mdhoat, please dont confuse China's military power and that of 60's era as well. We have beefed up, as have they. Infact, quantitatively they are much ahead, as was before and when push comes to shove, you will see how they again take a part of Indian land and then the Indian blame game will start. The govt's have been successfully dithering over spending the money for defence, examples range from the MRCA to the arty modernization plans. It always takes a jolt to wake Indian leaders up and they go back to the same old torpor pretty soon.mdhoat wrote:Please don't confuse India's present military strength and that of 60's era. Both are worlds apart. Contrary to normal thinking, since early 90's, Indian defense preparedness is more inclined to contain the threat of China than Pakistan. Today I dare say bring it on.....
China Military Watch
mdhoat wrote:Y. Kanan what evidence or line of thinking are you basing you assumptions on? As measured with Google Earth, the average distance between China mainland and Taiwan is only 100 miles. For current Chinese capabilities, thats nothing. Without US help, China can overwhelm Taiwan in a day or so. And what is too risky? And what exactly China has to lose if it goes to war with Taiwan minus any US intervention? Chinese generals will get goose bumps just by the thought of it.Even without the entry of the US into such a conflict, taking on Taiwan alone would be extremely costly.
No, I don't see China doing this -- too risky, too much to lose. Especially with virgin armed forces that lack any combat experience whatsoever.
What seems a lot more likely to me, is that China will beat up on a weaker opponent first.
That would be us.
On the other hand warring with India is a different playing field. Indian navy's supremacy in IOR vs China naval capabilities is well known fact. China has very limited options to go on the offensive via land coz of Tibet's average height, Himalayas, lack of strategic air bases in Tibet or northeast in sufficient no, far too many bottlenecks India can capitalize on. India has a qualitative edge over Chinese equipment. Just look at the sheer numerical and qualitative strength of Indian defense forces vs Taiwan's.
As for your assumption that China can muster more combative power against us than it can against Taiwan. I believe it should be the other way around. I am surprised what make you think India is weaker than Taiwan or any other country in Asia. All other listed points in your post apply equally to any nation in South Asia.
Please don't confuse India's present military strength and that of 60's era. Both are worlds apart. Contrary to normal thinking, since early 90's, Indian defense preparedness is more inclined to contain the threat of China than Pakistan. Today I dare say bring it on.....
It's not Taiwan that China's afraid of - it's the US (of course). The level of risk in fighting the US & Taiwan is exponentially greater than the level of risk in fighting India.
Indeed, taking on the US, even in a limited conventional war would be so costly the Chinese would try to avoid it at any cost. The US can target China's most expensive military assets with ease; and there's no defense against it. Every major surface warship, every fixed military target, every airbase, every prized asset that cannot be buried or hidden is going to be destroyed with ease (and at little cost to US forces). China can retaliate againt US bases with long-range rockets, they can try to ambush US naval forces with submarines and naval mines, but overall their ability to retalitate (short of nuclear war) is limited.
Taking on Taiwan, under those circumstances, would be uncertain at best. China can bombard the hell out of Taiwan with rockets but they lack the amphibious and airborne capability to stage an invasion. They'd be hard pressed even getting their forces across the Strait, what with Taiwanese and US aircraft, subs, anti-ship missiles, SAM's, etc. What a nightmare; it would make D-Day look like a cakewalk.
Much easier to pick a fight with India, where China can at least gain local superiority in a region of their choosing. They're rapidly building up a logistical and transportation network along the Indian border, and are clearly training for this scenario. China's infantry, armored, and arty\rocket\MRLS forces are really starting to get worrisome in terms of the sheer combat power they can bring to bear. The qualitative gains are what alarms me most. Even their infantry have surpassed ours in terms of equipment - with every soldier outfitted with modern body armor and better weapons, high quality comms and GPS for every squad and vehicle, battle-field management systems, widespread use of portable recon drones and other force multipliers, and so on. PLA training is still something of an unknown, and combat experience is lacking, but we are clearly not facing the PLA of old. These aren't hordes of low-tech but fanatical chinks; they're a modern army now, and more advanced than us (at least in terms of equipment).
http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=430918&sid=NAT
Uproar in LS over Chinese crackdown on protestors in Tibet
New Delhi, March 17: The Chinese crackdown on protestors in Tibet created uproar in the Lok Sabha on Monday, with several parties barring the left expressing concern over the "cultural genocide" in Lhasa.
Members of the BJP, BJD, Samajwadi Party and RJD wanted India to condemn the violence and seek immediate intervention by the United Nations and the main opposition even walked out.
Responding to the concern by members, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee expressed distress over the "unsettled situation and violence" in Tibet and wanted the causes of trouble in the autonomous region of China to be resolved through dialogue and non-violent means.
He informed the house that the government had already issued a statement in this regard.
Raising the issue in zero hour, V K Malhotra (BJP) alleged that Tibetans were being "massacred" in Lhasa and China was trying to "culturally finish Tibet", even when spiritual leader Dalai Lama is saying he wanted autonomy and not separation from China. While Ramjilal Suman (SP) wanted government to inform the house about its stand on the "violation of human rights" in Tibet, Adityanath (BJP) claimed if China was not stopped now, it would "annex Nepal and then the northeastern states." B Mahtab (BJD) wanted the government to protest the "ethnic cleansing and tell China to exercise restraint and stop cultural genocide." He also asked the government to press for immediate UN intervention in Tibet.
When the opposition walked out, Mukherjee said the policy on Tibet and China, which was formulated in 1959, remained the same and no government, including NDA, had changed it.
Uproar in LS over Chinese crackdown on protestors in Tibet
New Delhi, March 17: The Chinese crackdown on protestors in Tibet created uproar in the Lok Sabha on Monday, with several parties barring the left expressing concern over the "cultural genocide" in Lhasa.
Members of the BJP, BJD, Samajwadi Party and RJD wanted India to condemn the violence and seek immediate intervention by the United Nations and the main opposition even walked out.
Responding to the concern by members, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee expressed distress over the "unsettled situation and violence" in Tibet and wanted the causes of trouble in the autonomous region of China to be resolved through dialogue and non-violent means.
He informed the house that the government had already issued a statement in this regard.
Raising the issue in zero hour, V K Malhotra (BJP) alleged that Tibetans were being "massacred" in Lhasa and China was trying to "culturally finish Tibet", even when spiritual leader Dalai Lama is saying he wanted autonomy and not separation from China. While Ramjilal Suman (SP) wanted government to inform the house about its stand on the "violation of human rights" in Tibet, Adityanath (BJP) claimed if China was not stopped now, it would "annex Nepal and then the northeastern states." B Mahtab (BJD) wanted the government to protest the "ethnic cleansing and tell China to exercise restraint and stop cultural genocide." He also asked the government to press for immediate UN intervention in Tibet.
When the opposition walked out, Mukherjee said the policy on Tibet and China, which was formulated in 1959, remained the same and no government, including NDA, had changed it.
-
Ankit Desai
- BRFite
- Posts: 638
- Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
- Location: Gujarat
-
gopal.suri
- BRFite
- Posts: 191
- Joined: 26 May 2007 17:22
Agni-1 and CoT
The Agni-1 tactical rationale
After discussions on the need for a 250 to 900 km range missile, in October 1999, it was agreed to develop, test and produce the Agni-I. The road-mobile, solid propelled Agni-1 is ideal to be deployed at the border between India and Chinese occupied Tibet (CoT), where there is no availability of rail lines.
The first trial of the Agni-1 missile was carried out from the Wheelers Island on January 25, 2002. The 15 m long, solid fueled missile, with weight of about 12 tonnes is capable of delivering warheads of 1 ton. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2002-2003 demonstrated the effectiveness of long range missile strikes. This pushed the Prithvi Missile designers to look for options beyond the Prithvi’s set range. The motor casing was replaced with lighter, stronger composite ones and a number of other improvements were introduced. In April 2003, an extended range Prithvi flew beyond the barrier milestone. But the range improvement was still not enough. Hence the need for the Agni-I. Smaller size increases the flexibility of the Agni logistics chain. An Indian Air force IL-76 aircraft can airlift at least 2 Agni-1 missiles to Arunachal Pradesh or any other part of the country. Conservatively an IL-76 can air lift the dismantled Agni-1 Mobile launchers too. This will allow for rapid redeployment of missile assets in case of urgent requirements.
Agni-1 for China in occupied Tibet (CoT)
The next war with China will not remain a border war that will be fought on Tibetian borders. The southern most border of CoT falls at the tri border of India, Bhutan and Tibet. The northern most border of Tibet is Mt. Ulugh Mustagh. The distance between the two places is approximately 1100 km. Tsethang, the Chinese district HQ in Tibet, is 503 km from Bunmla in Arunachal Pradesh.
India will have to strike deep at Chinese air bases, railway lines, supply chains, military camps and missile installations deep inside Tibet. The Prithvi will not be enough for this requirement, while the Agni-II will be a dangerous provocation. However, the Agni-1 can easily hit any Chinese base in Tibet from within Indian borders. A single stage tactical missile like Agni-1 which is under 1000 km range will not evoke suspicion of a nuclear strike within Tibetian borders. The Agni-I will make an ideal long range tactical strike missile, and will certainly be a powerful addition to Indian weaponry ranged against Chinese forces in occupied Tibet.
The Agni-1 tactical rationale
After discussions on the need for a 250 to 900 km range missile, in October 1999, it was agreed to develop, test and produce the Agni-I. The road-mobile, solid propelled Agni-1 is ideal to be deployed at the border between India and Chinese occupied Tibet (CoT), where there is no availability of rail lines.
The first trial of the Agni-1 missile was carried out from the Wheelers Island on January 25, 2002. The 15 m long, solid fueled missile, with weight of about 12 tonnes is capable of delivering warheads of 1 ton. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2002-2003 demonstrated the effectiveness of long range missile strikes. This pushed the Prithvi Missile designers to look for options beyond the Prithvi’s set range. The motor casing was replaced with lighter, stronger composite ones and a number of other improvements were introduced. In April 2003, an extended range Prithvi flew beyond the barrier milestone. But the range improvement was still not enough. Hence the need for the Agni-I. Smaller size increases the flexibility of the Agni logistics chain. An Indian Air force IL-76 aircraft can airlift at least 2 Agni-1 missiles to Arunachal Pradesh or any other part of the country. Conservatively an IL-76 can air lift the dismantled Agni-1 Mobile launchers too. This will allow for rapid redeployment of missile assets in case of urgent requirements.
Agni-1 for China in occupied Tibet (CoT)
The next war with China will not remain a border war that will be fought on Tibetian borders. The southern most border of CoT falls at the tri border of India, Bhutan and Tibet. The northern most border of Tibet is Mt. Ulugh Mustagh. The distance between the two places is approximately 1100 km. Tsethang, the Chinese district HQ in Tibet, is 503 km from Bunmla in Arunachal Pradesh.
India will have to strike deep at Chinese air bases, railway lines, supply chains, military camps and missile installations deep inside Tibet. The Prithvi will not be enough for this requirement, while the Agni-II will be a dangerous provocation. However, the Agni-1 can easily hit any Chinese base in Tibet from within Indian borders. A single stage tactical missile like Agni-1 which is under 1000 km range will not evoke suspicion of a nuclear strike within Tibetian borders. The Agni-I will make an ideal long range tactical strike missile, and will certainly be a powerful addition to Indian weaponry ranged against Chinese forces in occupied Tibet.
Home Made Chinese AWAC
China Aviation Industry Corporation (AVIC). To be sure, AVIC 1 has successfully pushed through a wholly-Chinese made AWACS program named Kongjing or KJ-2000. Six of the aircraft (numbered from 2070 to 2076), were delivered in 2007 to the 26th division of the Chinese air force which has been re-deployed to Nanjing after being based for years at Liuzhou in Guangxi province. It openly promotes its product line but carefully kept the wraps on its AWACS program even though it is known a prototype of the aircraft was tested in 2003.
The project was based on a technological development of a Russian AWACS and incorporates a Chinese command system and radar manufactured by the Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology (known as Institute 14). Israel also supplied electronic instruments. The KJ-2000 are old Ilyushin 76MD aircraft converted at Xian. They can simultaneously keep tabs on up to 100 targets within a radius of 400 km. They would come particularly into their own in a crisis in the Taiwan straits. Now they have just deployed their first AWACS the Chinese are already thinking of building a new series of KJ-2000s, according to Japanese sources.
China Aviation Industry Corporation (AVIC). To be sure, AVIC 1 has successfully pushed through a wholly-Chinese made AWACS program named Kongjing or KJ-2000. Six of the aircraft (numbered from 2070 to 2076), were delivered in 2007 to the 26th division of the Chinese air force which has been re-deployed to Nanjing after being based for years at Liuzhou in Guangxi province. It openly promotes its product line but carefully kept the wraps on its AWACS program even though it is known a prototype of the aircraft was tested in 2003.
The project was based on a technological development of a Russian AWACS and incorporates a Chinese command system and radar manufactured by the Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology (known as Institute 14). Israel also supplied electronic instruments. The KJ-2000 are old Ilyushin 76MD aircraft converted at Xian. They can simultaneously keep tabs on up to 100 targets within a radius of 400 km. They would come particularly into their own in a crisis in the Taiwan straits. Now they have just deployed their first AWACS the Chinese are already thinking of building a new series of KJ-2000s, according to Japanese sources.
Isn't he comparing apples and oranges? The US used Tomahawks, a cruise missile, while the author calls for the use of Pritvis, a ballistic missile.gopal.suri wrote:Agni-1 and CoT
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2002-2003 demonstrated the effectiveness of long range missile strikes. This pushed the Prithvi Missile designers to look for options beyond the Prithvi’s set range.
China cites India, hikes defence budget to $57 billion
BEIJING: China on Tuesday announced a nearly 17.6 per cent hike in defence spending. It cited the high defence spending by India and other countries as part of its justification to enhance military expenditure to $57.22bn.
China spent just 1.4 per cent of its gross domestic product on defence against 2.5 per cent by India, Jiang Enzhul, spokesperson for the National People's Congress told reporters on Tuesday ahead of the annual NPC session beginning on Wednesday.
U.S. sees more Beijing missiles aimed at Taiwan
Who do you think these missiles will be pointed towards once they solve the Taiwan issue in their favour? No marks for correct guess.....
Who do you think these missiles will be pointed towards once they solve the Taiwan issue in their favour? No marks for correct guess.....
U.S. sees more Beijing missiles aimed at Taiwan
By Richard Halloran
March 28, 2008
China has deployed far more missiles aimed at Taiwan than previously reported, according to U.S. officials with access to intelligence assessments.
The officials say China has 1,400 ballistic missiles targeting the self-governing island over which Beijing claims sovereignty.
That is 40 percent more than earlier U.S. reports saying about 1,000 missiles were deployed across the strait from Taiwan.
The Pentagon, in its recent report on Chinese military power, said 990 to 1,070 missiles were pointed at Taiwan, including variants "with improved ranges, accuracies, and payloads."
President Chen Shui-bian, who is to step down on May 20 when President-elect Ma Ying-jeou is inaugurated, said recently that China had deployed 1,328 missiles at Taiwan.
U.S. officials have declined to confirm Mr. Chen's numbers on the record. But Washington has expressed growing concern over China's military buildup and the threat it poses to Taiwan.
"The threat that China poses is increasing, in my opinion, for the folks who are our friends in Taiwan," Adm. Timothy Keating, the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, told Congress earlier this month.
While avoiding discussion of operational plans to respond to the threat, Adm. Keating said his Pacific Command was "adequately resourced" to meet U.S. requirements.
He pointed to two aircraft carrier battle groups, six B-52 and three B-2 bombers deployed to Guam in the western Pacific, and a new addition to the Pacific Fleet, the submarine Ohio, which is armed with 150 Tomahawk cruise missiles.
The U.S. has long insisted that the future of Taiwan be settled peaceably, while Chinese leaders have repeatedly asserted that China would resort to military force to conquer the island if the government in Taipei declared formal independence.
The officials who produced the updated missile number have had long experience in dealing with the China-Taiwan dispute.
In its recent report on China's military power, required annually by the Congress, the Pentagon said, "China has the most active ballistic missile program in the world."
The People's Liberation Army (PLA) has deployed CSS-6 and CSS-7 short-range ballistic missiles to garrisons opposite Taiwan.
"It is increasing the size of this force at a rate of more than 100 missiles per year," the Pentagon said.
Further, the Pentagon said, "the PLA is acquiring large numbers of highly accurate cruise missiles," such as ground-launched land attack cruise missiles, supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, and anti-ship ballistic missiles.
Mr. Ma has promised not to seek independence for Taiwan, ruled out unification with the mainland and demanded no use of military force by either side.
"I believe the world is big enough to accommodate both Taiwan and the mainland," Mr. Ma said.
He has proposed a peace agreement with China, which would require Beijing to recognize the government in Taipei as legitimate.
TARGETING TAIWAN
China's military buildup includes missiles pointed at Taiwan, also known as the Republic of China, a democratically ruled island about 100 miles from the Chinese coast:
Year - Number of missiles
2008 - 1,400 *
2007 - 1,070
2006 -790
2005 -730
2003 - 450
2001 - 300
Since its relevant to China....
Former defense head to be questioned - Taiwan
Taiwan says did not dismantle U.S. missile parts
Former defense head to be questioned - Taiwan
Taiwan says did not dismantle U.S. missile parts
-
soutikghosh
- BRFite
- Posts: 178
- Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
- Location: new delhi
- Contact:
-
soutikghosh
- BRFite
- Posts: 178
- Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
- Location: new delhi
- Contact:
Yes it is the real thing. Same old story. They first toyed with the Russians about buying huge number of Smerch, toured the production plant, blueprint and drawings and at the last moment withdrew stating that the requirement for Smerch has ceased to exist. And guess what ,after few months there appears a new weapon named A-100 albeit with a bit deteoriated performance in comparison to Russian Smerch. They were not totally satisfied with it's performance thats why they launched WS-2 after a few months with a range of 150 - 200kms.Acharya wrote:Is it s photo copy of smerch or the real thingsum wrote:Have never understood how the chinese get away with blatant copying...
Why dont we do it atleast for the necessary items?? Morality be damned if we are able to have our own products instead of falling at Russian feet at all times!!!!
[quote]
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1159482
China army slams India’s ‘confrontationist’ stance
HONG KONG: Chinese military journals have in recent days and weeks ratcheted up the tough talk against India, accusing it of going on the “same old path of confrontation with China as it had in 1962.â€
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1159482
China army slams India’s ‘confrontationist’ stance
HONG KONG: Chinese military journals have in recent days and weeks ratcheted up the tough talk against India, accusing it of going on the “same old path of confrontation with China as it had in 1962.â€
[quote]Paper no. 2039 27.11.2006
China: Latest assessments of strategic experts on Sino-Indian ties
by D. S. Rajan
Internal Chinese views on India are different from what they say to international media. There appears to be two views one for internal consumption and another benign one for external consumption. We should not come to the conclusion that there are differences internally between strategic analysts and the policy makers in China. It is deliberately done to 'unsettle' Indian positions on China. Director
Almost coinciding with the visit of President Hu Jintao to India (November 20-23, 2006), strategic experts in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) belonging to Party and State-controlled think tanks, have made certain key observations on Sino-Indian relations in general and the border issue in particular. Inputs from specialists had always been a component in shaping of the foreign policy in the PRC and what has been said now therefore assumes significance.
An analysis done by Beijing-based China International Institute for Strategic Studies (CIISS)[1] (in Chinese language, November 21, 2006), on the subject of ‘future directions of the Sino-Indian border dispute’, judged that “conditions are not ripe for a peaceful and satisfactory solutionâ€
China: Latest assessments of strategic experts on Sino-Indian ties
by D. S. Rajan
Internal Chinese views on India are different from what they say to international media. There appears to be two views one for internal consumption and another benign one for external consumption. We should not come to the conclusion that there are differences internally between strategic analysts and the policy makers in China. It is deliberately done to 'unsettle' Indian positions on China. Director
Almost coinciding with the visit of President Hu Jintao to India (November 20-23, 2006), strategic experts in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) belonging to Party and State-controlled think tanks, have made certain key observations on Sino-Indian relations in general and the border issue in particular. Inputs from specialists had always been a component in shaping of the foreign policy in the PRC and what has been said now therefore assumes significance.
An analysis done by Beijing-based China International Institute for Strategic Studies (CIISS)[1] (in Chinese language, November 21, 2006), on the subject of ‘future directions of the Sino-Indian border dispute’, judged that “conditions are not ripe for a peaceful and satisfactory solutionâ€
These are my views:
If someone has a lot of reason to live, that person will want to live life as much as he or she can. Contrast this to a Jihadiot. The more China modernizes, the more shinny high rises go up all over China, the more glittzy jewels and cars flood China, the less they would want to risk these hard earned gains in a futile war.
Is Taiwan worth the destruction of Shanghai?
Lets see. The Chinese one child policy has raised quite a lot of spoilt brats who are extremely materialistic. Carrying on the family name (most Chinese maintain good written records of their clans and family lines going back centuries) is very important. Having one child and end up that one child in futile combat would be emotionally very destablizing. A destructive war could wipe out many clans due to this one child policy. Can the communist party risk that?
As is, on a daily basis the party leaders at every level had to deal with peasant dissatisfactions. A peasant revolt (core constituency where they get their PLA cannon fodders) is the last thing they want.
A destroyed city and industrial production region in war would be double jeopardy.
So where do we stand? Well, Chinese leadership will keep building their military so that a time will come when they hope to just stare down and cause an "Anchluss" without firing a shot. They think they stand a chance partly because there is a believe that their main adversary (the USA) despite militarily preponderant, would not have the stomach to risk a fight with passage of time. Current socio-political trend seems to point in such a direction.
Just as Beijing would be grappled with "Is it worth losing Shanghai for Taiwan" the American polity would be grappled with "Is it worth losing Los Angeles for Taiwan". At least that is what the Chinese leadership is hoping for in my opinion. It would be a copy of the Cuban Missile crisis and the Chinese hope America would blink first.
The Chinese would not engage in such a brinkmanship until they are ABSOLUTELY sure that they can achieve the desired goal. If the Chinese leadership blinks instead of the Americans, that would politically fatal for the CCP. Thus, they would not get into it until they are certain of success.
Question we all have to grapple with is when will that time be?
Avram
If someone has a lot of reason to live, that person will want to live life as much as he or she can. Contrast this to a Jihadiot. The more China modernizes, the more shinny high rises go up all over China, the more glittzy jewels and cars flood China, the less they would want to risk these hard earned gains in a futile war.
Is Taiwan worth the destruction of Shanghai?
Lets see. The Chinese one child policy has raised quite a lot of spoilt brats who are extremely materialistic. Carrying on the family name (most Chinese maintain good written records of their clans and family lines going back centuries) is very important. Having one child and end up that one child in futile combat would be emotionally very destablizing. A destructive war could wipe out many clans due to this one child policy. Can the communist party risk that?
As is, on a daily basis the party leaders at every level had to deal with peasant dissatisfactions. A peasant revolt (core constituency where they get their PLA cannon fodders) is the last thing they want.
A destroyed city and industrial production region in war would be double jeopardy.
So where do we stand? Well, Chinese leadership will keep building their military so that a time will come when they hope to just stare down and cause an "Anchluss" without firing a shot. They think they stand a chance partly because there is a believe that their main adversary (the USA) despite militarily preponderant, would not have the stomach to risk a fight with passage of time. Current socio-political trend seems to point in such a direction.
Just as Beijing would be grappled with "Is it worth losing Shanghai for Taiwan" the American polity would be grappled with "Is it worth losing Los Angeles for Taiwan". At least that is what the Chinese leadership is hoping for in my opinion. It would be a copy of the Cuban Missile crisis and the Chinese hope America would blink first.
The Chinese would not engage in such a brinkmanship until they are ABSOLUTELY sure that they can achieve the desired goal. If the Chinese leadership blinks instead of the Americans, that would politically fatal for the CCP. Thus, they would not get into it until they are certain of success.
Question we all have to grapple with is when will that time be?
Avram
yeah, but avram, China is playing that same psychology against Taiwan, for example. They're wooing the Taiwanese youth with the "join the Chinese family" mantra, along with the economic incentives. They're using economic ties to wrap their tentacles around Taiwan, so that it can't resist being re-absorbed. So the average Taiwanese is likewise now thinking that it's not worth jeopardizing their future by opposing Beijing. That's why the pro-OneChina KMT won the recent electoral vote.
China has successfully transitioned to a Chilean-style economy, whereby the leadership can keep tight political control while allowing the rest of the people to pursue fulfillment through free market enterprise.
Meanwhile, India is the opposite, with its populist poverty-stoking politicians keeping the country away from stronger economic reforms. Two steps forward, one step back. And whatever extra help India is now recently receiving from the USA and Japan due to fear of China's rise, is being offset by the increasingly sagging fortunes of the USA and Japan.
So we're once again stuck, as usual.
China has successfully transitioned to a Chilean-style economy, whereby the leadership can keep tight political control while allowing the rest of the people to pursue fulfillment through free market enterprise.
Meanwhile, India is the opposite, with its populist poverty-stoking politicians keeping the country away from stronger economic reforms. Two steps forward, one step back. And whatever extra help India is now recently receiving from the USA and Japan due to fear of China's rise, is being offset by the increasingly sagging fortunes of the USA and Japan.
So we're once again stuck, as usual.
Avram,
That would make fine if the Chinese were sane people like the rest of the democratic world but as commies come they generally tend to be irrational and aggressive.
The Chinese will push people to the limit and apply all kinds of pressure. When they have a decisive edge militarily they wont hesitate to use force to acheive their goals. Because in the eyes of the natives in China they will come out as doing the right thing and sticking up for China ; or at least they will spin it that way. Their ultimate aim at the end of the day is maintaining a state of totalitarian rule and all and any compromises that acheive and strengthen that goal is okay with them. Even if they face international condemnation, they will not loose power at home because they will have their people's support and still retain power. Any international condemnation will be portrayed as Western heavy handedness and anti-China bias.
This kind of grand self delusion is possible in China because unlike us they do not have independent discussion and analysis. The state is the party and the party the state.
That would make fine if the Chinese were sane people like the rest of the democratic world but as commies come they generally tend to be irrational and aggressive.
The Chinese will push people to the limit and apply all kinds of pressure. When they have a decisive edge militarily they wont hesitate to use force to acheive their goals. Because in the eyes of the natives in China they will come out as doing the right thing and sticking up for China ; or at least they will spin it that way. Their ultimate aim at the end of the day is maintaining a state of totalitarian rule and all and any compromises that acheive and strengthen that goal is okay with them. Even if they face international condemnation, they will not loose power at home because they will have their people's support and still retain power. Any international condemnation will be portrayed as Western heavy handedness and anti-China bias.
This kind of grand self delusion is possible in China because unlike us they do not have independent discussion and analysis. The state is the party and the party the state.
I think you are mistaken into lumping all communists into a single category. The CCP leadership is more nationalist than they are communists. I would say that they are akin to National Socialists or even Fascists. You would hardly find more rational people than the Chinese. Thus far, compared to Indian leadership, they have been least effected by any ideology, political emotionalism or nostalgia. They have acted in national interest of China in the best actionable method that is possible. They will continue to act in similar manner as in the past.
1) They never forbid the Chinese military/scientific from designing/developing and testing missiles of longer range than what they have in their arsenal. National interests requires them to use everything at their disposal towards increasing Chinese power. Compare that to India.
2) Sinkiang was a Muslim majority state and as Muslims go, the locals wanted to breakaway. China clamped down hashly. But they did not stop there. They Sinised the region by moving Hans by the millions and changed the demographic make-up of the place. Though large swath of Sinkiang is barren land, they have fortified their position and there is no chance Sinkiang is going to break away. Compare that to Kashmir. Pandits controlled a portion bigger in land and economy than their numbers in J&K. Nehru wanted to preserve that. He feared that if Hindus from mainland were allowed to move in, the power and position of the Pandits would wither away. Thus the special status. Well, we all can see what happened to the position of the Pandits now. Moving Hindus into JK would have bolster Hindu demographic numbers but for the special status crap.
3) Diplomatic front. China may make all sorts of noise about whatever but everything they do is to increase Chinese power. India still holds to Non-Allign Movement baggage.
Avram
1) They never forbid the Chinese military/scientific from designing/developing and testing missiles of longer range than what they have in their arsenal. National interests requires them to use everything at their disposal towards increasing Chinese power. Compare that to India.
2) Sinkiang was a Muslim majority state and as Muslims go, the locals wanted to breakaway. China clamped down hashly. But they did not stop there. They Sinised the region by moving Hans by the millions and changed the demographic make-up of the place. Though large swath of Sinkiang is barren land, they have fortified their position and there is no chance Sinkiang is going to break away. Compare that to Kashmir. Pandits controlled a portion bigger in land and economy than their numbers in J&K. Nehru wanted to preserve that. He feared that if Hindus from mainland were allowed to move in, the power and position of the Pandits would wither away. Thus the special status. Well, we all can see what happened to the position of the Pandits now. Moving Hindus into JK would have bolster Hindu demographic numbers but for the special status crap.
3) Diplomatic front. China may make all sorts of noise about whatever but everything they do is to increase Chinese power. India still holds to Non-Allign Movement baggage.
Avram
I tend to agree with asprinzl,that the Chinese are more nationalist than ideologist.The Chinese are closest to being "Asian fascists" than even the Japanese.There is an inborn superiority complex in the Chinese founded upon ignorance of the world,encouraged by the party that everything Chinese is superior, that is akin to Hitler's "Aryan" supremacism.The Chinese leadership still looks at the world as an entity that must be dominated by China,supplanting the US sometime this century.It does not look at the world as the home of the human race where poverty,inequality,ignorance and disease are mankind's enemies, and that nations must work together for the good of all.
Details from Janes' of China's new secret nucelar sub base revealed.It indicates that China plans to dominate the seas and straits in the region,including the approaches to the IOR.
http://www.janes.com/news/security/jir/ ... _1_n.shtml
Secret Sanya - China's new nuclear naval base revealed
21 April 2008
China is constructing a major underground nuclear submarine base near Sanya, on Hainan Island off its southern coast, Jane's can confirm. Although Asian military sources have disclosed this fact to Jane's since 2002, high-resolution commercially available satellite imagery from DigitalGlobe allows independent verification of the previous suggestions.
The extent of construction indicates the Sanya base (also known as Yulin) could become a key future base for People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) aircraft carriers and other power-projection ships. In December 2007, perhaps in concert with a major PLAN exercise the previous month, the PLA moved its first Type 094 second-generation nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) to Sanya.
An underground submarine base and the positioning of China's most advanced sub-surface combatants at Sanya would have implications for China's control of the South China Sea and the strategically vital straits in the area. Further satellite imagery suggests the construction of Sanya has been supported by a gradual military build-up in the Paracel Islands over the last 20 years, and the transformation of the Chinese-occupied features in the Spratly Island group into assets that could support a range of military operations.
China's nuclear and naval build-up at Sanya underlines Beijing's desire to assert tighter control over this region. China's increasing dependence on imported petroleum and mineral resources has contributed to an intensified Chinese concern about defending its access to vital sea lanes, particularly to its south. It is this concern that in large part is driving China's development of power-projection naval forces such as aircraft carriers and long-range nuclear submarines.
China has pursued this build-up at Sanya with little fanfare, offering no public explanations regarding its plan to base nuclear weapons or advanced naval platforms there.
For both regional and extra-regional powers, it will be difficult to ignore that China is now building a major naval base at Sanya and may be preparing to house and protect a large proportion of its nuclear forces here, and even operate them from this base. This development so close to the Southeast Asian sea lanes so vital to the economies of Asia can only cause concern far beyond these straits.
Image: Digital imagery has confirmed Sanya's place as a major future Chinese naval base. (DigitalGlobe)
http://www.janes.com/news/security/jir/ ... _1_n.shtml
Secret Sanya - China's new nuclear naval base revealed
21 April 2008
China is constructing a major underground nuclear submarine base near Sanya, on Hainan Island off its southern coast, Jane's can confirm. Although Asian military sources have disclosed this fact to Jane's since 2002, high-resolution commercially available satellite imagery from DigitalGlobe allows independent verification of the previous suggestions.
The extent of construction indicates the Sanya base (also known as Yulin) could become a key future base for People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) aircraft carriers and other power-projection ships. In December 2007, perhaps in concert with a major PLAN exercise the previous month, the PLA moved its first Type 094 second-generation nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) to Sanya.
An underground submarine base and the positioning of China's most advanced sub-surface combatants at Sanya would have implications for China's control of the South China Sea and the strategically vital straits in the area. Further satellite imagery suggests the construction of Sanya has been supported by a gradual military build-up in the Paracel Islands over the last 20 years, and the transformation of the Chinese-occupied features in the Spratly Island group into assets that could support a range of military operations.
China's nuclear and naval build-up at Sanya underlines Beijing's desire to assert tighter control over this region. China's increasing dependence on imported petroleum and mineral resources has contributed to an intensified Chinese concern about defending its access to vital sea lanes, particularly to its south. It is this concern that in large part is driving China's development of power-projection naval forces such as aircraft carriers and long-range nuclear submarines.
China has pursued this build-up at Sanya with little fanfare, offering no public explanations regarding its plan to base nuclear weapons or advanced naval platforms there.
For both regional and extra-regional powers, it will be difficult to ignore that China is now building a major naval base at Sanya and may be preparing to house and protect a large proportion of its nuclear forces here, and even operate them from this base. This development so close to the Southeast Asian sea lanes so vital to the economies of Asia can only cause concern far beyond these straits.
Image: Digital imagery has confirmed Sanya's place as a major future Chinese naval base. (DigitalGlobe)
-
soutikghosh
- BRFite
- Posts: 178
- Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
- Location: new delhi
- Contact:
More on China's new secret nuclear sub base at Hainan from Janes'.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 03,00.html
The AustralianApril 24, 2008 12:08am AEST Satellite images reveal China's underground nuclear submarine base Rowan Callick, China correspondent | April 24, 2008
CHINA is building a large underground nuclear submarine base at its sub-tropical Hainan Island, says Jane's Information Group, specialists in military intelligence.
Jane's says it was first informed by Asian defence sources about the construction of the base five years ago, but has now been able to confirm this through high-resolution, newly commercially available satellite imagery.
The Chinese navy has rapidly acquired a blue-water capacity. It has 57 submarines, five of them nuclear-powered, with many of them equipped with Yingji-8 anti-ship cruise missiles that they can launch while still submerged.
It underlined this capacity 18 months ago when a 75m long Song S20 class vessel, built in the Wuhan shipyard, with unusually quiet German diesel engines, suddenly surfaced in the middle of an American battle fleet.
The submarine appeared within 8km of the US aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk, in international waters not far from Japan's southern island of Okinawa.
The new Yulin submarine base is located near Sanya, a fast developing resort centre on the south of Hainan. It was at Sanya where Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and China's President Hu Jintao met 12 days ago.
The island, half the size of Tasmania, is best known for tourism and tropical fruit, and has also hosted most of the recent Miss World contests.
It is about 200km from the Vietnam coast. Jane's says the extent of construction revealed by the DigitalGlobe imagery indicates Yulin could become a key base for aircraft carriers and other large surface craft, as well as for submarines.
The first type 094 second-generation nuclear ballistic missile submarine was shifted there last December.
Jane's says such a base has implications "for China's control of the South China Sea and the strategically vital straits in the area, and underlines Beijing's desire to assert tighter control over this region".
Typically, China has offered no public explanation of this development, which has strategic implications for the hotly disputed Spratly Islands - believed to be oil-rich - within the South China Sea where China and Vietnam have the most extensive claims, as well as for the busy shipping lanes between Europe, Southeast Asia and North Asia, and for Taiwan, 900km north-east of Hainan.
And Jane's adds: "China's increasing dependence on imported petroleum and mineral resources has contributed to an intensified concern about defending its access to vital sea lanes, particularly to its south."
Taiwan's National Security Council recently reported that the number of tactical ballistic missiles deployed by China against it had reached more than 1400 at the start of this year, augmented by more than 190 cruise missiles.
The council said China's navy, with more than 1000 vessels and 250,000 personnel, was acquiring the capacity to blockade Taiwan.
Taiwan is itself set to spend $12.3billion on eight diesel-electric attack submarines that it would buy from the US, although selection of the prime contractor would probably take a further 15 months. A decision on that purchase is expected shortly after the May 20 inauguration of Taiwan's new president, Ma Ying-jeou.
Taiwan already has two Dutch-built Hai-lung (Sea Dragon) submarines, and two former US World War II-era submarines that are used only for training.
A report produced earlier this month by Asian Security Affairs specialist Shirley Kan for the US Congressional Research Service said: "The People's Liberation Army has continued to build up its forces that threaten Taiwan, raising the question of whether the military balance already has shifted to favour China."
If Mr Ma's Kuomintang party negotiates a withdrawal of the missiles targeting Taiwan, says the report, Taiwan's own "military deployments and missile programs could be subject to China's demands".
PS:How German engines are aboard a Chinese sub is intriguing.It indicates China's dexterity and ingenuity in foraging for suitable technology and we must keep in mind inevitable transfers to Pak.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 03,00.html
The AustralianApril 24, 2008 12:08am AEST Satellite images reveal China's underground nuclear submarine base Rowan Callick, China correspondent | April 24, 2008
CHINA is building a large underground nuclear submarine base at its sub-tropical Hainan Island, says Jane's Information Group, specialists in military intelligence.
Jane's says it was first informed by Asian defence sources about the construction of the base five years ago, but has now been able to confirm this through high-resolution, newly commercially available satellite imagery.
The Chinese navy has rapidly acquired a blue-water capacity. It has 57 submarines, five of them nuclear-powered, with many of them equipped with Yingji-8 anti-ship cruise missiles that they can launch while still submerged.
It underlined this capacity 18 months ago when a 75m long Song S20 class vessel, built in the Wuhan shipyard, with unusually quiet German diesel engines, suddenly surfaced in the middle of an American battle fleet.
The submarine appeared within 8km of the US aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk, in international waters not far from Japan's southern island of Okinawa.
The new Yulin submarine base is located near Sanya, a fast developing resort centre on the south of Hainan. It was at Sanya where Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and China's President Hu Jintao met 12 days ago.
The island, half the size of Tasmania, is best known for tourism and tropical fruit, and has also hosted most of the recent Miss World contests.
It is about 200km from the Vietnam coast. Jane's says the extent of construction revealed by the DigitalGlobe imagery indicates Yulin could become a key base for aircraft carriers and other large surface craft, as well as for submarines.
The first type 094 second-generation nuclear ballistic missile submarine was shifted there last December.
Jane's says such a base has implications "for China's control of the South China Sea and the strategically vital straits in the area, and underlines Beijing's desire to assert tighter control over this region".
Typically, China has offered no public explanation of this development, which has strategic implications for the hotly disputed Spratly Islands - believed to be oil-rich - within the South China Sea where China and Vietnam have the most extensive claims, as well as for the busy shipping lanes between Europe, Southeast Asia and North Asia, and for Taiwan, 900km north-east of Hainan.
And Jane's adds: "China's increasing dependence on imported petroleum and mineral resources has contributed to an intensified concern about defending its access to vital sea lanes, particularly to its south."
Taiwan's National Security Council recently reported that the number of tactical ballistic missiles deployed by China against it had reached more than 1400 at the start of this year, augmented by more than 190 cruise missiles.
The council said China's navy, with more than 1000 vessels and 250,000 personnel, was acquiring the capacity to blockade Taiwan.
Taiwan is itself set to spend $12.3billion on eight diesel-electric attack submarines that it would buy from the US, although selection of the prime contractor would probably take a further 15 months. A decision on that purchase is expected shortly after the May 20 inauguration of Taiwan's new president, Ma Ying-jeou.
Taiwan already has two Dutch-built Hai-lung (Sea Dragon) submarines, and two former US World War II-era submarines that are used only for training.
A report produced earlier this month by Asian Security Affairs specialist Shirley Kan for the US Congressional Research Service said: "The People's Liberation Army has continued to build up its forces that threaten Taiwan, raising the question of whether the military balance already has shifted to favour China."
If Mr Ma's Kuomintang party negotiates a withdrawal of the missiles targeting Taiwan, says the report, Taiwan's own "military deployments and missile programs could be subject to China's demands".
PS:How German engines are aboard a Chinese sub is intriguing.It indicates China's dexterity and ingenuity in foraging for suitable technology and we must keep in mind inevitable transfers to Pak.
Here are a couple of artices.
The first one is on the PLAAFs new AAMs
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/ ... detail.asp
The second one is on thier military spaceplane and hypersonics program.
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/ ... detail.asp
The first one is on the PLAAFs new AAMs
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/ ... detail.asp
The second one is on thier military spaceplane and hypersonics program.
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/ ... detail.asp
They have a whole bunch of Y-8 based Electronic Warfare Aircraft programs.soutikghosh wrote:CHINA'S KJ-800 ELINT AIRCRAFT
http://bp0.blogger.com/_3wZSwFvZzqM/SBF ... /KZ800.jpg
The development programme, known as “Gaoxin Projectâ€
China to receive lastest SAMs from Russia
By ANDREI CHANG
Published: May 02, 2008
http://www.upiasiaonline.com/Security/2 ... ssia/3682/
HONG KONG, China, Russia will deliver to China four battalions of 200-kilometer-range S-300PMU2 surface-to-air missiles this summer, the last batch in a series ordered by China. The first batch of four battalions of the same missiles was delivered in July 2007.
Starting in 1993, China received 12 battalions of S-300 SAMs, four of them S-300PMUs and eight S-300PMU1s. This means there are a total of 20 battalions of S-300 SAMs deployed in China. These missiles are expected to play a major role in China's core air defense system.
These missiles now cover the whole of the Chinese coast facing the Taiwan Strait. Positions previously covered by HQ-2 ground-to-air missiles have been upgraded to S-300 launch positions.
In the combat theater centered on the city of Fuzhou in Fujian province, Longtian Airport is armed with S-300s, which are intended to cover the whole northern section of the combat area. The S-300PMU1/2s deployed along the Taiwan Strait are right along the coastline, providing the first line of air defense for the operations of AWACS and bombers behind the front lines.
Since H-6H bombers are armed with long-range YJ-63 air-to-surface missiles, the KJ-200/2000 AWACS and H-6H/Ks outer-line protection is supported by the S-300 SAMs. These land-based SAM systems will provide effective protection against attacks from the air.
The objective of deploying S-300 SAMs at Longtian and Huian Airport is to protect the airports during a confrontation, and provide emergency landing sites for damaged combat aircraft. The mainstay third generation fighter aircraft including Su-27, J-11, Su-30 and J-10A fighters will not directly use these airport facilities due to their long flight ranges.
Originally, there was one S-300 position and one HQ-2 ground-to-air missile position at Longtian Airport. The S-300 position is composed of four launch vehicles and uses 64N6E search radar. This indicates that the ground-to-air missiles deployed at this airport are at least S-300PMU1s, because in the early phase the first batch of these missiles imported from Russia used ST-68UM (36D6) search radar produced by the Ukrainian Iskra Industrial Complex.
One battalion of the PLA Air Force's S-300PMU1 missiles normally uses four launch vehicles. The HQ-2 ground-to-air missile launch positions originally deployed at Longtian Airport are probably being rebuilt at the present time. A standard HQ-2 launch position usually has six launch sites, but currently the position has a layout of four launch sites and is equipped with a new warehouse. This is very likely prepared for the deployment of the S-300s. Nonetheless, the latest Google Earth satellite images show that S-300 missiles have not yet taken up this position.
Huian Airport is located in the north-central section of the Fujian coast directly facing the Taiwan Strait, and S-300s are also deployed at this airport. Besides, S-300 SAM positions have also been built in the Xindian area close to the city of Xiamen, where HQ-2 SAM positions have been upgraded to S-300 positions.
The HQ-2 positions in the Jiaomei area have also been rebuilt into S-300 positions. An analysis of images of the two positions released by Google Earth indicates that S-300 missiles have not yet been deployed here, however. HQ-2 SAMs were originally deployed at Zhangzhou Airport. The structure of the position currently being rebuilt is rather blurry. It is worth watching whether S-300 SAMs will be deployed here in the future.
In sum, there are five S-300 positions and two HQ-2 positions along the Taiwan Strait, the latter two located at Zhangzhou and Shantou Airports, with altogether 20 S-300 launchers. The No.2 Ground-to-Air Missile Brigade is stationed in this area.
S-300 positions are also found under construction in Beijing and Qingdao. The missiles have been sighted at the Zhonghuabu position near Qingdao, indicating this is the newest S-300 position, probably intended for the deployment of the latest S-300PMU2s. The importance of Qingdao lies in that the S-300s deployed here can be used to provide protection for the PLA Navy's No.1 Nuclear Submarine Base currently under expansion.
Almost all the S-300PMU1s are concentrated around Beijing. The No. 5 Ground-to-Air Missile Division was the first air defense unit to receive the S-300 missiles. It deserves close attention whether the No. 6 Ground-to-Air Division has been equipped with, or will receive, S-300 SAMs.
A new HQ-9 ground-to-air missile position has been observed at Fangezhuang, indicating that at least two battalions of HQ-9s are now under operational deployment. The first HQ-9 launch position was discovered at Jiuquan. Different from the S-300 position, the HQ-9 position is rectangular in shape, with eight launch sites. This means that one launch battalion is composed of eight launch vehicles, and the fire control radar is placed in the middle of the rectangular-shaped launch position.
At the outer rim of the launch position, circular roads connect the launch sites to enhance mobility and logistic efficiency. The deployment of HQ-9s in Beijing means that China's air defense capability has improved greatly, with a network that provides multiple-system, long-range and deep air defense. However, observers outside China have little knowledge of the technical parameters of the HQ-9. At least six S-300 SAM positions have been noticed around the Beijing region.
Other S-300 positions have been identified in Dalian and Lushun. This region is given special attention as it occupies a strategically important location; any aerial attacks upon Beijing launched by U.S. forces based on the Korean peninsula would have to go through this region.
Another major city currently protected by S-300 SAMs is of course Shanghai, where the No. 3 Ground-to-Air Missile Brigade is stationed. The Nichung and Minhang S-300 positions to the south of Shanghai are very close to the shore, and are obviously intended to deal with air attacks on Shanghai by Taiwan's tactical air force units in the event of a confrontation.
The 64N6E search radar used by S-300 SAM systems has also been sighted in the area close to Gongjialu, which very likely transmits aerial information data to other S-300 positions deployed in the neighboring area. One S-300 position is found at Liuhe to the north of Shanghai. The whole Shanghai area seems to be under the protection of four S-300 SAM positions.
The layout of the above missile positions reveals to some extent the tactical intentions of the PLA Air Force, that is, to give priority protection to Beijing and the coastal region with its S-300 SAMs. In particular, the air defense network along the coastal region including the Taiwan Strait and Shanghai has been greatly reinforced. A total of 18 S-300 SAM positions have been identified.
After receiving the new batch of four sets of S-300PMU2 missiles this year, and with the deployment of the HQ-9s, it deserves close observation whether China will continue to purchase new S-300 serial SAMs from Russia.
By ANDREI CHANG
Published: May 02, 2008
http://www.upiasiaonline.com/Security/2 ... ssia/3682/
HONG KONG, China, Russia will deliver to China four battalions of 200-kilometer-range S-300PMU2 surface-to-air missiles this summer, the last batch in a series ordered by China. The first batch of four battalions of the same missiles was delivered in July 2007.
Starting in 1993, China received 12 battalions of S-300 SAMs, four of them S-300PMUs and eight S-300PMU1s. This means there are a total of 20 battalions of S-300 SAMs deployed in China. These missiles are expected to play a major role in China's core air defense system.
These missiles now cover the whole of the Chinese coast facing the Taiwan Strait. Positions previously covered by HQ-2 ground-to-air missiles have been upgraded to S-300 launch positions.
In the combat theater centered on the city of Fuzhou in Fujian province, Longtian Airport is armed with S-300s, which are intended to cover the whole northern section of the combat area. The S-300PMU1/2s deployed along the Taiwan Strait are right along the coastline, providing the first line of air defense for the operations of AWACS and bombers behind the front lines.
Since H-6H bombers are armed with long-range YJ-63 air-to-surface missiles, the KJ-200/2000 AWACS and H-6H/Ks outer-line protection is supported by the S-300 SAMs. These land-based SAM systems will provide effective protection against attacks from the air.
The objective of deploying S-300 SAMs at Longtian and Huian Airport is to protect the airports during a confrontation, and provide emergency landing sites for damaged combat aircraft. The mainstay third generation fighter aircraft including Su-27, J-11, Su-30 and J-10A fighters will not directly use these airport facilities due to their long flight ranges.
Originally, there was one S-300 position and one HQ-2 ground-to-air missile position at Longtian Airport. The S-300 position is composed of four launch vehicles and uses 64N6E search radar. This indicates that the ground-to-air missiles deployed at this airport are at least S-300PMU1s, because in the early phase the first batch of these missiles imported from Russia used ST-68UM (36D6) search radar produced by the Ukrainian Iskra Industrial Complex.
One battalion of the PLA Air Force's S-300PMU1 missiles normally uses four launch vehicles. The HQ-2 ground-to-air missile launch positions originally deployed at Longtian Airport are probably being rebuilt at the present time. A standard HQ-2 launch position usually has six launch sites, but currently the position has a layout of four launch sites and is equipped with a new warehouse. This is very likely prepared for the deployment of the S-300s. Nonetheless, the latest Google Earth satellite images show that S-300 missiles have not yet taken up this position.
Huian Airport is located in the north-central section of the Fujian coast directly facing the Taiwan Strait, and S-300s are also deployed at this airport. Besides, S-300 SAM positions have also been built in the Xindian area close to the city of Xiamen, where HQ-2 SAM positions have been upgraded to S-300 positions.
The HQ-2 positions in the Jiaomei area have also been rebuilt into S-300 positions. An analysis of images of the two positions released by Google Earth indicates that S-300 missiles have not yet been deployed here, however. HQ-2 SAMs were originally deployed at Zhangzhou Airport. The structure of the position currently being rebuilt is rather blurry. It is worth watching whether S-300 SAMs will be deployed here in the future.
In sum, there are five S-300 positions and two HQ-2 positions along the Taiwan Strait, the latter two located at Zhangzhou and Shantou Airports, with altogether 20 S-300 launchers. The No.2 Ground-to-Air Missile Brigade is stationed in this area.
S-300 positions are also found under construction in Beijing and Qingdao. The missiles have been sighted at the Zhonghuabu position near Qingdao, indicating this is the newest S-300 position, probably intended for the deployment of the latest S-300PMU2s. The importance of Qingdao lies in that the S-300s deployed here can be used to provide protection for the PLA Navy's No.1 Nuclear Submarine Base currently under expansion.
Almost all the S-300PMU1s are concentrated around Beijing. The No. 5 Ground-to-Air Missile Division was the first air defense unit to receive the S-300 missiles. It deserves close attention whether the No. 6 Ground-to-Air Division has been equipped with, or will receive, S-300 SAMs.
A new HQ-9 ground-to-air missile position has been observed at Fangezhuang, indicating that at least two battalions of HQ-9s are now under operational deployment. The first HQ-9 launch position was discovered at Jiuquan. Different from the S-300 position, the HQ-9 position is rectangular in shape, with eight launch sites. This means that one launch battalion is composed of eight launch vehicles, and the fire control radar is placed in the middle of the rectangular-shaped launch position.
At the outer rim of the launch position, circular roads connect the launch sites to enhance mobility and logistic efficiency. The deployment of HQ-9s in Beijing means that China's air defense capability has improved greatly, with a network that provides multiple-system, long-range and deep air defense. However, observers outside China have little knowledge of the technical parameters of the HQ-9. At least six S-300 SAM positions have been noticed around the Beijing region.
Other S-300 positions have been identified in Dalian and Lushun. This region is given special attention as it occupies a strategically important location; any aerial attacks upon Beijing launched by U.S. forces based on the Korean peninsula would have to go through this region.
Another major city currently protected by S-300 SAMs is of course Shanghai, where the No. 3 Ground-to-Air Missile Brigade is stationed. The Nichung and Minhang S-300 positions to the south of Shanghai are very close to the shore, and are obviously intended to deal with air attacks on Shanghai by Taiwan's tactical air force units in the event of a confrontation.
The 64N6E search radar used by S-300 SAM systems has also been sighted in the area close to Gongjialu, which very likely transmits aerial information data to other S-300 positions deployed in the neighboring area. One S-300 position is found at Liuhe to the north of Shanghai. The whole Shanghai area seems to be under the protection of four S-300 SAM positions.
The layout of the above missile positions reveals to some extent the tactical intentions of the PLA Air Force, that is, to give priority protection to Beijing and the coastal region with its S-300 SAMs. In particular, the air defense network along the coastal region including the Taiwan Strait and Shanghai has been greatly reinforced. A total of 18 S-300 SAM positions have been identified.
After receiving the new batch of four sets of S-300PMU2 missiles this year, and with the deployment of the HQ-9s, it deserves close observation whether China will continue to purchase new S-300 serial SAMs from Russia.