China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 325
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby MeshaVishwas » 23 Nov 2019 14:37

Interesting watch:

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4915
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Kartik » 25 Nov 2019 13:02

China is now offering the J-10C on the export market, under the designation FC-20E

Dubai Airshow 2019- China's Chengdu promotes J-10C export variant

Image

The Chengdu Aerospace Corporation (CAC), one of two major fighter aircraft design and production centres in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), revealed the export variant of its J-10 fighter at the 17-21 November Dubai Airshow. Designated the FC-20E, the design is a near-parallel configuration of the J-10C, the third major iteration of the aircraft.

Photographs of the J-10C that circulated on Chinese aviation websites in October showed the aircraft still flying in factory primer, suggesting it is only in the initial stages of series-production.

It differs considerably from the original J-10A, most notably in its power plant. The initial J-10 batches have the Russian Salyut-made AL-31FN Series 3, a derivative of the engine installed in the Sukhoi Su-27 and Su-30MKK purchased by China.

The installation of the AL-31F in the J-10A required the Salyut plant’s design team to rotate the gearbox and accessory pack to the underside of the engine. The aircraft’s air intake also had to be a quadrangular shape like that of the Su-27 inlet.

In contrast, the J-10C is reported to be powered with the Chinese-made Wo Shan (WS)-10A engine and features a diverterless, oblong-shaped air inlet. The CAC design team has also demonstrated the aircraft flying with an axisymmetric thrust vector control (TVC) nozzle and a modified nozzle that should reduce the rear hemisphere radar cross section. A J-10C pre-production aircraft in this configuration flew at the November 2018 Air Show China in Zhuhai.

The J-10C is also equipped with an active electronically scanning array (AESA) radar, a new avionics suite, and electronic warfare (EW) modules.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 27 Nov 2019 20:54

Cheen has two jacks-of-all-trades platforms in the two-engined Y-7 and four-engined Y8/Y9 that they can mount anything on from SigInt to ASW to AEW.

Both are iterations of aircraft copied 60 years ago from the USSR -- AN-24 and AN-12.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1199699209047416833

@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
These photos taken on 27. November 2019 show a MA-60 remote sensing aircraft delivered to the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) for aerial observation missions. Altogether two aircraft were handed over.

Image




https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1199057032306933761

@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
On 24. October 2019, there were 6 Y-8Q ASW and a single KJ-500H AEW aircraft spotted at Shanghai-Dachang assigned to the 1st Naval Air Division, East China Sea Fleet Naval Air Force.

Image

Image

Image




vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5675
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby vishvak » 27 Nov 2019 20:58

The installation of the AL-31F in the J-10A required the Salyut plant’s design team to

Just a point there. We can buy transport aircrafts but fighter jets where some elbow room for one more option for engine could be considered.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 27 Nov 2019 21:19

vishvak wrote:
The installation of the AL-31F in the J-10A required the Salyut plant’s design team to

Just a point there. We can buy transport aircrafts but fighter jets where some elbow room for one more option for engine could be considered.


We did the same with the LCA. The Kaveri was supposed to be the initial production engine for the LCA until the airframe and engine were decoupled later. The initial prototypes were always powered by the F404 so there was "elbow" room for the Kaveri. That elbow room might still be there today if the Kaveri ever matures.

As for buying phoren transports, it creates corruption opportunities and delays. Take the Netra AEW program. Scandal with the Embraer selection means we will likely terminate the program at three on that platform. This is after it had proved itself on the battlefield on February.

A domestic platform that is readily available and where everyone expects to design for would facilitate development in my opinion. Again with Netra, the program was delayed 7 years with IAF/DRDO wrangling over which phoren platform a major factor. And then with the Embraer bribing that delayed system will likely to be capped at a ridiculously small number of just three.

All this could be avoided with a locally produced platform like the C295 IMHO as long as people are made to develop for a MII mass production and not a lab project with a handful of samples composed of imported parts.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18864
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 28 Nov 2019 02:36

You are looking at industrial benefits. The IAF wants to maximize its combat performance, ergo non starter until they change their mind.

mahadevbhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 44
Joined: 28 Oct 2019 19:47

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby mahadevbhu » 28 Nov 2019 08:22

Karan M wrote:You are looking at industrial benefits. The IAF wants to maximize its combat performance, ergo non starter until they change their mind.


Industrial benefits are a GoI subject. So unless they specifically want it - and they are good with imports- it won't happen.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 29 Nov 2019 15:43

^^^ For nuclear-armed powers like Cheen, and I would argue India too, industrial benefits should outpace those for warfighting.

Wars between great powers are few and far in between. Between nuclear-armed foes they can't last beyond a few skirmishes before the BOMB impacts decisions and everyone backs off.

But competition between the industries of great nations goes on every second whether or not there is war. In the 99.999% of the time where peace reigns, the nation with the better production wins over the one with the better warfighting formations.

The Chini MIC pumps out so much machines during peacetime that Cheen simply overwhelms opposition in contested territory like an endless herd of buffalo. A single buffalo cannot and does intend to fight but in numbers they will simply crowd out everyone else. And those masses of horns and hoofs discourage anyone else from fighting them. No one wants to go to war with Cheen even though it is widely acknowledge that their warfighting capability is quite low and their experience is non-existent.

Unless you are willing to initiate war, having great warfighting capability does not prevent losing contested territory, the global commons and influence during peace time.

In places that can only be accessed by machines like the oceans, especially in blue waters and in the arctics, the MIC is all important.

It will be even more important once nations start to put stakes on the moon and in space. Unless we can mass produce the machines needed to go there, we'll be sidelined. It is matter of time before that the contest for space begin in earnest.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 01 Dec 2019 16:55

Since the unveiling of the Z-20 Copyhawk, I have a new found interest in their helo industry. Identifying models and variants is like researching fauna from their eco-system.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino

Image

Image

The chini helo industry is basically FRENCH.

The AC311 is the civilian version of the Z-11 which is actually a licensed Ecureuil.
Image

The AC313 is a civvy version of the Z-8 which is ToT of the Super Frelon. The Z-8G and Z-8L are two of many variants.
Image
Image
Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Dec 2019 17:04

Admin note: looks like you have already two warnings. Report such posts instead of causing a silly racket

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Dec 2019 17:12

Cheen is drone crazy. Someone posted in one of the other forums that the PRC has the largest gaming population on earth by far that is composed of soft, spoiled, single-child little emperors who lend themselves far more to sitting in front of a monitor with a joystick than actually flying a manned aircraft. The future path can't be clearer where the PLAAF and PLAN will end up.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1201540380992442369


@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
And again one new UAV: For the first time an ELINT-variant of the GJ-2 Wing Loong II UCAV was seen. In contrast to the regular armed variant, it features several antennas installed underneath the fuselage as well under its wings plus a conformal array on the side of the fuselage.


Image

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 03 Dec 2019 17:34

J-20As and J-10Cs coming off Chengdu assembly line with new WS-10B variant.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1201154967224107009



@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
A J-20A powered by WS-10B was spotted again at CAC.

Image


https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1201163960097157121


@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
And similar to the WS-10B powered J-20A, also another J-10C + WS-10B in full reheat.

Image

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2226
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby g.sarkar » 03 Dec 2019 17:43

https://www.rediff.com/news/report/navy ... 191203.htm
Chinese vessel was operating in Indian waters sans permission: Navy chief
December 03, 2019
Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Karambir Singh on Tuesday said that the Indian Navy drove away a Chinese vessel Shi Yan 1 as it was operating in the Indian waters without permission.
"Our stand is that if you have to work in our Exclusive Economic Zone, you have to take our permission," he said while reacting to a question by ANI on why Chinese vessel Shi Yan 1 was asked to leave Indian waters.
Earlier, it was reported that the Indian Navy recently drove away a suspicious Chinese vessel operating in the Indian waters near Port Blair.
The Chinese research vessel Shi Yan 1 was carrying out research activities in the Indian waters near Port Blair in Andaman and Nicobar Islands and was detected by maritime surveillance aircraft operating there, government sources told ANI.
Sources said the vessel could have also been used by the Chinese to spy on the Indian activities in the Island territory from where India can keep a close eye on the maritime movements in the IOR and South-East Asian region.
After the vessel was detected by the agencies and found out that it was carrying out research activities in the Indian Exclusive Economic Zone, an Indian Navy warship was sent there to monitor it.
Since laws do not allow foreign countries to carry out any research or exploration activities in the Indian EEZ, the Indian Navy warship asked the Chinese research vessel to move out of Indian waters.
After being cautioned by the Indian Navy, the Chinese Shi Yan 1 vessel left Indian waters and moved to its other destination probably towards China, the sources said.
Admiral Singh also said that the Navy is procuring 41 ships and its long-term plan is to have three aircraft carriers.
Speaking at an annual press conference, Admiral Singh also assured the nation that the Navy is fully prepared to deal with national security challenges.
The Navy's annual budget allocation has come down from 18 per cent to 13 per cent in the last five years, he noted.
On the challenges in the neighbourhood, he said no action of any other player in the region should impact us.
"We are ready to work with like-minded nations in the region," he said.
Seven to eight Chinese ships are usually present in Indian Ocean region, Admiral Singh noted.
The Navy chief also said India is playing a stabilising role in the Indo-Pacific region.
Admiral Singh said that the force is fully committed to 'Make in India' vision and underlined that since December 2018, close to 88 per cent of Indian Navy's contracts and acceptance of necessity (AoN) by value have been concluded with or accorded to Indian vendors.
"Navy is fully committed to 'Make in India' vision. Since December 2018, close to 88 per cent of our contracts and AoN by value have been concluded with or accorded to Indian vendors," he said while addressing the Navy Day press conference in New Delhi.
.....
Gautam

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 08 Dec 2019 09:57

High volume production of the Y-9 at Shaanxi gives Cheen a lot of force multipliers like AWACS, EW, etc. cheap.

https://mobile.twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1203306591832772608

East Pendulum
@HenriKenhmann
Les chaînes d'assemblage de Shaanxi Aircraft Corporation (SAC) tournent à plein régime pour produire les différents avions "spéciaux" - AWACS, MPA, EW, MEDEVAC... à destination de l'armée de l'air et de la marine chinoise.

--------- Google Translated from French -------

The assembly lines of Shaanxi Aircraft Corporation (SAC) are running at full speed to produce the various "special" aircraft - AWACS, MPA, EW, MEDEVAC ... for the Chinese Air Force and Navy

Image

Image



https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1203322728356417543

Image

Image


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 08 Dec 2019 19:31

The specialized variants seem to come directly from the factory floor and not base transport models altered later.

The specialized ones seem to be built at a higher ratio than the regular Y9s too.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1203649891827945472


@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
Concerning the different Y-9 variants seen at the Shaanxi home facility at Hanzhong, here's my attempt to identify them; so any corrections are welcome

Image

Image






chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Dec 2019 08:49

Supposedly from the 2015 Cheen/Thailand exercise between Sino-flankers and Gripens!

Chinis were clobbered in BVR engagement by WIDE margin.

Some lessons for us too.

The huge RCS of the J-11A vs the much smaller one of the Gripen meant that the Sukhois were shot down by AMRAAM long before they can engage. The Gripen has the same RCS as the Tejas if not a little more. Armed with long range missiles like Derby or Meteor, a small fighter would be deadly.

On the flip side, the J-11A is armed much like our Flankers with the R-77 (PBB-AE) and R-73. We have a better sensor suite in the MKI but still the larger RCS and lower range of the R-77 is a weakness against a small foe with a long AMRAAM lance. (It might explain the need for the MKI to dodge mijjiles from the smaller F-solas instead of being on the offensive with the R-77s.)

The bar chart shows that the Flanker won fights inside 30KM but were annihilated beyond that.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1204368120791609344


@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
A report at the Northwestern Institute of Technology discussing the results of PLAAF's participation in aerial combat exercises in Thailand showed these results:
Su-27SK/J-11A vs JAS-39C in WVR = the PLAAF won;
in BVR rule engagements, the RTAF won.

Image

Image

Image






kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3693
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 14 Dec 2019 09:17

The tejas I think is more agile than the gripen, please correct if I am wrong. No TVC. Wonder if the IAF has done simulations of Tejas vs Su ?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Dec 2019 09:54

kit wrote:The tejas I think is more agile than the gripen, please correct if I am wrong. No TVC. Wonder if the IAF has done simulations of Tejas vs Su ?


Tejas was at Gagan Shakti with the MKI. They might have matched them up.

The Gripen has higher wing loading than the Tejas, in general that would mean a less maneuverable aircraft but a faster one. In any case, if the chini-thai exercises were true then the Tejas would never allow the MKI to get into range to use it TVC.

The J-11 actually won the WVR fights according to those reports -- the Flanker series being famously maneuverable even without the TVC. But in the real world you don't get into WVR unless you pass through BVR range.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18864
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 14 Dec 2019 10:03

Half baked information I am afraid.

A more detailed analysis was posted on twitter.

The J-11 pilots were badly trained. The specific points mentioned were:

1. Inability to undertake group fighter maneuvers.
2. Tactics used by RTAF were far superior, but PLAAF were croppers in even basic tactics, eg they were ambushed by RTAF coming out of the sun!
3. In BVR, the PRC guys were not trained to exploit their systems properly and did not engage in anti-BVR tactics.
4. The J-11s used were not stock Flankers, weaknesses in system integration were also possible.


chola wrote:Supposedly from the 2015 Cheen/Thailand exercise between Sino-flankers and Gripens!

Chinis were clobbered in BVR engagement by WIDE margin.

Some lessons for us too.

The huge RCS of the J-11A vs the much smaller one of the Gripen meant that the Sukhois were shot down by AMRAAM long before they can engage. The Gripen has the same RCS as the Tejas if not a little more. Armed with long range missiles like Derby or Meteor, a small fighter would be deadly.

On the flip side, the J-11A is armed much like our Flankers with the R-77 (PBB-AE) and R-73. We have a better sensor suite in the MKI but still the larger RCS and lower range of the R-77 is a weakness against a small foe with a long AMRAAM lance. (It might explain the need for the MKI to dodge mijjiles from the smaller F-solas instead of being on the offensive with the R-77s.)

The bar chart shows that the Flanker won fights inside 30KM but were annihilated beyond that.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 14 Dec 2019 10:17

^^^ The chinis might be badly trained but I doubt the Thais are first rate either. So I would say the training advantage of one over the other is a wash and it basically comes down to the basic advantages of each particular machine.

Here's more:
https://mobile.twitter.com/VinodDX9/status/1204785741642944513



Vinod DX9
@VinodDX9
This is from 2015 but has become popular recently.
During Falcon Strike 2015 exercise between #China and #Thailand Chinese J-11 showed superiority to Thai Jas-39 Gripen in WVR dog fight, but Gripen proved it's might in BVR combat and changed the game

http://alert5.com/2019/12/10/plaaf-j-11 ... rike-2015/



Added: The alert5 article includes what you said about the poor tactic of the chini pilots in the BVR fight, Karan ji. Still they were dominant in the WVR regime which tells me the Thais were not that much better as pilots. The huge difference in results seems more attributable to the different strengths of the planes. It would be different if the Thais were more equal in WVR but they were waxed 16-0 on the first day of close-in duels.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2877
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby nam » 14 Dec 2019 14:21

The Thais train with western airforces on BVR. In WVR Flankers were always better.

There is no very long range 150KM BVR shot, if your adversary knows you are firing a BVR. The idea is to fire long range(through blind spot) or close enough to NEZ.
Last edited by nam on 15 Dec 2019 01:59, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18864
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 15 Dec 2019 00:06

chola wrote:^^^ The chinis might be badly trained but I doubt the Thais are first rate either. So I would say the training advantage of one over the other is a wash and it basically comes down to the basic advantages of each particular machine.


How can we be sure? Please don't be under the expectation small AF are not well trained and don't have excellent pilots. Reason being these can be way way off the mark. Just take a look at the South American clashes between different AF. The pilots were excellent, top notch in terms of awareness re: advanced fighter tactics and used them to the hilt.

Added: The alert5 article includes what you said about the poor tactic of the chini pilots in the BVR fight, Karan ji. Still they were dominant in the WVR regime which tells me the Thais were not that much better as pilots. The huge difference in results seems more attributable to the different strengths of the planes. It would be different if the Thais were more equal in WVR but they were waxed 16-0 on the first day of close-in duels.


We can't say that the Thai's were not that much better overall and the machine *alone* made the difference. All we can say is the Chinese pilots had poor BVR tactics, because that's explicitly called out as are some of the J-11s issues. The same set of pilots could train heavily on WVR but be poor in BVR for instance.

The assumption re: different strengths of the aircraft fails there, because if the PLAAF guys were very well drilled they may have made a wash of the Thai guys in BVR or had a better result.

Point I am making is you need explicit test results or quotes attributed to the news reports associated with the exercise, reasonably logical ones, to draw conclusions. You may be right regarding the J-11 being inferior to the Thai Gripen in some parameters, but we can't be sure at this point that even if so, those parameters actually had a role to play in this exercise.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1275
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Nikhil T » 15 Dec 2019 08:40

Knowing the Chinese penchant for putting a positive image to rest of world, they would have sent their best pilots for the exercise. That’s why I think we should take the results of this exercise as a lesson in the importance of BVR.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 15 Dec 2019 11:10

Karan wrote:
We can't say that the Thai's were not that much better overall and the machine *alone* made the difference. All we can say is the Chinese pilots had poor BVR tactics, because that's explicitly called out as are some of the J-11s issues. The same set of pilots could train heavily on WVR but be poor in BVR for instance.

The assumption re: different strengths of the aircraft fails there, because if the PLAAF guys were very well drilled they may have made a wash of the Thai guys in BVR or had a better result.

Point I am making is you need explicit test results or quotes attributed to the news reports associated with the exercise, reasonably logical ones, to draw conclusions. You may be right regarding the J-11 being inferior to the Thai Gripen in some parameters, but we can't be sure at this point that even if so, those parameters actually had a role to play in this exercise.


It is unlikely we will ever get explicit test results. And you are right in that the poor BVR tactics were pointed out because the chinis wanted them point out since the slides are from their deck at a chini university. So obviously it is an issue for them. But if the report came from the Thais then the WVR results would be mentioned as the problem instead.

So a lot of it is conjecture based on one's interpretations of the results. In my view, pilot training is a wash when the Thais are clobbered in WVR and the chinis in BVR. Having sounder BVR tactics won't make you invulnerable so when you have a RCS many times larger than your opponent you will inevitably be operating at a disadvantage and on the defensive.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3693
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 15 Dec 2019 12:56

Nikhil T wrote:Knowing the Chinese penchant for putting a positive image to rest of world, they would have sent their best pilots for the exercise. That’s why I think we should take the results of this exercise as a lesson in the importance of BVR.


or maybe they wanted to know the Gripens "better", on the same note if the LCAs are sold to SEA countries , hope India puts in a clause to its use/exercises !!

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 18 Dec 2019 08:08

https://mobile.twitter.com/VinodDX9/status/1206908344729948160


Vinod DX9
@VinodDX9
#China commissions second Aircraft Carrier CV-17

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 19 Dec 2019 08:21

For the record. From first cutting of metal to commission was six years onlee.

https://mobile.twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1206949825893277696


East Pendulum
@HenriKenhmann
En attendant un article publié sur son sujet, voici un historique court du 2e porte-avions chinois 17 Shandong :

2013.11 - Découpe de la 1ère tôle
2015.03 - Mis sur cale sèche
2017.04 - Mis à flot et début d'agencement
2018.05 - 1ère sortie à la mer
2019.12 - Entrée en service

------- Google translated from French ---------

Pending an article published on its subject, here is a short history of the 2nd Chinese aircraft carrier 17 Shandong:

2013.11 - Cutting of the 1st sheet (first cutting of metal)
2015.03 - Keel laid down
2017.04 - Afloat and start of layout (launch and fitting)
2018.05 - 1st trip to the sea
2019.12 - Entry into service (commisioning)


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 19 Dec 2019 17:09

Here is their next one, Type 003, estimated to be 80 - 100K tons.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1205776965267021825

@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
A recent satellite image (4th December) shows the Type 003 carrier under construction at the Jiangnan Shipyard.
I'm not entirely sure, but it seems to show for the first time the modules aligned so that the ship's bow to mid section becomes visible.

Image



Someone pulled the modules together digitally and estimated a waterline of 320 meters. This would put it in the dimensions of a 100k-ton Nimitz class if correct.
Image

Image

First signs of assembly was in July of 2018. If on the same timeline as Type 002, launch could happen end of next year. But it is a much bigger ship and a more complicated CATOBAR so it is assumed that'll take more time.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 23 Dec 2019 17:59

Some interesting footage of launch and recovery on the new carrier. The pennant number is not seen on the ramp so the videos must have come during the trials before commissioning.

Not only is their equipment copies of russkie design, their operation manual from deck inspection to the colored vests of the aviation crews looks to be ripped off directly from the USN.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201912231077727025-video-shows-first-chinese-jet-takeoff-from-new-shandong-carrier/


Video Shows First Chinese Jet Takeoff From New Shandong Carrier
MILITARY & INTELLIGENCE
02:41 23.12.2019

A new Chinese carrier, the Shandong, which entered service on 17 December this year, was shown in action in a report by Chinese CCTV7 channel. The report features Chinese J-15 4th-generation jets practicing takeoff and landing on the boat.

Both the J-15 and the Shandong are heavily based on Soviet design, with the J-15 based on the Su-33 jet and the Shandong based on the Project 1143, or ‘Kuznetsov-class’, carrier family. Currently, Russia has one Project 1143 ship – the eponymous Admiral Kuznetsov, which participated in Russia’s military operation in Syria.

Both the Su-33 prototype and the Soviet Varyag carrier were purchased by China from Ukraine, according to Russian media reports.




mahadevbhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 44
Joined: 28 Oct 2019 19:47

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby mahadevbhu » 24 Dec 2019 12:23

They work like machines. Great progress from them, and it should inspire us a lot more to work our assess off to build our own country. Cheers

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3693
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby kit » 25 Dec 2019 03:29

China finally gets hands on jet engine manufacturing tech !

https://www.janes.com/article/93384/motor-sich-sale-to-prc-moving-forward-despite-opposition-from-ukraine-us-governments

Despite pressure from both the Ukrainian and US governments, the sale of the Zaporizhia, Ukraine-based aeroengine production association Motor Sich to China continues to move forward. The latest statements came on 13 December during a press tour of the company’s production facility given by the company’s president, Vyacheslav Boguslayev.

In support of the sale, the Ukrainian aerospace executive repeated an argument he has put forth in one form or another for months. Given current conditions with Ukraine’s modest defence outlays and the embargo on any exports to Russia, the only two choices for the company are to either sell out to a Chinese investor or be faced with furloughing large numbers of its workforce.


Was wondering why an indian company like Kalyani Forge could not have invested in such an opportunity !! ..

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Dec 2019 11:21

^^^ What else is new? The chinis are very adept at picking the bones of the old USSR, especially Ukraine, whether it is buying Motor Sich or getting the Varyag -- for $20M onlee -- or the SU-33 prototype (see post on new chini carrier above.)

Likely, we would never buy Ukrainian assets because being independent on things like engines, carrier aircraft, etc. could hurt the feelings of Russia? Chinis don't care. Instead of say funding a new Russian plane (like we did for the MiG-29) they went around the Russkies to develop their own with that prototype from Ukraine and THEN asked the Russians to supply the engines for the initial batch -- which the Russkies happily obliged.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4846
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Neshant » 25 Dec 2019 11:32


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Dec 2019 18:46

It looks like Cheen has decided on its next gen carrier fighter and it will be a derivative of the FC-31.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1207645513161596928

@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
It seems as if AVIC itself lifted the veil of secrecy about the future carrier-borne fighter giving a strong hint that a much redesigned variant has been selected by PLAN (already rumored as J-35) to be powered by the new WS-19.

Image




https://mobile.twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1209027477366030336
@Rupprecht_A
@RupprechtDeino
Even if an older image - since still in zink-chromate primer - only recently posted it is anyway an impressive one that gives a glimpse of the future SAC naval fighter (J-35?) .

Image


A post in the Diplomat in September on this possibility. This aircraft will be heavily tied to the WS-19 engine in development but will have a backup in the WS-13 as interim engines just as the J-20 has in the WS-10 in lieu of the WS-15. The WS-13 has already powered JF-17 and FC-31 testbeds so it is a known quantity (though the PAF rejected it.)

The fact they have multiple domestic engines for their programs is impressive. It will reduce risk of stall in the J-35 naval program in a major way.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/09/beyond-chinas-j-20-stealth-fighter/


The parameters of a carrierborne FC-31 variant/J-35 aren’t known, though some rumors have suggested the aircraft may have a maximum takeoff weight of about 30 tons (similar to the F-35). The aircraft would be initially powered by two nine ton thrust class WS-13E engines (improved Chinese copies of RD-93), and to be later powered by 10-11 ton thrust WS-19 engines in the late 2020s (in a thrust class of F414 or EJ200). The use of interim engines for the carrierborne FC-31 variant will not be dissimilar from the J-20’s use of interim engines prior to receiving intended its WS-15s. However, there have been some indications that the WS-19’s development cycle may be slightly shorter than the WS-15, as it may have benefited from cross applicable research and development originally conducted for the WS-15.


Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7442
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Prasad » 25 Dec 2019 19:31

Given what we've heard about the MKI engine and how much we've worked on them, I wonder how much of their engines that power their Su30 class fighters are indigenous tech. Did the Russians give them as much tech know-how as they did to us? How do we know if their WS- engines are new at all?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 25 Dec 2019 22:01

Prasad wrote:Given what we've heard about the MKI engine and how much we've worked on them, I wonder how much of their engines that power their Su30 class fighters are indigenous tech. Did the Russians give them as much tech know-how as they did to us? How do we know if their WS- engines are new at all?




The WS-10 series is supposedly reversed engineered from the Amreeki civilian CFM56 engine which itself was developed from the F101/F110 family so it was a roundabout way to steal a F-14/F-15 engine.

But IMHO, the Russians gave them a LOT especially for the Sino-flankers.

1) The J-11B with WS-10 flew in 2002 just 4 years after induction of the SU-27SK in 1998. There is no way to re-engine a plane that quickly without access to the FCS and that can only be given by the OEM,

2) Russkies supplied initial AL-31 engines for the J-20 program -- these are FN2/3 variants that were allowed to be modified and overhaul in Cheen,

3) They continued to supply the engines for the JF-17 and FC-31 with a specialized RD-33 called the RD-93 even when the chinis were developing the WS-13,

The Pakis rejected the WS-13 for Block 2 and probably Block 3 of the JF-17 but the WS-13 and I would imagine the WS-19 will be a threat to replace the RD-93 in later JF-17s and especially the FC-31 or a related Paki "5th gen".

The Russkies were and are in position to kill off the JF-17, J-20 and the J-35 programs by cutting off the prototype engines but they happily supply those engines until they are replaced by the chini versions. Why?

My guess is the Russkies have a monetary stake in the development of those chini engines.

Now did the Russians give them more than us? I would say so from what I described above. Not a high bar anyways. We can build the AL-31 but we can't use it anywhere else and it will die with the SU-30 MKI program.

mahadevbhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 44
Joined: 28 Oct 2019 19:47

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby mahadevbhu » 25 Dec 2019 23:47

Why are we so lallu about technology transfer and IP. How do we change this on a national level?

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby John » 25 Dec 2019 23:55


Now did the Russians give them more than us? I would say so from what I described above. Not a high bar anyways. We can build the AL-31 but we can't use it anywhere else and it will die with the SU-30 MKI program.



Because most of what we think it is China reverse engineering is actually full license transfer from Russia we even see parts from Russia on these so called Chinese weapon systems. Leaks from various sources have painted under the table Russia-China arms deals that are many multitude larger than arms deals that are reported.

These have been used to fund pet projects like Sochi or Crimea projects. West has turned a blind eye since most of money flows thru western banks. But China is becoming more self sufficient and the money train is coming to an end one of reasons Putin has been trying to fund another source of income.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3305
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby ArjunPandit » 26 Dec 2019 04:46

I dont think we cover chinese missile tests adequately..
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... le-capabl/
The test firing of China’s new JL-3 submarine-launched ballistic missile took place Sunday in the Bohai Sea off the coast of northern China, from a submerged Jin-class ballistic missile submarine, said two defense officials familiar with reports of the launch who spoke on condition of anonymit


The missile firing was monitored by U.S. intelligence satellites and other platforms from a position in the same sea and was monitored on a flight path westward.


chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 26 Dec 2019 14:14

^^^ Yeah, we don't. The same for related space launches. They are near completion with their Beidou global positioning network which should be a major impact story.

But aircraft and warships dominate among Chinese mil watchers just as they do here in BR.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], jhaloram, Kakarat, Rakesh, sgopal, srin, Varoon Shekhar and 25 guests