Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

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.
Post Reply
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ldev »

ChanakyaM wrote:And I think this is where they under estimate the Indian people and their resolve, we unite behind the country in time of need. So if you think China is going to lob 2000km missile in to hinterland of India what is preventing us from reciprocating? we do have some AGNI's in our quiver right? a couple of well placed on the eastern starboard is enough to rattle them, take out some of their major economic centers and we achieve parity.
Check out the missile thread. The creation of the Rocket Forces command is to formalize the use of ballistic missiles for conventional strikes vs the previous doctrine of utilizing them purely for the nuclear delivery role. And you need mass i.e. China has an estimated inventory of 2500 short medium and long range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. So it is going to take India some time to spool up production and command and control. Right now Agnis are tasked with the nuclear role only.

The recent Agni 5 test was IMO a very potent signal. That India recognizes the present conventional missile asymmetry vs India and is prepared to take the next step up the escalatory ladder if needed. Not an ideal situation because then the balance hangs by a thread. And hence the importance of getting on with the Rocket Forces Command asap.
ChanakyaM
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 22 Feb 2018 05:39

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ChanakyaM »

ldev wrote:Check out the missile thread. The creation of the Rocket Forces command is to formalize the use of ballistic missiles for conventional strikes vs the previous doctrine of utilizing them purely for the nuclear delivery role. And you need mass i.e. China has an estimated inventory of 2500 short medium and long range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. So it is going to take India some time to spool up production and command and control. Right now Agnis are tasked with the nuclear role only.

The recent Agni 5 test was IMO a very potent signal. That India recognizes the present conventional missile asymmetry vs India and is prepared to take the next step up the escalatory ladder if needed. Not an ideal situation because then the balance hangs by a thread. And hence the importance of getting on with the Rocket Forces Command asap.

while what you say might look right on paper, the doctrine of nuclearizing a missile or not is up to the strategic command / missile command based on the need of the moment/hour. We do not need a huge arsenal to knock some sense in to the chinks, all we need are a good number of well directed and placed ones where they hurt the most.

Do you really think all the sabre rattling is going to lead to some action, we are just witnessing another cold war this time with US and China as main adversaries and the erstwhile Soviet remains playing the second fiddle/actor here. Taiwan being the main play here with a weak administration at the helm they are trying to do a crimea there. We need to wait and see how this one plays out.

If they make a play for Taiwan we should effectively go out and take over POK and shut them out there while their eastern starboard is busy firefighting. This whole exercise of beefing up the napakis and new hardware on the NE front is to install a proxy while they are free to concentrate on their eastern front is what I think. I may be totally off mark here
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ldev »

ChanakyaM wrote: while what you say might look right on paper, the doctrine of nuclearizing a missile or not is up to the strategic command / missile command based on the need of the moment/hour. We do not need a huge arsenal to knock some sense in to the chinks, all we need are a good number of well directed and placed ones where they hurt the most.
It does not work that way that one fine day the SFC says, " You know what, today we will replace the nuclear warhead on this Agni 5 with a conventional warhead and let fly to Shanghai".

For a conventional warhead to be effective it has to have a better CEP than a nuclear warhead. That is why I said, do read up the article written by Saurav Jha in the Missile Thread. It is no mistake that the 2 missiles that he has specifically mentioned which could form part of the Rocket Force are the Prahlay and the Agni P, both of them have the best CEPs in India's missile inventory and hence best suited for conventional strikes. Also both are canisterised and mobile. You also need IRNSS to be robust enough to provide guidance all the way to target and the article implies that has so me way to go yet.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

ChanakyaM wrote:while what you say might look right on paper, the doctrine of nuclearizing a missile or not is up to the strategic command / missile command based on the need of the moment/hour. We do not need a huge arsenal to knock some sense in to the chinks, all we need are a good number of well directed and placed ones where they hurt the most.
Not all missiles in the SFC kitty are tasked for the nuclear role. The Shaurya - which is part of the SFC for now - will likely be armed only with conventional warheads. Even Agni Prime could be armed with conventional warheads. Ever since the foundation of the IGMDP, it has always been the goal to arm India's ballistic missiles (and now cruise missiles i.e. Nirbhay) with both nuclear and conventional warheads.

So if the PLARF attacks right now with ballistic missiles armed with conventional warheads, it will be the SFC that will respond in kind. And there are targets that the Shaurya and Agni Prime can effectively take out. But that response, while painful for the ChiComs, will be limited due to the low numbers at present.

This is where the IRF comes in. A large number of Shaurya, Nirbhay, Agni Prime (and other such missiles) will serve as a very effective deterrent against China. Shorter range missiles like the Pra-series will also nicely round up the proposed IRF. The end goal is effective deterrence.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Click on the link below ChanakyaM and then go to the "Specifications" sub-heading and look at the variety of warheads that the Agni (from Agni-I to Agni-IV) missile can carry. Agni-P can also carry a conventional warhead. All is good :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni_(missile)
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5461
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Cyrano »

We Spent a Year Investigating What the Chinese Army Is Buying. Here’s What We Learned.
Publicly available documents show how Chinese progress in military AI is being driven, in part, by access to American technology and capital.

<snip>
Over the past year, I was part of a team of researchers at the Center for Security and Emerging Technology that sifted through 350 Chinese military equipment contracts related specifically to AI. The sample we analyzed is part of a larger, publicly available dataset of 66,000 procurement records published between April and November 2020.
<snip>

Please follow the link to read the article.
ChanakyaM
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 22 Feb 2018 05:39

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ChanakyaM »

Rakesh wrote:Click on the link below ChanakyaM and then go to the "Specifications" sub-heading and look at the variety of warheads that the Agni (from Agni-I to Agni-IV) missile can carry. Agni-P can also carry a conventional warhead. All is good :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni_(missile)
Thanks ji will go through it
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by YashG »

TAI Anka used an engine which was built by technify. China bought Technify in 2013
https://www.al.com/press-register-busin ... tes_p.html

Guess how China has been accelerating its weapons production - this is how. On the fringes of Western Capitalistic Order, China has been taking full advantage. Today however China will not be able to make this kind of acquisition.
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by YashG »

https://twitter.com/joe_sameer/status/1 ... 8960343040
Sameer Joshi: The F-117's canopy windows were laminated to prevent radar waves from entering the cockpit. Without the special coating, the radar reflection from the pilot’s helmet would be greater than that from the entire aircraft!
And that is why fifth gen aircraft is not about making an aircraft in slanted curveless surfaces. This is the kind of nuance that perhaps takes decades to master. It is not the only one.
ritesh
BRFite
Posts: 494
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 17:48
Location: Mumbai

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ritesh »

Bhai log, have a noob question on chini missiles.

If we consider porki rebranded chini missiles as unreliable then whats the efficacy of the tallel than mountain and sweeter than honey friend' other missiles in the arsenal?

I know, chinis must have kept the super duper maal for its self, but their prowess or lack of it in other defence areas like af and navy do not inspire much confidence. So, how much of it is true capability and how much is hot air?
Last edited by ritesh on 17 Nov 2021 05:27, edited 1 time in total.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

China being a closed society, it is hard for OSINT folks to come to any verifiable conclusion. Being full of bluster is what the Chinese do best, but that does not mean that the dragon has no fire. So how much is true and how much is hot air is hard to quantify. The only thing one can do is to take their claims at face value, match it with what other countries have done and make an educated inference as to what the capability will actually be. But at the end of the day, it is only that --- an educated guess. The real capability will only display herself in a full blown conflict.

But capability alone does not translate into victory. Exploiting the platform, having an effective strategy and a counter strategy all factor into the final outcome of winning or losing a war. These are usually done with large scale exercises (which China definitely does inhouse), but also doing the same with other nations (which China is limited to Russia, Pakistan or some other friendly nation). This is important, because it gives the user a very good insight into how your platforms and your personnel will perform in a conflict and what areas need to be improved upon. If China has only done inhouse military exercises, those results will largely be skewed.

Countries like the US, UK, France, Japan, South Korea, Germany, India are relative unknowns to China in a military conflict. Even though some small scale exercises with India have been conducted, it is challenging for China to ascertain how India or any of these countries will respond militarily to a Chinese misadventure. That complicates military planning for the Chinese, which they will try to overcome. So for China it is a game of cat and mouse. Offer China an opportunity to participate in Red Flag in the US and they will grab it with both hands. It will be a great learning experience for them. Same with Malabar or Cope India or Garuda or Indra that India conducts with friendly nations.

The Chinese claimed that the PL-15 could do 300 km, but now it has been more or less ascertained (caveat - OSINT conclusion) that the missile likely has a maximum range of only 200 km. So the counter tactics that were closed to you - because of a claimed 300 km range - is now viable, because the range is significantly smaller. The export variant of the missile - the PL-15E - has a range of only 145 km.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Karan M »

Great post Rakesh. Some fellows like the Rupprecht fellow have bought into PRC bluster full time. At times he acts more Chinese jingoist than the Chinese themselves. PL-15 (export variant at least) can do 145km. Doubt the original will be significantly different, would have to be sized differently.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Karan M wrote:Some fellows like the Rupprecht fellow have bought into PRC bluster full time. At times he acts more Chinese jingoist than the Chinese themselves.
:lol: I have noticed that. The adulation that some of these guys do is quite eyebrow raising.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by hnair »

Karan M wrote:PL-15 (export variant at least) can do 145km. Doubt the original will be significantly different, would have to be sized differently.
The physics part (size vs range) is overlooked when it comes to chinese claims by a lot of western analysts as you said.

Usually the west understates or keeps quiet about capabilities of their domestic-use versions, but will be sticking with a more or less accurate published capabilities for their export-versions particularly in a foreign sale due to competition's PR. Soviets used to do a combo of both, wherein for some tactical weapons they release true capabilities(again maybe for competitive sales) and for strategic or home-use only ones they understate capability.

China and India are oddities. China uniformly overstates capabilities (a long list of disillusioned customers like pakis, gulf, africa, BD etc proves that), while India uniformly understates capabilities of both strategic and tactical weapons in its official PR. Again as Rakesh pointed out, China does not exercise with anyone seriously and so no one really knows the key part: how they use these things as part of a larger strategy. Am sure they have some fancy wushu tactics that impress all the players in that closed-loop consisting of their tacticians and senior commanders. Some of them might be pretty good tactics for their overall battle-management flow, again we wont know.

So add 10% more to the export-version capability of PL15 to get their domestic version ranges (similar motor and sensor) . But for the first day of war, I would assume IAF would consider range to be 200km range and then count the number of PL15s kicking up dust as it plummets into the Tibetan plateau at a lesser range before recalibrating home-team strategy for closing in etc.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

It could also be that the Export variant uses a simpler SRM while the domestic variant utilizes the dual-pulse motor as is widely spoken about while referencing the missile. The E variant hasn't actually been sold yet (I think) so unless someone buys it, and then talks about we don't know what type of weapon they are offering to customers for their JF-17 or other export approved fighters. Their OEM's wouldn't be the first to talk of extended range via this route. Israel claims that a dual-pulse 6" Derby achieves 80% of the Meteors performance.

Is a PL-15 with a dual-pulse motor going to have a credible 300 km capability? No. But it should be able to prolong coast and get 50-60% performance improvement in certain situations compared to the PL-12. Especially if they've also made advances in electronics, and overall weight optimization given that the PL-15 replaces some of the older (dated) imported content of the PL-12. I believe the Chinese aircraft have been spotted with larger (than PL-15) missile (PL-X) as well but we don't know its status. It is likely this missile that would offer that 300 km range. PL-15 seems to be the choice for IWB carriage on J-20, and later J-35 but the Flanker clones will be able to carry something larger. For that application you don't need a 300 km weapon (that would be more for the Flankers and stand off platforms that can't get close without risk).Regardless, killing a combat aircraft at 300 km is no easy task unless the enemy has no real way of denying the kill chain at that range. Most BVR combat is likely to occur inside 100 km for most situations when both sides are competent. It is for this range that most missiles are and need to be optimized. The networking required for long range targeted kills is not an easy thing and especially when you have the PLA running the show (with PLAAF likely a second fiddle to the Army).

On the range, lots of older reports have confusingly used PL-15 and PL-X to be one and the same when they are not. PL-15, provided it is a dual-pulse design as is claimed by the Chinese, should be in the 200 km class against certain targets and profiles. PL-X (unknown status) would be their very-long range weapon that it would use against targets like AWACS, Tankers etc (the USAF alone fields 400+ tankers).
China’s air force was dependent for these types of weapons on Russia from the mid-1990s and into the early 2000s with the semi-active R-27R (AA-10A Alamo) and the active-radar guided R-77 (AA-12A Adder) supplied as part of combat aircraft deals. Beginning in the mid-1990s, however, China also began to work on the development of an active-radar guided missile, with considerable Russian support, known as the PL-12. This missile entered Chinese service in 2006–07, giving the air force its first domestically produced active-radar-guided AAM. The PL-12 is broadly comparable to a number of Western medium-range missiles in this class, while the PL-12 is also the subject of an ongoing upgrade.

The PL-12, however, was only the start of China’s quest for increasingly capable radar-guided AAMs. Up to four other radar-guided beyond-visual-range missiles are in varying stages of design or development.

One of these, the PL-15, could enter service during the course of 2018, and has already been cited by senior U.S. Air Force personnel as a significant concern, including remarks by Gen. Hawk Carlisle, then head of U.S. Air Combat Command, in 2015. The PL-15 may have a maximum range in the order of 200 kilometres and is thought to be fitted with an advanced seeker using an active electronically scanned radar. The maximum range describes how far the missile could reach with an optimized trajectory requiring no maneuvering and with little energy left at the end of the flight. But given that a missile in the class of the PL-15 would often be used to engage a combat aircraft of a similar class, its actual maximum engagement range against a maneuvering target would be considerably less, though likely still in excess of the present Western generation of solid-rocket medium-range missiles. LINK
PL-15 Image
PL-X Image
Last edited by brar_w on 17 Nov 2021 20:18, edited 5 times in total.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ldev »

The missile’s active seeker uses an AESA aperture developed by No. 607 institute which has a narrow acquisition beam. The AESA gives the PL -15 robust Electronic Counter Counter Measures (EECM), a fact not ignored by US defense analysts.

Currently, the J-10C, J-16, and a few J-20s are armed with the PL-15.

The estimated range of the PL-15 is reportedly 200 kilometers with a large NEZ (no escape zone). The export variant has lower specs, however sources say it has a greater range than its US counterpart.
PL-15E: China’s jet fighters just got more deadly

US counterpart being referred to is the AIM-120D.

And if the delivery platform is the J-20 with it's LO if not VLO status, that complicates the situation for opposing 4 and 4+ gen fighters.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Karan M wrote:Great post Rakesh. Some fellows like the Rupprecht fellow have bought into PRC bluster full time. At times he acts more Chinese jingoist than the Chinese themselves. PL-15 (export variant at least) can do 145km. Doubt the original will be significantly different, would have to be sized differently.
Karan, the problem starts when NaPakis start believing the Chinese hype about the PL-15, their fanbois come up these fantasy claims. Some gems for your reading pleasure....enjoy for a good laugh. At the end of the day, range is just *ONE* factor that makes for a successful BVR kill. Impossible to make idiots understand that simple fact.

I am not even going to dispute this anymore. PL-15 has 300, 400 or perhaps 500 km range!! <slow clap>

https://twitter.com/aviation07101/statu ... 32929?s=20 ---> Many keep asking when we’ll get PL-15/XX or throw J-20 in. These are ace cards of China to deter US from conducting B-1B/B-52 missions supported by tankers/AWACs with F-22 escorting them. Take out tankers/AWACs or Naval ships with long range missiles & cut legs off of USAF/USN.

https://twitter.com/zjczky/status/14425 ... 70183?s=20 ---> The size of this PL-15E is not large, but it still has excellent range, advanced guidance mode and two-way datalink, which is enough to suppress the Russian missiles of the IAF.

https://twitter.com/RektsGod/status/140 ... 82339?s=20 ---> I'm sure PL-15 is more than maneuverable enough to beat F-22.

https://twitter.com/nuhor_lir_guren/sta ... 29664?s=20 ---> J-20 has IRST, F-22 does not. Other than that J-20's nose looks bigger could be housing a bigger (and newer) radar. For the moment I think J-20 has advantage over F-22 due to newer stealth material & coating, newer radar and the presence of IRST.

https://twitter.com/nuhor_lir_guren/sta ... 07136?s=20 ---> US did not make much progress on BVR missile, still the old AIM-120. China has PL-15, Europe has Meteor, even Japan has AAM-4, all better on some aspects than AIM-120. On BVR missile, F-22 is even at more of a disadvantage.

At least one NaPaki has got a hold of reality....

https://twitter.com/aviation07101/statu ... 22241?s=20 ---> AVIC releases official specs of PL-15E.

300Km gang:

Image
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Aditya_V »

aren't we missing something called the Aim 260 JATM, which the US is keeping a very closely guarded secret on? And also there is a long range engagement program, the US dominated air power for 100 years and air dominance is something they actively work towards.Before US entered WW2 B17 and B24s were heavily in production and B 29 design was being finalized which bombed the hell out of Germany and Japan, they will not surrender it so easily.
Last edited by Aditya_V on 17 Nov 2021 21:48, edited 3 times in total.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Aditya_V wrote:OT since this is Indian missile discussion thread, but aren't we missing something called the Aim 260 JATM, which is in production and US is keeping a very closely guarded secret on?
This is the Chinese armed forces thread (also known as the Terracotta armed forces thread). Are you sure you have the right thread? :)

Secondly, the AIM-260 JATM will not match the technological prowess of the Chinese PL-15 and PL-21 ultra very long range AAMs. These Chinese missiles can be launched from the runway itself. Their range is that long.

What no other industrialized nation on earth has mastered, the Chinese have.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Aditya_V »

Oops sorry will correct my post, there was a comment on PL 15 in the Indian missiles thread.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

All is good Sirjee. I moved all those posts from there into here, because it is better suited here.

Why ruin a good thread with talk of Chinese superiority? That kind of dhoti shivering deserves her own thread.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4053
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ArjunPandit »

rakesh ji have PSF Aerosint and Shahid raza blocked you? You seem to be missing their gems..based on those PL15 seems just short of an intergalactic weapon!
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Aditya_V wrote:aren't we missing something called the Aim 260 JATM, which the US is keeping a very closely guarded secret on? And also there is a long range engagement program, the US dominated air power for 100 years and air dominance is something they actively work towards.Before US entered WW2 B17 and B24s were heavily in production and B 29 design was being finalized which bombed the hell out of Germany and Japan, they will not surrender it so easily.
AIM-260 has been often compared to PL-15 and that would be fair from a application perspective since both will arm the stealth fighters of their individual users. Technical comparisons aren't possible because we know little on the PL-15 beyond some generally accepted attributes (like a dual pulse motor and Chinese seeker and guidance (whether AESA or not) as opposed to borrowed Russian tech as was the case of PL-12) and the AIM-260 is classified and remain a special access program even after it is fielded (they're actually building SAP bunkers for it at its first operational location and we probably won't see it for a while (my guess) even after it is operationalized over the next year or two).

Rakesh, I'm not sure on the PL-21 and what it exactly is. Some claim PL-X that is linked in my image above is the PL-21 but others doubt that. My guess is that PL-21 would be the designation of an improved PL-15 perhaps with a kinematic improvement and other enhancements while missiles like PL-X will remain on a different path, aimed at 4th gen aircraft and with very long range targeting of tankers, AEW, P-8's etc in mind. These classes of weapons don't really need to, and won't merge because of competing requirements so they will likely continue to follow different paths.

Those tweets are pure gold. :rotfl: Best to avoid twitter, and Wikipedia when looking at this and just try to figure what they would be looking to do based on physical evidence. PL-15 isn't an ultra long range missile. It is actually an iterative improvement over MRAAM class of missiles, much like the AIM-120D, Meteor and likely JATM. PL-X is a much much larger weapon which limits its use given both physical size of the weapon (and impact on platform) and the targeting needed to complete the kill chain. No idea on what PL-21 is and we likely won't know until we see one in an image that would allow us to analyze its intended use case.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

ArjunPandit wrote:rakesh ji have PSF Aerosint and Shahid Raza blocked you? You seem to be missing their gems..based on those PL15 seems just short of an intergalactic weapon!
I visit the latter's twitter thread whenever I need a good laugh. The one that really sticks in my mind is Lord Raza's tweet about the US giving F-35s to Pakistan to maintain regional parity with India over the Rafale purchase. As I mentioned in the past, the quality of opium sold in Pakistan is organic and pure. It is REALLY good stuff.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:Rakesh, I'm not sure on the PL-21 and what it exactly is. Some claim PL-X that is linked in my image above is the PL-21 but others doubt that. My guess is that PL-21 would be the designation of an improved PL-15 perhaps with a kinematic improvement and other enhancements while missiles like PL-X will remain on a different path, aimed at 4th gen aircraft and with very long range targeting of tankers, AEW, P-8's etc in mind. These classes of weapons don't really need to, and won't merge because of competing requirements so they will likely continue to follow different paths.
PL-21 is their AWACS killer. Or so they claim. 400 km. Reportedly comparable to the AIM-260 among others. That is what Wiki states, which is obviously been put there by a Chinese bot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-21
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4053
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ArjunPandit »

Rakesh wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:rakesh ji have PSF Aerosint and Shahid Raza blocked you? You seem to be missing their gems..based on those PL15 seems just short of an intergalactic weapon!
I visit the latter's twitter thread whenever I need a good laugh. The one that really sticks in my mind is Lord Raza's tweet about the US giving F-35s to Pakistan to maintain regional parity with India over the Rafale purchase. As I mentioned in the past, the quality of opium sold in Pakistan is organic and pure. It is REALLY good stuff.
is there any thread such gems can be archived for the laughter of future generations?
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Vivek K »

Rakesh wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:rakesh ji have PSF Aerosint and Shahid Raza blocked you? You seem to be missing their gems..based on those PL15 seems just short of an intergalactic weapon!
I visit the latter's twitter thread whenever I need a good laugh. The one that really sticks in my mind is Lord Raza's tweet about the US giving F-35s to Pakistan to maintain regional parity with India over the Rafale purchase. As I mentioned in the past, the quality of opium sold in Pakistan is organic and pure. It is REALLY good stuff.
:rotfl: Admiral saar - you need to distribute that stuff with the next Arihant class commissioning.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh wrote:PL-21 is their AWACS killer. Or so they claim. 400 km. Reportedly comparable to the AIM-260 among others. That is what Wiki states, which is obviously been put there by a Chinese bot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-21
Ignore Wiki as anyone can edit there unless it is linking back to a half decent primary source or material. From what we know so far, there is the PL-15 which is what the PLAAF has fielded with its 4+ and 5th gen fighters and it is the replacement for the PL-12. This has an export variant that has recently begun to be offered. This is logical since if we assume some of the accepted facts around the PL-15, this would make the weapon as one of the first active AAMs exportable by China that don't rely on foreign components or tech. Then there is a rumored third PL-15 variant which is designed for compressed carriage on the J-20 (which would allow for 6 missiles to be carried instead of the current four) but that variant has not appeared in photos or during J-20 displays etc.

PL-15:

Image

PL-X (sometimes called PL-20 but that's pure speculation)

Then there is the much larger PL-X (X because they haven't provided an official designation) which they've shown in photos. Its status is currently unknown because beyond 1 or 2 photos we know nothing about it.

Image

PL-21 (Unknown at this point)

China has in the past shown PL-21 as being a ramjet equipped missile (dated graphics) but there is no confirmation on either form factor or where the program currently stands.

Image

My guess is that it would be an iterative improvement over the PL-15 and will be J-20 IWB compliant. It could retain the same form factor of the PL-15 class but with a ramjet motor instead of a dual-pulse SRM.

Folks on twitter (and those random folks updating wiki) tend to confuse PL-15, PL-X and PL-21 and seem to roll up any possible attributes of the PLX or PL-21 into the PL-15. PL-15 is a iterative improvement over PL-12 with kinetic improvements resulting from a switch to a dual pulse motor, and guidance section being Indigenized (some believe it to be equipped with an AESA seeker), and the addition of a two-way data link. This should provide it at least a 50% increase in range over the likes of the PL-12 ( a conservative) but the diameter and form factor are not dramatically different. PL-X is much larger, while PL-21 is a complete unknown at this point with many images that are shared of it on the internet and SM being dated and might not depict where the program currently stands. If the PL-X is actually a program and not a one off test missile, then I would guess that PL-21 would be IWB compliant and thus not dramatically different from the PL-15 in size. But we just don't have good quality info to make that judgement.

Given this, it would appear that the PL-X, assuming its still an active program, is their ultra long range AEW, ISR, or Tanker targeting missile while the PL-15 and possibly the PL-21 are the more traditional MRAAM's that offer extended range in a largely similar (7-8 inch) form factor and weight class. But since the designation of PL-X isn't known, this has led many to speculate that it is either the PL-21 which would be unlikely since this form factor has never previously been attributed to the PL-21. Thus I would prefer to treat them as distinct systems, and basically ignore the PL-21 until some physical evidence of it emerges.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:Ignore Wiki as anyone can edit there.
While true, knowing how China strictly controls internet use....I am fairly confident that this Wiki claim of 400 km range for the PL-21 is coming from a Chinese fanbois (who is a mouthpiece of China's propaganda machine). The other possibility could be that it is also from one of these phoren OSINT guys who have fallen head over heels in love with China's military prowess. Here is another graphic of the 400 km range claim of the PL-XX, which is now largely claimed to be the PL-21. I am not stating that is what the range is, but rather just highlighting the claim being made.

I am not providing a link to this photo, because it comes from a NaPaki military forum.

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

There are folks who are trying to sift through all the crap that gets posted on Chinese SM and trying to create some form of accurate picture of events, and others who are just bad and fanbois with no real knowledge or analytical chops. Best to use the evidence that appears to be released by China and then work backwards and ignore all the bad takes that may originate from random folks on twitter or elsewhere. PL-21 may well be designed for ultra long range but we simply don't know because there is no physical evidence that would allow an assessment.

We have seen the PL-12, PL-15 and PL-X. Those three generally tend to support some of the more logical claims of iterative improvement on PL-15 especially if they have gone for a two data link, and a dual pulse motor. That should result in considerable range increase (over PL-12) and may well put it in the 200 km class against certain targets and intercept trajectories.

PL-X again appears to be a fairly large missile so very easy to guess that. it is designed to be the main weapon to execute ultra long range intercepts against high value non maneuvering targets. Given the target set, you can justify the larger size and weight. It is rumored to be 18 ft in length, and a larger diameter to the PL-12 and PL-15 series. Again, not out of the realm of possibility. The USN was also seen testing an unknown (though appears to be a booster-less SM-2/6 which is a 13.5 inch diameter missile relative to the 7 inch AMRAAM) ultra long range interceptor back in 2018 and the effort (this was captured then in broad daylight) was likely ongoing for a number of years prior to this. China too has a fairly substantial number of large RCS bombers, tankers, AEW etc etc so this would be a logical thing for the USN to work on as it develops a Counter-A2AD capability.

The Weekly Debrief: Air-Launched, SM-6-Like Missile Exposed In New Test Photo


Image
Rakesh wrote:I am not providing a link to this photo, because it comes from a NaPaki military forum.
This could be correct or though I suspect that 400 km is probably in the 300-400 km class. The PL-X fits that bill. PL-15 is a 150-200 km class weapon if it does indeed leverage two-way data-link, and a dual pulse motor. PL-21 could be PL-X or it could be a completely different system. I would suspect that it is an iterative improvement over the PL-15 but that is just a guess.

Rest on the PL-20, PL-XX, PL-21 et al is just a big unknown at this point.

But all the focus on missile kinematics ignores that on net-centric warfare, or ROE's and how PLA and PLAAF will collaborate on these type of missions. That's a bigger puzzle to crack. On the USN example, I cited earlier, we can go back to 2 decades of investment in creating a very long range beyond-line of sight integrated fire-control network. This manifests in a full fire-control level composite track capability leveraging AEGIS ships, E-2D's, EA-18G's, and F-35C's (and Blk III F/A-18s in the near term). This then coupled with launched and engage on remote capability fielded on missile defense side. And there was CEC even before that which though not on a common FC loop was still something beyond sharing overlays over data-link..We also know that they (DARPA and USAF) are experimenting with 100 Gb/s RF backbone so all that supports much longer intercept ranges where you are reasonably confident (though nothing is ever 100%) that you don't shoot down an airliner or your own aircraft and that you can create a viable kill chain that is somewhat self-healing (using mesh networks and distributed LOS and BLOS assets). I am not sure the Chinese concept of air-power is there yet. Seems still an Army, and artillery centric joint force which would handicap such concepts from emerging and being fully fleshed out prior to fielding. Thats a more interesting and worthy of research topic and much harder than fielding larger diameter weapons or new types of iterative seekers.
rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by rajpa »

Cyrano wrote:We Spent a Year Investigating What the Chinese Army Is Buying. Here’s What We Learned.
Publicly available documents show how Chinese progress in military AI is being driven, in part, by access to American technology and capital.

<snip>
Over the past year, I was part of a team of researchers at the Center for Security and Emerging Technology that sifted through 350 Chinese military equipment contracts related specifically to AI. The sample we analyzed is part of a larger, publicly available dataset of 66,000 procurement records published between April and November 2020.
<snip>

Please follow the link to read the article.
Pravin Sawhney on Twitter is one Chinese jingo who keeps fawning over Sugarlander AI, "intelligentized", "informationized" warfare capabilities that will rout us in 96 hours.
rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by rajpa »

hnair wrote:

China and India are oddities. China uniformly overstates capabilities (a long list of disillusioned customers like pakis, gulf, africa, BD etc proves that), while India uniformly understates capabilities of both strategic and tactical weapons in its official PR. Again as Rakesh pointed out, China does not exercise with anyone seriously and so no one really knows the key part: how they use these things as part of a larger strategy. Am sure they have some fancy wushu tactics that impress all the players in that closed-loop consisting of their tacticians and senior commanders. Some of them might be pretty good tactics for their overall battle-management flow, again we wont know..


Chinese got whacked by Thai air force in BVR. Poor tactics and situational awareness by Sugarbois.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Pratyush »

Parvin Swami, is at a different level. Until recently I didn't know he had a you tube channel.

Boy, th sum and substance of that channel is PRC stong TSP strong. India weak. Surrender.

Comment section is filled with TSPians.

Shockingly this dude is ex services.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Vivek K »

Ask him if India should have surrendered in 71?
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Pratyush »

I did ask, if India should give up Laddhak as a comment on one of the videos. In which this chap was saying that Laddhak is an issue of national 100virginity for Xi. That the PRC will fight hard with India to defeat us.

Some paki replied yes India should.

Anyway, I blocked the channel and am happy about it.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

A closer look at the J-35 carrier borne fighter prototype -

Image
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

If true, you gotta love the hypocrisy of this :lol:

https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... 19875?s=20 ---> Report: US Department of Defense (Pentagon) wants to completely ban all US tech export to Chinese semiconductor giant SMIC, but USA's own Department of Commerce is opposing it.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Chinese invasion of Taiwan 'not easy' due to 3 weaknesses
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4375424
14 Dec 2021
Post Reply