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.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6980
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Indranil » 24 Sep 2018 22:14

Hari Nair wrote:
chola wrote:
It would be wonderful to hear your opinion and your experience on the border with the PLA. Amazing how things had changed. Were not for the Tianenmen Square Massacre we might be seeing a chini military full of amreeki hardware today.

Also, it’s been asked multiple times in this thread why the Americans and Chinese like the Blackhawk so much when it seems the Mi-17 with its ramp is more useful and efficient in most situations.

Can you give us your opinion on this? The rear-ramp layout versus the side door one? This is an intriguing question especially since the PLA flies hundreds of Mi-17s too but insists on cloning a Blackhawk.

We’d love to have the professional view on the matter!


Interesting point raised there - why the preference for cloning the Blackhawk...Well, I can think of the following:
On the plus side-
The UH-60 / S-70 family have exceptional crashworthiness - proven better than the US Military Standard MIL-1290. Its due to a combination of the tail-wheel layout, crashworthy fuselage, undercarriage and seats. I wonder how much of those techs the Chinks cloned?
The UH-60 / S-70 are battle-damage tolerant using outsized hardened components in critical systems and controls. The Mi-17 is'nt far behind there.
The systems design and redundancies are way better than the Mi-17. It manoeuvrability is also far better, making it better for troop induction in the battlefield.
Its faster than the Mi-17. Along with better manoeuvrability and compact size, its better suited for special ops roles.
It has comparable underslung capability with the Mi-17.

On the Minus side:
It has a smaller cabin, carries far fewer troops than the Mi-17.
It lacks the clamshell door (rear door) layout that gives greater mission flexibility.
Its high-altitude capabilities are lesser than the Mi-17.

Sirjee, perhaps you can provide a comparison with IMRH in the Indian Military Helicopters thread, if it is not too early.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4662
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Neshant » 25 Sep 2018 05:11

In the right hands, this could be a very useful tool in crime prevention, safety, traffic rules, anti-terrorism, littering & cleanliness, missing persons, fugitive detection, business analytics, city planning and general population research..etc

In the wrong hands, i.e hands of Chini govt, it is a tool of oppression and a means of keeping dictators like Emperor Xi power.

-------

Digital Dictatorship: China Exerts Control Over Population Through "Social Credit" System

Image

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09- ... ial-credit

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Sep 2018 15:09

Intel tweets: An-12 ripoffs, Y-8 and its Y-9 follow-on. A jack-of-all-trades made in many variants for over four decades: transport, MPA/ASW, AEW.

https://twitter.com/Defence_blog/status/1043946206379028481
Kazakhstan receives first Y-8 military transport aircraft from China
Image

https://mobile.twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1029032328473894912
Y-9, lors de l'Aviadarts 2018 en Russie.
Image

https://twitter.com/dafengcao/status/1043838825867272192
Y-8Q ASW craft being loaded with torpedo.
Image

https://twitter.com/CombatAir/status/991676301118443525
New KJ-500 AEW prototype with refueling probe.
Image

We sorely lack a platform like this that we can use for a variety of roles. Technically it is a 1950s airframe that I think is well within our ability to make.

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

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 25 Sep 2018 22:49

The 6th Type 071 LPD has left for its first sea trial:

Image

Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 26 Sep 2018 08:39

unlike frigates or ddg, these will use economy diesels, sail slower and with a lean marine component have a lot of loitering endurance in the IOR rim.
good for showing flag and conducting exercises.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 26 Sep 2018 21:17

this is how PLAN will make keema out of the big hairy USN


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 27 Sep 2018 09:09

https://www.rt.com/news/439553-russia-l ... e-missile/

reading between the lines it seems russia may have sold off the KS172 to china to develop and use as they see fit for J20+ and retained the R37M for its own use.

expect more news in a year or two about a new ER-AAM for J20 and co.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5950
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Rakesh » 28 Sep 2018 07:00

Russia to China: You Shouldn't Have Stolen Our Jet Fighter
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... hter-32037

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 28 Sep 2018 07:33

Rakesh wrote:Russia to China: You Shouldn't Have Stolen Our Jet Fighter
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... hter-32037

Image


Peter crying wolf. Cheen could not have built a Flanker that can land on a carrier just by cloning. And if they did then why continue supplying the engines for this cloned fighter? The Russians could have stopped the program cold if they wanted to.

Nope, the Russians were involved in the J-15 without doubt. For all its faults the thing is still launching and landing on the Liaoning and soon another carrier in the next three years and possibly a third within five or six. When they plan that many carriers ahead and have only have one carrier jet then it is pretty clear they have enough confidence in its future.

They are only confident because they have a steady supply of Russian engines and expertise.

BTW, stories like this feeds into our narrative of a “reluctant” Russia helping Cheen who gets its stuff stolen. Bull Manure. They’re cover jobs for full and deep Russian involvement in the chini industry.

The chinis were always completely confident of a steady supply of russkie parts — including the RD-93 for JF-17. Remember all the talk of how our “special” relationship would stop the Pakis from getting the engine?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 28 Sep 2018 15:54

An operational J-20A. The chini watchers community collect the serials of every major type ever pictured. In front is a J-10B.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1045348080869146625

@RupprechtDeino
·
17h
Seventh J-20 assigned to the 176th Brigade confirmed


Image

Image

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9872
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 28 Sep 2018 16:24

In addition to what Chola says this RE thing is also about Chinese H&D. This whole RE thing is pure horse manure

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1573
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 28 Sep 2018 17:51

This induction drama is nonsense. The first flight of J20 was in 2011 and within 7 years they inducted their first 5 gen jet? with absolute 0 history of designing a stealth aircraft.

Su57 first flew in 2010 yet to be inducted.
F22 took 9 years to do first "induction" from first flight.
Rafale 15 years from first flight.

But the Chinis are so advanced they induct in 7 years.

Even the Bhunder 17 was "inducted" quite rapidly with yet to proven to have BVR capability.

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

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 28 Sep 2018 23:06

nam wrote:This induction drama is nonsense. The first flight of J20 was in 2011 and within 7 years they inducted their first 5 gen jet? with absolute 0 history of designing a stealth aircraft.

Su57 first flew in 2010 yet to be inducted.
F22 took 9 years to do first "induction" from first flight.
Rafale 15 years from first flight.

But the Chinis are so advanced they induct in 7 years.

Even the Bhunder 17 was "inducted" quite rapidly with yet to proven to have BVR capability.


The glaring gap in your analysis there is the F35. First flight 2006. First LRIP airframe delivery to the USAF, May of 2011.

5 years from first flight to induction. To be sure, the difference in combat capability between that first USAF F35's and the latest Block 3F equipped airframes is enormous. The whole point of LRIP deliveries is to train pilots & maintainers and develop tactics whilst concurrently continuing development of the airframe's sensors, avionics packages and weapons integration.

Sure, the J20's inducted in 2017 had barely reached IOC, just as the first F35A's at Englin AFB had. But you can be sure that the test squadron they are standing up is developing tactics and training future pilots and handlers whilst CAC continues development of the aircraft.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5950
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Rakesh » 28 Sep 2018 23:18

AGI: Please change your username to a more human sounding one.

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

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kakarat » 29 Sep 2018 00:11

AGI wrote:
nam wrote:This induction drama is nonsense. The first flight of J20 was in 2011 and within 7 years they inducted their first 5 gen jet? with absolute 0 history of designing a stealth aircraft.

Su57 first flew in 2010 yet to be inducted.
F22 took 9 years to do first "induction" from first flight.
Rafale 15 years from first flight.

But the Chinis are so advanced they induct in 7 years.

Even the Bhunder 17 was "inducted" quite rapidly with yet to proven to have BVR capability.


The glaring gap in your analysis there is the F35. First flight 2006. First LRIP airframe delivery to the USAF, May of 2011.

5 years from first flight to induction. To be sure, the difference in combat capability between that first USAF F35's and the latest Block 3F equipped airframes is enormous. The whole point of LRIP deliveries is to train pilots & maintainers and develop tactics whilst concurrently continuing development of the airframe's sensors, avionics packages and weapons integration.

Sure, the J20's inducted in 2017 had barely reached IOC, just as the first F35A's at Englin AFB had. But you can be sure that the test squadron they are standing up is developing tactics and training future pilots and handlers whilst CAC continues development of the aircraft.


Just for your information the F-35 was developed from the X-35 which had its first flight on 24 October 2000 and Lockheed Martin also had the experience of developing the F-22 to bank upon

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6784
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 29 Sep 2018 00:32

X-35 was a technology demonstrator using modified F-22 engines. They did not begin engineering as per the DOD requirements until they won the contract in 2000/2001 time-frame. Almost nothing that would traditionally take a lot of time to engineer, validate, test, and refine was firmly defined when the X-35 was flying. The X-35 shaved no testing requirement from the F-35, and the X-32 wouldn't have done either for the F-32 had it been chosen. That effort was primarily aimed at de-risking concepts and eventually selecting a winner. The X-35, for example, didn't even have a weapons bay let alone any avionics solutions that the F-35 would be ultimately required to have.

5 years from first flight to induction. To be sure, the difference in combat capability between that first USAF F35's and the latest Block 3F equipped airframes is enormous. The whole point of LRIP deliveries is to train pilots & maintainers and develop tactics whilst concurrently continuing development of the airframe's sensors, avionics packages and weapons integration.


The difference in combat capability on the IOC F-35 (USAF) between 3I and 3F were to a large part (99%) software related and not aircraft ability rated. As the devTest software was certified, it was ported over to IOC aircraft which then were able to obtain that capability. There was slight difference in the USMCs jump from 2B to 3F but most of it was due to them upgrading to newer mission computers (the difference between 2B and 3I was that the latter hosted 2B software on new mission computers).

Sure, the J20's inducted in 2017 had barely reached IOC, just as the first F35A's at Englin AFB had


There is no "barely reached IOC". Either you declare IOC, or you don't. On the F-35, IOC was determined, not for the test units at Eglin or elsewhere but with the first combat-coded squadron out at Hill Air Force Base (USAF). It was the capability of those aircraft (validated 3I performance using actual flight validation against native F-15E units acting as the red force along with simulated air-defense systems) and the readiness (no. of trained pilots and maintainers) and the ability of that squadron to deploy that determined whether and when IOC was declared. The criteria for IOC were defined by each service upon program re-baseline and they held individual units and the program to that standard -

Air Force F-35A initial operational capability (IOC) shall be declared when the first
operational squadron is equipped with 12-24 aircraft, and Airmen are trained, manned, and
equipped to conduct basic Close Air Support (CAS), Interdiction, and limited Suppression
and Destruction of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD/DEAD) operations in a contested
environment. Based on the current F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) schedule, the F-35A
will reach the IOC milestone between August 2016 (Objective) and December 2016
(Threshold). Should capability delivery experience changes or delays, this estimate will be
revised appropriately.


A good way to look at the time side of things is to look at when the money started flowing in to engineer a defined solution or requirement. The F-35 EMD contract was awarded in late 2000, so it took about 15 years to IOC for the Marines, 16 years for the USAF, and another 2 years from the USN. On the ATF, Lockheed was selected in 1991, and first squadron IOC was 2005, 14 years later.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6973
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 30 Sep 2018 07:32

The Z10 has a chin mounted gun slaved to the pilots helmet

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4662
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Neshant » 30 Sep 2018 10:33

all hell gone break loose

----

Chinese Air Force Holds Live-Fire War Drill In South China Sea Days After US Exercise

Image

Image

Image

China Central Television, as per the Twitter account of the official People's Daily newspaper, reported Saturday that the Chinese military deployed fighter jets and bombers to conduct live-fire war drills in the disputed South China Sea, just days after the Japan Air Self-Defense Force and nuclear-capable US B-52 strategic bombers held exercises over the East China Sea and the Sea of Japan on September 27.


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09- ... s-exercise

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 30 Sep 2018 14:58

nam wrote:This induction drama is nonsense. The first flight of J20 was in 2011 and within 7 years they inducted their first 5 gen jet? with absolute 0 history of designing a stealth aircraft.

Su57 first flew in 2010 yet to be inducted.
F22 took 9 years to do first "induction" from first flight.
Rafale 15 years from first flight.

But the Chinis are so advanced they induct in 7 years.

Even the Bhunder 17 was "inducted" quite rapidly with yet to proven to have BVR capability.


Induction doesn’t have to mean the system is mature (or even safe, in Cheen’s case.)

For example, they also have no history of building large destroyers with UVLS like the Type 052D either. Now they have 21 built or in construction since 2014 onlee.

Same with aircraft carriers and large transports. Y-20’s first flight was 2013. Induction in 2016.

That J-10B in front of the J-20 is another example. It first flew in 1998. Induction in 2006. It was the first FBW aircraft Cheen ever made and it performed like their first with prototypes and LSPs crashing left and right. Now they are in their hundreds and into their “C” variant with TVC testbeds indicating even more developments in the future.

They induct quickly and then work out the capabilities later. It is a philosophy that didn’t start with the “stealth” fighter. What this does is lock the PLAAF and PLANAF into domestic systems early and often. Probably not ideal if you are fighting wars all the time but Cheen hadn’t fought a war in four or five decades anyways and the MIC is more important to them than warfighting ability.

Unlike the J-10, the Tejas had a spotless accident record during development but it is also just being inducted into the IAF. Different philosophies.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1573
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 30 Sep 2018 15:16

Neshant wrote:
Image



This always cracks me up. Most of the Flanker clones (even J10s), that comes out from Chini has rocket pods on them. I saw them on Land attack Flankers, now the sea as well. This comes from the concept of PLAAF being sub-ordinate to PLA. They do what PLA asks them to do, i.e. be a air borne rocket artillery.

They have a clone of a very capable air superiority fighter.. and they hang rocket pods on them. Only the Chinis think they can get so close to their target to fire rockets.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1573
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 30 Sep 2018 15:22

chola wrote:
That J-10B in front of the J-20 is another example. It first flew in 1998. Induction in 2006. It was the first FBW aircraft Cheen ever made and it performed like their first with prototypes and LSPs crashing left and right. Now they are in their hundreds and into their “C” variant with TVC testbeds indicating even more developments in the future.

They induct quickly and then work out the capabilities later. It is a philosophy that didn’t start with the “stealth” fighter. What this does is lock the PLAAF and PLANAF into domestic systems early and often. Probably not ideal if you are fighting wars all the time but Cheen hadn’t fought a war in four or five decades anyways and the MIC is more important to them than warfighting ability.

Unlike the J-10, the Tejas had a spotless accident record during development but it is also just being inducted into the IAF. Different philosophies.


Perfectly fine with what they are doing. And I want people to over-react as well.

However it is also important to understand where they are capability wise.

Our folks get very defensive talking about LCA, when Paks bring in jocker fighter-17 to the topic. That thing does not have a proper video of a BVR firing. It is only flying around with it.

This after 10 years of official "induction" .

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 30 Sep 2018 15:53

nam wrote:
chola wrote:
That J-10B in front of the J-20 is another example. It first flew in 1998. Induction in 2006. It was the first FBW aircraft Cheen ever made and it performed like their first with prototypes and LSPs crashing left and right. Now they are in their hundreds and into their “C” variant with TVC testbeds indicating even more developments in the future.

They induct quickly and then work out the capabilities later. It is a philosophy that didn’t start with the “stealth” fighter. What this does is lock the PLAAF and PLANAF into domestic systems early and often. Probably not ideal if you are fighting wars all the time but Cheen hadn’t fought a war in four or five decades anyways and the MIC is more important to them than warfighting ability.

Unlike the J-10, the Tejas had a spotless accident record during development but it is also just being inducted into the IAF. Different philosophies.


Perfectly fine with what they are doing. And I want people to over-react as well.

However it is also important to understand where they are capability wise.

Our folks get very defensive talking about LCA, when Paks bring in jocker fighter-17 to the topic. That thing does not have a proper video of a BVR firing. It is only flying around with it.

This after 10 years of official "induction" .


We should be defensive — not of the LCA in particular — but of our philosophy.

The reason I wanted war over Doklam is wartime gives us an advantage over Cheen. Because war is the ONLY time when superior warfighting capabilities give you an advantage.

But it means chit if the opponent never fights or if your own politicians cannot inagine going to war without the other guy starting it first.

The PRC does its dirty work during peace not war and that requires an MIC that pumps out ships, planes and infrastructure in numbers so they can spread chini jurisdiction to disputed regions and the global commons. All their machines need to do is to be able to move from one spot to the next. Whether their mijjiles work or not is irrelevant in this scheme since no one is shooting at them.

Our philosophy OTOH is to prepare for combat first and foremost with firangi gear in the lead because the two-front war is always imminent — never mind that we are in perhaps the weakest military region on earth save sub-Saharan darkest Africa. We have a failed muzzie state on one hand and a chini shopkeeping, factory-running distinctly unmilitary civilization of short rice-eaters on the other. The rest from Nepal to Sri Lanka are military midgets with less fighting ability than Nigeria.

Our philosophy is to prepare our military for war while Cheen’s is to work their military during peace. Our philosophy works better if we were warlike TFTAs like Roos and Amreekis so we can use that superior combat ability on the drop of a dime on places like Iraq or Ukraine. But we are short and rice-eating onlee just like chinis and war is not something we like to initiate.

The difference between us and them is their philosophy and strategy reflect and suit their race better than ours does for us.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 01 Oct 2018 07:44

to really test and prove its combined arms capability china will need to find and fight a colonial war in africa against some "rebels" to defend some "regime" which is allied to peking. preferably a unstable coastal state like sudan or eritrea.

this would permit deploying everything they have in limited numbers and check their procedures and gear in live situation.

america has been doing this for 100 years now. russia has done it a few times - vietnam/angola in covert manner, syria/AF/ukraine in overt

to be taken seriously just posing in a gym wont do. a tiger has to inflict pain and rule the forest.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 01 Oct 2018 07:56

timesnow

Beijing: In a first, China has successfully tested three types of scaled-down hypersonic aircraft models together whose speed will be adjustable for a precision strike towards an unstoppable nuclear-capable weapon, the state media reported on Sunday. Tests of the three scaled-down models of the "wide-speed-range vehicles", which can fly at from hypersonic velocity to lower than the speed of sound, were carried out on September 21 at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Centre in northwest China, the state broadcaster CCTV reported. In the news footage, three models representing differently shaped designs, code-named D18-1S, D18-2S, and D18-3S were lifted and then dropped from a balloon.

Another media report said that the speed of the hypersonic aircraft will be adjustable. This was China's first test of this type of hypersonic aircraft whose speed will be adjustable for a precision strike towards an unstoppable nuclear-capable weapon, the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported. Last month, Chinese scientists conducted their first experimental flight of a hypersonic glider named Starry Sky 2 that was launched by a rocket and then flew on its own shockwave at Mach 6 (six times the speed of sound, or 7,344km/h). Once fully developed, its sheer speed would be capable of penetrating any anti-missile defence system currently available, the report said.

"Their technologies can be inter-complementary. They can be combined together and make a hypersonic missile," Hong Kong-based military commentator Song Zhongping told the Post. Researchers measured the respective aerodynamic features of three different design shapes, and recorded their processes of falling, accelerating, breaking the sonic barrier, aerodynamic rebound, parachute opening, landing and retrieving while collecting data, the CCTV report said.

It was to compare and choose from the three designs, said Song, adding that there will be further wind tunnel tests with larger or real-size models before finalising the aerodynamic configuration of the vehicle. China, whose defence budget this year amounted to USD 175 billion, is investing heavily in defence research and development to catch-up with the US, Russia and the European Union. China has been testing hypersonic glide vehicles since 2014. The United States and Russia have been carrying out similar experiments.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Oct 2018 17:09

Singha wrote:to really test and prove its combined arms capability china will need to find and fight a colonial war in africa against some "rebels" to defend some "regime" which is allied to peking. preferably a unstable coastal state like sudan or eritrea.

this would permit deploying everything they have in limited numbers and check their procedures and gear in live situation.

america has been doing this for 100 years now. russia has done it a few times - vietnam/angola in covert manner, syria/AF/ukraine in overt

to be taken seriously just posing in a gym wont do. a tiger has to inflict pain and rule the forest.


Absolutely true. The chinis are as far away from that TFTA gori model of constant warfare tempering the sword as you can get.

But they know their strengths and weaknesses. They don’t try to challenge the whites in warfighting but in production. In this strategy, they have a better chance of winning.

Any kind of force on force contest and the goris win by a wide margin. This is the same for any non-whites — chini, desi, bantus, bushmen, etc. White skins had literally a couple of centuries head start on this.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Oct 2018 17:12

On chini induction, the Y-20 really takes the cake. First flight by Xian in 2013. Induction into PLAAF in 2016.

Now being packed with Peepul’s Airborne troopers and shat out the other end in big numbers.

A margin of safety with four engines I guess. But obviously this can’t be a fully vetted out aircraft operationally in such a short period. And probably more than a bit dangerous too. The PLAAF can’t delay until every detail is to their liking.

Clear a case of the MNC’s considerations being prioritized over the military’s.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 02 Oct 2018 09:30

NDTV
WASHINGTON: A Chinese warship sailed within yards of an American destroyer -- forcing it to change course -- in an "unsafe and unprofessional" encounter as the US vessel was in contested waters in the South China Sea, an official said Monday.
The USS Decatur guided-missile destroyer was conducting what the military calls a "freedom of navigation operation" Sunday, when it passed within 12 nautical miles of Gaven and Johnson reefs in the remote Spratly Islands.

The 12-mile distance is commonly accepted as constituting the territorial waters of a landmass.

Beijing claims all of the Spratly chain as part of its sweeping claims across much of the South China Sea.

During the operation, a Chinese Luyang destroyer approached the USS Decatur in "an unsafe and unprofessional maneuver in the vicinity of Gaven Reef in the South China Sea," US Pacific Fleet spokesman Commander Nate Christensen said.

The Chinese ship then conducted a series of "increasingly aggressive maneuvers, and warned the Decatur to depart the area," he added.

The Chinese "destroyer approached within 45 yards (meters) of Decatur's bow, after which Decatur maneuvered to prevent a collision."

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 02 Oct 2018 09:33

a Jilin-1 video satellite got this footage of a suborbital launch from the desert
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/10 ... 7020786689

indicates they can with sufficient sats track our MLRS and artillery fires from space too. or spy on our airbases and logistics nodes using time lapse video stitched from multiple sats in nearby orbital planes

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 02 Oct 2018 15:41

Singha wrote:NDTV
WASHINGTON: A Chinese warship sailed within yards of an American destroyer -- forcing it to change course -- in an "unsafe and unprofessional" encounter as the US vessel was in contested waters in the South China Sea, an official said Monday.
The USS Decatur guided-missile destroyer was conducting what the military calls a "freedom of navigation operation" Sunday, when it passed within 12 nautical miles of Gaven and Johnson reefs in the remote Spratly Islands.

The 12-mile distance is commonly accepted as constituting the territorial waters of a landmass.

Beijing claims all of the Spratly chain as part of its sweeping claims across much of the South China Sea.

During the operation, a Chinese Luyang destroyer approached the USS Decatur in "an unsafe and unprofessional maneuver in the vicinity of Gaven Reef in the South China Sea," US Pacific Fleet spokesman Commander Nate Christensen said.

The Chinese ship then conducted a series of "increasingly aggressive maneuvers, and warned the Decatur to depart the area," he added.

The Chinese "destroyer approached within 45 yards (meters) of Decatur's bow, after which Decatur maneuvered to prevent a collision."


Whoa! An Arleigh Burke in direct confrontation with a Type 052C/D? Looking for pics on this one!

Maybe some real honest fireworks after major disappointments from the Doklam and Korea jaw-jaws?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 02 Oct 2018 20:48

Cnn

Schuster said China seems to be adopting "a more aggressive response policy" to US ships, emboldened in part by last year's collisions between US destroyers and merchant ships in the Asia-Pacific.
Naval academics theorize the collisions that killed 16 US sailors have the Chinese navy doubting US seamanship skills and giving it confidence to "intimidate" US ship captains, Schuster said

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 02 Oct 2018 20:51

Horses for courses murica needs to sail 20,000t tramp steamers loaded with rocks for fonops flag waving

A collision with a 7000t ddg would badly thrash the ddg due to weight and higher freeboard

Mount a few guns and torpedoes

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20905
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prem » 02 Oct 2018 23:51

chola wrote:
Singha wrote:NDTV
WASHINGTON:
During the operation, a Chinese Luyang destroyer approached the USS Decatur in "an unsafe and unprofessional maneuver in the vicinity of Gaven Reef in the South China Sea," US Pacific Fleet spokesman Commander Nate Christensen said.The Chinese ship then conducted a series of "increasingly aggressive maneuvers, and warned the Decatur to depart the area," he added.The Chinese "destroyer approached within 45 yards (meters) of Decatur's bow, after which Decatur maneuvered to prevent a collision."


Chinese using paki tactics? Few years ago, Paki tried same with INS Godavari using USA donated ship.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Oct 2018 08:30

And here we go:

https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/1047195727808647170

Amreeki AB DDG on left, chini Type 052C on right.
Image

Image

Pretty close. Yah.

Tweets say it is the USS Decatur(DDG 73) and PLANS Lanzhou (170.)

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 03 Oct 2018 10:01

when ships sail too close together some kind of suction effect pulls them closer if the helsman is not careful. this is noted for UNREP transfers but here its much closer than UNREP. dangerous and unprofessional.

I can only recall few such cases where a soviet ffg hit a american ffg



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Blac ... g_incident

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4662
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Neshant » 04 Oct 2018 08:44

If anything, one sided mercantalist trade by China is what is leading to war.

US is lucky to have strong man Trump at the helm along with Peter Navarro and Michael Pillsbury forestalling America's decline in global power.



------

US, China Diving Into A New Cold War; Jack Ma Warns: "When Trade Stops, Sometimes War Starts"

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10- ... war-starts

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 04 Oct 2018 09:12

Usn proposes huge show of teeth exercise in south china sea
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/03/politics ... index.html

The pentagon wants to show plan its place

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 04 Oct 2018 10:32

28th infantry div, veterans of the hedgerow fighting in normandie march through paris in battle gear in show of force. they marched right through paris and were back in action. 1st army, lead by omar bradley in person. probably patton reported to him.

Image

USN will probably mass together 4 CVN groups and countless subs and DDGs for this kind of parade down the taiwan straits and near hainan :D

friendly nations like aus, japan, india should also be invited to the party.... call it HOLIKA 2018

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1347
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 04 Oct 2018 14:27

chola wrote:On chini induction, the Y-20 really takes the cake. First flight by Xian in 2013. Induction into PLAAF in 2016.
A margin of safety with four engines I guess. But obviously this can’t be a fully vetted out aircraft operationally in such a short period. And probably more than a bit dangerous too. The PLAAF can’t delay until every detail is to their liking.

Image



This is worth looking into more deeply and understanding.
Interlace it with attempts to buy IL-76 for AWACS , Tanker and Freighter purposes , not to mention std use.
And then understand the 3 years from First flight to Induction

I note the engines are the gajraj engines.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63585
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 04 Oct 2018 14:30

quid pro quo with ilyushin - help us implement the stolen c17 design drawings and we will keep you well fed.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 04 Oct 2018 14:44

Singha wrote:28th infantry div, veterans of the hedgerow fighting in normandie march through paris in battle gear in show of force. they marched right through paris and were back in action. 1st army, lead by omar bradley in person. probably patton reported to him.

Image

USN will probably mass together 4 CVN groups and countless subs and DDGs for this kind of parade down the taiwan straits and near hainan :D

friendly nations like aus, japan, india should also be invited to the party.... call it HOLIKA 2018


I rather we keep our distance on this one. Taiwan Strait is liable to turn hot. LOL

Possible that the PLAN and PLAAF might meet them in force during any exercise in the Strait. Hard to tell when hundreds of chini planes and ships (including Coast Guard and fishing militia) heading towards you are not hostile in intention and whoosh! a missile goes off and the whole Strait is aflame — within chini land-based air cover.

We should be involve in a counterattack. The initial exercise is putting yourself in their kill zone to demonstrate a point. We let Unkil do that dirty.

Long run if no war happens, it is good and bad. Good because it might move the PRC towards making the same kind of military expenditure that collapsed the USSR (PRC mil budget is exceptionally low at 2% of GDP.)

The bad part is they might end up with a military with double the size of what they have now comfortably within 5% of GDP which is the same as the US. This could be bad for anyone who is not Unkil should these two not come to actual blows.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests