China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

[member_23694]

one thing i find difficult to understand, the JF-20/21 are still using Russian engine which are not optimised for stealth. This implies that the Chinese don't have a proper 4th Gen engine to power these aircraft. So is it possible for them to field a proper 5th gen fighter aircraft in the next 5 years considering the fact that the Russian will be having there own 5th gen engine probably around 2018.
If this is the case then do we need to worry for these aircrafts since we should be having a more competent aircraft in PAK FA around 2019 coupled with the Rafale and Super SU 30's

[nakul]

We don't need to worry. The counter to stealth fighters are not stealth fighters. It is radar. Apart from a networked radar system, we are inducting airborne radars aggressively.They should be able to detect stealth aircraft easily. Without the advantage of stealth, these 5th gen fighters do not have a huge advantage over the advanced 4th gen fighters. It is only marketing buzz and hype that Lockheed Martin has successfully created that 5th gen fighters are invulnerable to 4th gen fighters. 5th gen is more than just stealth -- supercruise, sensor fusion, network centric & super maneuvrability are also important. We need to see China demonstrate these technologies as well...

[Singha]

for sake of argument let us assume the J-x fields the same sensors and weapons as a 4th gen MKK.
and lets us say its using its internal bay for a few AAM and both sides are supported by awacs.
in such scenario, having a clean config and internal weapons will give it a better advantage in reducing the lock-on range of weapons and permit better acceleration than a 4th gen bird with external stores and little rcs optimization.

[nakul]

The AWACS will act as the eyes & ears for the 4th gen aircraft. Once a LO bird is detected, a missile can be launched in LOAL mode guided by the mother ship to the enemy's vicinity till it is close enough to acquire a lock. The AWACS will keep the aircrafts updated of the enemy's location.

The boxy configuration of the J - x versus a sleek Su 30 MKI aerodynamics with external payload is a bit of a toss. The Su 30 MKI is known to be more maneuvrable than the venerable F 22. The biggest drawback of a 5th gen body is poor aerodynamics with the F 22 & PAK FA compensating by TVC. The Chinese will have to seriously take a look into this branch of engine technology if they are to be taken seriously. The USAF has shown the need for super maneuvrability by opting for TVC where it mattered most in spite of the fanboys claiming that dogfighting is dead. The Chinese are not stupid.

[vivek_ahuja]

Vivek, it *looks* that way. Right now, there is no way of knowing. But given the absurdity and lies that characterize other things coming out of China (economic statistics, etc.), there is good reason to be skeptical.

Skeptical? Yes
Head in the sand? No

The Chinese make up a lot of stuff out of thin air. However, their aerospace industry is no joke these days. They may be replicating a lot of work originally done elsewhere, but it does not matter. They are learning.

If a plane looks good, it probably is.

My concern is whether the F-35/F-22 look that this new bird has is because of them stealing the required information (as Lockheed claims) or whether they actually designed it and the only reason it looks similar is because common aerodynamic/radar CS reduction problems have common solutions worldwide. If the latter is true, it means that their aerospace industry is years (if not a decade) ahead of our own. An even if they stole it, they have it now and that's all that matters.

Granted that the wild card here is the engines, avionics and weapons. We don't know what the performance of those systems are going to be like until we are facing them in combat.

Not good.

Besides which, between the upgraded MKI's, the Rafale's, and the FGFA, there is no reason for India to panic.

I am more worried about the growth rate of their aerospace industry compared to ours. Also, the quality side seems to be catching up. We may have the advantage now, but its because none of our aircraft are built on our own.

Honestly, I suspect that the Chinese are worrying about the modernization plans of the Indian military. Because the IAF focuses on quality, it can be aggressive in a way that the PLAAF cannot. (How nervous would an MKK pilot be, knowing that if he encountered an MKI, he would probably be killed?)

Again, too many assumptions in your statement.

By all accounts the PLAAF (isn't it CAF these days?) SU-30MKK pilots are being increasingly well trained and supported to be aggressive in the air. Not sure about their other aircraft crews though. Point is that the days of soviet era GCI controlled pilots are a days of the past for China as well. There are no pilots willing to defect to other countries (except maybe Taiwan) to worry the Chinese into putting rigid controls on pilot training and Combat Leader training.

Like I said, we will only know their effectiveness when we go up against them

[vivek_ahuja]

All this basically means that strategy jocks will finally realize the capabilities of Dragon and not put their head in the sand like an an Ostrich.

Including folks here.

IMO, before this decade is out, rest assured, IAF would have 250+ Rafale and Sukhois should increase in numbers as well. And PLAAF should start making transition to a true 4+ gen air force by end of this decade.

Agreed.

I need to revise my own projections for the simulations I had done for the scenarios dhaga back in 2008 based on data available then.

Should be interesting to see how the numbers play out once you put these new developments from last few years into the mix...

[vivek_ahuja]

We don't need to worry. The counter to stealth fighters are not stealth fighters. It is radar. Apart from a networked radar system, we are inducting airborne radars aggressively.They should be able to detect stealth aircraft easily.

You sure about that? If a J-21 projects its frontal view with internal weapons to your AWACS, can you be sure you will detect him in time to bring weapons to bear on him before he kills your AWACS?

More to the point, can your SU-30s/Rafales etc launch weapons against a target being painted by the AWACS radar and not their own? Has the IAF gotten/tested this capability?

The only sure-shot way of detecting low observable aircraft is using Bi-Static and Multi-static radars and their airborne equivalent. Which means more AWACS in a given environment with overlapping fields of EM view.

Does the IAF have so many AWACS to provide coverage all the thousands of kilometers of Chinese border? Not to mention the Naval aspects of this new J-21? What will the IN do?

[Vashishtha]

More to the point, can your SU-30s/Rafales etc launch weapons against a target being painted by the AWACS radar and not their own? Has the IAF gotten/tested this capability?

Yes. There is nothing special about this ability, its pretty standard...

[vivek_ahuja]

Gentlemen,

Make no mistake: this new aircraft, despite how it compares with F-35 and so on, WILL tax the IAF and IN plenty in terms of countering it.

As said earlier here: the counter to the J-21 is not the Indian FGFA. We have to substantially beef up our airborne early warning capabilities, have to integrate and fuse the weapons from our fighters with the network centric AWACS and so on.

And for the love of god, the Indian Navy needs to find a AEW platform better than the Kamovs they have for now.

[vivek_ahuja]

More to the point, can your SU-30s/Rafales etc launch weapons against a target being painted by the AWACS radar and not their own? Has the IAF gotten/tested this capability?

Yes. There is nothing special about this ability, its pretty standard...

I am aware of the technology being available, but has the IAF used/deployed it?

I admit it may be its because I have been missing from BR for some time, but can you point me towards any source/link that shows that the Phalcon radar can guide Su-30 weapons?

Thanks in advance!

[nakul]

You hit the nail on the head. We don't have radars that will detect incoming LO aircraft. They also need bistatic radars for this. This is what asymmetric warfare is all about. The response to a sword is a shield, the response to LO is radar not LO.

Even the F 22 is optimised for shorter wavelengths. Unless China has obtained super duper technology, it should be vulnerable to L band radar on our AWACS. This coupled with network centricity that Rafale brings (they should put it in others too), we can counter the threat using technologies (software, network centricity) within our means.

AWACS are the only way out. Even if we have a 1000 PAK FAs, we would not know where to deploy them without detecting the enemy. Moreover, we have the advantage of access to superior radar technology. The way IAF is progressing, I think they are focussing more on detecting the incoming threats (Phalcon, AEW&C, AWACS India, bistatic radar). You are right that we currently don't have everything ready. But measures are already been taken to bridge the gap (cruise missile defence, aerostats).

[Sid]

More to the point, can your SU-30s/Rafales etc launch weapons against a target being painted by the AWACS radar and not their own? Has the IAF gotten/tested this capability?

Yes. There is nothing special about this ability, its pretty standard...

What standard? AWACs and fighters do not work in hunter/killer formations.

AWACs can assign target to fighters, but do not lock them.

By your definition SU-30 will never have to switch on their BARS and can always work in passive mode in presence of an AWAC.

[nakul]

By your definition SU-30 will never have to switch on their BARS and can always work in passive mode in presence of an AWAC.

That is the major advantages of AWACS. The radar can continue to sniff signals without emiting anything. The enemy has no clue where you are approaching from unless it brings its own AWACS. In the absence of AWACS, one plane switches on the radar while the rest use its information to form a picture of the battlefield. Even the Apaches equipped with Longbow radars have this networking capablity.

[Victor]

We don't need to worry. The counter to stealth fighters are not stealth fighters. It is radar.

Better tell the IAF quick. They are getting ready to dump $30 billion on this stealth fighter snake oil.

[nakul]

Yes, I was telling them to cancel the deal but they told me that IAF was an offensive force. Can't argue with them, can I?

[vivek_ahuja]

We don't need to worry. The counter to stealth fighters are not stealth fighters. It is radar.

Better tell the IAF quick. They are getting ready to dump $30 billion on this stealth fighter snake oil.

You do realize that even though the answer to stealth fighters from the defensive standpoint is indeed radars, you still need your own stealth fighters to punch through into the enemy's defenses, right?

Why try to confuse the two together?

[Victor]

It's only confusing if we say that their stealth fighters are no good because our radars can see them but our stealth fighters are very good because their radars can't see them.

[Virupaksha]

It's only confusing if we say that their stealth fighters are no good because our radars can see them but our stealth fighters are very good because their radars can't see them.

If we take that logic, their should be no infantry , hey - their counter was invented possibly 20000 years ago - the rocks, then swords, then bullets. That does not mean infantry exist today on all sides.

[SaiK]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=19633

I am thinking this way.. but plausible:

pakis can make chippanda do us the $100b investment on LAC, and start attacking us from NE..
But, pakis should know, we have capability to take on pakis even while we engage chippanda on this logic what shukla ji says.. meaning, if that is true, then chippanda is a dead lion, while we can whack the live ass pakis.

[vivek_ahuja]

It's only confusing if we say that their stealth fighters are no good because our radars can see them but our stealth fighters are very good because their radars can't see them.

I don't recall anybody suggesting this. In fact, the point being made was that just because we are buying stealth fighters does not automatically mean we are defended against their stealth fighters.

Bottom line is that this new fighter means a change in threat as far as our radars and detection capability is concerned. Just the same way that when (if ?) the AMCA or FGFA come along, the Chinese will have to reassess their own defenses.

Right now its a race to get these systems in service, and the Chinese are jumping in leaps and bounds. Let's see if that momentum holds when they try to convert these prototypes to operational platforms.

[Christopher Sidor]

5th gen is more than just stealth -- supercruise, sensor fusion, network centric & super maneuvrability are also important. We need to see China demonstrate these technologies as well...

How true. Heartily agree with you boss.

[vasu raya]

Whats the difference between the RCS of a cruise missile and LO fighter/bomber from a radar perspective? very less, so if we can get a credible CMD wouldn't that apply to stealth fighters as well? good, Vivek is playing the Devil's advocate

Are the concepts of radar and software controlled radio compatible?

[vivek_ahuja]

Whats the difference between the RCS of a cruise missile and LO fighter/bomber from a radar perspective? very less, so if we can get a credible CMD wouldn't that apply to stealth fighters as well?

That's a generalization but mostly accurate. If we have credible CMD, we should be able to apply that with minor mods to LO aircraft.

So the extrapolated question is: do we have credible CMD?

IMO, the answer will be a solid 'Yes' in the coming years. What we need though is to buffer the technology being developed with credible numbers. In other words, developing a radar to defeat the threat is one thing and deploying it in numbers to pose a threat to the enemy plans (and that too in reasonable timeframe) is another. I guess we will found out one way or another about this.

good, Vivek is playing the Devil's advocate

Umm, thank you?

[Shreeman]

http://i.imgur.com/DQeJU.jpg

[Kartik]

As a previous poster said, "The fact is JSF, J 21, AMCA are all smaller size stealth plane which means shorter range and smaller pay load. You can't change the rule physics." Since he knows the measurements of vaporware, you better trust him

Good thing about vaporware is you can make it any size you want. You can even call it "medium" even if its small.

Now lets go back to topic...

If you and Wong intend to troll on this forum, then your days here will be numbered. Stick to your discussions, otherwise the mods will need to be called in. Remember, we have no Paki posters on BRF and we do fine. Not having 2 Chinese posters won't bother anyone here.

To our Indian posters- please don't get nasty and personal with Chinese posters here. If they don't troll, lets not get nasty. If they do, inform the mods and they'll handle them.

[ashi]

Good thing about vaporware is you can make it any size you want. You can even call it "medium" even if its small.

Now lets go back to topic...

If you and Wong intend to troll on this forum, then your days here will be numbered. Stick to your discussions, otherwise the mods will need to be called in. Remember, we have no Paki posters on BRF and we do fine. Not having 2 Chinese posters won't bother anyone here.

To our Indian posters- please don't get nasty and personal with Chinese posters here. If they don't troll, lets not get nasty. If they do, inform the mods and they'll handle them.

I don't see anyone getting nasty. Do you over-react? Or you just don't like the message?

[wong]

^^^

That's the standard argument of last resort here when they have no comeback.

The Pakistani defence sites are 65% Indian and making good money. They obviously have nothing to fear from a fair and open discussion.

[wong]

^^^^
Whatever dude.


The J-31 has been picked up by the first mainstream press...

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012 ... prototype/

[nakul]

From the above link

Two additional possibilities also raise interesting questions: First, some observers suggest that twin-wheel nose landing gear hints at carrier operations, rendering it strategically noteworthy as the PLA Navy prepares to commission its first carrier, the Liaoning, although the J-31’s configuration and structural outlines may make that unlikely. Second, while the aircraft undoubtedly draws on significant indigenous capacity, it also appears similar in shape and size to Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II. In a report in March, The Australian quoted “senior security figures” saying hackers from China cracked into British defense firm BAE Systems’ computers and siphoned off large amounts of data on the design, performance, and other characteristics of the F-35. Elements of the J-31’s general configuration and contours also resemble those of Lockheed Martin’s twin-engine F-22 Raptor.

If this is true, then the real threat from this aircraft will be the littoral states in the SCS. The Chinese are still years away from having an operational aircraft carrier. The aircraft carrier will obviously operate in areas outside the reach of ground based aircrafts. Indian Ocean is a few decades away as operating safely in far away waters without securing its near neighborhood is unlikely.

Neither the J-31 nor the J-20 has demonstrably advanced beyond the prototype stage, although at least two J-20 airframes have undertaken at least 53 test flights, according to Xinhua. It is too early to determine the extent to which they will succeed, when precisely they will be operational, the extent to which they can utilize indigenous engines, whether they will truly have “stealth” capabilities, and whether those would entail primarily forward stealth or all-aspect stealth. Stealthiness depends not only on geometry but also on radar-absorbent coatings on exterior surfaces (pdf), particularly the leading edges of wings and other reflective points. This “sensitive skin” degrades constantly and has to be maintained vigilantly to retain its effectiveness, but China lacks experience with such “defense dermatology.” Until such a capability is demonstrated, it is better to refer to the J-31 and J-20 as aspiring to be “low observable.”

The PAK FA was criticised for not having all aspect stealth. The Chinese are in a similar situation. However, the aspects of 5th gen fighters (super maneuvrability, super cruise, sensor fusion) are not touched upon in the article. They might be working on it at the moment but there is nothing out there that shows their progress on this front. Russia is unlikely to export its advanced engines so China will have to rely on homegrown technologies to fulfil its needs.

[nash]

what are the specification of this J-31?...then it will make more sense of comparing this jet with existing stealth fighter.

[John]

The Pakistani defence sites are 65% Indian and making good money. They obviously have nothing to fear from a fair and open discussion.

No offense but the revenue they generate is miniscule compared to time invested most often it is run by people who are passionate or want to spread certain PR. If you are running a defense site to make money you need to find better ways to make money and yes i have run them back in early days of the internet.

[Kartik]

^^^

That's the standard argument of last resort here when they have no comeback.

The Pakistani defence sites are 65% Indian and making good money. They obviously have nothing to fear from a fair and open discussion.

get civil and get off the remarks that are meant to instigate a flame war. If not, your days here will be numbered.

[Kartik]

Having twin nose wheels does not in any way indicate that it has to be a carrier version for CATOBAR ops. the Tejas has twin nose wheels whereas the naval Tejas has one. The Gripen has twin nose wheels as well and no naval version as yet. The Mirage-2000 had twin nose wheels and no carrier version at all.

[nakul]

China is still a long way off from any real carrier ops. The announcement that China is not in a race to build carriers to compete with India indicates that they realise the complexity in building & running carriers. Of the photos released of the Varyag, they don't show any fighters with it. This is a well timed psy ops with Panetta visting China. China could have used its well known strategy of hiding its claws till necessary but the over the top release of pix indicate things are different. There is pressure on them to catch up with the PAK FA (partly because of our involvement in FGFA). We can expect more "possibilities" of China having 5th gen tech but as usual they are stingy in releasing any real info.

[wong]

^^^

That's the standard argument of last resort here when they have no comeback.

The Pakistani defence sites are 65% Indian and making good money. They obviously have nothing to fear from a fair and open discussion.

get civil and get off the remarks that are meant to instigate a flame war. If not, your days here will be numbered.

Yadayadayada, Like I care. The Chinese posters are the civils one here. All the name calling & threats are from Indians.

Latest J-16 goodness...

[nakul]

Is it better than Su 30 that China already has?

[kit]

I think there is a very high probablility for a chinese attack on sikkim/arunachal in a multi pronged strike. The one way for the chinese leadership to control its populace is its defacto religion buddhism and what better to control the holiest shrines of buddhism and thus control potential unrest., this has been one of the main objectives of the politburo.The timing would be interesting ., could be the time of indian general elections,

[kit]

Btw one of the main designers for aircraft in china has been apparently called a 'prodigy' in developing designs for new planes.I had briefly read about him in a western defence magazine.Does any one here have an idea about this.I think this is one of the reasons they are having some head way in developing new designs and improving on old designs.

[asprinzl]

There is seldom you find magic bullet in life. That does not mean there are never magic bullets or breakthroughs. More often it is hard work and more hard work. If you keep pounding at the rock, the rock will eventually break. It is not a miracle that the rock breaks. It is a certainty that the rock will break. What matters is that how fast or how soon you want the rock to break. If you keep pounding at the rock at your own leasurely phase, the rock may break in a hundred years. If you pound at the rock at feverish phase, the rock will break at a time much sooner. That is also how things are in any field of human endeavor including the mastery of jet engine technology.

Shana Tovah (Happy New Year)
Avram

[member_22539]

The way I see it, the more threatening Chicoms are, the faster people will get off their behinds here in India and deliver, be it foreign collaborations or domestic development. So, as usual, a threat from China is good in the long term.

By the way, its really hilarious how a little good news gets our penny brigade Chinese posters all high and mighty. Arrogance just oozes through all orifices. One really wonders how these morons are part of such an old civilization.