China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Sep 2019 16:08

An example of the furious pace of chini development cycles. The speed of the Type 075 LHD project is breathtaking even for them. Check the previous post on this page of what it looked like in May. It was little more than the keel. Now it looks nearly complete and painted. This in a span of four months for a Vikrant-sized vessel.

That is not the worst of it. Because the second 075 can be seen in this picture (the rust colored mass in front.) And we know the modules of the third ship are stacked up next to the dry dock from satellite pictures.

https://mobile.twitter.com/niktsar/status/1172472492830658561

Nikos Tsarnas
@niktsar

Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 14 Sep 2019 16:12

Iteration cycle is indeed fast & furious, and prudence demands that even if their stuff is crap, we assume it is serious. But multiple rushed production cycles of half-baked stuff remain a problem and the fast cycles could be well explained by how they are skimping on pain-staking testing and validation.

Analysis wise, doubts remain about the quality of the stuff they are churning out.

1.The recent (under) performance of the KLJ-7/SD-10 combo in the Balakote event apart, we do know the PAF tried hard to fit the RC-400/Mica combination instead (despite the raw figures being in favor of the former for the missile). Speaks for itself.
The PAF did not launch a single SD-10 towards a mere 2x Mirages. The Mirages were as heavily outnumbered as the Su-30s. A Mirage kill would have been as much of a prestige one as a Su-30. But they just couldn't.

2.We also know the PAF went for more Erieyes to bolster its inventory and has deployed ZDK-03s away from the conflict. Again, these are CETC units, China's premier radar designer & this also speaks for itself.

3. We have a report above that merely 5 years back, two of China's premier AD designs - YLC2C and YL18 were both returned by Ecuador.

4. Jordan recently put up all its Chinese acquired UAVs for sale.

5. The USAF's bigwig recently noted the Chinese UAVs which a lot of African nations had purchased were pretty much junk. Some of these are China's newest designs.

6. A few years back, a PRC sub literally killed its crew due to a malfunctioning battery/propulsion problem.

7. Despite spending billions, PRC continues to send Russian powerplants for the JF-17. Despite a Chinese LDP in display, usage of prior Chinese RWR, Pakistan turned towards Turkey (!) and Spain for JF-17.

8. Despite the "success" of so many domestic SAM systems, significant (not trial batch) orders for S-400s continue to be placed by PRC for its praetorian defence of Beijing etc.

9. Despite a so called stealth aircraft, PRC purchased a significant number of Su-35s.

Adding up all the above, there is clearly a quality & capability issue across the PRC MIC, fancy pics and power shows apart.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11144
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 14 Sep 2019 16:33

There is no way you get proper electronics and wiring done soo fast, my predictions are these are for Belt and Road Debt enforcement, unfortunately the Chinese are going to attack a relatively weak country without allies soon.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Sep 2019 16:40

Karan M wrote:Iteration cycle is indeed fast & furious, and prudence demands that even if their stuff is crap, we assume it is serious. But multiple rushed production cycles of half-baked stuff remain a problem and the fast cycles could be well explained by how they are skimping on pain-staking testing and validation.

Analysis wise, doubts remain about the quality of the stuff they are churning out.

1.The recent (under) performance of the KLJ-7/SD-10 combo in the Balakote event apart, we do know the PAF tried hard to fit the RC-400/Mica combination instead (despite the raw figures being in favor of the former for the missile). Speaks for itself.
The PAF did not launch a single SD-10 towards a mere 2x Mirages. The Mirages were as heavily outnumbered as the Su-30s. A Mirage kill would have been as much of a prestige one as a Su-30. But they just couldn't.

2.We also know the PAF went for more Erieyes to bolster its inventory and has deployed ZDK-03s away from the conflict. Again, these are CETC units, China's premier radar designer & this also speaks for itself.

3. We have a report above that merely 5 years back, two of China's premier AD designs - YLC2C and YL18 were both returned by Ecuador.

4. Jordan recently put up all its Chinese acquired UAVs for sale.

5. The USAF's bigwig recently noted the Chinese UAVs which a lot of African nations had purchased were pretty much junk. Some of these are China's newest designs.

6. A few years back, a PRC sub literally killed its crew due to a malfunctioning battery/propulsion problem.

7. Despite spending billions, PRC continues to send Russian powerplants for the JF-17. Despite a Chinese LDP in display, usage of prior Chinese RWR, Pakistan turned towards Turkey (!) and Spain for JF-17.

8. Despite the "success" of so many domestic SAM systems, significant (not trial batch) orders for S-400s continue to be placed by PRC for its praetorian defence of Beijing etc.

9. Despite a so called stealth aircraft, PRC purchased a significant number of Su-35s.

Adding up all the above, there is clearly a quality & capability issue across the PRC MIC, fancy pics and power shows apart.


Karan ji, there is little doubt that their stuff is crap compared to the goras. But to everyone else?

If you look at their performance in the global market place across a wide range of products then it is almist inevitable they will become competitive with even the goras after a spell.

They do this by iterations and eventually the quality catches up cost-effectiveness-wise (if not the best overall) to grab a chunk of the market.

We've already seen this race up the technological and production ladder already from Japan ("Made in Japan" used to be a mark of inferiority) and Korea (I was growing up in Amreeka when Hyundai was a popular joke.) They are practically the same Sinosphere race and (Chopsticks) culture as the chinis. Why should we expect anything different?

The Amreekis certainly don't. They are now waging war against Cheen to try to disrupt this process. They don't want a giant-sized Japan, Korea or Taiwan for that matter.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 14 Sep 2019 16:52

Chola, you dont seem to get product development as you are looking at it purely as "iterations". Iterations don't matter diddly, until and unless you thoroughly debug and fix the issue with the first or second iteration.

Check the products I have referenced above. Each was the 3rd or 4th iteration of some domestic design or by a very experienced Chinese design house. Yet there are issues & mass production is going on unimpeded.

Japan and Korea are completely different cases because the Japanese were literally hand-held by the Americans, the Koreans by the Japanese & Americans and both came up with a huge emphasis on quality. Deming circles & the Japanese Kaizen method are examples of iterative improvement done right.

But you can't skip testing & validation, period.

I made a point in the other thread but you & the rest of the China crowd don't seem to have understood it or noticed it all.

NIIP has been developing an AESA FCR for the Su-57 for the past 10 years and more! Its but now entering into low rate production. As of 2015-17, it was still in testing though reasonably mature. This is NIIP, Russia's pre-eminent ESA designer & developer whose Irbis is regarded as a near peer of AESAs in performance, bar specialized functions such as LPI.

And China is buying the Irbis "to evaluate" & its own AESAs used on its pre-eminent AEW&C (easier to make it much more capable than a FCR given space available) are not on order from a primary customer, whereas a Swedish previous generation system, is!

And, whereas it is hawking AESA FCRs.

Now, do you understand how the "fast iterations" are coming about?

They are compromising on the development & test cycle to make money and land orders. They have the buzzwords and tech claims ready, but when deployed, they are not able to manage the reality. This is *not* the same for other countries.

Russia, India, US, France all tend to heavily test gear which they deploy - Russia is at least doing so now, in between they used India as a testbed.

Israel (which too shares China's start-up, get a customer first culture) offers both mature & bleeding edge stuff. With the latter, you risk it. G5 Litening vs the proven G4. Guess what most AF purchased?

The thing though is the stuff from PRC above is not "bleeding edge" its what should have been mature/matured, but isn't. This has a connotation for the next gen of products.

Rushing to mass production is stupid, because customers wise up.

Want one more example which you wouldn't want to acknowledge? Indian power industry guys bought Chinese gear en masse. The German/desi stuff at BHEL was simply too delayed.

All that stuff broke down super fast & they came running back to BHEL.

Pakistan imported trains en masse from China. Broke down, they were asking India for trains made by Indian railways (!) in its own factories etc.

I don't know how many more examples you need to understand China has a quality issue, and its not a small one.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Sep 2019 17:03

Aditya_V wrote:There is no way you get proper electronics and wiring done soo fast, my predictions are these are for Belt and Road Debt enforcement, unfortunately the Chinese are going to attack a relatively weak country without allies soon.


They can't be properly crewed either. But it won't matter if they don't go to war. Those ships are to put overwhelming chini presence in waters that other nations can't match. The shear size and numbers of the chinese fleet will deter any attempt to force to them out.

They won't attack anyone with them. It is not in their interest. They grew to be a dominant power in the last 40 years without going to war but having a massive military. They won't change that strategy.

It is a virtuous circle for them as short productive rice-eaters who are adverse to actual fighting. The more they build, the more they can take over in peacetime while the massive and constantly growing size of their fleet deter war.

Unless someone is willing to start a fight with them, their biggest weakness -- warfighting -- will never come into play, I fear.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 14 Sep 2019 17:30

I am beginning to think the PRC MIC is basically a massive jobs program. Not only does it achieve PRCs stated goals of foreign policy respect by intimidation - look we have 500 ships, nevermind those ships may be subpar in reality, but the massive investment in local production keeps people happy, and cities/districts humming.

Huge supply chains can supply away, the excess steel, this, that production keeps going on. This is *just how they are*. This is intrinsic to their economy, the way they went after infrastructure, economic viability, quality be darned for making sure GDP numbers etc were ok. Empty towns, bridges/roads to nowhere.. now its ships, submarines, fighters, trainers all being churned out with limited rationalization and significant overlap because all factories need to be kept going.

Also, the massive quantitative easing which would have boggled the brain of any western economist with the effort to cover up all the NPAs to state/district/state owned factories and keep the economy chugging.

So, now, they have moved on to their MIC as a way to provide jobs, keep the economy chugging, and also manage power projection, foreign policy goals and ... also make money. So many nations like Iran, South American, African countries, Pakistan which can't access even Russian gear as they wish to. Here are the Chinese. Its a good policy for their objectives, bar the obvious lackadaisical quality & political aspects. They will give you whatever you wish. The Iranian AD network is basically PRC designed and developed. The BRI is part & parcel of this effort. Infra, then civvie exports + weapons.

They will improve no doubt, but we should be aware of their actual intent and not ape them mindlessly. This profligate spending is basically driven by the fact they got the economic heft to be so. If we copy them, we will go broke. Best we focus on specific capabilities and acquire those, and continue a focus on a strict test & deploy method.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Sep 2019 18:37

Karan M wrote:Chola, you dont seem to get product development as you are looking at it purely as "iterations". Iterations don't matter diddly, until and unless you thoroughly debug and fix the issue with the first or second iteration.
...
Rushing to mass production is stupid, because customers wise up.
...
I don't know how many more examples you need to understand China has a quality issue, and its not a small one.

No more examples needed, Karan ji. I know even more examples and not just in the defense side of things. Cheen has a quality problem but it is overstated and relative to goras only IMO. It is the same for their civilian products. Their quality is not up to par with gora ones but the issue is overstated otherwise they wouldn't have sold on the market.

And the idea they "skip" testing is rather inaccurate, Sir. Since you yourself posted this:

6. A few years back, a PRC sub literally killed its crew due to a malfunctioning battery/propulsion problem.

That was them testing their AIP prototype not a production model, Karan ji. They lost over 70, I believe, but didn't give up. They also lost 40 crew and technicians testing their flying chapati on a turboprop transport (sounds familiar?) and didn't give up. They lost who knows how many in the well-document travails in the development and testing of the J-10 and J-15.

So they literally threw lives into the products they are testing. Maybe the rushed cycles had compromised safety. But the iterations come quickly and changes are introduced quickly.

This week, Thailand just signed for a 25K-ton LPD. Well Thailand had been complaining of chini quality since the 1980s. But year after year they buy newer iterations of previous products. They won't do that unless the quality had improved over time. That is the same with chini civilian products as well.

Sooner or later their stuff will become competitive. With fast development cycles and iterations, their emphasis is on the sooner rather than later.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Sep 2019 18:52

Karan M wrote:I am beginning to think the PRC MIC is basically a massive jobs program. Not only does it achieve PRCs stated goals of foreign policy respect by intimidation - look we have 500 ships, nevermind those ships may be subpar in reality, but the massive investment in local production keeps people happy, and cities/districts humming.


This I agree with %100 especially since Trump's war had clobbered their export sector!

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2475
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby darshhan » 15 Sep 2019 00:39

There is another reason why China will never wage an open war against any country having decent combat capability for eg. Japan, Russia, India or even vietnam or phillipines. This is because they absolutely hate to "Lose Face". In this matter China is very similar to its close friend Pakistan. Any one who has dealt with chinese for some time, know how important it is for Chinese to never lose face. So quality and ruggedness of their military products is of secondary concern. The countries which lack money and are not exactly close to US and other western powers will have no choice but to buy Chinese shit. So china gains an export market and earns valuable foreign exchange besides providing employment to chinese professionals.

So what are going to be China's options to act against its formidable opponents in the near future. The first one is using catspaw entities like Pakistan to balance and contain its opponents. Other options are covert warfare including social and political manipulation in its opposing countries. Followed by cyber attacks wherever possible .

Of late they have also been very vigorous in developing swarming technologies for their UAVs. Once they are able to mature this technology then all bets are off.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3307
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 15 Sep 2019 01:48

darshhan wrote:There is another reason why China will never wage an open war against any country having decent combat capability for eg. Japan, Russia, India or even vietnam or phillipines. This is because they absolutely hate to "Lose Face". In this matter China is very similar to its close friend Pakistan. Any one who has dealt with chinese for some time, know how important it is for Chinese to never lose face. So quality and ruggedness of their military products is of secondary concern. The countries which lack money and are not exactly close to US and other western powers will have no choice but to buy Chinese shit. So china gains an export market and earns valuable foreign exchange besides providing employment to chinese professionals.

So what are going to be China's options to act against its formidable opponents in the near future. The first one is using catspaw entities like Pakistan to balance and contain its opponents. Other options are covert warfare including social and political manipulation in its opposing countries. Followed by cyber attacks wherever possible .

Of late they have also been very vigorous in developing swarming technologies for their UAVs. Once they are able to mature this technology then all bets are off.


I think China WILL attempt a conflict on a small scale against a mid sized power most likely the UK in the next 5 years. , while the UK tries to ride on unkils cloak tails it seldom sees the big picture when operating in South China Sea. With that they hope other countries will fall in line. More likely if the trumper wins a second term.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 15 Sep 2019 05:28

chola wrote:No more examples needed, Karan ji. I know even more examples and not just in the defense side of things. Cheen has a quality problem but it is overstated and relative to goras only IMO.


If you know more examples then you'd surely also know it doesn't just extend to goras, but extends to many others. I don't know what is your fixation with goras either. Brazil, India, South Korea, Japan, even certain Arab nations are now making weapons to a fair degree of quality.

India tests its indigenous platforms extensively to the degree people mock the services process driven tests. But at least when they enter service, they don't suffer recalls the way the PRC stuff does.

Our issue is often with service, supply chain management & vendor management. This is a different issue altogether.

The one area where we have had a very Chinese type production setup is the OFB. Guess what? Similar results. A political, state owned, unionized setup, supported by powerful labor orgs. Makes bad products, sub-par quality, frequent issues.

It is the same for their civilian products. Their quality is not up to par with gora ones but the issue is overstated otherwise they wouldn't have sold on the market.


Clearly, you are refusing to look at the facts. The countries buying Chinese, including India are often seduced by cost & delivery considerations. Indian power plant operators or Ecuador buying radars - both looked at price and cost, and said wow! Then came the reality when products entered service.

https://www.uasvision.com/2019/06/06/jo ... nese-uavs/

However, its six CH-4B UAVs were reportedly delivered about two years ago. The RCAF told Shepard Media in November 2018 it was not happy with the aircraft’s performance and was looking to retire them.


Or even this:
https://taskandpurpose.com/china-j-15-fighter-jets

The J-15—which is an unlicensed Chinese development based on a T-10K-3 prototype of the Russian Su-33 Flanker-D—has proven to be a disappointment in service with the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). The navalized Chinese Flanker derivative has suffered a number of high-profile crashes due to technical issues with the aircraft’s engines and flight control system.

The J-15’s problems are apparently serious enough that Beijing is embarking on the development of a new carrier-based aircraft that would take the J-15’s place in China’s nascent carrier air wings.

A “new carrier-based fighter to replace the J-15” is being developed, Lt. Gen. Zhang Honghe, deputy head of the PLA Air Force, told the South China Morning Post.
.....

According to the SCMP, there have been at least four J-15 crashes that have resulted in at least one fatality and one case of serious injury due to what has been described as a series of “unpardonable mechanical failures.”

The technical problems seem to be traceable to the J-15’s indigenously developed engines and flight control system.

“The J-15 is a problematic aircraft – its unstable flight control system was the key factor behind the two fatal accidents two years ago,” a source told the SCMP.


This is the J-15, the much hyped program that was a "perfect" example of how China had adapted the Flanker & took the Ukrainians help to navalize it, how it would defeat the Indian MiG-29K (which was flawed etc) and an equal of the Super Hornet etc etc.

This is the result of your "fast iteration cycles". A whole program, gone. Yes learning & all, but with what compromises made along the way.

Even articles like SCMP attempting to support Chinese arms let the cat out of the bag:
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diploma ... ity-issues

2016
At September’s Africa Aerospace and Defence air show in Pretoria, South Africa, Chinese exhibitors struggled to find buyers even though Beijing tried hard to secure sales of its L-15 Falcon trainer and JF-17 fighter, Andrei Chang, the founder of military magazine Kanwa Asian Defence, told the South China Morning Post.

He said Cameroon had received four Harbin Z-9 attack helicopters from China after Beijing offered a US$100 million loan last year, but one of them had crashed soon after being handed over. Cameroon was still negotiating with China over the accident and had no any plans to buy any more Chinese weapons due to quality concerns, Chang said.


Cameroon (!!) had quality concerns over the Z-9, an AS-365 Dauphin copy etc.

And the idea they "skip" testing is rather inaccurate, Sir. Since you yourself posted this:

6. A few years back, a PRC sub literally killed its crew due to a malfunctioning battery/propulsion problem.


That was them testing their AIP prototype not a production model, Karan ji. They lost over 70, I believe, but didn't give up. They also lost 40 crew and technicians testing their flying chapati on a turboprop transport (sounds familiar?) and didn't give up. They lost who knows how many in the well-document travails in the development and testing of the J-10 and J-15.

So they literally threw lives into the products they are testing. Maybe the rushed cycles had compromised safety. But the iterations come quickly and changes are introduced quickly.


Chola - at this point I am wondering whether you have any idea of development or are you just making stuff as you go along! Of what use was the "fast cycle" when they rushed a compromised product like the J-15 into service and having 4 crashes back to back, without a careful methodical design & development process. And you are touting the AIP and AEW&C crash as a virtue?

No sane individual would sign off on some prototype with significant design flaws unless there was a) a process mistake OR b) there is a cultural/industry issue with skipping the tests necessary to take a plane to actual flight testing, or a submarine to be actually deployed to the sea.

Do you even understand what you are touting as a virtue, is actually the very thing that is a problem. They are rushing things to production, build & think they are ok to test/fly etc.

A proper test regimen WOULD NOT risk its crews like the Chinese are doing today. This stuff was the norm in the Cold War, in the 1950's and in the 1960s. But not today. When it happens like on our SARAS (SOP issues + raw design) it is not by intent.

What you are touting as a virtue, is anything but! It is nuts.

They are rushing production cycles, losing crews because the earlier tests were not sufficient (and after the loss, how will they know from the wreckage what went wrong, it will be guesswork mostly!) and then they just go ahead, build and make more of them.

This week, Thailand just signed for a 25K-ton LPD. Well Thailand had been complaining of chini quality since the 1980s. But year after year they buy newer iterations of previous products. They won't do that unless the quality had improved over time. That is the same with chini civilian products as well.


Do you seriously think arms exports with China (or any exporter) are driven only by quality concerns and no other political concerns come in? Heard of the F-104 and its sales in Europe? Or the Al-Yamamah deal?

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics ... arms-deals

“The NCPO [National Council for Peace and Order – the ruling junta’s name for itself] allowed the army to buy a large number of weapons from China, including a Chinese S-26T submarine and a VN1 armoured vehicle,” he said.

“Why do they focus on arms procurement only with China? [This] procurement cannot be openly examined as in the procurement of goods from the West.” Relations between Thailand and the United States , its long-time ally, chilled following the military coup in 2014.


Will the Thai mil govt in particular allow any details of the gear to leak out in public?

Even where the Govts do retain the product (i.e. like Pakistan with JF-17, they replace key systems)
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-b ... pons-17746

In the last five years, for example, more than two-thirds (71%, to be exact) of all Chinese arms sales went to just three countries: Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Myanmar. The rest went mostly to a handful poorer countries in the African continent, particularly Algeria, Nigeria, Sudan, and Tanzania.
.....................
Few countries are lining up to buy other Chinese weapons systems, or, if they are, they’re throwing out Chinese parts and replacing them with Western systems. This is because China’s defense industry is still very weak when it comes to key technologies like jet engines and electronics. Algeria acquired corvettes from China but subsequently outfitted them with French radar and communications gear. Pakistani JF-17 jets use a Russian engine, while Thailand turned to Saab of Sweden to upgrade its Chinese-built frigates.


And given what the ME countries (who can afford the best) will soon learn about Chinese gear only those under sanctions like Iran, will remain dependent on the PRC. They will be a nice testbed, captive market like Pakistan.

Sooner or later their stuff will become competitive. With fast development cycles and iterations, their emphasis is on the sooner rather than later.


At this point, you are just making the same statement again & again, without any evidence so far, of where they are in terms of actual performance & quality. Nor does it appear do you understand how involved and methodical real world product development is. Stating the same thing again and again, without looking at where they are today, does not make for objective analysis of any sort.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 15 Sep 2019 07:13

At this point, you are just making the same statement again & again, without any evidence so far, of where they are in terms of actual performance & quality.


Perhaps I have become repetitive. I speak from a market's perspective so the base message will be the same. Their products would not sell unless they had some semblance of quality. Crap really doesn't sell.

So exactly, Karan ji. Where are they today? They did not get to be the second largest economy and largest trading nation by building and selling complete crap that are not tested or validated.

For all the problems of the J-15, it still flies. Because of it, they are building more carriers.

The AIP program that killed 70 eventually led to their Yuan class with 20 built or in planning.

Their chapati accident that killed 45 led to the KJ-500 that is being mass produced like, well, chapatis.

I don't know. Wall Street saw them as another Far Eastern Tiger in the same vein as Japan, Korea and Taiwan two decades ago and nothing since has shown us that this view was wrong. The fact that the US has to fight a trade and technology war with them for supremacy like it had with Japan in the 1990s pretty proves they are nothing but a bigger Japan with all that entails for production and quality.

YashG
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby YashG » 15 Sep 2019 08:54

Chinese defence achievements till now have been significantly assisted by their stealing of secrets from other countries. But that is now beginning to change- countries have become very conscious of Chinese espionage. The recent arrest of a high standing official of huawei is a watershed moment.

From here on till next decade we should be able to see some impact of this in their defence achievements as countries around the world make it difficult for the Chinese to simply steal/copy technology.

In civilian space it is a known fact that china spies over every person who enters their country stealing their data. They habe used it to advantage of their own comapnies. But that will also reduce as US is cutting off their access. Chinese scholars are being given less access by the US research community.

I have spoken to a professor doing research in AI at a mjor institute of India repeatedly swatting off chinese attacks on his server.

As Chine alienates itself from western world, the effects will show up on their quality of stuff they develop.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2202
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby vivek_ahuja » 15 Sep 2019 10:47

Karan M wrote:1.The recent (under) performance of the KLJ-7/SD-10 combo in the Balakote event apart...

2.We also know the PAF went for more Erieyes to bolster its inventory and has deployed ZDK-03s away from the conflict. Again, these are CETC units, China's premier radar designer & this also speaks for itself.

3. We have a report above that merely 5 years back, two of China's premier AD designs - YLC2C and YL18 were both returned by Ecuador.

4. Jordan recently put up all its Chinese acquired UAVs for sale.

5. The USAF's bigwig recently noted the Chinese UAVs which a lot of African nations had purchased were pretty much junk. Some of these are China's newest designs.

...


A lot of this list looks like the main issues holding the Chinese back is the electronics. Radars, ECM, ECCM and other EO systems. Aero engines is another weak point, but they are not alone in this. Their overall manufacturing QA might be a third issue causing trouble for them. Fast production without sufficient trials will do that.

But all that aside, I do see the virtue in pointing out (as Chola has), that their airplanes are indeed flying and their ships are floating. Their ballistic missiles work as well, as does their space program and their commercial airplane production. They seem to kill a lot of their people doing it, but they have people to spare. And their political life and culture in general does not hold human lives (or lives in general) very highly. So I am not sure they are having the same heartburn about lost lives the way Karan M is pointing out.

@Karan: Is it possible that in highlighting the weak points in their avionics, electronics and radars, you are missing the point that they are learning (albeit in a way not prescribed by western methods)? Is the western approach to product development the only game in town?

I think you should make the call on what you want to do with this thread. I read the title as "China Military Watch", and in that sense, I distinguish it against "China Military Capabilities and Analysis". Chola is doing a good job of centralizing what is available on different fora on the internet, so that it informs further analysis and discussion. People like me come here to get the latest news on China's military production. Perhaps the capabilities analysis of said production ought to be a different thread? Perhaps there is benefit in keeping this one like you do with Indian military news and reports threads?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 15 Sep 2019 14:54

Vivek, I think both the points should be discussed on one thread.

Reason being an objective view should take into account the pros and cons of their build away, we'll see the rest later approach. It can be ruinous to India if we get awed by their profligation of platforms and try to react via massive imports or mass production of half baked systems in panic.

What we're doing right, methodical tests of desi and imported kit for instance, should not be sabotaged by reports of China making 10,000 kits. You can see the effect their PR game has on folks who are not exposed to product devpt test cycles, who are not well versed with PR.

They start buying into the hype and get convinced that merely rushing things into production us debugging. It rarely is, you'd have wasted huge amounts of resources on a flawed product, diverted them from a limited budget.

I also think it's not merely an electronics issue but a cultural one. Reason being as late as 2015 or thereabouts, Indian engineers working on Kaveri noted their PRC counterparts were on the same boat as they were, after having observed them at Gromov. Yet, PRC started mass deploying engines on fighters, not 1-2 but squadron level numbers. Reports then emerged of extremely low reliability, crashes.

So, there is a cultural issue of having to in US parlance, fake it till you make it, OR rushing to production, consequences be darned because the program is too big to fail as it is a jobs/prestige program. The same issue was seen with imports of Chinese powerplant eqpt, the raw material was substandard, service was poor, and the Chinese treated the customers badly. This is the private sector.

Now imagine you are a state owned firm, with your bigwigs on best name basis with Xi, a huge employer in a city industrial cluster. Would a PLA general be able to stop a showpiece program? This is OFB on steroids. We've seen with OFB how bad this combination is. You will make huge production lots, only have to them sequestered when they fail, and no-one is held accountable, workers go on strike if anything is upset. Now, I have a few more first hand stories from having worked with PRC teams, but will leave that aside for now.

I think it is very important to catalogue both sides in a thread on Chinese Chinese military devpt. Their pros,and cons.

About what they are getting right, ballistic missiles, missiles, heres my point. What do we know of reliability rates? Prudence demands that we assume they are at high yield (we overprepare) but these endemic issues do make me wonder whether some orgs/units are insulated or they too are in the same boat.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 15 Sep 2019 15:06

chola wrote:Perhaps I have become repetitive. I speak from a market's perspective so the base message will be the same. Their products would not sell unless they had some semblance of quality. Crap really doesn't sell.


This is why I can state with reasonable certainty that you have not seen any market dynamics in the developing and even some parts of the developed world. Crap sells all the time on cost, service, time basis. Then it flares up as it did with several customers of PRC gear. Military sales have another dimension of politics, financing and kickbacks as they usually tend to be guarded from public review, feedback is rarely reported in detail.

So exactly, Karan ji. Where are they today? They did not get to be the second largest economy and largest trading nation by building and selling complete crap that are not tested or validated.


Much on the back of build to print designs where everything was carefully hand held by the very OEMs who transferred to them. Mil production is a different kettle of fish. Just because you can make a phone, copied from foreign ref design, with a yield of 70% and still make margin, junk the rejects, you cant apply the same philosophy to a fighter or a sub where the problems appear suddenly and without warning. To fix this, you do decades of testing before clearing the product. The PRC is bypassing this process/seeking shortcuts.

or all the problems of the J-15, it still flies. Because of it, they are building more carriers.


Which is stupid on their part. If they cant fix the J15, they have white elephants.

The AIP program that killed 70 eventually led to their Yuan class with 20 built or in planning.
Their chapati accident that killed 45 led to the KJ-500 that is being mass produced like, well, chapatis.


And the bigger point is, which you are unable to acknowledge is those platforms may still gave glaring deficiencies vis a vis their counterparts from other countries on account of a build away, mindset.

I don't know. Wall Street saw them as another Far Eastern Tiger in the same vein as Japan, Korea and Taiwan two decades ago and nothing since has shown us that this view was wrong. The fact that the US has to fight a trade and technology war with them for supremacy like it had with Japan in the 1990s pretty proves they are nothing but a bigger Japan with all that entails for production and quality.


Please lets stop namedropping Wall Street etc. It is a non sequitur. Most of us who saw the innards of what was sold to China, knew about Chinese customers/ how products were built keeping PRC demands in mind, have a fair idea of the huge difference in mindset between the average PRC customer and the western one, and even some Indian customers. It's not apples to apples at all.

LakshmanPST
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 99
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby LakshmanPST » 16 Sep 2019 09:46

I think both the above arguements are valid...
-
I don't think any one in the world, including US & European countries, can design a product that is 100% accident free...
The products are tested for quality and later for trails only to reduce the PROBABILITY of malfunction...

Yes, Chinese can build products on a mass scale... But their products have a higher probability of malfunction...
This, during peacetime will result in loss of precious lives and during war time, it may even become the reason for loss of war...
-
But the thing is, as long as PRChina don't go to war with a major power and sticks to bullying small countries, these weapons are enough... And smaller countries whose main aim is to have a decent enough military within limited budgets can afford to buy those weapons...

But India can not be like China coz. we do not bully small countries... We may go to war in future and with only 2 countries which have significant military power... So, we can not afford to mass build low quality & inadequately tested military hardware like China... Quality is as much important for us as quantity...

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Deans » 16 Sep 2019 10:27

I see a parallel between China's defence production effort and that of the former Soviet Union. In both cases, producers had to meet quantitative targets - or be shot. They stole tech from the US. That results in shortcuts which may not be apparent when the product is built - or some general is persuaded that time and cost can be saved by not adding some `unnecessary' safety feature (that was one of the main causes of the Chernobyl meltdown). It also means not all parts of a system have been mastered by the manufacturer. It is very reassuring to the manufacturers that any flaws in their equipment will only be known if the country goes to war (the chances of which are low due to the reasons others in this forum have mentioned and I concur with). If the product fails in an exercise, its because `untrained conscripts' were to blame. If it succeeds, its often because Generals have a vested interest in the success (lives of their men in a future conflict are irrelevant) and conduce exercises in highly sanitised environments.

The Russians are remedying this, with manufacturers representatives being sent off to Syria where their equipment is being used (75% of Russian squadrons have had a deployment to Syria).
Last edited by Deans on 16 Sep 2019 10:32, edited 2 times in total.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11144
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 16 Sep 2019 10:28

To add to the above points with soo many defaults in Belt and Road in the name of "restructuring", the Chinese are waiting to show their muscles, I think in 1962 they expected it to be even more easier against India and 1979 they didnt expect Vietnam to be that tough.

They are first going to attack a country in Africa with a relatively weak military to build credentials.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2019 12:34

Karan M wrote:About what they are getting right, ballistic missiles, missiles, heres my point. What do we know of reliability rates? Prudence demands that we assume they are at high yield (we overprepare) but these endemic issues do make me wonder whether some orgs/units are insulated or they too are in the same boat.


Bingo!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.scmp.c ... ity-issues

Chinese arms manufacturers may find it even more challenging to make sales following the reported failure of Chinese-made C-705 anti-ship missiles to hit their targets during an Indonesian exercise in September that was watched by Indonesian President Joko Widodo.

IHS Jane’s reported that two C-705 missiles failed to hit their targets after being fired from two of the Indonesian navy’s KCR-40-class missile attack craft during the large-scale Armada Jaya 2016 exercise in the Java Sea on September 14.

........

And instead of accepting the problems, guess what, they blamed the weather, user, even dragged in India's Su-30s. Check out the sheer insecurity on display. The Chinese are, very image conscious.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2019 12:35

Deans, great insights as usual. The Syria deployment will have a salutary impact on Russian gear. Also, Indias effect on Russian MIC is ignored. In India, they have to compete with the best western gear to swing our deals. That forces them to push the envelope. For instance, our specs for the Su30 with raw performance > Mirage 2000V, which the aircraft more or less met. Similarly, today, the basic threshold the MiG35 has to cross are the MMRCA specs gathered from a sampling of a diverse set of WW wares. Raises standards. And we dont hesitate to reject in most cases, if the products are not up to spec.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2019 12:42

And this:


The Sad State of Quality Systems in Most Chinese Factories
November 8, 2018


The sad truth in China is, 5% of the manufacturers are doing a good job consistently, and the rest have ups & downs that irritate and frighten Western customers.

And, of those 5% that do a good job consistently, 0.5% do so because of good systems and the other 4.5% do so because operations are not very complex and management watches what happens carefully.

Yes, I made these numbers up. But that’s my impression after 12 years spent working here across multiple sectors (from apparel to tier-1 automotive, and from furniture to electronics). Bad suppliers quality is still a real problem in China.


See the attached infographic. This is OFB in a nutshell.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2019 12:53

Another thing, archive everything. Over a decade of watching this stuff, and I can tell you for sure most details of China get deleted double quick if they are from sites which PRC can influence.

YashG
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby YashG » 20 Sep 2019 12:33

YashG wrote:Chinese defence achievements till now have been significantly assisted by their stealing of secrets from other countries. But that is now beginning to change- countries have become very conscious of Chinese espionage. The recent arrest of a high standing official of huawei is a watershed moment.

From here on till next decade we should be able to see some impact of this in their defence achievements as countries around the world make it difficult for the Chinese to simply steal/copy technology.
As Chine alienates itself from western world, the effects will show up on their quality of stuff they develop.


Guy in an earlier post I had made the claim that US is cutting off Chinese stealing capacity. Here is an article that corroborates the same -
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/19/761962531/people-are-looking-at-your-linkedin-profile-they-might-be-chinese-spies

From this point forward - you will see deceleration in Chinese technology developments. Basically US will ensure that they dont get to copy anymore. US companies will be warned, restricted and so on. They will be choked off at even University/Academia level!
The free ride for China is over. If you find distinct signs of Chinese military programs slowing down unexplicably - call out. I hope/expect that to happen!

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 508
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby SNaik » 25 Sep 2019 14:56


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Sep 2019 15:01

^^^ It went from this (on left):
Image

to this:
Image

In four months. Top photo taken in May. Modular shipbuilding.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 26 Sep 2019 11:01

They flooded the dry dock with a second hull only partially completed. How does this work? Is the unfinished hull sealed so it could float too? Or they simply allow water to flood the unfinished hull?

Building two 35-40K ton vessels in a dry dock simultaneously is a feat in itself to be honest. But it would be funny if they had a mishap floating the thing out. Maybe a nice long scratch in its new paint job from the other hull.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1177066905976410112

@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
Following this image the Type 075 LHD is still in the dry dock, which is now filled ... and also the second hull is visible.

Image

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11144
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 26 Sep 2019 11:49

The question is not just getting a steel block together in 4 months, but the design electronics, weapons fitment etc. I find it hard to believe miles of cabling, various weapons, SAM's etc have been integrated. You can build various parts and intergrate it together, Given thee closed nature of PRC, no real reports on its performance in sea tests, electronics , reliability etc will be shown.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 26 Sep 2019 12:01

^^^ Actually, welding blocks together in 4 months is no easy chore either when you considered our much smaller P17A Nilgiri well have taken about two years when it launches shortly (knock on wood.)

But I understand your point, Aditya ji. The fitting out process will take longer without doubt. Yes, we really know nothing about the effectiveness of their warships. But we do know they can move from point A to point B which might be all they need since they haven't fought a war in 40 years.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11144
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 26 Sep 2019 13:26

Saar, for us its not just welding blocks, but design changes, Integrating the space for electronic equipment all built into our design. In 4 months you can weld something together and then worry where will the wiring accommodation go etc. Unless you want the whole ship to communicate using wireless tech. Its one thing to have efficient process. This is more like the USS WASP (CV-7)

tandav
BRFite
Posts: 407
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 08:24

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby tandav » 27 Sep 2019 21:30

China will unveil many new weapon systems on its special 1 Oct 2019 national parade.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/27/asia/china-military-parade-analysis-preview-intl-hnk/index.html

DF-41 ICBM (10 nos MIRV)
Type 15 Light Tank for Himalayan frontier
DR-8 Hypersonic Target Acquisition Drone
H-6 Bomber with advanced features
Unmanned Submersible drone

The most threatening of these system are the unmanned system that they can deploy and weaponize in a heartbeat. System that make a lot of our human based border control system vulnerable. The India-China border is probably already under watch a very tight C4I system supported by drones. It is one of the reasons why they are able to penetrate into India easily and intercept our soldiers on patrol in a targeted fashion.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 29 Sep 2019 15:11

From Japanese watcher Horobeyo.
https://mobile.twitter.com/horobeyo

On the size of the Type 075:
Image

Image

Image

Rapid construction of the ships lends to new variants. Rumors that second batch of three will be 075A that is larger and might include a ramp:

Image

Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 29 Sep 2019 16:12

This is money splurge on an epic scale. Literally, their own cash for jobs program to keep the economy chugging along.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3307
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 29 Sep 2019 16:36

Aditya_V wrote:There is no way you get proper electronics and wiring done soo fast, my predictions are these are for Belt and Road Debt enforcement, unfortunately the Chinese are going to attack a relatively weak country without allies soon.


Attack and do what ? .. occupation of another country by force is so 18th century.. change their regimes and buy their bureaucracy to exploit natural resources and hog their markets and kill domestic industries , just a modern version of East india company. And ..they ARE doing it already.

Some countries are wisening up and China might be tempted a show of force and expose their cards. The US is awaiting such an eventuality and keeping a regional potential policing power handy.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 29 Sep 2019 17:22

Karan M wrote:This is money splurge on an epic scale. Literally, their own cash for jobs program to keep the economy chugging along.


Without doubt, Karan ji. With their export engine being clobbered by Trump, they need to generate jobs elsewhere.

It also dovetails with their strategy of filling up and taking over waters with machines that other nation can't make enough of.

They can't crew the number of capital ships that are in their pipeline from what we know today -- two CVs, 15 052D DDGs, 8 055 CGs and 3 075 LHDs. All that will be coming online in just the next five years. There is also a shadow navy in their Coast Guard who are receiving new 4K-ton (based on the 054 FFG) and 12K-ton (yes, cruiser-sized) cutters. So training and staffing naval/maritime personnel will be another jobs program.

Without the export engine, Cheen becomes a lot more like the USSR and its vulnerabilities. Unkil wants Cheen to spend and create jobs on these things rather than competitive cars or cellphones that can grow their economy. The key is whether the civilian portion of the chini economy can be productive enough in a trade war with the US to support these military jobs programs.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3756
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 30 Sep 2019 16:06

Interesting thread on how watchers estimate length on new launches. Using landmarks and GE. The method is different from the triangulation one used by the Japanese watcher above with a difference of 7 meters.

https://mobile.twitter.com/niktsar/status/1178015388749176832

Tsar Nick
@niktsar
075 length est through geolocation ~245m

Image
Image

Image Image



Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Philip » 01 Oct 2019 08:43

Watch live the stinking pigs of the Middle Kingdom march Nazi style on their 70th. anniversary. The sh*tworms are well on their way for the military conquest of Asia and only under India's leadership and military muscle- sorely in need of expansion to meet the neo- Nazi Chins, can India and a coalition of allies stop them.

It is about to show off their latest milware including their
Dong Feng- 41, an ICBM capable of striking any part of the planet.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7750
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 01 Oct 2019 21:17

So the first time the DF-17 makes an appearance. This is their Medium range BGV that US intel claims China tested in November of 2017. This is also likely what is spurring the fast-tracking of laser scaling and the next gen. interceptors that were recently in the news under various semi-classified contract awards to Lockheed and Raytheon. I believe the US position is that this weapon system is aimed at breaking BMD system set ups in Guam, Japan, South Korea and elsewhere.

Image

Image

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1928
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby AdityaM » 02 Oct 2019 09:32

China's High-Speed Drone Is Rocket-Powered And All About Doing What Satellites Can't

Some amazing pics at https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/11790 ... 20384?s=21

What is the 2 man open roof helicopter like thing. Also any idea about the bulky torpedo like weapon

(Don’t know how to post twitter pics)
Last edited by AdityaM on 02 Oct 2019 09:40, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, chiru, Google [Bot], Kakarat, sajaym, sgopal and 67 guests