China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

[NRao]

Nothing new there on the military front, PLA needs to let steam out once in a while. However, PLA using economics as a tool seems to be a newer strategy that may have come to light recently.

Chinese military is asking for trouble. While the Chinese civilian leadership goes about making friends for economic gains, the PLA is laying the ground work to muscle in in the region and then perhaps out of the region.

[RamaY]

'China ready to go to war to safeguard national interests'

Another Chini invention...

Which country doesn't go to war to safeguard its national interests.

Perhaps Chinis should think why so many neighbors dislike their nation

[SaiK]

will democracy in china bring down such idiotic war thoughts?

[NRao]

Notice the old USSR thinking (not that it is bad). China would like to revive that by hooking up with countries in South America and Africa!!! And then the PLA would like to the 'hood lined up with Chinese economic power? Other nations should stop buying from China.

[Don]

The Chinese testing another attack helicopter WZ-19. This one is a lighter class compared to the Z-10.

[D Roy]

Really?

That looks awfully like the kawasaki OH-1.

http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/japan.php

Of course given Chicom skills in "reverse engineering" it could well be the WZ-19 or whatever.

and this isn't really an "Attack helicopter" . More like an armed scout really.

[Singha]

I wonder whats the benefit of the ungainly fenestron tail? I thought that was not popular anymore? sometimes the chinese get carried away by the 'clone' thing without fully understanding the pros and cons of it...or if they fail to understand fully, they clone 101% to keep it safe per the original design.

perhaps the french dauphin inspired this effort.
http://www.idcow.net/idcow/products/h48nr2004.jpg

[D Roy]

its a hubha hu of the OH-1 if it really exists.

I am sick and tired of all this Chicom propaganda.

[Singha]

indeed . treat it like the crap it is until they open up their system to outside sources and start being relatively honest about things comparable to other arms producing nations.

grainy fanboy images and unverified claims are not going to hack it anymore.

[NRao]

This is not meant to be a knock on the Chinese, but, China has NO infrastructure to design something new. They have never had the R&D to support such an effort!!!!

I would urge everyone to listen to the Sounder Rajan vid from AE11. His formula in short: 25 years of solid R&D, 6 years to mature, cost-price needs to close AND the product needs to be in the market for 25 years. (This statement made in the presence of Boeing's VP on the same stage!!)

Under the circumstances China does not need to worry about point 2, 3 and perhaps even 4. BUT even they cannot escape #1.

What we are witnessing with these birds, tanks, the J-10, etc are jerky advancements.

They seem to take something that has worked as the base-line and then build something on top of that. This pattern seems to apply to pretty much every case. Including their current political thinking.

[shiv]

'China ready to go to war to safeguard national interests'

The obvious response is to harm Chinese interests if it does go to war so that it will be Chinese interest not to go to war.

Wrong forum. We have a separate forum for rhetorical lungi dances.

[kit]

'China ready to go to war to safeguard national interests'<br sourceIndex="704">

<br sourceIndex="705"><br sourceIndex="706">The obvious response is to harm Chinese interests if it does go to war so that it will be Chinese interest not to go to war. <br sourceIndex="707"><br sourceIndex="708">Wrong forum. We have a separate forum for rhetorical lungi dances.

Heh , nicely put.Thats why i advise for a FIRST STRIKE NUCLEAR OPTION.It is a game changer.

[Avinandan]

Another pic (or maybe mockup) of WZ-19

courtesy: militaryphotos

It has got a radome FCS RADAR (similar to Apache Longbow Radar).
Now this is a huge leap for China, as tech putting a RADAR on top with the kind of heavy vibrations was only with US and IMVHO a closely guarded one as well.

Please provide comments, if I am seeing too much in this.

[ashi]

Air Chief Marshal PV Naik questions ethics of 5th generation project
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ai ... ct_1504803
Air Chief Marshal PV Naik is not a big fan of China’s fifth generation aircraft programme. Without naming the neighbouring country, the air chief dropped enough hint to condemn the programme, asking if it was ‘ethical’.

Worldwide it has been speculated that China has developed its fifth generation aircraft through reverse engineering. “Is reverse engineering an ethical process? Because we know of a country which recently developed a fifth generation stealth aircraft… There is no R&D involved in its development. So is it (the project) ethical or an illegitimate backdoor entry?” he asked, speaking at the inauguration of the eight edition of the Aero India International Seminar on Monday.

It was evident that Naik referred to the J-20 aircraft which China recently flight tested at its Chengdu air base. The J-20 is the most keenly-watched defence aviation programme in the world since its first flight in January as many countries and defence analysts in the west have doubted China’s ability to develop such a plane.

The IAF chief also called for the development of technology at a faster rate due to the rise in terrorism. “Terrorists no longer work in their traditional manner to affect the immediate surroundings, but are now targeting the ‘political, sociological and economical’ aspects. There is a need for global cooperation as it would benefit everyone,” he said.

[rgsrini]

^^^

It has got a radome FCS RADAR (similar to Apache Longbow Radar).
Now this is a huge leap for China, as tech putting a RADAR on top with the kind of heavy vibrations was only with US and IMVHO a closely guarded one as well.

Please provide comments, if I am seeing too much in this

Here is another Chinese one and you can actually see it working.

Note: Please set the volume to max before clicking on the link.

You have got to admire their capabilities. Wow! absolutely beastly if you ask me!!!
Looks and sounds so scary!!!
I wouldn't want to fight against this. I hope we come up with something against this soon...


In case you don't get what I mean. Just because it sounds and stinks like the real one, it doesn't have to be...a real one.

[kit]

^^^

It has got a radome FCS RADAR (similar to Apache Longbow Radar).
Now this is a huge leap for China, as tech putting a RADAR on top with the kind of heavy vibrations was only with US and IMVHO a closely guarded one as well.

Please provide comments, if I am seeing too much in this

Here is another Chinese one and you can actually see it working.

Note: Please set the volume to max before clicking on the link.

You have got to admire their capabilities. Wow! absolutely beastly if you ask me!!!
Looks and sounds so scary!!!
I wouldn't want to fight against this. I hope we come up with something against this soon...


In case you don't get what I mean. Just because it sounds and stinks like the real one, it doesn't have to be...a real one.

You wont be able to do that in India., it WILL have to work or the chap next to you will only be happy to put your a** in the line.Chinese are scared to do anything on their own, everything is done according to the state(read party).The average chinese wonder how all those demonstrations, hartals etc etc work in India., they cant even think about unless one has a death wish !

[shiv]

Now this is a huge leap for China, as tech putting a RADAR on top with the kind of heavy vibrations was only with US and IMVHO a closely guarded one as well.

Please provide comments, if I am seeing too much in this.

Since you ask - anyone can put a radar on a mast on a helicopter. Getting that radar to work consistently and well in that environment is more difficult. Nobody, but nobody releases any information about the reliability and uptime of radars in that position and the anti-vibration measures that were taken to keep it working, and the performance limits of such a mast mounted radar.

Every country that wants to do that will have to work out the tech on its own. China is certainly putting some money into R&D and that will probably pay dividends in 30 years. But so is India and the routes India takes need not be the ones that America or China took.

I believe there are a lot of variables in the system in a way that goes beyond the mere installation of a ball on a mast. Right now the information we have is Chinees ball on mast and a history of American success in that area. Whether these facts tie in together as Chinese success in the area is debatable - but it certainly suggests that the Chinese are trying to copy an American idea (Longbow) that is used in a specific way by the US and that China may be wanting to mimic the US method. A detailed expose on the history and applications o Longbow will give some idea of what the Chinese may be thinking about. If they are not bluffing.

JMT

[rgsrini]

You wont be able to do that in India., it WILL have to work or the chap next to you will only be happy to put your a** in the line.Chinese are scared to do anything on their own, everything is done according to the state(read party).The average chinese wonder how all those demonstrations, hartals etc etc work in India., they cant even think about unless one has a death wish !

I am not sure if you actually clicked the link to see what it is... It is an animatronics dinosaur made in China. It looks and sound quite realistic (No one has actually seen a real dinosaur is a subject for another day), but not actually a real dinosaur. Similarly, just because a chinese model looks like it sports a particular capability, doesn't mean it actually has that capability. Especially considering there is so little information available in public domain and there is quite a few available about how chinese are prone to faking stuff...

sigh...

[kit]

ah, speaking of toys ..

[UrNewAdmin]

'China extending Tibet rail link to Sikkim' http://www.zeenews.com/news687115.html

New Delhi: In what could be a matter of concern for India, reports on Monday claimed that China is planning to extend its Tibet railway network, stretching it to the strategically important Chumbi valley area, next to Sikkim and the Siliguri corridor.

As per a report published in a leading daily, the Chinese Railways Ministry had last month unveiled a map confirming the development and long-term railway network plan.

The release of map by the Chinese Railways Ministry has now ended all speculation in this regard and officially confirmed that China will be extending its railway network from Lhasa to Zangmu on the Nepal border, which is going to eventually extend into Nepal and even Kathmandu.

As per the plan, another line will branch out midway from this link to Zangmu, at a place called Shigatse. This line will move east and go right up to Yadong, on the mouth of the Chumbi Valley. This town is connected to Sikkim through the Nathu La pass and is strategically located on the tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan.

The region adjoining Yadong is still disputed between China and Bhutan and some portion of it also witnessed military conflict in 1962 as part of New Delhi’s effort to defend Nathu La.

The Chinese side has not yet started the construction work but it has launched feasibility studies concerning the project. This project is slated for completion by 2017, bringing the Tibet railway just 500 km short of the Siliguri corridor. This may raise demands from Bangladesh to provide connectivity to the Chinese market via India.

What is of major concern to India is that New Delhi is finding it difficult to match pace with China’s ability to increase its railway network and registering its heavy presence in the region, which would ultimately benefit its industries and markets.

As per reports, China last year built over 10,000 km of high speed railway, and in the past five years has added 70,000 km railway lines. India, on the other hand, has struggled to connect Bhutan to India by rail.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

Interesting article on the arms build-up in Asia

[rajanb]

Good article Mahesh. Thanks.

But quoting from that:

One big reason India is beefing up its arsenal: China.

"It goes without saying that India must be seriously concerned with the rise of China's strategic power, including its military and economic power," says Ashwani Kumar, member of parliament from India's ruling Congress party. "India has consistently opposed an arms race—but India will not be found wanting in taking all measures necessary for the effective safeguarding of its territorial integrity and national interests."

When will we "walk the talk" in terms of the inordinate delays in requirements for all the three branches of our armed forces?

[hnair]

PLAAF should mount the MMW radar donut atop the tail of the WZ-10...... will look very businesslike, when it turns around to lift its tail boom up for a better view over some Tibetan ridge. Pakis operational inputs will be heavy in such compromising positions.

[Don]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110215/ap_ ... ier_killer

US admiral: Carrier killer won't stop US Navy

By ERIC TALMADGE, Associated Press Eric Talmadge, Associated Press – 2 hrs 45 mins ago
YOKOSUKA, Japan – A new "carrier killer" missile that has become a symbol of China's rising military might will not force the U.S. Navy to change the way it operates in the Pacific, a senior Navy commander told The Associated Press.

Defense analysts say the Dong Feng 21D missile could upend the balance of power in Asia, where U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups have ruled the waves since the end of World War II.

However, Vice Adm. Scott van Buskirk, commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet, told the AP in an interview that the Navy does not see the much-feared weapon as creating any insurmountable vulnerability for the U.S. carriers — the Navy's crown jewels.

"It's not the Achilles heel of our aircraft carriers or our Navy — it is one weapons system, one technology that is out there," Van Buskirk said in an interview this week on the bridge of the USS George Washington, the only carrier that is home-based in the western Pacific.

The DF 21D is unique in that it is believed capable of hitting a powerfully defended moving target — like the USS George Washington — with pinpoint precision. That objective is so complex that the Soviets gave up on a similar project.

The missile would penetrate defenses because its speed from launch would not allow enough time for carriers or other large ships to complete countermeasures.

That could seriously weaken Washington's ability to intervene in any potential conflict over Taiwan or North Korea, as well as deny U.S. ships safe access to international waters near China's 11,200-mile (18,000-kilometer) -long coastline.

Van Buskirk, whose fleet is responsible for most of the Pacific and Indian oceans, with 60-70 ships and 40,000 sailors and Marines under its command, said the capabilities of the Chinese missile are as yet unproven. But he acknowledged it does raise special concerns.

"Any new capability is something that we try to monitor," he said.

"If there wasn't this to point to as a game changer, there would be something else," he said. "That term has been bandied about for many things. I think it really depends in how you define the game, whether it really changes it or not. It's a very specific scenario for a very specific capability — some things can be very impactful."

The development of the missile comes as China is increasingly venturing further out to sea and is becoming more assertive around its coastline and in disputes over territory.

Late last year, China and Japan were locked in a heated diplomatic row over several islands both claim in the East China Sea, an area regularly patrolled by U.S. Navy vessels. A flotilla of 10 Chinese warships, including advanced submarines and destroyers, passed through the Miyako Strait last April in the biggest transit of its kind to date.

Experts saw it as an attempt by China to test Japan and the United States and demonstrate its open water capabilities.

China has also expressed strong displeasure with U.S. carrier operations off the Korean Peninsula, saying that they posed a security risk to its capital.

Still, van Buskirk said the Navy has no intention of altering its mission because of the new threat and will continue to operate in the seas around Japan, Korea, the Philippines and anywhere else it deems necessary.

"We won't change these operations because of this specific technology that might be out there," he told The AP while the USS George Washington was in its home port just south of Tokyo for repairs last week. "But we will carefully monitor and adapt to it."

The faster-than-expected development of the missile has set off alarm bells in Washington. Further, China is developing a stealth fighter jet that could be used to support its navy in a potential conflict and hopes to deploy its first aircraft carriers over the next decade.

Before visiting Beijing last month, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he has been concerned about the anti-ship missile since he took office.

In December, Adm. Robert Willard, the head of the U.S. Pacific Command, told Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper he believed the missile program had achieved "initial operational capability," meaning a workable design had been settled on and was being further developed.

The missile is considered a key component of China's strategy of denying U.S. planes and ships access to waters off its coast. The strategy includes overlapping layers of air defense systems, naval assets such as submarines, and advanced ballistic missile systems — all woven together with a network of satellites.

At its most capable, the DF 21D could be launched from land with enough accuracy to penetrate the defenses of even the most advanced moving aircraft carrier at a distance of more than 900 miles (1,500 kilometers).

To allay regional security fears, van Buskirk said, China needs to be more forthcoming about its intentions.

"It goes back to transparency," he said. "Using the United States as an example, we are very clear about our intent when conducting routine and normal operations in international waters ... That is what you might expect from other nations that might operate in this region.

[Mike]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110215/ap_ ... ier_killer

"It goes back to transparency," he said. "Using the United States as an example, we are very clear about our intent when conducting routine and normal operations in international waters ... That is what you might expect from other nations that might operate in this region.

I don't believe such "in-direct" claims from China that its whatever missile can hit a moving carrier from 1500km. As it is well-documented, the Soviets tried to do it but could not do it. No chance that China can do it. Probably just some drumming by US armed forces to secure more funding.

[Austin]

APA: Assessing PLA Underground Air Basing Capability
APA: F-35, F-22 and B-2 vs China's Underground Airbases Everything Old is New Again

[rsharma]

APA: Assessing PLA Underground Air Basing Capability
APA: F-35, F-22 and B-2 vs China's Underground Airbases Everything Old is New Again

Though the cynical may laugh away at Kopp & his alarmist assessments.. but.. one cannot help but praise the thoroughness of his analysis..

[srai]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110215/ap_ ... ier_killer

US admiral: Carrier killer won't stop US Navy

...

The US has been developing a ship based ballistic missile defense (with Japan as its partner) since 1999. The entry date is sometime around 2018. Here are the details: RIM-161 SM-3 (AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense

[Don]

China-ready test for military
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110217/j ... 594696.jsp

India, China growth race 'silly', says Nobel winner
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/India_C ... r_999.html

[Christopher Sidor]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110215/ap_ ... ier_killer

"It goes back to transparency," he said. "Using the United States as an example, we are very clear about our intent when conducting routine and normal operations in international waters ... That is what you might expect from other nations that might operate in this region.

I don't believe such "in-direct" claims from China that its whatever missile can hit a moving carrier from 1500km. As it is well-documented, the Soviets tried to do it but could not do it. No chance that China can do it. Probably just some drumming by US armed forces to secure more funding.

Your reasoning is that Soviets failed hence the chinks will fail too? Soviets tried this concept around 1970s. The year today is 2011. More than 40 years has gone by. Technology has moved on with the limitations of 1970s no longer applicable in the second decade of 21st century.

And mike food for thought. In the year 2007, it was reported that a Chinese song-class submarine surfaced so close to USS Kitty Hawk that it would have been possible for it to launch its torpedoes. With Dong DF-21 in play, such a submarine could come close and illuminate the carrier for the warhead of the DF-21. The cost of manufacturing 10-15 DF-21 ASBM would be less than the cost of a single aircraft carrier. Add to this the fact that China is going to have one of the biggest submarine fleets in east Asia.

I am only painting a single target acquisition picture. Throw in unmanned aerial platforms, unmanned submerged platforms and satellites, the picture becomes even more potent. In fact all of these non-submarine based target acquiring methods can play together and provide redundancy for each other. And if DF-21 ASBM is nuclear capable, then the accuracy of the missile will be a moot point.

We tend to dismiss the DF-21 ASBM because it is difficult for a BM to be programmed to hit a moving target i.e. without any external guidance what so ever in its terminal phase. However if the US Afghanistan SOF history shows us anything it is this, illuminating a target and then hitting it is more precise and more deadly.

Off course why are we worried about this so called ASBM. It will most probably involve US ships in the pacific, there is no way this same capability can be used against IN ships say operating in the Bay of Bengal or Arabian sea.
There is no way that the pakis will provide such a launch station say somewhere in the baluchistan or sindh. And offcourse we can all depend on the burmese to prevent such overflights. And a Chinese base on Burmese territory for launch of DF-21 ASBM, that is soooo outlandish, we need not even dwell on it.

And if the worst came to worst we can always try and do the typical Indian response. We wait for the threat to be fully developed and then try to come up with a response. No out-thinking our enemies for us. Nah we continue to follow our ancestors foot steps who allowed an invader to cross the river fully with his entire army intact and then we attacked him. Overlooking the fact that had we attacked the enemy when he was crossing the river or when he had just reached the banks we would have annihilated him. I am quoting this incident from our country's history metaphorically and not literally.

[Christopher Sidor]

China-ready test for military
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110217/j ... 594696.jsp

India, China growth race 'silly', says Nobel winner
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/India_C ... r_999.html

The actual article, which is referred to in "India, China growth race 'silly', says Nobel winner", is
Growth and other concerns

[ashi]

Airfleet Magazine

Cross post from PAK-FA and FGFA Thread.

Besides the analysis of the mysterious J-20, the author also speaks highly of the J-10 and that disagrees with many of the critics from this forum.

Why the Chinese shaped the J-20
in the way it is? Perhaps, they are unfamiliar
with the classic solutions for a delta-
winged, canard-equipped fighter? No,
this is not the case knowing that Chengdu’s
previous design was the J-10 light weight
fighter, now in service with PLAAF. On its
first public flight, the J-20 was escorted by
a J-10B twin seater, the operational trainer
version of the baseline J-10 single seat
fighter. This airplane was the star of the Airshow
China 2008 and 2010, when it flew
superbly with the PLAAF display team pilots
at the controls. The J-10 is a very maneuverable
airplane, and this is the testimony
of the Chinese designers’ skills in development
of maneuverable fighter aircraft.

Another J-10 clip which shows its climb, its turns and its low speed fly-by.

[Mike]

I don't believe such "in-direct" claims from China that its whatever missile can hit a moving carrier from 1500km. As it is well-documented, the Soviets tried to do it but could not do it. No chance that China can do it. Probably just some drumming by US armed forces to secure more funding.

Your reasoning is that Soviets failed hence the chinks will fail too? Soviets tried this concept around 1970s. The year today is 2011. More than 40 years has gone by. Technology has moved on with the limitations of 1970s no longer applicable in the second decade of 21st century.

And mike food for thought. In the year 2007, it was reported that a Chinese song-class submarine surfaced so close to USS Kitty Hawk that it would have been possible for it to launch its torpedoes. With Dong DF-21 in play, such a submarine could come close and illuminate the carrier for the warhead of the DF-21. The cost of manufacturing 10-15 DF-21 ASBM would be less than the cost of a single aircraft carrier. Add to this the fact that China is going to have one of the biggest submarine fleets in east Asia.

I am only painting a single target acquisition picture. Throw in unmanned aerial platforms, unmanned submerged platforms and satellites, the picture becomes even more potent. In fact all of these non-submarine based target acquiring methods can play together and provide redundancy for each other. And if DF-21 ASBM is nuclear capable, then the accuracy of the missile will be a moot point.

We tend to dismiss the DF-21 ASBM because it is difficult for a BM to be programmed to hit a moving target i.e. without any external guidance what so ever in its terminal phase. However if the US Afghanistan SOF history shows us anything it is this, illuminating a target and then hitting it is more precise and more deadly.

Off course why are we worried about this so called ASBM. It will most probably involve US ships in the pacific, there is no way this same capability can be used against IN ships say operating in the Bay of Bengal or Arabian sea.
There is no way that the pakis will provide such a launch station say somewhere in the baluchistan or sindh. And offcourse we can all depend on the burmese to prevent such overflights. And a Chinese base on Burmese territory for launch of DF-21 ASBM, that is soooo outlandish, we need not even dwell on it.

And if the worst came to worst we can always try and do the typical Indian response. We wait for the threat to be fully developed and then try to come up with a response. No out-thinking our enemies for us. Nah we continue to follow our ancestors foot steps who allowed an invader to cross the river fully with his entire army intact and then we attacked him. Overlooking the fact that had we attacked the enemy when he was crossing the river or when he had just reached the banks we would have annihilated him. I am quoting this incident from our country's history metaphorically and not literally.

Sure, tech could advance but laws of physics do not change.

I agree with you that illuminating the target is much easier now than 40 years ago through various means, e.g. satellite, subs, UAVs, etc. The real issue is relaying those info to the missile.

A hypersonic missile forms a layer of ions (simply speaking, charged particles) on its frontal surface due to aerodynamic heating. Such layer is inpenetrable to EM waves, including radio waves. In order for it to receive updates, the missile (or warhead, whatever it is) has to slow down to Mach 4 or below. Then there comes the dilemma :

1) If you are Mach 4+, then you cannot receive update and cannot maneuver effectively
2) If you are below Mach 4, then you are too slow and prone to interception. Such high trajectory objects would be easily picked up by radar so there is plenty of time to reach

I think it is a good discussion. Any thoughts are welcome

[Austin]

Photo: Peace Mission 2010 ( via mp.net )

Part-1 Part-2

[Christopher Sidor]

Airfleet Magazine

Cross post from PAK-FA and FGFA Thread.

Besides the analysis of the mysterious J-20, the author also speaks highly of the J-10 and that disagrees with many of the critics from this forum.

Why the Chinese shaped the J-20
in the way it is? Perhaps, they are unfamiliar
with the classic solutions for a delta-
winged, canard-equipped fighter? No,
this is not the case knowing that Chengdu’s
previous design was the J-10 light weight
fighter, now in service with PLAAF. On its
first public flight, the J-20 was escorted by
a J-10B twin seater, the operational trainer
version of the baseline J-10 single seat
fighter. This airplane was the star of the Airshow
China 2008 and 2010, when it flew
superbly with the PLAAF display team pilots
at the controls. The J-10 is a very maneuverable
airplane, and this is the testimony
of the Chinese designers’ skills in development
of maneuverable fighter aircraft.

Another J-10 clip which shows its climb, its turns and its low speed fly-by.

Ashi i cannot open the pdf file. If it is feasible can you please copy and paste the relevant portions.

[shiv]

A Chinese video featuring Tu-16 Badger clone refueller, Fennec, Dauphin and Super Frelon helo clones
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNHvoROOD-w

[maganlal]

Not trying to sound pessimistic, but after looking at the videos of J-10 and that of the LCA from Aero India, seems like LCA has no chance against the J-10, at least in dogfight. J-10 is displaying high AoA even in low speed (wow!)and I remember the LCA turns were really wide in comparison to this.

[rohitvats]

Oh ho!!!

[shiv]

Not trying to sound pessimistic, but after looking at the videos of J-10 and that of the LCA from Aero India, seems like LCA has no chance against the J-10, at least in dogfight. J-10 is displaying high AoA even in low speed (wow!)and I remember the LCA turns were really wide in comparison to this.

Wait till you see the timing of the turns and loops with a timer embedded in the video. Coming soon your way.. Unfortunately I have no video of J-10 doing a loop.

High AoA at high speed means the plane will climb sir. High AoA at low speed is a sitting duck for a HJT-16 with guns. That AoA and that speed is good only for an airshow. Nice AoA but useless for combat - although I admit it can be used to escort the Pakistani PM flying to Peking in a Karakorum K-8

[NRao]

Not trying to sound pessimistic, but after looking at the videos of J-10 and that of the LCA from Aero India, seems like LCA has no chance against the J-10, at least in dogfight. J-10 is displaying high AoA even in low speed (wow!)and I remember the LCA turns were really wide in comparison to this.

We DO need some comic relief at times.

BTW, the LCA was designed to take on the F-16.

But, wait, I thought the J-17 shot down a F-22.

So, why are we talking about J-10 vs. LCA?