China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 28 Sep 2012 01:35

True but IA needs to get their act together. IN ad now finally IAF seem to be doing something in that regard.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 28 Sep 2012 01:38

wong wrote:
Don wrote:
Forget knowing about the Chinese military, these guys have trouble with knowing the current state of their own military. It's always this or that vaporware just around the corners in 2 or 3 years, always 2 to 3 years. I'm still waiting for that AK/FNC clone called the INSAS to finally work right so they don't have to import small arms (55+ years after China mastered the Type 56). If I was going to be shot at from 300 yards away, I hope and pray the shooter has an INSAS and not a Colt M16.

Mods, what is this guy doing on BRF? He has been trolling almost every time he posts and yet no action has been taken.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 28 Sep 2012 02:31

Let him be..He is comic relief, just like an aircraft carrier without aircrafts or SSBN that has never gone on deterrent patrol.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 28 Sep 2012 02:49

very authentic looking skid marks. kudos

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Sep 2012 03:57

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90786/7962127.html

Military experts: China's future naval surface battle group will have real core
(PLA Daily)
08:17, September 27, 2012

The official delivery and commissioning of China's first aircraft carrier “Liaoning ship" has attracted great attention from all sectors of the society. The reporters from the PLA Daily connected military experts and invited them to interpret related issues of the official commissioning of China's first aircraft carrier.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 28 Sep 2012 06:43

hnair wrote:very authentic looking skid marks. kudos

Really? I thought it looked like they were doing wheelies with a tractor.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Sep 2012 07:32

Lovely clean deck and smart sailors. Why is the front of the ship curved up? I have seen that on aircraft carriers, but I can see no aircraft here.
<disclaimer: Om. I do not underestimate China>

member_23858 · Post by **member_23858** » 28 Sep 2012 08:56

Kartik wrote:
Don wrote:
Forget knowing about the Chinese military, these guys have trouble with knowing the current state of their own military. It's always this or that vaporware just around the corners in 2 or 3 years, always 2 to 3 years. I'm still waiting for that AK/FNC clone called the INSAS to finally work right so they don't have to import small arms (55+ years after China mastered the Type 56). If I was going to be shot at from 300 yards away, I hope and pray the shooter has an INSAS and not a Colt M16.
Mods, what is this guy doing on BRF? He has been trolling almost every time he posts and yet no action has been taken.

Kartik Saar, dont get offended, what wong is saying is not wong. of course chinese know more about their military, seeing that chinese government usually uses the same military against its own people more often, these people get 'live, first hand demos' ...
Tiananmen Massacre anyone?

member_23858 · Post by **member_23858** » 28 Sep 2012 09:02

shiv wrote:

Lovely clean deck and smart sailors. Why is the front of the ship curved up? I have seen that on aircraft carriers, but I can see no aircraft here.
<disclaimer: Om. I do not underestimate China>

shiv saar, that is 6th Gen aircraft that Varyag is carrying, you will need special soopal seclet chinaman goggles to see it saar....

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 28 Sep 2012 10:00

^^They are waiting for another American diplomat to visit to unveil them. Of course, you wont see them taking off or landing, but you will certainly see gorgeous pictures of them parked and being towed aboard the ship.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 28 Sep 2012 10:52

^^^ they have stealth aircraft on board. Called the NO.
Not Observable.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 28 Sep 2012 13:25

NV, 'Not Visible', the pic above, at certain angles it actually look slike a toy model with some close prefessional photography with a lot of toy sailors

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 28 Sep 2012 14:27

I cannot even begin to comprehend the existential questions that plague the mind of the captain of that floating table now.....

amit · Post by **amit** » 28 Sep 2012 14:41

^^^^^^

Just you wait! You SDREs will be soon shivering in your dhoti when that table - I mean aircraft carrier sails into the Bay of Bengal with a squadron of these fierce creatures:

It's an excellent and unencumbered platform to get these airborne in minutes. Go, run and hide in your dark narrow spaces!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Sep 2012 15:13

can your give some advance warning sire. I load this page and instantly feel that uncomfortable drippy pissy feeling in my shorts...got to go and change now like the cowardly hindoo I am.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Sep 2012 15:15

rajanb wrote:^^^ they have stealth aircraft on board. Called the NO.
Not Observable.

It carries N.O. aircraft, you mean. The are stored on the ~~empty~~ M.T. deck

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Sep 2012 15:21

Anand K wrote:I cannot even begin to comprehend the existential questions that plague the mind of the captain of that floating table now.....

They could at least have put one helicopter on it no? It's a bad omen to show an empty deck like that.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 28 Sep 2012 15:23

They could at least have put one helicopter on it no? It's a bad omen to show an empty deck like that.

What helicopter? I thought noodle delivery was to be done by boats to the shore. Has the casino claimed 30 min or free?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 28 Sep 2012 16:19

humour aside, the PLAN are making a bold statement re the Varyag. they now have 2-3 years of working on procedures, tactics, etc. before embarking aircraft on board. i would not be surprised if some variants of their stable are not being navalised and will be revealed shortly. it will take them another decade before it is a potent war fighting system - but they are on their way

member_23858 · Post by **member_23858** » 28 Sep 2012 16:32

Lalmohan wrote:humour aside, the PLAN are making a bold statement re the Varyag. they now have 2-3 years of working on procedures, tactics, etc. before embarking aircraft on board. i would not be surprised if some variants of their stable are not being navalised and will be revealed shortly. it will take them another decade before it is a potent war fighting system - but they are on their way

totally agree with you Lalmohan-jee...
One cannot really ascertain what is going on behind the "Shaolin curtain". But its rather confusing that china would launch a partially functional carrier and force the interested parties of south china sea into a single group under the umbrella of Khan...

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 28 Sep 2012 16:43

One cannot really ascertain what is going on behind the "Shaolin curtain". But its rather confusing that china would launch a partially functional carrier and force the interested parties of south china sea into a single group under the umbrella of Khan...

They have not done this in a hurry. The dispute has been going on for many years. They have correctly guessed that US is not going to come to their aid. The Philipines is the only state in the region to have a treaty with the US but the US does not consider the treaty applicable to disputed territory. The rest of the country are very much on their own. Only Japan in E Asia is going to stand up hence the recent talks between their dignitaries. The SE Asians are not going to be really entertained in the same way. The US capacity to wage war is on the decline and China isn't going to waste time till its carrier is ready. The psychological effect of a carrier will weigh in the mind of its potential adversaries their lack of airplane notwithstanding.

vina · Post by **vina** » 28 Sep 2012 16:43

i would not be surprised if some variants of their stable are not being navalised and will be revealed shortly. it will take them another decade before it is a potent war fighting system - but they are on their way

That "variant" has already been "revealed" . The Chinese got a prototype SU-33 that was lying in a bone yard at Ukraine shipped across and using the "secrets" , got that cloned. So what is going to fly off the Varyag is the same plane that flies off he Kuznetsov, the difference being that the Chinese plane is a cloned Su-33. So, it all comes down to how successful the cloned J-11 fighters are?

Trouble is that the Su-33 is simply too big for that carrier and the Russians too are ditching the SU-33 for the Mig29K (after India paid for development of course, thank you) after the SU-33 reaches end of life on the Kuzentsov.

The SU-33 being the size and weight it is will have very little margins even in the cold northern latitudes for STOBAR, but closer to the the equator and tropical waters with temperatures in the mid 30s , to nearly 40C, that will be severly compromised in terms of fuel and payload.

The Chinese have atleast 15 years to go before they can field a halfway reliable force. Close to 20 years sounds more like it. Right now, that carrier is a sitting duck and is as useful as a fishing boat in a shooting war even with somone like a Vietnam.

vina · Post by **vina** » 28 Sep 2012 16:45

nakul wrote: The psychological effect of a carrier will weigh in the mind of its potential adversaries their lack of airplane notwithstanding.

I wonder what will happen to the "Psychological effect of a carrier" if a squadron of truck mounted Brahmos are supplied to The Phillipines and Vietnam each.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 28 Sep 2012 16:50

vina wrote:
nakul wrote: The psychological effect of a carrier will weigh in the mind of its potential adversaries their lack of airplane notwithstanding.
I wonder what will happen to the "Psychological effect of a carrier" if a squadron of truck mounted Brahmos are supplied to The Phillipines and Vietnam each.

Vietnam already has the Yakhont. It is also ordering Kilo subs from Russia. That has not prevented China from declaring the islands as their territory. vietnam is within the combat radius of Su 30 MKK and no amount of naval power is going to change that. They aren't Paki to go for a war they have little chance of winning. The Chinese know this and will not push them so hard. Just a little here, a little there and soon the frog will not know when he got cooked. They are doing that for a long time with India as well except that the Vietnamese forces are not as powerful as India's.

vina · Post by **vina** » 28 Sep 2012 16:59

They are doing that for a long time with India as well except that the Vietnamese forces are not as powerful as India's

The jury is out on that. Unlike with India, when the Chinese messed around with Vietnam the last time in 1979, the Chinese got a bloody nose and the Chinese put tail between legs and ran home.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 28 Sep 2012 17:07

vina wrote:
They are doing that for a long time with India as well except that the Vietnamese forces are not as powerful as India's
The jury is out on that. Unlike with India, when the Chinese messed around with Vietnam the last time in 1979, the Chinese got a bloody nose and the Chinese put tail between legs and ran home.

You are missing the point. They will only attack when they are forced to. The Chinese have been claiming the islands for years. They have already declared it a province. What did Vietnam do? They ordered Kilos from Russia but did not offer any serious resistance. China understands the threshold of Vietnam & Philipines and will keep the temperature below that. That is why Philipines treaty with a superpower is doing squat to protect the Scarboroughs. China does similar temperature management with India. Heard of stapled visas? They are not enough to provoke any serious repsonse. The old guy send something about winning a war without sending a single soldier. They are following that to the 'T'. They send fishing boats to keep it cool.

The fact that a lot of countries rely on China's economy (Cambodia, Philipines etc) helps to reimpose their bully attitude. The presence of an aircraft carrier is not going to change things too much for now. But it does give them an opportunity to meddle in affairs of faraway places in the future.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Sep 2012 17:11

Recently, there was a ddm report about chinese bricks on the Vikram failed! they know how to keep us without a platform while they show bad omen of NO a/c. Enemy can strike without a/c on A/C.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 28 Sep 2012 20:00

The carrier will be another Xia. It will not leave operate outside the safety of land based aircrafts.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Sep 2012 20:09

For that matter any non-nuclear A/C cannot be so far away from the motherland.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 28 Sep 2012 20:12

Yes when operationally deployed they can with a tanker.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 28 Sep 2012 20:40

Ahh Chicom is doing some photo ops on the Tibetan plateau.

J-10A, Flankers, Chicom 122mm. Chicom A-100 ( 300 mm) , Chicom PR fail - I'll tell you why - there's a picture where TFTA Chicom troops wearing PASGT style helmets are mixed with troops wearing older generation helmets.
Chicom Type 99. IFVs old and new.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90786/7963108.html

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Sep 2012 20:41

Only increases the vulnerability if the operational aspects does not take holistic operational aspects into account, i.e., logistics, air support, network support (including sat based), etc. nothing to the effect maasan ops can take place anywhere on the planet. The investment there is mighty huge!.. Maasans have an extra leg when can land their ospreys, c-17s, etc on their massive A/Cs. It brings in total game changer super powerish setup. China can't be sleeping on these lines.. they better think hard, if they only want to be super duper economic #1 by selling cheap-o stuffs to unkill land. They are now under pressure to challenge the maasan nation 1-1. Else, they are in deep sh!t.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 28 Sep 2012 20:45

On a different note.

I think we need to start doing Chicom ORBAT assessments for lanzhou and Chengdu MRs and make a sticky out of it.

Plus keep an eye on what the Second Artillery is bringing in.

The DF-16 has apparently been operationalized recently.

Plus need to keep track of their exercises since Stride 2009.

all the developments in armour, artillery and airpower can be collated. What is more difficult to assess is Chicom's EW ORBAT.

From google earth we could probably get some clues of their new MPRs.

BRawman seems quite keen to assess their heliborne capability. Also need to look at An-2 colt style transports which can handle along river and mountain alleys.

The war in Tibet thread has some good brainstorming. Perhaps BR can also do some online table top exercises. Organize some open source contests perhaps?

manum · Post by **manum** » 28 Sep 2012 23:28

I always wonder about how much of their military budget is for photo op....and the gadget they buy....

Gorshkov is made by russians and they are having troubles with it...how come chinese end up being so fast and upright...

Most of their photo op is equally for masses in mainland..as much as international...

Their military vapourwares seems to be part and parcel of the system they have...I'll not be surprised if half of their gadgets are defunct...

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 29 Sep 2012 00:00

D Roy wrote:On a different note.

I think we need to start doing Chicom ORBAT assessments for lanzhou and Chengdu MRs and make a sticky out of it.

BRawman seems quite keen to assess their heliborne capability. Also need to look at An-2 colt style transports which can handle along river and mountain alleys.

excellent idea D Roy-saar.

regarding heliborne capability, I had mentioned this specific point in a minor difa-e-opinion with vivek_ahuja-saar that the single purchase that is troubling me (personally) the most, are these big orders for Mi-17V5/7 medium helicopters and the Sichuan-Lantian assembly. I do not like the sound of it one bit..... Now if they decide to order 10s of Medium-to-Heavy transports (other than those ball slapping excersizes with AN-12/IL76 derivatives), then we need to start getting really, really serious about fighting inside Tibet.

I usually feel that some of the jingo injuns do this continuous

about their faceted sheet-metal skinned planes, an aircraft carrier that uses "external adaptive propulsion" (tug boats), the bad roads on our side that prevent us from deploying (but lets the PLA to breeze through to the Gangetic plains via djinn-takknikki) and of course, that perennial favorite: the uber-logistics-marvel of a single rail through Tibet, complete with a coating of anti-HAPE paint.

But this time, we are seeing a problem.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 29 Sep 2012 00:04

The Chinese have already thrown their weight around on their southern & eastern coasts. Are they planning something northern & western borders as well? Bji mentioned strenghtening of the border with Kazakhstan. But CSTO would get involved and i don't think China wants to push Russia now. That leaves the western part open.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Sep 2012 03:28

I am intentionally upping the ante here - with full post / op-ed. if admins feel copyright violation of chindu, please delete text or let me know, I shall do so.

The relationship between India and the U.S. is emerging as one of the three that will shape Asia and global politics in the decades ahead, the other two being U.S.-China and India-China
It is rare for the ideas people to be behind the curve but those who say the India-US relationship has been reduced to merely “feel good” meetings and junkets are exactly that — a little behind the curve. Critics in both Washington and New Delhi complain about the preponderance of grand rhetoric which remains unmatched by delivery. Yes, India has signed some significant defence deals with the U.S. but where’s the real beef or the strategic content, they ask.

This reductive description is more a function of the traits typical of people in the two countries — if some Americans are driven by “instant gratification,” their Indian counterparts see “melodrama” as a virtue. But beyond these personality quirks, clues point to a maturing partnership that no longer needs the adrenalin rush of big-ticket developments such as the Indo-U.S. civil nuclear agreement of 2008.

The language

It is apparent that India and the U.S. have made a long-term bet on each other even though the language reflects a cautious discretion bred in political realities. In India it is still not kosher for many to call America a good friend, a useful partner. It is ever so easy to point to the long history of Washington’s coddling of Pakistan and its disregard of Indian concerns as exhibit A. Their counterparts in Washington complain: what has India done for the U.S. lately? Remember the promise of commercial dividends from the nuclear deal?

Fortunately, those who make decisions are largely unfettered by this narrative. They don’t want the present to be completely hostage to the past. They are already moving ahead, pushed by new geographies and challenges. The India-U.S. relationship is emerging as one of the three bilateral relationships that will shape Asia and perhaps define global politics in the decades ahead. The other two being U.S.-China and India-China.

Four trends

The new India-U.S. partnership has four broad trends, which were apparent during recent discussions between Indian parliamentarians and scholars with senior officials in the departments of State and Defence, and at the National Security Council as part of a delegation organised by the Naval Post-graduate School, Monterey Bay and the Observer Research Foundation.

The relationship has moved beyond “parallel actions” where both countries despite a congruence of interests moved separately, whether in Myanmar, the Middle East or Afghanistan. The old distrust has been replaced by a new respect for this kind of independent parallelism, which now seems to be converging. This has opened up the field to a wide variety of issues for frank discussion and an exchange of ideas between the two. From Pakistan to cyber security to space, no subject is taboo.

The two main drivers for American consolidation of thought: an externality called China on the one hand, and internal doubts about the merits of unilateralism, on the other. American people have no appetite for new, expensive engagements. They imagine themselves better off “leading from behind” despite the hawkish clamour from conservative talking heads.

The second noticeable trend is the understanding between the political leadership in both countries, stressed and repeated at very senior levels. In the U.S., bipartisan support for India is public and enthusiastic, putting New Delhi in the sanguine position of not having to fret about a change of administration in Washington this November. In India, the support is pledged quietly and firmly and repeated through itinerant former foreign secretaries and retired generals. The challenge here is to overcome the inertia of the mid-level bureaucracy on both sides which can puncture their political masters’ biggest dreams with pinpricks born of residual institutional memories.

Also apparent is a new appreciation at high levels that the bet on India cannot and should not be purely for its large market. India’s emergence is good in itself because of strategic convergences. Short-term transactional expectations around that odd contract or defence deal gone awry will continue to disappoint, but policymakers understand the need for “patience” — a word that has become part of official U.S. speak on India. The understanding has opened the door to Washington looking at India in the medium-term instead of just for short-term gains. A growing number of thinkers in Washington believe the strengthening of India will be one of the main features of the U.S. presence in Asia this century.

The last and perhaps the most interesting development is the real entry of the U.S. Defense Department to try to “own and guide” the India relationship in ways that were unimaginable a few years ago. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Deputy Secretary Ashton Carter have taken a decision to act on some of India’s perennial complaints about tech and weapons transfer to put real meat on the bones. Almost all key U.S. relationships are driven by the Department of Defense (DoD) because of the high element of the strategic content. The trajectory from the early 1990s when the DoD hardly had any interest in India to reach a point where it wants to be the main driver is significant.

Regional issues

This has important benefits. Plain talk is one. Senior U.S. officials have apparently conveyed to the Pakistani generals that India’s strategic interests in Afghanistan far outweigh theirs because India has greater capacity, reach and ultimately more robust goals in the region. So they had better get used to the idea. The de-hyphenation is complete. This attitudinal change is a far cry from even two years ago when the Americans were hedging their bets between the two countries. But today there is greater appreciation of India’s pain. The Americans are equally perplexed about how to deal with a country that has allowed its own slow radicalisation and despite opportunities, has failed to stem the tide.

Where will the new trends lead? There could be a mismatch of expectations and capacity. For instance, the U.S. may now be willing to see India as a key balancer in the region and in Afghanistan. New Delhi, however, may be more comfortable with a far modest role. India is unlikely to agree to be a net provider of security and its strategic outlook may be limited to ensuring that anti-India forces don’t dominate Kabul. The green-on-blue attacks against U.S. troops may have already given the Indian political class jitters about training Afghan forces.

Then there is the brute reality of India itself, which can alienate the strongest ally. The Democrats and the Republicans are united in their support for India but what about the political climate in a country with narrow horizons and where short-term obsessions manifest in “tactical” moves that can derail the country’s larger strategic goals?

(Seema Sirohi is a columnist based in Washington DC. Samir Saran, Vice-President at the Observer Research Foundation, was a part of the recent Track-2 interactions with the U.S. establishment.)

Keywords: India-US relations, India, international relations

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 29 Sep 2012 07:26

About two years ago I was on a plane sitting beside a serving Indian general. This is what he told me when our discussion touched on China: "They are not as powerful as everyone is thinking they are and we are not as weak as everyone is making us out to be."

Earlier this year, a high ranking naval officer in the USN stationed in Hawaii told me: "The Chinese are not as powerful as they want us to believe and the Indians are not as meek as they want everyone to think".

In a nutshell, that is how the reality is.

On the other hand, in the 1990s, PLAN gunboats did blow to smitherens Vietnamese ships during a brief clash in the disputed Spartly islands. The same spot where the same PLAN blew to smitheren South Vietnamese naval boats during the height of Vietnam War. If you look on the map, this spot is so far away from China but very close to SEA. The audacity.....but not so fast!!!! Some years ago, the Philipines airforce planes bombed to smitherens Chinese naval installations in one of the disputed spots that the Chinese have secretly built. Thus far, China has been tiptoe-ing around the Philipines without provoking them too much. They may bully Vietnam because Vietnam is at the moment without credible alliance with major powers but it aint gonna happen with Malaysia, P-pines, Singapore, Thailand or Indonesia. These nations have bulked up the airpower and the Spartly is within their fighters' range.

Avram.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 29 Sep 2012 07:51

Vietnam is buying 4 gepard and 4 sigma corvettes. They do have some Yakhont but 4 Brahmos equipped talwars will do nicely to bulk up their navy.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 29 Sep 2012 12:01

Hnair wrote:

that the single purchase that is troubling me (personally) the most, are these big orders for Mi-17V5/7 medium helicopters and the Sichuan-Lantian assembly.

Absolutely. This along with the domestic french inspired knock offs , their numbers, deployment patterns and helibases in Lanzhou and Chengdu should be analysed. Spare parts position etc.

It would give an inkling of what might be going on. Because in recent times they have been upgrading their SF and also equipping them with vehicles carrying 120mm mortars etc that can be airdropped by medium lift helos.

Plus see if the old An-2s and 3s in their inventory are undergoing overhaul. That would also give us some clues.

The real physical infrastructure that needs to be looked at are the smaller sized bunkers which they might be building near the border as well as tunnels.

Chicom may adopt the same kind of doctrine that the Norks have vis a vis the South. After all the terrain separating those two is similar to some stretches of the border between us and Chicom.