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.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9821
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 21 Aug 2018 10:43

Noticed 1 some more key differences between type 056/056A, apart from long range, special hulls with special raft mounted engines, Kamorta carries heavyweight torpedos vs type 056A carries lightweight Torpedos(324mm width) which can engage subs only with 3Km range. and does not have a helicopter hanger

https://thediplomat.com/2018/06/chinas-navy-commissions-41st-type-056056a-stealth-warship/

As I reported elsewhere, Type 056/056A corvettes are multipurpose platforms capable of surface warfare in the littoral region: “Next to four YJ-83 anti-ship missiles (two launchers with two missiles each) and a 76-millimeter main gun, the ASW variant is also equipped with two 324-millimeter triple torpedo launchers (…). The ship’s flight deck also allows operation of a Harbin Z-9 military helicopter, specifically equipped for ASW missions.”

However, the ship does not have a helicopter hangar to permanently carry a Z-9 fitted with an airborne dipping sonar for ASW missions. Given the ships’ deployment close to shore, this could possibly be addressed by close coordination between the surface combatants and PLANs growing fleet of land-based ASW aircraft like the Gaoxin-6.


SO basically it is wrong to compare Kamorta and type 056A, type 56/56A is our OPV class fitted with 4 Anti ship missiles and 2 light torpedos.

See the propulsion
- for our Saryu class OPV - 2 × Pielstick PA 6B STC diesel engines, 21,725 PS (15,979 kW)
- for type 056/056A - 2 SEMT Pielstick PA6-STC diesel motors
- for kamorta - 20,384 hp (15,200 kW)CODAD: 4 × Pielstick 12PA 6 STC6 Diesel engines

So I think we are unnecessarily beating ourselves comparing cost of Kamorta and type 56. With only a small bow mounted sonar and 2 lightweight torpedos without a helicopter hanger which even our OPV's have, can be best used as a stop gap measure and cannot be real ASW assets for the PLAN.

Reading more on the Z-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin_Z-9

The naval version introduced in the 1990s is known as the Z-9C. As well as SAR and ASW duties, the Z-9C can be fitted with an X-band KLC-1 surface search radar to detect surface targets beyond the range of shipborne radar systems.[5]


Note no dipping Sonar
The Chinese seem to be just throwing numbers, I am sure without the Sensors and equipment our Hull manufacturing is not much more expensive than the Chinese.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 21 Aug 2018 10:56

not just dipping sonar, but a proper ASW copter like sea king, merlin or SH60 have onboard stations and sonobuoys also.

Image

Image
Image

a rebadged dauphin heli is not capable of proper ASW the way a powerful Merlin or SH60 can

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1071
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby rkhanna » 21 Aug 2018 16:19

[possibly not for this thread but didnt know where else to post]

Fantastic coup if true. They are Really pushing the envelop to develop their "Superpower Narrative" .


"Strange how it keeps happening, how the greatest works of Chinese art keep getting brazenly stolen from museums around the world. Is it a conspiracy? Vengeance for treasures plundered years ago? We sent Alex W. Palmer to investigate the trail of theft and the stunning rumor: Is the Chinese government behind one of the boldest art-crime waves in history?
https://www.gq.com/story/the-great-chin ... _cp_fb_tny

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 21 Aug 2018 18:08

Good work

I dont even hear a mouse squeak from delhi about the vast collection of looted indian treasures in london

We ahould directly ask her majesty how she feels wearing a crown having a stolen diamond , desi msm should heckle her majesty as the bandit rani

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 22 Aug 2018 13:17

Aditya_V wrote:Noticed 1 some more key differences between type 056/056A, apart from long range, special hulls with special raft mounted engines, Kamorta carries heavyweight torpedos vs type 056A carries lightweight Torpedos(324mm width) which can engage subs only with 3Km range. and does not have a helicopter hanger

https://thediplomat.com/2018/06/chinas-navy-commissions-41st-type-056056a-stealth-warship/

As I reported elsewhere, Type 056/056A corvettes are multipurpose platforms capable of surface warfare in the littoral region: “Next to four YJ-83 anti-ship missiles (two launchers with two missiles each) and a 76-millimeter main gun, the ASW variant is also equipped with two 324-millimeter triple torpedo launchers (…). The ship’s flight deck also allows operation of a Harbin Z-9 military helicopter, specifically equipped for ASW missions.”

However, the ship does not have a helicopter hangar to permanently carry a Z-9 fitted with an airborne dipping sonar for ASW missions. Given the ships’ deployment close to shore, this could possibly be addressed by close coordination between the surface combatants and PLANs growing fleet of land-based ASW aircraft like the Gaoxin-6.


SO basically it is wrong to compare Kamorta and type 056A, type 56/56A is our OPV class fitted with 4 Anti ship missiles and 2 light torpedos.

See the propulsion
- for our Saryu class OPV - 2 × Pielstick PA 6B STC diesel engines, 21,725 PS (15,979 kW)
- for type 056/056A - 2 SEMT Pielstick PA6-STC diesel motors
- for kamorta - 20,384 hp (15,200 kW)CODAD: 4 × Pielstick 12PA 6 STC6 Diesel engines

So I think we are unnecessarily beating ourselves comparing cost of Kamorta and type 56. With only a small bow mounted sonar and 2 lightweight torpedos without a helicopter hanger which even our OPV's have, can be best used as a stop gap measure and cannot be real ASW assets for the PLAN.

Reading more on the Z-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin_Z-9

The naval version introduced in the 1990s is known as the Z-9C. As well as SAR and ASW duties, the Z-9C can be fitted with an X-band KLC-1 surface search radar to detect surface targets beyond the range of shipborne radar systems.[5]


Note no dipping Sonar
The Chinese seem to be just throwing numbers, I am sure without the Sensors and equipment our Hull manufacturing is not much more expensive than the Chinese.


Whilst I would wholeheartedly agree that equating the two would be a mistake, I would offer that the two classes follow different paths toward ASW.

The 056A programme is a cheap light frigate(PLAN nomenclature) or corvette that allows the Chinese Navy to flood the all seas bound by the first isalnd chain with hulls and sensors, freeing the larger Type 054A's and Type 052C's/D's for longer range missions. Both variants of the class are credited with a three-week period of endurance at sea, operating in the littorals, under the protective umbrella of land based air assets.

The ASW variant of the Type 056 - which numbers 20+ commissioned hulls and counting - does have a comprehensive sonar and decoy suite. All ASW variants are equipped with the same towed array and variable depth sonar set-up as the Type 052D and flight 2 Type 054A's:

Image

The variable depth sonar and its release mechanism are obvious in this picture, but you can also note the coiled towed array and its release aperture to the the left of the VDS. Both active and passive arrays can be deployed at once, as is demonstrated by a Type 052D in the pic below:

Image

To your point about the use of raft mounted engines and transmission, I think that's a feature in almost all modern ASW naval platforms. All Type 056 and Type 054A variants have their diesel engines mounted on rafts as a noise suppression measure.

WRT torpedoes, both type 056 variants (GP and ASW) are equipped with two triple torpedo launchers. That 6 Yu7, light weight torpedoes, credited with a 10km range, and a speed of 43kts.
Lacking a VLS, the Type 056A cannot use the vertically launched Yu8 ("ASROC") torpedo carrying rocket as the Type 054A does, but the Chinese Navy has developed an air-breathing torpedo carrying missile to be launched from the ST-16M deck launchers of Type 056A's (and Type 054A frigates?).

Image

Image

Image

More on that missile and the original video can be found in this navyrecognition article: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2016/november-2016-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4589-new-long-range-anti-submarine-rocket-asroc-emerges-out-of-china.html

However, ASW heli's are a weak point for all Chinese surface assets at the moment. The Z9C is not as capable or as long-legged as the much larger NH90, or Merlin. It is a 4.5 ton airframe vs 10 tons for the NH90 and SH60 and it does not carry on board sono-buoys. But it does have a dipping sonar:

Image

Building a Kamorta sized ASW platform really would have been a non-starter for the Chinese. It's the size of a frigate, and even with four shipyards spitting them out concurrently, such a vessel would have been prohibitively expensive to build en-masse. At the rate they're building and commissioning them, the Chinese seem satisfied with these vessels as a replacement for their old/obsolete Type 037 (500ton) sub chasers.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9821
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 22 Aug 2018 13:28

I Think the original point being why similair Type 56 and Kamorta is twice as big and costly- India is inefficient. The point is Type 56 and Kamorta are not comparable. For numbers we can possibly consider building ASW subs from our OPV platform. The modified Type 56 is also built for the Chinese coastguard like our Vikram class.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 22 Aug 2018 13:58

Aditya_V wrote:I Think the original point being why similair Type 56 and Kamorta is twice as big and costly- India is inefficient. The point is Type 56 and Kamorta are not comparable. For numbers we can possibly consider building ASW subs from our OPV platform. The modified Type 56 is also built for the Chinese coastguard like our Vikram class.


The inefficiency is in the execution. Building 3 in 12 years to their 50 in 6 years means there is a hell of a lot of room for improvement. Pointing this out is not “beating ourselves up.” It should be a kick in the pants to do better. The US itself uses Cheen as an incentive to improve.

I’ll agree the Type 56 and Kamorta should not be compared as platforms as one is twice the size and cost as the other. But I think the respective philosophies can and should be compared. We have a smaller budget but we are building a small frigate as our main ASW platform while they are using a corvette. Four ships can’t cover much of a territory. They have a bigger budget but they still strive for economy of scale to lower costs.

It is a bad trend IMHO. Think about it, a smaller budget but more expensive vessels versus someone with a larger budget AND smaller cheaper vessels. That is how you get ever lopsided numbers in their favor.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9821
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 22 Aug 2018 14:36

The way we need to go is a few more advanced Kamorta's and probably corvettes based on say Vikram class OPV hull. That way we can specialised long endurance platforms with good ASW which can protect battlegroups while numbers can be done on Vikram class.

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 22 Aug 2018 15:20

Aditya_V wrote:I Think the original point being why similair Type 56 and Kamorta is twice as big and costly- India is inefficient. The point is Type 56 and Kamorta are not comparable. For numbers we can possibly consider building ASW subs from our OPV platform. The modified Type 56 is also built for the Chinese coastguard like our Vikram class.


Duly noted. I was simply pointing out that given its comprehensive ASW sensor and weapons suite, the Type 056A is quite capable of performing the ASW mission.

As you've already alluded to, a similarly outfitted Vikram class would do the same for the IN at much lower acquisition and operational costs than is the case with the much larger and complex Kamorta.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Aug 2018 08:01

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Intern ... ammunition
India-Japan defense forces to exchange fuel and ammunition
Two nations explore ways to cooperate as China expands influence in Indian Ocean

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 23 Aug 2018 08:24

After three decades, the Copyhawk is finally with an operational unit.

Production or LRIP Z-20 at a PLA aviation base reported to be the 71st LH (Air Assault) Brigade.

Image

Image

Copyhawk is a true reverse engineering project. The US cut off supplies and cooperation in 1989 after selling the S-70 to Cheen. They had been working on it every since.

A sharp comparison to the rest of the chini army’s helos. During the 30-odd years they were plugging away at the Copyhawk, Cheen built umpteen Super Frelon and Dauphin variants from their ToT with France.

Lesson is ToT trumps RE by a WIDE margin.

The latest Dauphin variant is the Z-19 that shares the top picture.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Aug 2018 08:34

and what is its use case considering they have a factory to license make the excellent Mi17v ?
it lacks a rear ramp to wheel in equipment also like generators, jeeps, 105mm etc as chinook does that role in us army.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 23 Aug 2018 10:15

Singha wrote:and what is its use case considering they have a factory to license make the excellent Mi17v ?
it lacks a rear ramp to wheel in equipment also like generators, jeeps, 105mm etc as chinook does that role in us army.


I personally can’t think of cases where the ramp wouldn’t be more useful but there must be reasons why the Blackhawk is so popular with the Americans. And the chinis too since I’ve read they’ve been maintaining and using their 23-odd Blackhawks to this day despitevthe embargo.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Aug 2018 10:20

one use case could be the coolness factor of warriors sitting on the floor dangling their legs out as it sweeps in low over treeline to ingress zone.
even the UH1 huey was wide open both sides. people held on to ropes and stuff to avoid falling out as it executed sharp banks.

the mi17v looks like a kindly grandma.

you cannot do this in a mi17v . cheen 1 yindia 0

Image

and the LCH cannot do this. murica 1 yindia 0
Image

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1071
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby rkhanna » 23 Aug 2018 10:34

Well because of the Side Egress for Troops the Blackhawk does make for a better Urban Assault Helo than the Mi-17. However time for ramp based helo's is longer to discharge their cargo and thus more vulnerable to ground fire.

And from what i remmember reading the Blackhawk has some of the best crash survivable capability - ofcourse no idea if the CHinese varient retains the exact Frame properties.

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 23 Aug 2018 12:58

Singha wrote:and what is its use case considering they have a factory to license make the excellent Mi17v ?
it lacks a rear ramp to wheel in equipment also like generators, jeeps, 105mm etc as chinook does that role in us army.


The Mi-171/Mi -17V5/Mi-17V7/ Mi171-E's line may have become the medium-weight helicopter back-bone of the PLA and PLAAF, but initially, ie in the 80's, the PLA had selected the S70-C over the Mi-17 sighting the former's superior high altitude performance.

25 Mi-17-V7's were ordered circa 2002(and 52 more in 2012) to serve in Tibet and Xinjiang due to their more powerful VK-2500, however, the PLA still uses their remaining S-70C's in those regions as well, despite being 30 year old airframes. The PLA really likes the S-70C; it would make sense for them to want a modernized version in the form of the Z-20 to replace their old S-70C fleet and the original Mi17's(all later upgraded to the Mi-171 standard).

They might also satisfy Navy requirements. As noted previously, shipborne ASW helicopters are a key weak-point or the Chinese Navy. The Z9C is too small to carry sono-buoys and process sonar data independent of its launching warship; the ASW Z18 is very capable of doing both, but is too large to be accommodated by PLAN frigates and destroyers and is currently only hosted by the carriers and LPD's.

A similarly outfitted Z20 with folding rotors and tail section would be ideal for outfitting their Type 054A's/Type 052D's/Type 055's and even their legion of corvettes.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1569
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Manish_P » 23 Aug 2018 13:47

Singha wrote:
you cannot do this in a mi17v . cheen 1 yindia 0

Image


Singha sir, one more

If the enemy shoots an RPG it can quickly turn such that the rocket goes in from one side and exits out of the other, hollywood ishstyle 8)

cheen/khan 2 -- yindia/rodina 0

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 23 Aug 2018 13:59

Their carrier is preparing for a second round of sea trials. It has reportedly been fueled and her boilers have been active for since August 15th:

Image

The barracks ship attacked to the carrier, pendant no. 89 left the shipyard recently as well:

Image

Mock-ups of a Z18, Z9 and a J15 have also been loaded via crane onto her flight deck:

Image

Also interesting is that the personnel visible milling about the Z18 mock-up in the photo above are Navy personnel, not dock workers. At sea flight deck training/trials in the offing during her second sea trial?

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1071
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby rkhanna » 23 Aug 2018 14:34

Vostok 2018 : CHina to sent 1 Brigade (3200 troops + 30 Aviation Assets) to Russia for exercises

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/21/asia ... index.html

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1455
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 23 Aug 2018 16:31

AGI wrote:
Mock-ups of a Z18, Z9 and a J15 have also been loaded via crane onto her flight deck:



Why mock-ups during a sea trials?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 23 Aug 2018 17:09

nam wrote:
AGI wrote:
Mock-ups of a Z18, Z9 and a J15 have also been loaded via crane onto her flight deck:



Why mock-ups during a sea trials?


Handling training for new crew, I imagine, without endangering the real thing. For example, the arse of the J-15 needs to hang over the lift when transitioning to the hangar. If the newbies screw up and the plane goes into the drink, it’ll be just the mock up.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 23 Aug 2018 17:11

That trick failed spectacularly in Mogadishu during the “Blackhawk Down” episode.

If the enemy shoots an RPG it can quickly turn such that the rocket goes in from one side and exits out of the other, hollywood ishstyle 8)

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1455
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 23 Aug 2018 18:01

chola wrote:
Handling training for new crew, I imagine, without endangering the real thing. For example, the arse of the J-15 needs to hang over the lift when transitioning to the hangar. If the newbies screw up and the plane goes into the drink, it’ll be just the mock up.


Is this a normal thing? I have never seen other navies using mockups of jets on carriers.

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 23 Aug 2018 19:13

nam wrote:
chola wrote:
Handling training for new crew, I imagine, without endangering the real thing. For example, the arse of the J-15 needs to hang over the lift when transitioning to the hangar. If the newbies screw up and the plane goes into the drink, it’ll be just the mock up.


Is this a normal thing? I have never seen other navies using mockups of jets on carriers.


HMS Queen Elizabeth's future deck crew has been training with fiberglass mock-ups of the F35B since her first sea trials. This is at Naval Airstation Culdrose however, not on the actual carrier.

By filling the models with water, the crew is able to realistically stimulate handing airframes with different fuel and weapons loads on deck. They can also stimulate moving aircraft with the tugs. Some of the UK training aids have realistically opening canopies to stimulate evacuating an injured pilot from the cockpit:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16448
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Rahul M » 24 Aug 2018 02:19

Hi AGI, welcome to BRF.
please choose a human sounding username since your current one violates forum rules.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Aug 2018 10:44

battle of the phillipine sea. mind boggling scale.

the largest carrier vs carrier fight in history
8 japani carriers + 500 ac vs 15 usn carriers + 900 ac covering a huge invasion fleet of the marianas islands.

by that phase of the war
- most of IJN veteran aviators were gone to attrition. crews were relative green
- the zero had lost the edge to the grumann hellcat and corsair - both shared the 2000hp engine, the hellcat had easier handling and was accepted as the prime carrier fighter . the corsair was faster and meaner but was a devil to land on carriers, so for a while was given to USMC to use from island bases but seems to have returned to carrier service also by that time.

day1.

murican radar detects waves of strikes from 100 miles out. some *450* fighters mostly hellcats manned by veterans are launched to intercept.
in a day long fight against multiple waves they down some 300 japanese planes for 28 of their own.
in the day, two american subs sneak in and sink the 2 largest japani carriers (IJN ASW through the war was very poor and american subs had a field day destroying their transport "maru" ships)

day2.

muricans try to pin location of the remaining carriers and by late afternoon the spotters fix it. the strike group leader takes risk and launches full deckloads into the gathering dusk at limit of range. they manage to bag 1 more carrier...but return in the dark unable to find their own carriers.

the 15 carriers strung in a line 30 miles long switch on their lights (despite risk of submarines) and scatter their escorts for CSAR work.

80 planes ditch into the sea or crash on landing.

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 24 Aug 2018 12:07

Rahul M wrote:Hi AGI, welcome to BRF.
please choose a human sounding username since your current one violates forum rules.


Thanks for the warm welcome mate. I'd be happy to comply if you'd send a PM explaining how to edit my user name...The only option I see on the edit account settings page is the password change option...

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2662
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 24 Aug 2018 12:33

Singha wrote:Good work

I dont even hear a mouse squeak from delhi about the vast collection of looted indian treasures in london

We ahould directly ask her majesty how she feels wearing a crown having a stolen diamond , desi msm should heckle her majesty as the bandit rani


Should we deploy Tharoor to use some choice English words for her majesty :mrgreen:

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1455
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 24 Aug 2018 12:46

Mockups on land would make sense, if you're training greenhorn. What surprised me mock ups on a new carrier going on sea trial.

Why would you send in un-trained crews on a sea trail? You send your best, so that the carrier is properly tested.

Sea trials are not for training crews.

There might be a obvious answer, which I am missing.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Aug 2018 12:59

kit wrote:
Singha wrote:Good work

I dont even hear a mouse squeak from delhi about the vast collection of looted indian treasures in london

We ahould directly ask her majesty how she feels wearing a crown having a stolen diamond , desi msm should heckle her majesty as the bandit rani


Should we deploy Tharoor to use some choice English words for her majesty :mrgreen:


Just read up on that. It seems some of the wealthy class are commissioning these thefts or “recoveries” of these ancient chini treasures. Along with some government agencies. Great story, deserves a movie.

B/K/Tollywood should make one to inspire the Rakshaks. An inspirational film of recovering the Kohinoor with Prabhas or Vijay punching out James Bond on his way out.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Aug 2018 13:05

nam wrote:Mockups on land would make sense, if you're training greenhorn. What surprised me mock ups on a new carrier going on sea trial.

Why would you send in un-trained crews on a sea trail? You send your best, so that the carrier is properly tested.

Sea trials are not for training crews.

There might be a obvious answer, which I am missing.


The Britshits can’t find enough crew for their carrier. And they have only 19 surface ships.

The chinis will have staffing problems many times worse with all the ships they are pumping out. Me thinks they are training wherever and whenever they can. There’ll be a lot of greenhorns on that carrier paired with some veterans from the Liaoning.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Aug 2018 13:08

And right on cue — the first of their giant 055 destroyer just went on sea trials.

Image

Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Aug 2018 15:07

compared to its size, why is the front gun turret so big ? the 5" guns on DDG51 looks smallish
Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Aug 2018 15:14

good look by CNN onboard a P8A. khan is mapping every mm should x,y,z co-ordinates be needed by JASSMs later.
http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2018 ... china-sea/

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Aug 2018 22:43

battle of savo island guadalcanal - the worst naval defeat of usn in ww2

must be compulsory reading for budding PLAN admirals, as also william halsey's combined BB+CV 100 ship armada being lured away from leyte gulf
deadly precision gunnery work at night by the japanese cruisers


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Aug 2018 22:53

that place is called ironbottom sound iirc due to the sheer number of ships sunk there usually in night battles.
IJN had the excellent 'long lance' torpedo and used it to good effect.



most of the older battleships which sunk in shallow water @ pearl harbour were raised, repaired and put back into action as shore bombardment platforms to support the marines . these old wounded elephants had their day of rage in the battle of the surigao straits



one cruiser the louisville alone unleashed some 300+ 8" shells...what a terrible night it must have been .. horizon lighted up by combined broadsides, burning ships all over, destroyers making smoke and unleashing silent torpedoes....

Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 923
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Lisa » 24 Aug 2018 23:01

Singha wrote:compared to its size, why is the front gun turret so big ? the 5" guns on DDG51 looks smallish
Image


I doubt that the figure given for tonnage is true. Think about it in this regard.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 24 Aug 2018 23:53

Lisa wrote:
Singha wrote:compared to its size, why is the front gun turret so big ? the 5" guns on DDG51 looks smallish
Image


I doubt that the figure given for tonnage is true. Think about it in this regard.



Good observation, Singhaji. And good point, Lisa. I thought the size difference in some of photos between the Type 055 and the 7.5K ton Type 052D wasn’t that large, myself.

Image

That said, the gun is 130MM vs the AB’s Mk45 127MM and we can count by sat picts that it has 112 VLS hatches to the 052D’s 64 which corresponds with the increase in tonnage unless they’ve gotten more efficient with space.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2763
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Aug 2018 00:29

Singha wrote:battle of savo island guadalcanal - the worst naval defeat of usn in ww2

must be compulsory reading for budding PLAN admirals, as also william halsey's combined BB+CV 100 ship armada being lured away from leyte gulf
deadly precision gunnery work at night by the japanese cruisers


Yah, the Air-Sea-Land battle of Guadalcanal was epic. Modern combined arms warfare at its grandest. It was a fight to control the lines of communication. Once the Japanese lost the seas around Guadalcanal, most of the 30K troops on the island starved and the road to Japan was open.

US
7,100 dead
7,789+ wounded
4 captured
29 ships lost
615 aircraft lost

JAPAN
19,200 dead (8,500+ killed in action)
1,000 captured
38 ships lost
683–880 aircraft lost

I doubt Cheen would be brave enough to face the US in a neutral spot like Guadalcanal. The TFTA Japanese were something else. Cheen as SYRE would rather not fight but flood the surrounding waters with ships and aircraft. Any fight between them and the US would be within their land based aircraft and mijjiles.

I would love to see such an epic battle though. (As you are, I’m sure!) We haven’t had one since WWII.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63335
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 25 Aug 2018 07:34

These semi starving cut off japani soldiers were portrayed in the anti war epic “the thin red line”


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests