vehicle with an explosive into a government building, and police killed what authorities call three armed terror suspects who had detonated an explosive last month.

Earlier this week, five were killed in a knife attack in Hotan prefecture, Pishan County, with police shooting the three attackers, the China Daily reported. Authorities are calling the incident a terror attack, though they have not identified the perpetrators or victims.

Pishan County has been referred to as a "hotbed of terrorism" since four people from the county took part in a suicide bombing in Urumqi in May 2014 that killed 39, according to the South China Morning Post.


China denies that its Uygur population faces discrimination and blames Islamist separatists for the violence. However, over the last two years, local governments have made regional officials promise not to fast for Ramadan and have forced Uygur village shops to sell alcohol and cigarettes despite religious objections. In November, the government ordered all residents of Xinjiang to turn in their passports for "inspection," on pain of being forbidden to travel in the future.

On Friday, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for efforts to improve "national security" across the country at a Beijing national security seminar.

[Pratyush]

Shiv regarding identifying an AWACS. The simplest way is to locate the most powerful airborne radar and track it.

[shiv]

Shiv regarding identifying an AWACS. The simplest way is to locate the most powerful airborne radar and track it.

As long as it is transmitting. To locate it - it must transmit, or else someone else must emit and be "seen" by the AWACS

[Pratyush]

If it stops emitting it's just another passive sensor. Will not makes much difference as it will no longer be fulfilling it's most important function. That is command and control.

[shiv]

If it stops emitting it's just another passive sensor. Will not makes much difference as it will no longer be fulfilling it's most important function. That is command and control.

No - actually it depends on the type of emission. Powerful radar signals that probe deep into hostile airspace will be seen. But passive signals picked up from the air - not limited by mountains and the earth's curvature can be picked up, analysed and transmitted in short encrypted frequency agile bursts to a nearby ground or aircraft receiver who can further transmit to a satellite of other platforms.

It is not necessary for the AWACS to keep emitting. Other emitters' signals can be picked up and analysed by the AWACS in a manner that the emitters themselves cannot do.

[Pratyush]

Shiv the elint aircraft do what you are suggesting of the AWACS. The most important function of AWACS is to act as the eyes in sky for the own air force. By observing the battle fiend and shaping it by coordinating the offensive or defensive operations. Up until now , technology has not matured to an extent that the passive elint monitoring can be integrated with a platform with active sensor capabilities. Once tech matures to such an extent that active and passive sensors co exist on the same plane. Then things can be different.

But at this time the AWACS in order to do it's job. Must be an active sensor platform.

Which makes it the biggest em emitter on the aerial battle field.

An attacker can try to take it down. But unless the defender is so badly damaged that it cannot put up defensive aircrafts or lacks ground based Sam support that AWACS cannot call upon in its area of operations. AWACS cannot be brought down. At best it can be pushed a 100 or so KMs for 15 to 30 minutes at a time.

[brar_w]

Shiv the elint aircraft do what you are suggesting of the AWACS. The most important function of AWACS is to act as the eyes in sky for the own air force. By observing the battle fiend and shaping it by coordinating the offensive or defensive operations. Up until now , technology has not matured to an extent that the passive elint monitoring can be integrated with a platform with active sensor capabilities. Once tech matures to such an extent that active and passive sensors co exist on the same plane. Then things can be different.

AEW and AWACS do install ESM/ELINT apertures on their AEW aircraft. The Boeing E-7 uses a set of more than 4 antennas installed under the nose and tail. Australia's suite is based on the Elta EL/M-8300. The US Navy uses an upgraded AN/ALQ-217 from its E-2C's, on the new E-2D. Even the NATO E-3 AWACS series were upgraded with the AN/AYR‐1 ESM suite in the early to mid 1990's and the latest USAF E-3 upgrade may have seen yet another upgrade in this department. On the E-2 side, the tactics are a lot of the times to just be listening for emissions using it and other assets. This is how the US Navy employs the E-2 in a defensive role for many missions.

See - https://s32.postimg.org/5hmjpg605/E_7.jpg

Edit - Here is a detail account of some of these ESM/ELINT apertures.

Up until now , technology has not matured to an extent that the passive elint monitoring can be integrated with a platform with active sensor capabilities.

Although I haven't looked into how these ESM/ELINT systems are used on these AWACS/AEW aircraft but highly sensitive passive sensors co-exist with very high power emitters even now. Not only that they can and do perform concurrent missions even when the active emitter is a multi-band one . One such system is the AN/ALQ-218 RWR/ESM/ELINT installed on the EA-18G's.

[brar_w]

China's Type 001A CV makes progress at Dalian - 38.935925 N 121.613170 E - Sean O'Connor, Indianapolis Janes

Airbus Defence and Space imagery captured on 13 January shows progress being made with China's Type 001A aircraft carrier (CV) at the Dalian shipyard in northeastern China, where the carrier hull is progressing towards being launched.

Jane's previously examined the status of the shipbuilding programmes at Dalian in August 2016. Since then the superstructure of the Type 001A CV has been installed, along with the aircraft elevators, and the remaining decking has been put in place. Minor work remains visible on deck, with a portion of decking seen temporarily removed in November 2016.

On 20 February state broadcaster China Central Television (CCTV) reported that some of the support equipment, possibly including support bracers or scaffolding around the upper surfaces, had been removed and that red paint had been applied to the hull. Red anti-fouling paint is used beneath the waterline to prevent the growth of marine organisms on the hull, which can affect performance.

The lack of major external components remaining to be installed on the Type 001A CV hull, and the presence of the red anti-fouling paint on the lower hull, indicates that it is nearing launch. The only major exterior work remaining involves surfacing and painting the flight deck. It may be possible to perform this task following launch, should the dry dock be required for another shipbuilding programme. A key indicator that the Type 001A is preparing for launch will be removal of extant support bracers currently in place within the dry dock, as well as any remaining equipment or materials residing on the dry dock floor.

Meanwhile, the 13 January satellite imagery also shows that the second Dalian-produced Type 052D guided-missile destroyer (DDG) is receiving weapons and sensors. Between August 2016 and October 2016 Type 052D DDG Hull 11, the second of at least three Dalian-produced examples, returned to dry dock. When launched on 3 August 2016 the hull lacked weapon and sensor fittings, yet by January 2017 most weapon and sensor fittings had been installed.

The first Dalian-produced Type 052D DDG hull remains pierside as it undertakes sea trials and final fitting out, while the third hull is still under construction.

https://janes.ihs.com/ExternalItems/Jan ... 696505.jpg

[kit]

Would it be so difficult to make a decoy that can electronically simulate an AWACS ???

[Singha]

Rcs and iff yes emitted power no.

[brar_w]

Would it be so difficult to make a decoy that can electronically simulate an AWACS ???

Depends what the end goal is. Do you wan't to present a decoy that mimics AWACS like emission patterns to a sensitive receiver, or do you want deployable decoys that can confuse missile seekers.

RCS can be replicated. Same with flight profiles, but it won't be easy to confuse a competent receiver mated to a dedicated ELINT aircraft or something fitted for Electronic Warfare.