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.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21980
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Austin » 28 Oct 2018 20:31

chola wrote:Intel tweets:

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

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

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

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

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

These were posted on @dafengcao and @RupprechtDeino timelines.


The Carrier looks awesome , The Chinese are really good with their ship building

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6934
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 28 Oct 2018 23:24

If someone funds, I could get nice pictures from Zhuhai :)
Also note they opened that long overwater bridge just in time for the airshow.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4642
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Neshant » 29 Oct 2018 12:06

China's President Orders Military To "Prepare For War"

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

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1422
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby ArjunPandit » 29 Oct 2018 12:25

that would be at least the 100th time She 11 would have said it

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 36
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 29 Oct 2018 15:36

Apparently the J10B WS10X TVC testbed will be at the Zhuhai Airshow as well.

Image

Image

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 29 Oct 2018 17:11

Austin wrote:The Carrier looks awesome , The Chinese are really good with their ship building


It is nearly an exact clone of the Varyag which must have saved them years if not a few decades.

Image

Image

They’ve made some very good choices in their carrier program. They owned both the Minsk and Kiev for years to study and learn but made no effort to convert them. But once the Varyag became available they went all in on the project. Repairing and completing a derelict hulk that ultimately became the foundation of their carrier program.

The Kuznetsov class was the one true fleet carrier the USSR created. Big angled deck. Lifts on the edge of the flight deck. 65K-tons. The Kiev class was a VSTOL cruiser with small restrictive lifts set debilitatingly in the middle of the runway. They made the right choice.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 29 Oct 2018 17:19

AGI wrote:Apparently the J10B WS10X TVC testbed will be at the Zhuhai Airshow as well.

Image


Their engine programs have come a long way. To use a TVC prototype on a single-engined aircraft at an airshow is a mark of confidence. Obviously, they must have tested the hell out of the WS-10 on their Il-76 and J-11 testbeds. Luxuries the Kaveri never had.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6711
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 29 Oct 2018 17:25

^ Lot of folks who worked on the NASA MATV will have flashbacks of the early 90s :)


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 30 Oct 2018 15:30


souravB
BRFite
Posts: 229
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby souravB » 30 Oct 2018 17:37

From this pic of J20
Image
How is the stealth being affected without the canards and wings being planform aligned? also there are more protruding parts under the vertical fins than I am comfortable seeing on a stealth fighter.
But the ac do handles very well.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6934
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 30 Oct 2018 21:18

Yeah but all said and done, its an ugly plane imo.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 31 Oct 2018 08:21

^^^ To be honest, the J-20 has a brutish kind of beauty to it IMHO. It looks appealingly muscular and powerful and sexy in a perverse way.
Image
Image


If it were a woman, she would be Chyna who plied the WWF when I was a kid putting men in headlocks and piledrivers.
[img]https://www-gannett--cdn-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/5f6f5765f42ec5ec280c3567ea61c11386ccef06/c=0-46-810-

edited please be prudent with your pstings

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 31 Oct 2018 08:26

souravB wrote:From this pic of J20
Image
How is the stealth being affected without the canards and wings being planform aligned? also there are more protruding parts under the vertical fins than I am comfortable seeing on a stealth fighter.
But the ac do handles very well.


Unlikely to have all-aspect stealth. More stealthy during ingress, less on egress. Attack and scoot.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21980
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Austin » 31 Oct 2018 10:10

Two Chinese intelligence officers accused of stealing US jet engine tech

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/30/asia ... index.html

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 31 Oct 2018 15:05

AGI wrote:Apparently the J10B WS10X TVC testbed will be at the Zhuhai Airshow as well.
Image



I just have one question and I much rather be given an academic and non-financial answer.
Why did PAF not go for this despite all the doors being open to them ?

and no... they are not going for this a/c.
Has anyone come across any analysis ?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9823
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 31 Oct 2018 15:21

Pakis have always been ready for the J10 , the PAF air Marshall has even claimed Chinese will sell them J10 in 2014. But Isralei and Russian objections mean the Chinese have so far not acceded to OAF request. Plus the Chinese are not willing like US, I guess they expect Pakis to pay for defense
Purchases

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1422
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby ArjunPandit » 31 Oct 2018 15:36

^the flying costs of a twin engine and maintenance costs of chinese copy will beggar PAF which gets the left overs of PA and gifts of our Yankee friends' tax money

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Nov 2018 09:42

Khalsa wrote:
AGI wrote:Apparently the J10B WS10X TVC testbed will be at the Zhuhai Airshow as well.
Image



I just have one question and I much rather be given an academic and non-financial answer.
Why did PAF not go for this despite all the doors being open to them ?

and no... they are not going for this a/c.
Has anyone come across any analysis ?



PAF kept saying they were getting 40 FC-20s (export version of J-10A) for years now so pretty sure their air force wanted and expected it. But never happened because I don’t think Cheen was giving it away with aid.

Also politically the JF-17 was THEIR single-engined fighter so for the Paki gov it made little sense to put money elsewhere.

Speaking of which, three PAF JF-17s shot arriving at Zhuhai:
https://twitter.com/dafengcao/status/1057601035961683968
Image
Image
Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Nov 2018 09:57

Incidentally, J-20, J-10 and JF-17 are all from Chengdu Aircraft (CAC.) Nothing so far from their other major fighter builder, Shenyang (SAC), who makes the J-11, J-15 and other flanker clones and the FC-31.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4642
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Neshant » 01 Nov 2018 09:58

Khalsa wrote:
I just have one question and I much rather be given an academic and non-financial answer.
Why did PAF not go for this despite all the doors being open to them ?

and no... they are not going for this a/c.
Has anyone come across any analysis ?


it had a Russian engine originally.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Nov 2018 10:05

Neshant wrote:
Khalsa wrote:
I just have one question and I much rather be given an academic and non-financial answer.
Why did PAF not go for this despite all the doors being open to them ?

and no... they are not going for this a/c.
Has anyone come across any analysis ?


it had a Russian engine originally.


So does the JF-17. Issue is not Russian engines or Russian objection. They would have been happy to sell hundreds of Al-31s. We, for some reason, like to imagine the Russians as reluctant participants. The RD-93 powering the Blunder shows us pointedly they are not. Issue comes down to Pakiland being piss poor.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21980
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Austin » 01 Nov 2018 10:11

chola wrote:
Austin wrote:The Carrier looks awesome , The Chinese are really good with their ship building


It is nearly an exact clone of the Varyag which must have saved them years if not a few decades.


Imitation is best form of flattery and if building Varyag saves time effort and money and gains them experience then it’s the best way to move forward

Had the Chinese had the mind of IN DND and efficiency of yard they would take 1 decade to think and 1 decade to build , importing every thing best from every where to make it work in the name of having expertise in System Integration and getting the best.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Nov 2018 10:57

Austin wrote:
chola wrote:
It is nearly an exact clone of the Varyag which must have saved them years if not a few decades.


Imitation is best form of flattery and if building Varyag saves time effort and money and gains them experience then it’s the best way to move forward

Had the Chinese had the mind of IN DND and efficiency of yard they would take 1 decade to think and 1 decade to build , importing every thing best from every where to make it work in the name of having expertise in System Integration and getting the best.


Yes, that is how Cheen who only operated a carrier since 2012 will lap us in the field where we had a 50-year head start.

Behooves me how we hadn’t started on an iac decades ago, even on a 20K ton AC like the original Vikrant or Viraat. Our capacity should have been built up by the time IAC1 started. When CSL began the new Vikrant, we went from our largest 8K ton warship to 40K. It was a great leap forward, yes. But that capacity should had been built up long ago and save us the interminable delays hitting Vikrant now.

Our ability to access and import from everywhere is both a boon and a bane. My god, we’ve operated carriers far longer than Russia but we are importing their aviation complex (major cause of delay) and their “expertise” which gave us small lifts limiting us to the MiG-29K even for a carrier we designed and made ourselves!

Cheen copies, cheats and steals. Being a gentleman does nothing for national security. Planning well does. Cheen plans well.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 01 Nov 2018 12:35

chola wrote:
Neshant wrote:
it had a Russian engine originally.


So does the JF-17. Issue is not Russian engines or Russian objection. They would have been happy to sell hundreds of Al-31s. We, for some reason, like to imagine the Russians as reluctant participants. The RD-93 powering the Blunder shows us pointedly they are not. Issue comes down to Pakiland being piss poor.



Thank you Chola and Neshant

Clearing up a few things
the J-10 is not double engined. I am talking of the Lavi Clone her guys. Its powered by a single engine - the AL-31. The Su-27 variety.
Israel and Russia do not have much in terms of stopping the sale of these to Pakistan.

Whats Israel going to say ... you know the design you kind of stole and the kinda we sold to you ... don't pass the aircraft you built 33 years after.
Nope.

I seriously believe the PAF commander had a good luck at the Lavi_Clone and the Fighting Falcon and said.... do you think I am an idiot ?
I seriously doubt the capability of the J-10 to hold a serious turn and burn aggressive fight or go toe to toe with a Fulcrum or even a Mirage.
Don't even bring in the Flanker.

The J-10/ Lavi_Clone to be represents an Israeli_fied F-16. Better avionics with quicker launch times and fitting with a surge requirements to defend on all fronts quickly. I think the Israeli themselves don't feel much of a loss at losing Lavis and gaining an almost contiously upgradeable F-16.

I believe/ theorise/ conclude that the machine based / academic decision that IAF (Israel) went through before giving up the Lavi dream is what the PAF has gone through. I have trawled the PAK def forums and except for the fan boys, I have not seen much appetite for the J-10s.



Going forward I believe you will see the PAF and Paki appetite go up for Free FC-31s or paid FC-31s as their go forward 5th Gen aircraft.

Yes I have deliberately ignored left aside the financial aspects for the
beggar nation of Paf and its ability to afford such pieces of equipment
the financial sabotage and back hand corporate blackmailing that was put into to scuttle the LAVI.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9823
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 01 Nov 2018 16:30

Ok Now what stops the Pakis from askign J-11 to J-16's from the Chinese the 100% reverse engineered Chinese Fighters?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Nov 2018 17:40

Khalsa wrote:The J-10/ Lavi_Clone to be represents an Israeli_fied F-16. Better avionics with quicker launch times and fitting with a surge requirements to defend on all fronts quickly. I think the Israeli themselves don't feel much of a loss at losing Lavis and gaining an almost contiously upgradeable F-16.


Israel might have access to continuously upgraded F-16s. Pakiland does not. It needs to scrounge and beg for them. The last F-16s in PAF inventory were old second-hand airframes from Jordan. Three out of 16 crashed since transfering to Paki hand in 2013 onlee.

The J-10 would represent a brand-new upgraded F-16 so they wanted it. All the way up to their defense minister. It came down to negotiating beggar terms and Cheeen was niggardly with aid.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704083904576333192239624926
China and Pakistan are also discussing plans for Pakistan to buy China's more advanced FC-20 fighter, also known as the J-10, Ahmad Mukhtar, Pakistan's defense minister told reporters Wednesday.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10431
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby pankajs » 01 Nov 2018 18:57

Concerning but also reassuring ... The Chinis are still seeking to import Radar technology and that can only signal one thing.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society ... -equipment
Britain to sell China ‘unlimited’ amount of military radar equipment, technology
A British defence company has been given the green light to supply an unlimited quantity of goods to China’s military, including airborne radar technology likely to be used by the PLA Air Force.

Although the supplier has not been named, the “open individual export licence” (OIEL) has been in place since April – two months after British Prime Minister Theresa May visited Beijing – according to information from Britain’s Department for International Trade.

Unlike previous deals involving British arms sales to China, which were capped by amount and value, under the new agreement the supplier can “export an unlimited quantity of goods”, including equipment, components, software and technology for military radar systems, the department said.

Its strategic export control database described the equipment covered by the licence as “target acquisition, weapon control and countermeasure systems” for “aircraft, helicopters and drones”.
Last month, Professor Hugh Griffiths, one of Britain’s top radar scientists and chairman of the Defence Science Expert Committee at the Ministry of Defence, was officially recognised by Beijing for his contribution to the advancement of Chinese radar technology.

Wu Jianqi, chief designer of China’s first anti-stealth aircraft radar system, presented Griffiths with an “Outstanding Award for Chinese Radar International Development” in front of more than 700 Chinese scientists at a conference in Nanjing, capital of east China’s Jiangsu province, according to information on official websites.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1478
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 02 Nov 2018 00:08

Rivets on J20 v/s our LCA. Interesting how Chini riverts are close, where as we make with less number.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DqwyOPdU0AA2PHZ?format=jpg
https://bharatshakti.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/BIAS-Team-Tejas_3.jpg

F22. Similar as Chini.
https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/F22-Pilot.-1.jpg

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 02 Nov 2018 08:57

pankajs wrote:Concerning but also reassuring ... The Chinis are still seeking to import Radar technology and that can only signal one thing.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society ... -equipment


Nothing re-assuring about it. We had always counted our advantage over Cheen on access to Western sensors and systems. Shared values as democracies, remember?

Always knew that it was a sham, though. Our Phalcons came from an Israeli project for Cheen so who knows what else. But anyhoo now this is out in the open with the UK selling target radar outright. Things are based on the filthy lucre. And Cheen has far more of it.

Anyhoo Britain and Israel would be just two of the many from the ”free world.” We’ve known for ages that Cheen’s slanty-eyed cousins from Japan, Korea and Taiwan had made the chini electronics eco-system world class but the West including France and Germany as well as the UK have a role in uplifting Cheen’s MIC too.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10431
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby pankajs » 02 Nov 2018 12:23

Lets me break it down, the way I see it. Consider another portion from the very same piece.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society ... -equipment
Britain to sell China ‘unlimited’ amount of military radar equipment, technology

Outsiders view ... held by many on this very forum. Not surprising .... given their "parade" quality "leaks".
Meanwhile, David Stupples, a British professor of electronic and radio systems at City, University of London, whose research focuses on electronic intelligence and warfare, said he had been invited to lecture at the technical institute associated with intelligence services in China.

China has made tremendous progress in radar design over the past 10 years and must be considered in the [world’s] top 10,” he said.

In space-based radar systems, for instance, China has shown “expertise and ingenuity”, but for maritime and airborne applications, “the UK is marginally ahead”, Stupples said.

Britain was also ahead on designing complete intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems, although the Chinese military’s “individual components are first rate”, he said.

Insiders view
Cao Yunhe, an award-winning military radar scientist at Xidian University in Xian, capital of northwest China’s Shaanxi province, said the export licence was good news for China’s military strength and radar research.

“If they are willing to sell we are willing to buy,” he said. We want to know how their systems operate. It will help us improve our own design,” he said.

However, it was unlikely the technology and equipment being sold by Britain would be its most advanced.

“There will always be some restrictions. If not on quantity, then on quality,” he said.

Wang Tong, who is also from Xidian University and works on radar systems for China’s military aircraft and satellites, said the exchanges between Chinese and British experts would not go “too deep”.

<snip>

“Sharing information about models and specifications is strictly prohibited. I believe both sides are fully aware of the consequences,” Wang said.

Most of the time people are just talking about physics, mathematical models and new theories.”

1. China has spent hundreds of billions on its military programs so extending that to Radar development would not be too far fetched.
2. Chinese have access to Russian/Ukranian, etc maal/talent.
3. Chinese have access to dis-assemble, study, copy every western item supplied to Bakistan including all kinds of Radars.
4. China has a robust system for stealing technology running for decades.

In spite of all of the above, by their own admission they are not getting top of the line equipment under this deal. They are now trying to buy equipment that are 2nd grade not top of the line.

Why would someone spend money on "Not top of the line"? Only when their own products are 3rd grade at least 2 notches below "top of the line".

Now compare that to Indian Radar development. We too import but we also have been co-developing "not top of the line" equipment for quite some time now. We seem to have mastered at least quite a few "not top of the line" equipment especially in the Radar area.

It is very rare, especially wrt China, to get a data point like this where the Chinese are revealing a lot about their progress in some area by their action. This obviously is me trying to put 2 and 2 together and *reach* for 22. Very re-assuring to me if my reading is even in the ball park.

Kengsley
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 36
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kengsley » 02 Nov 2018 12:40

Lost in the hubbub of their second carrier leaving for its 3rd sea trial,is the Liaoning being moved from dry dock to complete her refit dock-side. Happened immediately after the second ship left the shipyard:

Image

Image

Image

Image


Image

Image

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9823
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 02 Nov 2018 12:57

Regarding PAF JF17 at Zuhai must have been quite an achivement to get them there, unless they were dismantled put on a transport aircraft and resembled at Zuhai or moved by ship. These don't have ariel refuelling and even with those 2 drop tanks its quite a task to get them to Zuhai. Me thinks these were freshly assembled at Chengdu and moved to Zuhai, rather PAC Kamra-> Hotan and a series of PLAAF bases before getting to Zuhai

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1478
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 02 Nov 2018 13:29

pankajs wrote:
In spite of all of the above, by their own admission they are not getting top of the line equipment under this deal. They are now trying to buy equipment that are 2nd grade not top of the line.



The Chinese radar development are quite intriguing. Offically they have a AESA AWACS, on J-10/20 and a land AESA for one SAM. Given the money spend, I would expect them to rollout AESA like crazy. That is not he case, specially their land versions. Their ships had PESA, may be the new one have AESA.

Even their S300 clone has PESA, fundamentally tells it is heavily supported by Russia. There was one report on jet radar being offered with "air cooled", which is fundamentally means it is a bad radar. AESA modules, cooling solution etc, Chinese should be able to develop quite easily.

Chini started with airborne radar (claimed), while we with land based(swordfish). This is shown in the fact that we have major program on land based and Chini seems to be ahead in airborne.

So AESA kit should not be a problem. It is the DSP, beam manipulation, ECM etc, i.e. software where they might have problem. This is what the reports say as well when they mention "mathematics".

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 02 Nov 2018 16:45

pankajs wrote:1. China has spent hundreds of billions on its military programs so extending that to Radar development would not be too far fetched.
2. Chinese have access to Russian/Ukranian, etc maal/talent.
3. Chinese have access to dis-assemble, study, copy every western item supplied to Bakistan including all kinds of Radars.
4. China has a robust system for stealing technology running for decades.


All of the above are not particularly reassuring. You are saying they have more money, robust spying and intelligence and access to Russian and Ukrainian and now they have a direct pipeline to a Western source.


In spite of all of the above, by their own admission they are not getting top of the line equipment under this deal. They are now trying to buy equipment that are 2nd grade not top of the line.

Why would someone spend money on "Not top of the line"? Only when their own products are 3rd grade at least 2 notches below "top of the line".

Now compare that to Indian Radar development. We too import but we also have been co-developing "not top of the line" equipment for quite some time now. We seem to have mastered at least quite a few "not top of the line" equipment especially in the Radar area.

It is very rare, especially wrt China, to get a data point like this where the Chinese are revealing a lot about their progress in some area by their action. This obviously is me trying to put 2 and 2 together and *reach* for 22. Very re-assuring to me if my reading is even in the ball park.


Now isn’t it always assumed that we had better radar and avionics gear because of access to Western sources?

The hierarchy that practically everyone of us adheres to in terms of radars/avionics is this:

1. Unkil
2. Sundry westerners (French, Britshit, Israeli, Japanese, South Korean)
3. Russian
4. India (access to sundry westerners and some Unkil — P8)
5. Cheen (no access to Unkil or sundry westerners)

Now it is revealed that Cheen also have access to number two. So our lead is actually narrower than we thought.

Are you trying to make an efficiency statement here? The chinis spent hundreds of billions more than us but is no further ahead?

For that to work, you need to figure out how much they spent on radars and how much we spent on radars, the quantity of radars each have, their respective quality and then you can compare.

Nothing really reassuring at all IMHO. The Brits in the article you quoted said the chinis are already top 10 and we can assume the rest of the top ten is composed of Unkil, Russia and sundry Westerners. Now we find out that Cheen have a pipeline to the West too.

Maybe kill switches in the Western gear sold to Cheen is reassuring?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10431
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby pankajs » 02 Nov 2018 18:12

chola wrote:
pankajs wrote:1. China has spent hundreds of billions on its military programs so extending that to Radar development would not be too far fetched.
2. Chinese have access to Russian/Ukranian, etc maal/talent.
3. Chinese have access to dis-assemble, study, copy every western item supplied to Bakistan including all kinds of Radars.
4. China has a robust system for stealing technology running for decades.

All of the above are not particularly reassuring. You are saying they have more money, robust spying and intelligence and access to Russian and Ukrainian and now they have a direct pipeline to a Western source.

1,2,3,4 Plus 5.
chola wrote:Anyhoo Britain and Israel would be just two of the many from the ”free world.” We’ve known for ages that Cheen’s slanty-eyed cousins from Japan, Korea and Taiwan had made the chini electronics eco-system world class but the West including France and Germany as well as the UK have a role in uplifting Cheen’s MIC too.

Plus 6.
Last month, Professor Hugh Griffiths, one of Britain’s top radar scientists and chairman of the Defence Science Expert Committee at the Ministry of Defence, was officially recognised by Beijing for his contribution to the advancement of Chinese radar technology

AND after all this "now" they are going to buy a notch below the top line from Britshit! So all the above did not yield the desired result in-spite of all the world-class drool worthy photos that have been circulating all over the net.

Very very re-assuring.

chola wrote:Now isn’t it always assumed that we had better radar and avionics gear because of access to Western sources?

The hierarchy that practically everyone of us adheres to in terms of radars/avionics is this:

1. Unkil
2. Sundry westerners (French, Britshit, Israeli, Japanese, South Korean)
3. Russian
4. India (access to sundry westerners and some Unkil — P8)
5. Cheen (no access to Unkil or sundry westerners)

Now it is revealed that Cheen also have access to number two. So our lead is actually narrower than we thought.

Are you trying to make an efficiency statement here? The chinis spent hundreds of billions more than us but is no further ahead?

For that to work, you need to figure out how much they spent on radars and how much we spent on radars, the quantity of radars each have, their respective quality and then you can compare.

Nothing really reassuring at all IMHO. The Brits in the article you quoted said the chinis are already top 10 and we can assume the rest of the top ten is composed of Unkil, Russia and sundry Westerners. Now we find out that Cheen have a pipeline to the West too.

Maybe kill switches in the Western gear sold to Cheen is reassuring?

1. On the lead, Our lead is still intact as of now and we already have fruits of co-development. After this deal, the Chinese will still be buying a notch below the top line.
2. My statement is both on efficiency and progress on domestic development. They are buying below top of the line because their own own development still seems to be below that given all that they had invested in terms of money and effort including stealing trade scerets. In the Indian case, our local development with/without foreign assistance seems to have matured a lot though we have ground to cover when compared to the west.

BTW, per your original reply, the Chinese already had access to "Sundry westerners (French, Britshit, Israeli, Japanese, South Korean)" . While this deal will supply them with new Radar equipment, it will not add to their domestic research/production capability that has not already been provided by Sundry westerners who have already "made the chini electronics eco-system world class" and "uplifting Cheen’s MIC too".

OTOH, this buy puts the Chinese domestic capability in the correct perspective, very different from the usual hype driven narrative accompanied by world-class drool worthy photos. That is very reassuring.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Nov 2018 11:58

^^^ Still don’t see why we should be re-assured that Cheen has access to Western systems when we had always counted on our own access to Western systems to maintain an edge.

Whether it is Green Pine for land, MF-Star for our latest destroyers at sea or the Elta MMFC for Tejas in the air, we still depend on western radars. Far better to have the chinis stuck with Russian or their own.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2767
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Nov 2018 12:05

Two 052D stretched versions each moored alongside normal models. Gives a good point of view for comparison.
Image

At least 7 large DDGs in the picture with a second 055 and a fifth 052D (stretched) under construction.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1573
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Manish_P » 03 Nov 2018 21:41

What is this :shock:

At the 2018 Chinese air show

Image

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 04 Nov 2018 04:10

^^^^
Those air intakes. Oh my god
its the grandson of F-117

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21980
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Austin » 04 Nov 2018 06:47

Looks like a badly made mock-up of F-117 :rotfl:


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, lakshmanM, Nitesh and 47 guests