China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jun 2011 20:12

China does need food. their agriculture is gradually collapsing via desertification, drought and pollution. they did not have a high % of arable land relative to political boundary to start with. there are limits to how much fertilizer one can throw at the soil. southern china is facing its worst drought in 30 yrs.

so one expects them to be net importers of all types of food going fwd , starting with rice from cambodia and thailand to fish from chile or beef, vegetables, fruit and pork from brazil.

Don · Post by **Don** » 07 Jun 2011 20:31

Singha wrote:China does need food. their agriculture is gradually collapsing via desertification, drought and pollution. they did not have a high % of arable land relative to political boundary to start with. there are limits to how much fertilizer one can throw at the soil. southern china is facing its worst drought in 30 yrs.

so one expects them to be net importers of all types of food going fwd , starting with rice from cambodia and thailand to fish from chile or beef, vegetables, fruit and pork from brazil.

I think China is basically self sufficient in terms of grain (rice and wheat), vegetables, or Aquaculture but the problem is the population is now eating alot more meat. Most of those Soybeans are used as animal feed.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-1 ... -pigs.html

“China is building a livestock and meat industry in five years that took the United States 50 years,” said Michael Swanson, the senior agricultural economist in Minneapolis for San Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. “U.S. farm trade with China may double in the next five years.”

The 13-fold expansion in China’s economy in the last two decades has meant an almost doubling in meat consumption by the country’s 1.34 billion people, World Bank and government data show. While the U.S. trade gap with China widened by about 13 percent to $23.3 billion in January, exports of U.S. farm goods are the highest ever and the Asian nation is the top customer.

China may increase soybean imports to 68 million tons by 2014, a 17.7 million-ton increase from last year that would exceed the purchases forecast by the USDA, according to Grant Kimberley, director of market promotion for the Iowa Soybean Association. Farmers in the state reaped 13.5 million tons in 2010. China consumes one in every four tons produced globally.

It takes about 2.8 pounds of feed to produce one pound of pork, according to the American Soybean Association. Increased meat production and demand for feed is coming at a time of near- record global food prices that contributed to protests across northern Africa and the Middle East, toppling leaders in Egypt and Tunisia. Rising prices pushed about 44 million people into poverty since June, the World Bank said in February.

Soybean demand is increasing from fish farms in China, which already accounts for 63 percent of global output of aquaculture, according to Kimberley. Commercial fish production uses as little as 1.2 pounds of feed to get one pound of meat, compared with 2.8 pounds to produce a pound of chicken and 3.2 pounds for a pound of pork, he said.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jun 2011 20:42

china is definitely importing rice from ASEAN region as this xinhua article today says:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001 ... 01973.html

Don · Post by **Don** » 07 Jun 2011 21:11

Singha wrote:china is definitely importing rice from ASEAN region as this xinhua article today says:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001 ... 01973.html

Most Asian nations both export and import rice depending on strain / quality.

Interesting rice facts :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jun 2011 21:41

Khan is evolving a strategy around the lizard, expect more and more noise on this subject from khanland in the coming month. there is a good mix of rhetoric (election related) and containment policies coming out. Expect this to accelerate in 2012 (both streams). Yindoos are a prime tools in this containment. MMRCA is not the tools, it is the huge transport fleet we are buying.
Remember WWII, the US flew huge missions to supply allied troops in China to fight the Japs from India. There would be a redux of this. Next to expect will be yindoos buying a huge tranche of missiles and other ordnance (LGB, cluster ammo etc) and also integrating these with MMRCA birds. Khan will use Yindoos as a forward base for action against lizard and that day is not far off.

whatever is the outcome in Pukeland, it would become an insignificant factor in Khan's global gameplan!!!
Shiv, I think we should start a new thread on Khan Vs Lizard as well as Puke dismemberment.

sevoke · Post by **sevoke** » 08 Jun 2011 14:44

You're right. It does seem like the media frenzy is building up. BBC is following suit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13692558

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Jun 2011 15:54

Folks please. Much of this discussion should go on the Chjina thread in the other forum. Please leave this thread alone for military related developments.

Adminullahs? Could you help here please?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Jun 2011 18:57

my apologies

GeorgeM · Post by **GeorgeM** » 08 Jun 2011 20:11

Don wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:Growing security concerns due to natural resources demand led by China and India : SIPRI
Here is an example :

I think the next battle ground is economic not military. Leaders of any country who fails to understand this will miss the boat.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110606/ap_ ... a_moves_in

China shops for Latin American oil, food, minerals
..."

My response in Managing Chinese Threat

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Jun 2011 21:14

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13692558

china confirms varyag will join the PLAN soon for sea trials

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 09 Jun 2011 00:51

China's new fighter bomber

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 09 Jun 2011 05:40

I can begin to hate the Chinese, or at least the Chinese netizens just for the quality of their pictures. As Shiv says, another case of lookie, lookie

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jun 2011 06:27

ShauryaT wrote:I can begin to hate the Chinese, or at least the Chinese netizens just for the quality of their pictures. As Shiv says, another case of lookie, lookie

Shaurya - this Chinese "revealing" of new weapons is like any standard Bolllywood sexy song sequence in which a pretty actress gives tantalizing glimpses of nether regions. But because of the censor board you know damn well what you are not going to get from Bollywood. But the constant hope that something will show up as she twirls and allows her skirt to rise above her hips keeps one on tenterhooks and sustains the boners for longer.

This appears to be a sort of game. Other countries have taken the sex and romance out of military hardware. The Chinese are creating a new art where there is an artful blending of hardware and hard-on.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Jun 2011 06:39

For a minute, i thought it was BTS bus.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jun 2011 07:12

ashi wrote:China's new fighter bomber
http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/up ... -_part.jpg

Thousands of rivets. Where are the composites?

amit · Post by **amit** » 09 Jun 2011 07:18

shiv wrote:
ashi wrote:China's new fighter bomber
http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/up ... -_part.jpg
Thousands of rivets. Where are the composites?

Maybe the Photoshop is an unlicensed version?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Jun 2011 07:41

^there is another term for it

[quote]cheap ba$turds[/quote]

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 09 Jun 2011 07:54

shiv wrote:
ashi wrote:China's new fighter bomber
http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/up ... -_part.jpg
Thousands of rivets. Where are the composites?

I wasn't gonna post this, since it's still very much in the rumor stage and no posters with good sources have stepped up thus far. With that said, the rumors are getting pretty loud, and since it's already posted here I'll comment on it too.

Now, if the JH-7B is to serve the same role in the future as the JH-7A does now, then it'll primarily be a low-cost, long-range, anti-shipping plane. That's a pretty specific role. It's hard to say about composites and whatnot right now, and I'm sure all planes have a ton of rivets, not sure what you can tell from that. As a matter of fact, you can't really tell anything from that picture yet except that it's got DSI and it doesn't look like the F-35, J-20, or the JF-17. It might still just be a fake, but if it's real it's definitely a new kind of plane and its color and the method of its "release" probably points toward the PLA. It does have the two little red upside down triangle as in early JH-7's, but I'm not sure how exclusive that is.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jun 2011 08:10

my theory is PRC will use evolutionary stealth projects of existing kit like JH-7 and JF-17 to build knowledge and experience with stealth a/c design and transfer that to more important projects like J-10mk2 , J-20 and the future a2a stealth bird they would be working on.

that being said, a reduction of frontal RCS and just a 1/2 big weapons like ASMs coated with RAM does benefit the anti-shipping role to an extent.

Don · Post by **Don** » 09 Jun 2011 08:30

DavidD wrote: I wasn't gonna post this, since it's still very much in the rumor stage and no posters with good sources have stepped up thus far. With that said, the rumors are getting pretty loud, and since it's already posted here I'll comment on it too.

Now, if the JH-7B is to serve the same role in the future as the JH-7A does now, then it'll primarily be a low-cost, long-range, anti-shipping plane. That's a pretty specific role. It's hard to say about composites and whatnot right now, and I'm sure all planes have a ton of rivets, not sure what you can tell from that. As a matter of fact, you can't really tell anything from that picture yet except that it's got DSI and it doesn't look like the F-35, J-20, or the JF-17. It might still just be a fake, but if it's real it's definitely a new kind of plane and its color and the method of its "release" probably points toward the PLA. It does have the two little red upside down triangle as in early JH-7's, but I'm not sure how exclusive that is.

I agree not enough sources or pictures.

Could it be based on this prevous graphic ?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Jun 2011 09:02

^majestic cutout!

Don · Post by **Don** » 09 Jun 2011 09:40

shiv wrote:
ashi wrote:China's new fighter bomber
http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/up ... -_part.jpg
Thousands of rivets. Where are the composites?

Even JSF has rivets : )

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jun 2011 17:57

Don wrote:
shiv wrote: Thousands of rivets. Where are the composites?
Even JSF has rivets : )

tch tch tch! How disappointing!

But no AESA in the Chinese a/c? Plain vanilla cone for radome?

Don · Post by **Don** » 09 Jun 2011 20:35

shiv wrote:

tch tch tch! How disappointing!

But no AESA in the Chinese a/c? Plain vanilla cone for radome?

Seriously, I think that picture is not real.

anishns · Post by **anishns** » 09 Jun 2011 21:27

Why are all the warnings in English "Fragile" , "Do not Remove before flight"

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Jun 2011 21:38

Nightwatch, 9 June 2011

LINK

China: People's Liberation Army Chief of General Staff General Chen Bingde said the 300-meter (990-foot) refurbished Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag was being built but has not yet been completed, Hong Kong Commercial Daily reported 8 June. Chen's assistant, Qi Jianguo, said the aircraft carrier would not enter other nations' territories in accordance with Chinese defensive military strategy. Qi added an aircraft carrier was a symbol of a great nation.

Comment: NightWatch has reported the recent progress of China first aircraft carrier. There is no new information in the report, but it Qi's statement reinforces the assessment that this first Chinese carrier has significant symbolic value in supporting China's emergence as a military as well as an economic power.

The Chinese are following their interpretation of the US model of a great power. It includes possessing an aircraft carrier or two. They are arriving at a capability that Western navies and the Japanese Navy developed more than 70 years ago.

It is important that they consider it a symbol because the most visionary naval strategist in the US describes aircraft carriers as big targets for small missiles.

Nevertheless among the riparian states of the western Pacific and the South China Sea, Chinese leaders will be unable to resist the temptation to use aircraft carriers to show the flag and assert hegemony. Expect a great Chinese fleet to circumnavigate the world in coming years.

In the next two decades China will be launching more carriers when India will be sailing a fleet of newer generation carriers of its own. Then the competition for dominance in Asia will reach a new level.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 09 Jun 2011 22:59

Don wrote:
shiv wrote:

tch tch tch! How disappointing!

But no AESA in the Chinese a/c? Plain vanilla cone for radome?
Seriously, I think that picture is not real.

If you're talking about the supposed JH-XX pic then you're right, it's now been confirmed to be a fake. I suppose there was a reason why none of the big shrimps came out to vouch for its authenticity, though it was a pretty good CG!

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 09 Jun 2011 23:24

anishns wrote:Why are all the warnings in English "Fragile" , "Do not Remove before flight"

He posted a picture of JSF to show rivets.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Jun 2011 10:43

Ukraine helps China to build the wind tunnel to develop heavy military transport aircraft

Ukraine made three programs of cooperation, and actively help the Chinese develop heavy military transport aircraft. “Chinese and Asian defense” issue 3, 2011, the disclosure, an aviation industry sources, the last two years Ukraine and China launched a large-scale cooperation projects to help China build a large wind tunnel laboratory, used for heavy military transport aircraft wind tunnel tests.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Jun 2011 10:53

Ukraine is actively selling Russian military technology to China

Ukrainian state-owned company engaged in the export of weapons, actively participates in the process of establishing China's own aircraft carrier, and the development of new modern equipment for the aircraft carrier "Varag". Thus confirming speculation representative of the Russian Navy, noting that the Chinese training complex, mimicking the deck of an aircraft carrier, is very similar in size and appearance to the Ukrainian counterpart (system line), especially near.

At the same time representative of the Ukrainian defense enterprises, who arrived in China on a working visit, stressed that the scope of cooperation between China and Ukraine is much less than expected the Russian side. He also confirmed rumors that the aircraft carrier "Varang" will be equipped with engines of Ukrainian origin. In addition, he said that Ukraine will sell China two landing craft air cushion type "Bison", while non-media stories that will be sold 4 ships.

He said: "Over the last 2-3 years, cooperation between China and Ukraine in the sphere of military technology has reached a new level. There are several explanations: China wants to get our technology. We believe that this development is contrary to our economic interests. Therefore, during the visit Ukrainian president to Beijing, the issue of military cooperation hotly debated, but no specific documents were signed. In the first couple, the Chinese want to learn how to design the ships, "Bison," but we explained to the Chinese side that we can partially help in adapting to the Chinese ships conditions, but refuse to transfer the technology completely. As a result, China's "Bison" will be different from Ukrainian: they will be installed Chinese weapons and fire control system. In addition, the final installation of equipment will be held in China. Moreover, taking into account the location of the air cushion in the Chinese ship, we changed the location of the compartments.

The representative of the defense company also noted: "The Ukrainian experts also visited the Chinese factory for the production of boilers in Harbin. After graduating from the program of cooperation on the known gas turbine DN80 (according to which Ukraine will give China technology of these turbines), Harbin plant will be mainly in China for the production of Engines for military vessels.However, when asked about when will the turbines will be installed on Chinese aircraft carriers, he just smiled.

At this point it is safe to say that the Varyag and Chinese aircraft carriers will be Ukrainian engines. All associated tests are very successful, and probably in the near future Ukraine will provide China with test instances.

Talking about the training complex, the representative said that the cooperation is very, very limited, as Ukraine had sold technology to China and is no longer responsible for the construction of military facilities by the Chinese side. Assistance of the Ukrainian side on this issue at the moment is limited to advice on the internal layout of the complex.

But, according to the magazine "Hanhe Yachzhoufanu, even such help Ukraine is a good deposit for the development of Chinese shipbuilding industry. Thanks to cooperation with Ukraine, China, learned the basic methods of training.

In Ukraine there are many more opportunities for arms sales and technology, but the acquisition of modern technology will still pass through the Russian export company.

Ukrainian sources also said that the Ukrainian company "Artem" has the right to export antitank missiles and missile R-27T air-to-air missiles. In addition, the Kharkov plant for the production of engines has the right to export diesel engines for tanks 6TD-2.

If we talk about training complex "thread", this complex is directly subordinate to the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine, and Ukraine has the right to sell the technology without additional approvals from any other country.

According to sources, the development of China's carrier Ukraine can provide only a limited number of specialists. However, some of the dismissed employees of Ukrainian companies can go to China at his own request, writes the Washington Post.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Jun 2011 23:55

The pic is a bit blurry, but this appears to be another DSI-intake aircraft:

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/9089 ... nding4.jpg

It's a JL-9 trainer, so not sure exactly why they're modifying it.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 11 Jun 2011 01:48

I don't know why they developed the humps on the JL-9, but most probably those are for export to countries which will field these planes as there frontline planes. It's just another bullet point. They will still be cannon fodder for the frontline planes of any other respectable AF. Having said that, I like the JL-9 and the L-15 planes.

Especially the JL-9. It is a simple case of making do with what is available at hand. Simple progression from the J-7. Simple and easy. Didn't even change the engines or the wings! It shows in the time they required to field it. IMHO, the above two planes would be quite handy. The should see good numbers.

On the other hand, I lament what we did with the trainer scenario ... I love the IJT-36, but the CAT and the HTT-39 are missed opportunities. As respectable as the Hawks are, I would have loved to desi trainers in tippy grey and it was easily do-able.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 11 Jun 2011 23:21

China has joined the club with its first aircraft carrier

It's been revealed that the Chinese are building their first aircraft carrier, the Varyag. At 300 metres in length, it will be 30 metres shorter than a US Nimitz class super-carrier. The hull of the Varyag dates back to the 1980s, was initially constructed by the Russians, and sat in a dockyard in the Ukraine rusting until it was purchased by the Chinese. While the vessel is set for sea trials later this year, the Chinese still have to master its use, including learning how to launch and recover jets, which should take them several more years to accomplish.

US carriers

Currently the largest carriers in the world, Nimitz class super-carriers have an approximate displacement of 102,000 tonnes, are propelled by two Westinghouse A4W nuclear reactors to four screws, can achieve over 30 knots, have an unlimited range, and carry a crew of 5,680, which includes air wing personnel. Each of them also carry between 85 and 90 aircraft.

carrier strike group(CSG)

Each CSG consists of a carrier and its air wing, a minimum of one cruiser, a minimum of two destroyers/frigates and logistical support vessels. The inclusion of submarines is never officially listed, as to do so would admit their presence and therefore limit their capabilities.

A single US carrier strike group is, at present, the most powerful military asset in the world. In the case of the US navy, a CSG has the ability to deploy amphibious ready groups (marines/special forces); establish air supremacy in a given theatre of operation; operate in all weather conditions 24 hours a day (save those that pose a threat to the group's immediate security); are designed to be able to project power ashore to deal with a multitude of sophisticated land-based threats, such as missile defence systems; and, above all, can deploy theatre ballistic missiles that possess a range of between 300 to 3,500 kilometres (tactical-intercontinental). That aspect changes if the group is accompanied by a ballistic submarine (SSBN), which has the ability to launch up to 24 Trident II's with a START-limited five MIRV's per missile, each of which can be configured to deliver W88s, which have a maximum yield of 475 kilotonnes – roughly 36 times more powerful per warhead than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
In short, a single CSG could – if fully unleashed – devastate most nations on earth.

article is more on US capabilities than on chinese.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 12 Jun 2011 10:25

indranilroy wrote:I don't know why they developed the humps on the JL-9, but most probably those are for export to countries which will field these planes as there frontline planes. It's just another bullet point. They will still be cannon fodder for the frontline planes of any other respectable AF. Having said that, I like the JL-9 and the L-15 planes.

Especially the JL-9. It is a simple case of making do with what is available at hand. Simple progression from the J-7. Simple and easy. Didn't even change the engines or the wings! It shows in the time they required to field it. IMHO, the above two planes would be quite handy. The should see good numbers.

On the other hand, I lament what we did with the trainer scenario ... I love the IJT-36, but the CAT and the HTT-39 are missed opportunities. As respectable as the Hawks are, I would have loved to desi trainers in tippy grey and it was easily do-able.

The pic is a bit blurry, so I'm not 100% sure those are DSI, but since it's less complex, cheaper to maintain, and the JL-9 isn't meant to have great supersonic performance it kind of makes some sense. As for the L-15, it's a nice plane, but I think it's too...luxurious for China right now. I mean, it's a $15 million trainer, something more developed countries can afford. I think India can easily make a Mig-21 based trainer as well and make it cheap and fast like the JL-9.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Jun 2011 13:21

the airpower of the CBG concept has reached mythical proportions due to media psyops and discovery/netgeo.

take the biggest carrier - 100 a/c airwing out of which say 75 are hornets. in tests , they been able to get around 1.5 sorties/ac/day for a few days , when deploying with full loads of aircrews, pilots, munitions etc.
so thats ~100 fighter sorties/day.

if the idea is to influence the battle on land, then we need to subtract the air defence sorties which must be there 24x7 to maintain a CAP over the whole fleet area. lets say 4 hornets are always kept in air and they use C-2 refuellers/KC135 from land to extend the patrol...to 6 hrs duration. so that takes up 16 sorties....more if any form of threat appears and addl a/c are scrambled.

so roughly it comes back down to 75 strike sorties best case - probably less after a day or two of heavy ops.

if the sorties expect to face SAM / AA - then some will have to be Growlers and hornets loaded up for A2A mission...so subtract around 15 sorties there.

60 sorties actually carrying bombs and rockets to land.

it will be devastating to a big target or two on whichever country is attacked but will need a long time to have a serious impact by itself. USN gets around this by deploying 3-4 carriers to cover each other and generate more strikes , other countries do not have such a inventory.

it took 70 days of continuous strikes by a huge nato sea and land based inventory to defeat serbia for example.
and these days "tokyo fire raid" or "dresden fire raid" to terrorize civilians are unacceptable...
the cost of keeping the heavy hitters like B52 and B1 in the air will not be cheap either and their sortie turnaround rates not too good.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 12 Jun 2011 13:42

Sirji,
The initial table cleaning by tossing in a few hundred lakshmi vedi's on the target before letting loose any CBG also plays a teeny weeny part too.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Jun 2011 13:47

multiple CBGs and showers of 100s of cruise missiles is something only khan chacha can afford at this juncture. the Euros have not figured out how to make cheap CMs in bulk and neither has india/china. for us they are costly 'semi-strategic' weapons to be polished and hoarded lest anyone scratch or use them. for chacha they are like potato wedges and poached eggs- part of every meal.

India / China can put say 2 CVs each with 50 fighters into a trouble spot, plus the escort vessels (and no E2 onsite, depend on land based awacs having the legs and numbers to maintain the bubble).
this is not something thats likely to overly scare even iran, pakistan or north korea imo.

we can probably use such a dual-CV TF for hit and run raiding, but no sitting comfortably off the shore maintaining air dominance with all threats cleaned up or chased away.

when part of the winning team even players like manjrekar sir and irfan pathan look like world beaters

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 12 Jun 2011 13:48

V. big part of the CBG's role is played via Tomahawk strikes imho - each of these ships can probly launch a few hundred at various targets - strike capability goes up considerably. The idea in GW I for example, was to soften targets via CM strikes. airstrikes via hornet types was launched only after comfortable level of degradation had taken place. And all of this against relatively piss poor defences - Iraq in GWI was overwhelmed with incredible odds - but I doubt China would be that easy, esp. if the US is the sole antagonist.

CM

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 12 Jun 2011 20:24

Cain Marko wrote:V. big part of the CBG's role is played via Tomahawk strikes imho - each of these ships can probly launch a few hundred at various targets - strike capability goes up considerably...

You got it spot on... the key to the success of an carrier borne (or land based) air strike would be a saturation attack using a barrage of CMs/BMs. This is where IAs large array of Prithvis and Brahmos II would come in handy. unfortunately none of our ships are designed to carry a huge # of Brahmos like the Tomohawks carried by USN.

A barrage of 200-300 Brahmos and Prithvi designed to hit military targets in Pukistan would destroy / degrade their war fighting ability significantly even before the first IBG revs-up its engines. JMT

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 12 Jun 2011 23:31

Cain Marko wrote: And all of this against relatively piss poor defences - Iraq in GWI was overwhelmed with incredible odds

This is a common statement but is a bit extreme. Iraq's armed forces after the long war with Iran and huge support from USSR/US was not a joke.