China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Jun 2011 04:28

NOT a good development for India. I read an article that was even more explicit about Israeli intentions for FAR more closer relations with China. But this one should be enough to raise red flags all over the place:

China hopes to strengthen military co-op with Israel, defense minister

Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak meets top Chinese general on visit to Beijing

zlin · Post by **zlin** » 14 Jun 2011 05:43

J20 big pictures
http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_b0caf8ddeee05d5.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_85903e50bbac6dd.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_f226b8743937849.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_8edfaaf2acc820b.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_3f2d0ee1f403a7c.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_b33c2e0ed8cdf29.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_255f6d47494df73.jpg

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Jun 2011 05:49

^^^^^^

Government Issue?

One of them has the photographer standing in line with the ILS!!!!

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 14 Jun 2011 08:13

Threats from advanced military just a myth: China

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 14 Jun 2011 09:20

That bird does look rather menacing - v.nice.

CM

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 15 Jun 2011 12:21

zlin wrote:J20 big pictures
http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_b0caf8ddeee05d5.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_85903e50bbac6dd.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_f226b8743937849.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_8edfaaf2acc820b.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_3f2d0ee1f403a7c.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_b33c2e0ed8cdf29.jpg

http://img.fyjs.cn/Mon_1106/27_66_255f6d47494df73.jpg

The left and right intakes look different. The one on the port side looks like it has little bumps on them, someone on another board suggested that they could be used to test for the optimal DSI bump size, which would make it an intake designed to test for a normal DSI. The starboard size one looks like it has a movable lip, perhaps used to test for variable DSI.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Jun 2011 20:41

DavidD wrote: The left and right intakes look different. The one on the port side looks like it has little bumps on them, someone on another board suggested that they could be used to test for the optimal DSI bump size, which would make it an intake designed to test for a normal DSI. The starboard size one looks like it has a movable lip, perhaps used to test for variable DSI.

They look the same to me.

However I believe it is highly unlikely that they would be experimenting with two different types of intakes on one prototype at this stage. If they were playing around with two types of intakes it can only mean that they are "not sure" of which one is better. If they are not sure and have a choice of two intake designs, then they really should have done extensive wind tunnel testing to be as sure as possible that one is appropriate - at least for a start. Then it would make sense to test that one design thoroughly on the prototype - all the way up to speeds from 0.9 to 1,3 mach - after all these are meant to be supersonic intakes. And when all the data that can possibly be gained from one intake design has been gathered - they can then putting a new design so that the new data can be compared with the old design.

Looks like Chinese jingos are as wildly imaginative as Indian jingos.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 16 Jun 2011 07:29

Beware the J-20 mock-up

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 17 Jun 2011 09:21

Deception by the Boatload: Brahma Chellaney

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 17 Jun 2011 10:33

abhishek_sharma wrote:China's Aircraft Carrier Ambitions: An Update

There are two more articles on China's aircraft carrier:

CHINA’S AIRCRAFT CARRIER AMBITIONS: Seeking Truth from Rumors

CHINA’S AIRCRAFT CARRIER DILEMMA

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 18 Jun 2011 06:15

shiv wrote:
DavidD wrote: The left and right intakes look different. The one on the port side looks like it has little bumps on them, someone on another board suggested that they could be used to test for the optimal DSI bump size, which would make it an intake designed to test for a normal DSI. The starboard size one looks like it has a movable lip, perhaps used to test for variable DSI.
They look the same to me.

However I believe it is highly unlikely that they would be experimenting with two different types of intakes on one prototype at this stage. If they were playing around with two types of intakes it can only mean that they are "not sure" of which one is better. If they are not sure and have a choice of two intake designs, then they really should have done extensive wind tunnel testing to be as sure as possible that one is appropriate - at least for a start. Then it would make sense to test that one design thoroughly on the prototype - all the way up to speeds from 0.9 to 1,3 mach - after all these are meant to be supersonic intakes. And when all the data that can possibly be gained from one intake design has been gathered - they can then putting a new design so that the new data can be compared with the old design.

Looks like Chinese jingos are as wildly imaginative as Indian jingos.

You don't see the differences? One seems to have a double lip, the other has a single lip, smooth edges. One has a set of little dots on it, the other doesn't. I don't know enough about aircraft design to comment on the efficacy of wind tunnel testing, but I'd imagine that there are some advantages to testing it on a real aircraft in air. I think it's very possible that they don't know which is the best yet, since one hasn't been used on any aircraft yet.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Jun 2011 06:49

DavidD wrote: I don't know enough about aircraft design to comment on the efficacy of wind tunnel testing, but I'd imagine that there are some advantages to testing it on a real aircraft in air. I think it's very possible that they don't know which is the best yet, since one hasn't been used on any aircraft yet.

The worst way to find out is to test them together. The thing to do is to test one configuration thoroughly and test the other one separately.

If an accident occurs nobody will know which one. If one intake causes better engine performance under some circumstances (speed, altitude attitude, temperature) and the other under different circumstances your engineers will still not know which is better overall unless tested separately. And the differential thrust can cause problems that need to be accounted for by the flight control software.

It would be really funny to say that Chinese engineers are too stupid for words. More likely they are not stupid and they are not playing with separate intake designs. It's one thing for Chinese jingos to release a stream of photoshopped images. it's another thing top start believing things from those images as technical specifications.

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 18 Jun 2011 17:06

abhishek_sharma wrote:Deception by the Boatload: Brahma Chellaney

I would not be surprised if the Chinese eventually build the naval port at gawadar or even occupy it. The statement by the Chinese Foreign Ministry Official should be taken with a grain of salt. Let us not forget that the Chinese Foreign Ministry has no influence over the elements that occupy the CMC. It is allegedly in some quarters that most of the time Chinese Foreign Ministry is kept out of the loop about the decisions taken by CMC members. Its inputs are neither sought and if provided are not taken seriously.

Chinese will not immediately start building up the naval facilities in Gawadar. Rather China will first build the connecting infrastructure through the Northern Part of Kashmir, which is immorally and illegally held by Pakistan, to northern Pakistani Punjab. This is similar to what they did against India. They first built up roads and infrastructure and then attacked us.
After the supporting infrastructure is in place it will built the port and Pakistan will claim that the port is being built for its navy. Offcourse chinese PLAN ships and probably submarines will visit the port and will stay for extended periods which Pakistan will happily provide. After all dont the Pakistanis claim that they have a big heart?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jun 2011 17:22

China will build.

Pakistan will happily provide.

And, India, with very few exceptions, will blissfully keep quite, as she did with the Sino-Pak nuclear deal.

disha · Post by **disha** » 18 Jun 2011 23:26

I am surprised that there is so much discussion going around on this butt ugly fatbox with "different" intakes and other yaada yaada goodies!

Fatbox (tm) is a joke with 10 control surfaces and huge fins and a huge body, so much that it will look like a turkey flying straight at us. Infact the little gnats can do a nice little ring-a-ring arounds for the Fatbox.

Also I do not understand the dhoti-shiver that is happening when Chineese come in Gwadar. We should welcome them to be in Gwadar, in Karachi, in Sindh, in Islamabad and in large numbers. I will be happy to see at least 2 Million Han Chineese and additional 1 Million supportive Han chineese in those areas!!

sevoke · Post by **sevoke** » 19 Jun 2011 01:41

Well said Disha! Nearer the enemy, the easier to obliterate. Besides, who'd want to miss out on the social dynamic between puki madrassa types and the han clones especially when pork fried rice becomes the largest selling underground food commodity.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Jun 2011 03:02

Peaceful China!!!

Chinese naval maneuvers seen as warning to Vietnam

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Jun 2011 03:06

NRao wrote:Peaceful China!!!

Chinese naval maneuvers seen as warning to Vietnam

Funny:

Social media are also fueling anti-Chinese sentiments, including an online petition to change the name of the South China Sea to the Southeast Asia Sea.

Sign up guys, sign up.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Jun 2011 20:55

China's 5G fighter 'a showoff'

It was more a demonstration than a real program," Mikhail Pogosyan, head of United Aircraft Corporation, said.

The Chinese aircraft industry is developing successfully but it lacks what is required for a breakthrough, he said.

"There will be no breakthroughs here. Great scale and great experience are needed to carry out such programs," Pogosyan said.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 21 Jun 2011 11:06

shiv wrote:
DavidD wrote: I don't know enough about aircraft design to comment on the efficacy of wind tunnel testing, but I'd imagine that there are some advantages to testing it on a real aircraft in air. I think it's very possible that they don't know which is the best yet, since one hasn't been used on any aircraft yet.

The worst way to find out is to test them together. The thing to do is to test one configuration thoroughly and test the other one separately.

If an accident occurs nobody will know which one. If one intake causes better engine performance under some circumstances (speed, altitude attitude, temperature) and the other under different circumstances your engineers will still not know which is better overall unless tested separately. And the differential thrust can cause problems that need to be accounted for by the flight control software.

It would be really funny to say that Chinese engineers are too stupid for words. More likely they are not stupid and they are not playing with separate intake designs. It's one thing for Chinese jingos to release a stream of photoshopped images. it's another thing top start believing things from those images as technical specifications.

Yea it doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. Somebody over on SDF explained how it could work, but I just don't know enough about it. You can't deny that at least visually, they are different, whether it's logical or not.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 22 Jun 2011 05:34

Suprisingly good video at NDTV, its in hindi

China: Expert in Stealing Technologies
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/ndtv-s ... ory/203096

Don · Post by **Don** » 24 Jun 2011 09:26

Bolivian K-8 arriving

Over 200 exported with 82 on export order.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Jun 2011 09:54

So 282 order is a good number for K-8 fighter which i thought would not see service beyond PLAAF and PAF , perhaps JF-17 will follow it , there are many countries who need cheap but decent fighter/trainer thats the niche volume market that china would capture in the next 2 decades.

Don · Post by **Don** » 24 Jun 2011 10:01

Austin wrote:So 282 order is a good number for K-8 fighter which i thought would not see service beyond PLAAF and PAF , perhaps JF-17 will follow it , there are many countries who need cheap but decent fighter/trainer thats the niche volume market that china would capture in the next 2 decades.

Good point Austin, their follow up is the L-15 trainer but I seriously doubt if it will have the same success as the K-8.

http://cnair.top81.cn/FT-7_K-8_L-15.htm

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 24 Jun 2011 10:07

You have to hand it to the Chinis, they know what they want and are willing to do it by hook or by crook. The sheer brazenness of importing many billions of $ of Russkie maal and then turning around and selling knockoffs to compete with the Russkies.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 24 Jun 2011 18:32

China’s J-15 No Game Changer

yantra · Post by **yantra** » 24 Jun 2011 19:04

First would be to copy - and perfect that art. Then innovate on that platform - the new products will be better than the copied ones. Chinese seem to be following the earlier Japanese/Korean models (70s Japanese products, 80s Korean products). In time, even Chinese products would be known for their quality and innovation.

It will be too late for the West to catch up then if they allow plagiarism for the much needed money now. They will have a cake to-day and no bread tomorrow.

India is taking a labored approach to build quality and innovative products from scratch. Success would be, at best, inconsistent and the road long.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Jun 2011 12:45

Quite an exhaustive analysis by SOC on Chinese Naval Air Power and SAM Network

Chinese Naval Air Power Development , Chinas Strategic SAM Network

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jun 2011 17:50

karan_mc wrote:China’s J-15 No Game Changer

I for one would not believe a single -ve word from the Chinese.

They are out to take over the IOR for sure. It may take 20-30 years, but that is what they are planning on.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Jun 2011 17:36

Folks - here is somthing I found by pure chance while I was doing something else. The average depth of the Yellow sea is just 44 meters. That means the waters off the coast of China are pretty shallow. A Submarine that measures say 20 meters from keel to top of conning tower would be just underwater over most of the coast of China - and that includes Chinese subs.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... Yellow-Sea

The area of the Yellow Sea proper (excluding the Bo Hai) is about 146,700 square miles (380,000 square km); its mean depth is 144 feet (44 metres), and its maximum depth is some 500 feet (152 metres).

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 26 Jun 2011 18:08

Shiv sir, the shallow depth of the south china sea is something that I had mentioned in this earlier post of mine. I had also put in some other interesting info about the various straits and sea involved vis--vis IN & PLAN.

bmallick wrote:I looked at the depths of the various straits around Indonesia. The rough data is as follows.

Strait, location, average depth (m), Width ( Km), Approx distance from Port Blair ( Km)

1. Mallacca, North & East of Sumatra, 25 5 - 300, 600 northern end --- 1400 southern

2. Sunda, Between Sumatra & Java, 18, 3-4, 2400

3. Lombok, South of Java, between Bali & lombok, 250 - 350, 10-15, 3400

4. Ombai, North-West of East Timor, Very Deep Sections 3250, 10-100, 5000

5. Timor Passage, South of East Timor & North Of Australia, 200 (avg) Timor Trough 3300, Wide sea, 5200

Apart from these there are quite a few straits between Lombok & Ombai, which can be used for movement. Also the Sunda trench, which has a maximum depth of 7200 m ( avg > 1000m), is 2600 km long, runs the entire length of Indonesian Island chain, almost parallel to it. Is 200-300 km away from the Indonesian coast. In the north it reaches into the Andaman Sea. Moreover these Straits are part of what is called the Indonesian Throughflow, which is the flow of Warm, Less saline Pacific waters into the Colder, Saline Indian Ocean. Hence good Thermoclines, difficult for ASW.

From the above data, it is clear that both PLAN & IN would need to go through these gates to move into each others area. Now any movement of Surface ship flotilla would be immediately known and counter can be prepared. The other option is to pre-base flotilla in each others backyard. But that too would be a known quantity and hence planned for to counter. In this regard PLAN is better placed, as South China is a closed sea, hence any IN flotilla based there can be located by air assets. However in case of PLAN basing in Gwadar, etc. the Arabian Sea is open and provides direct open access to Indian Ocean, hence greater difficulty for IN to search for them.

So the better option is Submarine. But the very low depth of Mallacca & Sunda Strait means that Subs would have difficulty in using them to break out. Can this be done, of course, but difficult to keep hidden in these narrow & shallow straits. Hence the other straits become more important. But the huge distance involved for these means that diesel electrics would lack the lungs to go, cross them and move into the suoth china sea, or vice-versa into the Indian Ocean. Hence the importance of SSN or very Large SSK.

For PLAN Subs, once they cross the straits, 200 km away is deep waters of Sunda Trench, which they simply follow to move into the Andaman Sea. Also once they cross the straits they can head out to open Indian Ocean. But for IN subs, once they cross the straits and move into the Southern part of the South china sea, the sea is generally shallow at 50-60 m. Its the northern part of the South china sea which is deep with avg depth > 4000 m. So IN subs once they cross straits, would have to further move 1400- 2500 km ( depending on route taken ) to reach deep waters. Moreover unlike the Arabian Sea, Bay of Bengal & Northern Indian ocean, the South china sea is dotted with Islands, which PLAN can use to augment its ASW efforts.

I hope this information would help us in further debating on how to use our assets in offense & what possible options we have to counter PLAN.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jun 2011 18:17

VinodTK wrote:India set to drop anchor off China
India has taken the first tentative steps towards establishing a “sustainable maritime presence” in the South China Sea, not far from the Chinese mainland.

With Indo-Vietnamese naval cooperation set to strengthen in the days to come, Vietnam has allowed Indian naval warships to drop anchor at its Nha Trang port in southern Vietnam during naval goodwill visits, well-placed government sources have confirmed.

Sources said the Indian Navy was perhaps the only foreign Navy in recent times to have been given this privilege by the Vietna-mese at a port other than Halong Bay, near Hanoi.

“The move will give India the key to a sustainable presence in the South China Sea,” said a government source. This will enable India to play a bigger role in the strategic Southeast Asian region which overlooks key shipping lines.

India, too, is set to offer naval facilities for training and capacity-building to Vietnam. The Commander-in-Chief of the Vietnam People’s Navy, Vice-Admi-ral and deputy minister Nguyen Van Hien, is scheduled to visit New Delhi, Mumbai and Visakhapat-nam during his visit starting Monday to witness Indian naval capabilities.

“India could also offer its experience in ship-building to Vietnam, which currently has a small Navy,” said a government source.

China will no doubt be closely monitoring the Indo-Vietnamese naval co-operation.

Both India and Vietnam are wary of growing Chinese military capabilities. Both countries have been victims of Chinese military aggression in past.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Jun 2011 20:27

the shallowness works as a 2-edged sword. it deters enemy submarines from moving too close to the coastline - not that anyone needs to these days , but it also permits people to wait at the edge of deep water and get a chance to detect chinese subs coming out of base as they have to transit these waters at shallow depth or along some well known deep water channels....vs having a base right at the edge of a deep and wide trench area where subs can immediately disappear into deep dive and move away.

from map looks like hainan island is one place relatively close to a deep area, so no surprises its a major submarine base.

afaik the laccadive islands are coral islands formed over 1000s of years. these would be flat and relatively low, with lagoons - very unsuitable for shipping ports.

on other hand the andamans are built from volcanic activity and might have places where deep water harbours were formed. infact it might be easier to find cliffs and deep water for submarine ops there than the Andhra coast, shallowed out for millenia by the siltage of major rivers like krishna and godavari.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Jun 2011 21:24

^^Google Earth clearly indicates depths. Laccadive side is very deep and so is the Andaman.s and vizag areas. The shallow shelf is more in the Kutch region. Hainan has shallow water on 3 sides. On one side it gets deep after about 100 km

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jun 2011 21:42

Place a layered string of nice hydrophones at about 2-300 M depth all along the rim and sleep well.

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 26 Jun 2011 21:52

NRao wrote:Place a layered string of nice hydrophones at about 2-300 M depth all along the rim and sleep well.

1. How do you intend to provide power to the hydrophones to operate?
2. How do you intend to receive information from them?

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 26 Jun 2011 21:58

Best deep water for waiting in ambush for PLAN subs, breaking into India Ocean & Andaman Sea, is the mouth of the straits of the Indonesian archipelago. Unless they break into the Indian Ocean & Andaman Sea, they cannot affect any of our operations. With us sitting in the trade routes of Andaman Sea & Indian Ocean we can easily severe it for China. To prevent check us they need to break out and with us sitting in the deep waters of the Sunda Trench, 100-200 kms off the straits in the Indonesian Archipelego, we can easily see them coming and hit them.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jun 2011 22:10

bmallick wrote:
NRao wrote:Place a layered string of nice hydrophones at about 2-300 M depth all along the rim and sleep well.
1. How do you intend to provide power to the hydrophones to operate?
2. How do you intend to receive information from them?

We had discussed such topics (on BR) in around 2000. Google is a better resource for such questions, but here is a generic, comprehensive read.

A much more expensive, but permanent, technology for acoustic exploration is the installation of a hydrophone array connected to an underwater communications cable. Since the 1960s, the U.S. Navy has operated such a SOund SUrveillance System (SOSUS) for military applications in many areas of the world ocean. With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the end of the Cold War, the U.S. Navy offered the civilian scientific community “dual use” of SOSUS to evaluate its value in ocean environmental monitoring.

We can discuss details, if need be, after that.

(BTW, I am not expert, but I do know that this is tried and tested and deployed system since the 70s at least.)

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 27 Jun 2011 00:22

bmallick wrote:Best deep water for waiting in ambush for PLAN subs, breaking into India Ocean & Andaman Sea, is the mouth of the straits of the Indonesian archipelago. Unless they break into the Indian Ocean & Andaman Sea, they cannot affect any of our operations. With us sitting in the trade routes of Andaman Sea & Indian Ocean we can easily severe it for China. To prevent check us they need to break out and with us sitting in the deep waters of the Sunda Trench, 100-200 kms off the straits in the Indonesian Archipelego, we can easily see them coming and hit them.

Can IN block those passages so that once PLAN enters IOR it becomes a hunting ground and be hunted as target.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 27 Jun 2011 00:27

Singha wrote:

on other hand the andamans are built from volcanic activity and might have places where deep water harbours were formed. infact it might be easier to find cliffs and deep water for submarine ops there than the Andhra coast, shallowed out for millenia by the siltage of major rivers like krishna and godavari.

Entire IOR is not more than 4000 ft and this shallow waters cannot provide much security for any foriegn vessels.

They have to go towards the western shores of Indonasia for safety and those areas must be under IN watch