China Military Watch

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Dec 2010 00:17

Samay wrote: Amazing love for the chinese. If it was about pakis and abusing them , it would have been allowed, there's a dedicated thread for that, but no-no for chinese .! Sometimes mods too behave like politicians ,not angering mandarins

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 Dec 2010 05:58

samay, when your parents taught you not to swear it had nothing to do with any affinity for creatures whose names were used in those swearwords. think about it.

Ashutosh got it right.

Dharma · Post by **Dharma** » 20 Dec 2010 06:24

@^^^From an optimist POV, I think this maybe the so called chinese free media(party mouthpiece) finally acknowledging that part of tibet is not a integral part of china and that they are occupying it illegally by declaring the length of the shared border less than what it is..This must be seen as a great development with regards to resolving the china tibet dispute..or they probably screwed up the figures between miles and kilometers..Either way lets not give them too much attention than they deserve..

arnabh · Post by **arnabh** » 20 Dec 2010 08:02

rohitvats wrote:
arnabh wrote:well...maybe it is permeating fear of the chinese indians have.....the chinese can do the worst thing possible of arming pak with nuclear missiles against india but indians cannot even twist the 'chinese' spelling to vent frustration....the mentality of being slaves under british is strong indeed
Wow!!!.....great insight, my dear friend. Now what other deep and hidden meanings did you pick up about us lesser mortals posting on here during your time spent on BRF?

The most obvious (not hidden) I gather from your post is a definite lack self esteem, the lesser mortal that you have openly declared you are....i have little doubt about you having inferiority complex issues vis-a-vis your esteemed chinese....

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 20 Dec 2010 08:37

Lisa wrote: Deterrence has little to do with bravado. It is a policy based on madness.

Yes, but it's a very calculated madness ... everything has to be gamed out and pre-planned. There is no time for philosophical discussions once hostilities start.

It should have simply started staplelying ALL Indian visas to ALL Chinese
passports. Let them bring up the complaint. Simple answer, we thought
this was new Chinese protocol. You stop, we stop. Your choice.

Hmm ... no need to get angry. Perhaps it would be better to put export duties on Indian raw material exports to China. And duties on imports competing with Indian industries.

I would say that this behavior from the Chinese is actually good thing .... if our government is willing to draw the right lessons, and take appropriate defensive steps.

aditp · Post by **aditp** » 20 Dec 2010 17:37

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 21 Dec 2010 13:30

Documents Confirm China's Aircraft Carrier Plans

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 21 Dec 2010 13:42

Kailash wrote:Documents Confirm China's Aircraft Carrier Plans

Posted and discussed earlier mate..

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 21 Dec 2010 19:14

whilst many western commentators have focused on the trade agreements, a few are pointing out that India has stuck an ungli into the dragon's musharraff during this visit and spun it around a bit - which is something that many around the world are pleased with
that confidence may come as a surprise to many gentle rakshaks

like i said elsewhere, dragon-don then needed to visit pak-chameli's dance bar to lick his wounds before heading home

also, just spotted on india defence that indian and mongolian troops were conducting training exercises whilst the emperor was in town

nice

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 23 Dec 2010 07:23

J-20, China's "5th gen Aircraft". http://twitpic.com/3ijrf3/full

Believe it at your risk.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 23 Dec 2010 09:19

Dmurphy wrote:J-20, China's "5th gen Aircraft". http://twitpic.com/3ijrf3/full

Believe it at your risk.

Rumors swirling that this is the one. Apparently it was leaked by the same guy who leaked the first J-10B photos. Hard to see anything though, the vertical stabilizers look kinda like F-117's, but not nearly as swept back. The J-20 is said to have had its first taxi trial a few weeks ago, and that it had its first high speed taxi trial yesterday or so.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Dec 2010 09:41

If the news is true and J-20 pics are not PS , then the chinese would have started serious work on this project almost a decade back , would be interesting to see the planform of J-20.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 23 Dec 2010 12:43

Austin wrote:If the news is true and J-20 pics are not PS , then the chinese would have started serious work on this project almost a decade back , would be interesting to see the planform of J-20.

According to the big shrimps on Chinese boards, it looks like the F-22 from the front and the front-side, it looks like the F-23 from the middle side, and it looks like the F-117 from the back. Overall it looks closer to the F-23. I guess we'll just have to wait for clearer pics and judge for ourselves though!

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 23 Dec 2010 13:47

i would expect Chinese plans for a F-22 class fighter to be fairly well advanced
we shouldn't worry about how they got there, but that they will get there

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Dec 2010 13:56

YF-23 was certainly one of the best looking fighter , sad it lost out to YF-22 for some funny reason.

There was good amount of time for any one interested in developing a 5th gen fighter to study the virtue of YF-23 design , would be good to see black widow remains alive in some form.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 24 Dec 2010 06:27

China may be Ready to Launch its First Aircraft Carrier in 2011 : Sources

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 24 Dec 2010 07:31

Lalmohan wrote:i would expect Chinese plans for a F-22 class fighter to be fairly well advanced
we shouldn't worry about how they got there, but that they will get there

I have yet to see any credible proof that they have a real capability to build any real 4th generation aircraft, forget an F-22. In every measure of comparison, the J10B is inferior to even the Su-27, forget the Su-30's. Is this thing to fly on Jinn engines, or is Russia secretly arming the PRC or is PRC able to keep all things, so well hidden from the prying eyes of the world.

Let us take this Chinese aircraft carrier story, what have we seen so far? Do we know anything, in terms of the Varyag's propulsion, armaments and protection, radars, air wing composition...will not even talk about its battle group and operation plans and preparedness.

My general sense of things is China is in a "worse" position in terms of indigenous advanced military technology compared to India. The one area that they do excel is in reverse engineering old soviet technology and then producing them in numbers. It is a shame really, given the size of their economy and the amount of money being spent on their military modernization, estimated to be about $150 billion per year. There is serious rot in the Chinese system, similar to the USSR and our Paki brothers.

Closed societies have a way, usually it involves deceit and corruption and they devise ways to hide their rot, till it crumples. So, take all "reports" based on "analysts" opinion with a pinch of salt.

Follow their actions, the PLAAF wants more Su-30's and Su-35's.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 24 Dec 2010 10:10

ShauryaT wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:i would expect Chinese plans for a F-22 class fighter to be fairly well advanced
we shouldn't worry about how they got there, but that they will get there
I have yet to see any credible proof that they have a real capability to build any real 4th generation aircraft, forget an F-22. In every measure of comparison, the J10B is inferior to even the Su-27, forget the Su-30's. Is this thing to fly on Jinn engines, or is Russia secretly arming the PRC or is PRC able to keep all things, so well hidden from the prying eyes of the world.

Let us take this Chinese aircraft carrier story, what have we seen so far? Do we know anything, in terms of the Varyag's propulsion, armaments and protection, radars, air wing composition...will not even talk about its battle group and operation plans and preparedness.

My general sense of things is China is in a "worse" position in terms of indigenous advanced military technology compared to India. The one area that they do excel is in reverse engineering old soviet technology and then producing them in numbers. It is a shame really, given the size of their economy and the amount of money being spent on their military modernization, estimated to be about $150 billion per year. There is serious rot in the Chinese system, similar to the USSR and our Paki brothers.

Closed societies have a way, usually it involves deceit and corruption and they devise ways to hide their rot, till it crumples. So, take all "reports" based on "analysts" opinion with a pinch of salt.

Follow their actions, the PLAAF wants more Su-30's and Su-35's.

When it comes to PLA-watching, you need to ask yourself two questions. One is what constitutes as "credible proof," and, more importantly, will you EVER get that credible proof. For example, some BRFites won't trust any statement coming from inside of China, and since independent verification is impossible, they can always be right no matter what they believe, based on their own criteria.

Now, you seem to be slightly more enlightened than that and you seem to at least believe in Chinese actions, so we can analyze those actions. First, China hasn't ordered Su-30's in many years and has shown no intentions of ordering more, so we can assume that China is capable of indigenously producing aircrafts of similar calibers. Next, while the Russians seem to be pretty eager to sell Su-35's, there has been zero indication that China wants any, so it seems safe to assume that China can now or will soon be able to produce something similar.

Now, the engines. The WS-10 has gone through many hurdles. The thing was supposed to be ready around 2005ish, but it appears to be ready only recently. Why do I think it's ready now? Again, by looking at China's actions. One, when the WS-10 wasn't ready on time, China ordered additional AL-31's. This indicates that they aren't willing to put just any crappy not-yet-ready engine into their planes. However, there hasn't been additional AL-31 orders in years, and the existing stocks have rapidly dried up, this must mean that they're fairly confident in the progress of the WS-10. A few months ago, a financial report stated that orders for WS-10 parts have gone through the roof, indicating that it is undergoing mass production. About a month ago, pictures of numerous J-11's equipped with WS-10's surfaced, serving as yet another proof that the engine is undergoing mass production. Since we've established that they aren't willing to put just any engine into their planes, that must mean that the engine is ready.

As for the J-10B vs. Su-27 comparison, not sure where you get your info. They're aircrafts of different classes, so comparisons aren't very apt in the first place. As far as air superiority goes, trustworthy sources from the PLA indicate that even the J-10A is far superior, so I suppose it's logical to assume that the J-10B is even more so. Then again, we're back to the "credible proof" thing. You'll never get credible proof of the J-10 vs. Su-27 comparison, not in any way, so you're certainly free to believe what you want.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 24 Dec 2010 10:48

PLAAF Awacs & AEW:

http://ifile.it/3uxvg4t/PLAAF%20AWACS%2 ... %20AEW.zip

ACM December 2010.

chand · Post by **chand** » 24 Dec 2010 11:39

ShauryaT wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:i would expect Chinese plans for a F-22 class fighter to be fairly well advanced
we shouldn't worry about how they got there, but that they will get there
I have yet to see any credible proof that they have a real capability to build any real 4th generation aircraft, forget an F-22. In every measure of comparison, the J10B is inferior to even the Su-27, forget the Su-30's. Is this thing to fly on Jinn engines, or is Russia secretly arming the PRC or is PRC able to keep all things, so well hidden from the prying eyes of the world.

Let us take this Chinese aircraft carrier story, what have we seen so far? Do we know anything, in terms of the Varyag's propulsion, armaments and protection, radars, air wing composition...will not even talk about its battle group and operation plans and preparedness.

My general sense of things is China is in a "worse" position in terms of indigenous advanced military technology compared to India. The one area that they do excel is in reverse engineering old soviet technology and then producing them in numbers. It is a shame really, given the size of their economy and the amount of money being spent on their military modernization, estimated to be about $150 billion per year. There is serious rot in the Chinese system, similar to the USSR and our Paki brothers.

Closed societies have a way, usually it involves deceit and corruption and they devise ways to hide their rot, till it crumples. So, take all "reports" based on "analysts" opinion with a pinch of salt.

Follow their actions, the PLAAF wants mvre Su-30's and Su-35's.

Man, you've got a lot of ideas just by guessing without any "credible proof" as well. So, just cut it.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 24 Dec 2010 12:30

Some updates:

First, here's an enhanced photo of the blurry J-20 pic:

According to witnesses, and there were plenty though technically they weren't allowed to take photos(someone I suppose surreptitiously snuck in a couple of blurry ones), this CG looks the closest shape-wise at least from the side:

An unsmeared version of the below pic was released on Chinese message boards, but they were quickly taken down by censors:

A couple of things from the 3rd pic. First, the red star with the words "August 1st" on the vertical stabilizers, plus the dark color of the aircraft as opposed to the normal yellow primer used on prototypes, corroborate with reports from ~3 weeks ago made by very reliable Chinese posters. This adds more legitimacy to the picture. Second, the location of the star seems to indicate that the vertical stabilizers do not have rudders, which means that it's all-moving and that the whole stabilizer is a control surface(like the PAK-FA and the YF-23).

Changing gears now...here's the latest photo of the Varyag:

Steam coming out of the main stack, probably from the main steam engine. The side looks repainted as well. The ship looks like it's gonna be ready for launch in a few months.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Dec 2010 12:56

I have my reservations on selective leaks on Chinese FGFA , these so called selective leaks and what the aircraft looks like could be just plain simple PS.

I remember we went through same PS before PAK-FA was officially reveled and none turned out to be true till last day.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 24 Dec 2010 13:08

Programs shrouded in secrecy results in even great strides being made, to be questioned. Some will make these products to be from the super dragon that breathes fire, others will question if the Dragon has any legs to stand on its own. Going by past history of another bear that was supposed to be super duper strong, stories we grew up on, I will err on caution.

So, results is all one can go by. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Your posts are as credible as any of the recent glut of reports on this ability of the dragon to breath fire. So, fire away more details, on why you believe the various sub systems of a J10B, which are supposed to have been indigenously designed perform to certain levels or the Varyag has "engines" fitted.

I do not understand much of the technologies in these toys, what I do understand is when products become capabilities that a military can use. So, am willing to be educated but each reader here will make up their own mind based on their own lens of looking at things.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 24 Dec 2010 13:11

Why is the J20? picture in black and white?

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 24 Dec 2010 13:19

Austin wrote:I have my reservations on selective leaks on Chinese FGFA , these so called selective leaks and what the aircraft looks like could be just plain simple PS.

I remember we went through same PS before PAK-FA was officially reveled and none turned out to be true till last day.

I understand your skepticism, but I'm 99% certain that this is the real deal. There are simply way too many indications that this is real, way too many corroborating sources. ALL the credible, long-time PLA observers indicate that this one's real, and for good reasons. One, consider the source of the pics. It was posted by the same guy who posted the first blurry J-10B photos, which were ridiculed by many until clearer pics showed up a few days later. Two, there are many eyewitnesses of the plane. CAC isn't hidden in a remote location, so people can stand by the fence and watch it(though they're not allowed to take pics. However, as noted before, someone always gets a hidden shot off.), and they indicate that this is the plane. Three, there are some posters with actual inside knowledge, and they have also stood by these pics. Four, these pics look exactly like how people who've observed the earlier, first taxi trial described the plane to be. Lastly, the clearer leaked photos were quickly censored, which is also a good indication that this is the real deal.

Any one of these sources can be reasonably doubted, but when they all point toward the same thing, it becomes hard to be skeptical.

wrdos · Post by **wrdos** » 24 Dec 2010 13:23

ShauryaT Ji,

You thought J10B is poorer than Su27?

Sir, Su27 was imported and then produced in China from 1992. Around 2003, the Chinese decided to give up its production since they thought the plane "outdated".

J10B is a most recent variant of J10 that went into service in 2004. Most people believe that J10B still need tests of 1~2 years to go to service, i.e. as late as in 2011 or 2012.

And you said J10B is poorer than Su27.

OK, just believe what you want to.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 24 Dec 2010 13:29

Austin wrote:I have my reservations on selective leaks on Chinese FGFA , these so called selective leaks and what the aircraft looks like could be just plain simple PS.

I remember we went through same PS before PAK-FA was officially reveled and none turned out to be true till last day.

It is just simple PS. And for that matter, not very expertly done too.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Dec 2010 13:33

DavidD wrote:Any one of these sources can be reasonably doubted, but when they all point toward the same thing, it becomes hard to be skeptical.

David , I understand your reason to be optimist and believe this is a real deal , but I have my reservation on this if Chinese FGFA is a real deal and its no secret they would revel it , if its a secret they wont allow any fence sitters watch it but no photos please kind of thing.

So lets wait till they declassify the real thing and we can all see for real and match it with what "real source" had put up.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 24 Dec 2010 13:33

ShauryaT wrote:Programs shrouded in secrecy results in even great strides being made, to be questioned. Some will make these products to be from the super dragon that breathes fire, others will question if the Dragon has any legs to stand on its own. Going by past history of another bear that was supposed to be super duper strong, stories we grew up on, I will err on caution.

So, results is all one can go by. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Your posts are as credible as any of the recent glut of reports on this ability of the dragon to breath fire. So, fire away more details, on why you believe the various sub systems of a J10B, which are supposed to have been indigenously designed perform to certain levels or the Varyag has "engines" fitted.

I do not understand much of the technologies in these toys, what I do understand is when products become capabilities that a military can use. So, am willing to be educated but each reader here will make up their own mind based on their own lens of looking at things.

I can't answer the question re: the J-10B, too little is definitely known about it. It's supposed to have an AESA radar, it definitely has DSI, it definitely has IRST, and it's supposed to be fitted with the WS-10A soon. But as you can see, there's a lot of "supposed" in there.

As for the Varyag, the smoke coming out of the main stack is a pretty good indication that the engine is up and running. It could, of course, just be the auxillary power plant, but it really makes no sense to fit it with weapons systems and sensors if it doesn't even have the main engines in yet. Additionally, since I'm no expert on carriers, I take a lot of info from people who are more knowledgeable. There's a regular poster on sinodefence who's served for over a decade on multiple U.S. carriers, and both he and some other credible posters believe that the smoke coming out of the main stack and the machine-boiler room(lower on the carrier) indicate that the main engines are up and running.

ShauryaT wrote:Why is the J20? picture in black and white?s.

It's not, the enhanced images are black and white so they're easier to see. The pictures ARE pretty blurry though, but a knowledgeable poster on sinodefence explained it as such:

70092 wrote:
As for the blur-pictures, it is quite understandable: CAC is located somewhere near Chengdu city, and many military fans like to travel around the factory's airport everyday.

The security guards there get used to them, as long as you are Chinese nationals, you can watch the fighters there, but in theory you CANNOT take pictures.

So you cannot go there and bring a huge camre and take pictures there, they will confiscate them and may even arrest you.

According to the eye witness there, on 22/Dec, the securtiy guards are joined with them to watch the fighters, and therefore the security guards are quite near to them.

Thus any early-leaks are most likely taken by phone-camre and taken in a sneaky way to avoid the attentioin of the security guards there, hence the poor image quality.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2010 13:36

The is clearly Sunless Tzutiyapanti at work here - what an idiotic non photograph.

It is typical of the Chinese to be less than up front with regard to what is going on. I have on my hard disk photos of the J-10 from 2001 - when it was a complete mystery. I have not found earlier J-10 photos (on my HDD) which were similar to this blurry photo - but the ones I do have are similarly shrouded in mystery.

There is a philosophical consequence attached to what is visible and what is not visible. A woman who does not want to expose her breasts keeps them covered up. Another woman allows her breasts to be seen when she wants them seen. There is a third category of woman who will not openly show her breasts but will give a tantalizing glimpse of the desirable goods that lie partially hidden by occasional, incomplete exposures.

The motivation of all 3 women is different. The US kept the F-117 under wraps until they wanted it seen. India has made no secret of the ADS and nuclear sub program but has kept it under strict wraps. The lesson is that even in relatively open societies things that need to be kept hidden are kept hidden.

Why then should the Chinese - a completely policed and cagey society want to show bits of cleavage and nipple behind a diaphanous veil? Either show it or hide it. If you are doing in-between stuff you are sending a signal that could be akin to the Paki ROFLcopter. It is a boast "Ah we have got blahblah blah" but there is no confidence to be open about that blahblahblah

So please stop these stories about the Chinese aircraft carrier and 5th gen aircraft. Every man and his uncle "have a program". Let us see it out in the open. The visible performance of the oh so secret J-10 is not a lot to write home about.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 24 Dec 2010 13:40

Austin wrote:
DavidD wrote:Any one of these sources can be reasonably doubted, but when they all point toward the same thing, it becomes hard to be skeptical.
David , I understand your reason to be optimist and believe this is a real deal , but I have my reservation on this if Chinese FGFA is a real deal and its no secret they would revel it , if its a secret they wont allow any fence sitters watch it but no photos please kind of thing.

So lets wait till they declassify the real thing and we can all see for real and match it with what "real source" had put up.

That's fine my man, I understand exactly where you're coming from. I was pretty skeptical about the first J-10B pics as well, and I had the same line of reasoning as you did. It sounds perfectly logical, and really, I still don't know why it didn't work the last time I applied it.

I mean, why allow people to watch it if it's secret, and why would you censor it if it's not? Makes no sense to me either!

If it's like the J-10B though, we should see clearer pics very soon!

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 24 Dec 2010 13:44

Sounds like you don't like teases shiv

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 24 Dec 2010 13:45

chand wrote: Man, you've got a lot of ideas just by guessing without any "credible proof" as well. So, just cut it.

chand ji: "credibility" comes from either demonstrated ability or from people/institutions who you can trust that one has the claimed abilities.

In PRC's case the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Look at their deployed systems, go beyond the surface and ask hard questions, like what is the tracking range of their MMR or AESA, how many targets can it engage, what are the capabilities of the ECM, how does this radar work with the PL12? What are the processors its system uses, the speed of the data links, which have a direct bearing on the sensor fusion capabilities (which will be an evolution, do not just go by the shiny LCD's!) who designed the key systems for the PL12 to work with the radar, what is its range in tail chase mode? Look at, if even its own poodles trust these systems. What are the PGM's their aircrafts will use, presuming GPS and GLONASS are off limits. Compare for yourself the various performance videos posted and make your own call on the agility of the aircrafts, fitted with Russian engines.

I am skeptical of Indian programs as well, but for different reasons. But there is one thing common between India and China in these respects. Both are playing catch up to the western led defense technologies, deemed to be important for modern wars. I am generally skeptical of the ability to leap frog generations, except for maybe very limited areas. Answer a basic question, why does one hide to such a degree that no information can be trusted.

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 24 Dec 2010 13:54

shiv wrote:Let us see it out in the open. The visible performance of the oh so secret J-10 is not a lot to write home about.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... as-j1.html

As for the performance of J-10, here is an evaluation from a professional dated back to 2008.

Vladimir Karnozov, a Moscow-based aerospace journalist, visited the Zhuhai air show this week, and files this sobering report about the new J-10 fighter.

ZHUHAI -- There is an old anecdote. The optimists around the world learn English. The pessimists, Chinese. But down-to-earth study the Kalashnikov assault rifle.
I think it is time for the down-to-earth crowd to study their rifles using Chinese manuals!
Two years ago every important source told me, let's wait two years and see what comes of China's new J-10 fighter.
Now everyone I trust says the Chinese pulled it off, and the J-10 has proven a tremendously successful program.
I watched how the J-10 flew over Zhuhai, in 30 degree Celsius temperatures and high humidity.
The pilot did none of the show tricks like post-stall or tail slide or pitch-back, but turns were very tight, initial rate of turn very high. It was clear there is a lot of potential in this airplane to achieve the same maneuvers more quickly.
The pilot rarely used afterburner and the degrees of canard deflection were small. Still, the airplane flew very well. I reckon it will beat F-16C or MiG-29/SMT easily.

Chinese have already completed over 100 J-10s and they have bought more Russian engines for next series.
I do not think they would buy more Flankers since the J-10 is as good as the Flanker, to say the least.
Chinese military said "no" to local engine makers and "no" to local makers of some key systems, instead buying these critical items directly from Russia.
As for AWACS support, it is present with 4 A-50 equipped with KJ-2000 radars and it seems the Chinese have bought a special version of the Ka-31, although very much different from the Indian navy version. Apparently with a new radar.
If proper tactics are used, the PLAAF can beat Taiwanese opponents in conventional air war. Unless the US makes it into a full scale world-for-world battle, the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party does have a chance.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 24 Dec 2010 14:03

ShauryaT wrote:
chand wrote: Man, you've got a lot of ideas just by guessing without any "credible proof" as well. So, just cut it.
chand ji: "credibility" comes from either demonstrated ability or from people/institutions who you can trust that one has the claimed abilities.

In PRC's case the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Look at their deployed systems, go beyond the surface and ask hard questions, like what is the tracking range of their MMR or AESA, how many targets can it engage, what are the capabilities of the ECM, how does this radar work with the PL12? What are the processors its system uses, the speed of the data links, which have a direct bearing on the sensor fusion capabilities (which will be an evolution, do not just go by the shiny LCD's!) who designed the key systems for the PL12 to work with the radar, what is its range in tail chase mode? Look at, if even its own poodles trust these systems. What are the PGM's their aircrafts will use, presuming GPS and GLONASS are off limits. Compare for yourself the various performance videos posted and make your own call on the agility of the aircrafts, fitted with Russian engines.

I am skeptical of Indian programs as well, but for different reasons. But there is one thing common between India and China in these respects. Both are playing catch up to the western led defense technologies, deemed to be important for modern wars. I am generally skeptical of the ability to leap frog generations, except for maybe very limited areas. Answer a basic question, why does one hide to such a degree that no information can be trusted.

A lot of that information isn't hidden actually, they're just written in Chinese. Also, much of what you asked about are also regarding export systems, so I'm pretty sure they're not hidden either. What's more, some of the detailed things you asked for aren't released to the public by ANY nation's military, not just China's. But when you get down to it, if you aren't gonna trust Chinese sources anyway then what does it matter if they hide it or not? Like you said before, it's best to just study the actions of the PLA, rather than words from China which you don't trust or words from the outside which aren't based on any sort of inside knowledge.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 24 Dec 2010 14:12

wrdos wrote:
You thought J10B is poorer than Su27?

Sir, Su27 was imported and then produced in China from 1992. Around 2003, the Chinese decided to give up its production since they thought the plane "outdated".

J10B is a most recent variant of J10 that went into service in 2004. Most people believe that J10B still need tests of 1~2 years to go to service, i.e. as late as in 2011 or 2012.

And you said J10B is poorer than Su27.

OK, just believe what you want to.

I guess, we have seen the J10B's maturity of its FBW, its low speed characteristics, its AoA, its radar and BVR and WVR capabilities, the speed, range, empty weights and full loads it can carry to come to a certain conclusion.

Ofcourse, the Su 27 has proven itself and its faults and evolution by way of the Su30 and Su35 are there for us to see.

So, how does the J10, single engined, probably with lower speeds, probably with no known BVR capabilities, an inferior radar, lower capacities to carry weapons and an inferior support system by way of the capabilities of the AWACS it has, compete with a Su 27? Can it become better, sure but is it, is another question.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2010 14:13

ashi wrote:
shiv wrote:Let us see it out in the open. The visible performance of the oh so secret J-10 is not a lot to write home about.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... as-j1.html

As for the performance of J-10, here is an evaluation from a professional dated back to 2008.

Vladimir Karnozov, a Moscow-based aerospace journalist, visited the Zhuhai air show this week, and files this sobering report about the new J-10 fighter.

Sorry Sir. I am also an "aviation journalist" who is as well known as Karnozov and I have my own views, a critical eye for aerospace claims and a state of the art BS meter.

"Turn rate" and "climb rate" etc look amazing in isolation but they need to be actually timed, or at the very least compared with something else. In the absence of that it is hot air.

I am not trying to make the Chinese lose face - but losing face and saving face are a different issue from honesty. What engine does the J-10 use is an old and fundamental question. Of course of course the WS-10 will come - as it has been coming

From Zhuhai 2010
http://www.oananews.org/view.php?id=142599

November 17, 2010
China to order new batches of aircraft engines in RF.

ZHUHAI (China), November 16 (Itar-Tass) -- China shows a stable demand for Russian engines for fighters and intends to continue their purchases, director for the foreign policy activity of the Moscow machine-building production enterprise "Salyut" Igor Mulishkin told ITAR-TASS at the air show which opened here on Tuesday. "Now we are finishing the fulfilment of a regular contract to supply 122 engines to China. On the sidelines of Rosoboronexport, talks on the purchase of new batches of engines are underway," Mulishkin said. He specified that the point at issue is the supply of AL-31F engines for Su-27 and Su-30 aircraft and AL-31FN engines for new Chinese fighters J-10 (Jian-10).

According to Mulishkin, China's demand for these engines is not slackening, but just growing. "Cooperation of our enterprise with China is constantly developing. We consider the possibility of equipping aircraft of Chinese make with engines of increased power and resource," he added.

Mulishkin also pointed to successful cooperation with the Chinese corporation Limin in supplies of engine spare parts.

Why is there so much bullshitting about the WS 10? Who is to say that there is not a whole lot more bullshiiting that is going on? These questions are very easy to answer. Just use the same CPC morons who publish blurry pictures to put up hi-res videos. Send the J-10 to the whore Pakistan's air base and conduct a joint exercise and allow the whore's pilots to comment on the exercise. It's not difficult - but China does not have the guts to do that. Yet.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Dec 2010 14:23

DavidD wrote:That's fine my man, I understand exactly where you're coming from. I was pretty skeptical about the first J-10B pics as well, and I had the same line of reasoning as you did. It sounds perfectly logical, and really

The problem with Chinese FGFA is there are too many PS out there claiming this is the real thing , If the Chinese are half as good as the Russians they would hide the real prototype and revel when they think its the right time.

All i can see is some faint images , speculative tail that one can barely make out and then there is this beautiful CGI claiming this is the real thing , Atleast Saturn had put up some CGI of PAK-FA almost 2 years before the first flight and people could go into informed speculation. { and one can now say from those CGI by Saturn it was close to real thing hiding stuff where they thought it best remain hidden }

I just wished we had such informed speculation from Chinese Aircraft maker , relying on "reliable source" and some faint images is not close to informed speculation , to be frank those images looks to me like a Flanker or Mig-25.

sarabpal.s · Post by **sarabpal.s** » 24 Dec 2010 16:34

China more believe in showoff to hide his own shortcomings. that why i am telling you if they had done it with stealth now than they would come up by now on every TV show or airshow.

I think chines are still has many gaps to fill before stealth concept actually make in road in PLA.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2010 18:02

Maybe I am ignorant. But let me try and infuse some science into the "China Military Watch". Using an analogy from medicine one can say that there is an association between HIV infection and hepatitis and the use of Heroin. All addicts don't get HIV infection or Hepatitis and all people with AIDS or HIV are not Heroin addicts, but there is a strong correlation that makes it essential to think of one when the other is discovered.

So what does this have to do with China Military Watch?

It's like this. The singe biggest causes of military aircraft attrition and loss of fleet strength is peacetime attrition. Flying accidents occur in Air Forces even if they deny that they are occurring. Denying that accidents occur is stupid. The US and India are particularly open and up front about accidents. Every accident is reported and the causes are often made public - at least to the extent that the cause is stated as "technical" or "pilot error".

The PLAAF is notoriously cagey about training and flight accidents. I have been trying to find info on that

1) here is a link from keypubs which lists PLAAF accidents (surely incomplete)
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=41945

A handful of accidents are listed from 1980 to 2004. Note 6 Su27/30 crashes listed from 2000 to 2004

2) Here is the Google cache of another article

Since the Chinese media rarely reports aircraft accidents, there is no way to verify the accuracy of the flight safety record, but this claim, also, is questionable. For example, there are credible reports that Cao Shuangming, the PLAAF commander from 1992-1994, was relieved of duty partly due to a series of aircraft accidents that took place under his command. Furthermore, since the PLAAF rarely trains using rapid aircraft turn around sorties and most engines can only be used from 100 to 300 hours before they are overhauled, the maintenance record would probably be reduced considerably during periods of sustained use, such as during a conflict.

3 More detail on the above from an article by an Indian
http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/12078/phadke.pdf

Allen mentions that, according to PLAAF Commander Liu Shunyao, “Air Force aviation
units during 1996 exceeded their annual training plan requirements by 1.8 percent and flight
safety has remained up to the world’s advanced level for 16 consecutive years.” But Allen cau-
tions (in the footnote):
One has to take comments about the PLAAF’s annual training plan and safe-
ty record with a grain of salt. For example, the PLAAF was involved in the
huge joint exercises opposite Taiwan in early 1996, which obviously increased
the planned flight training effort. Further, according to a 1996 Xinhua report,
a series of arresting cables installed at various units safely arrested more than
140 aircraft that either aborted takeoff or overshot the runway during land-
ing. This report indicates that there were numerous accidents that took place
before the arresting cables were installed. In addition, General Cao Shuang-
ming, the PLAAF’s commander from 1992–1994, was relieved of duty because
of an excess number of aircraft accidents during his time.
He also supports the estimates indicating that “the A-Class regiments, which have high-
er combat capability, now account for approximately 90–95 percent of the flight units’ com-
bat regiments.”25 But it is difficult to accept these figures at face value as the reality may be
different.
According to Xue Litai:
In the ’80s, the PLAAF did not have enough money to focus its attention on
flying training. PLAAF officers have always complained of lack of funds.
Some 10 to 15 percent of PLA budgeted funds are lost every year to corrup-
tion. In addition a large portion of the funds go toward the payment of salaries.
Even so, in recent years there has been considerable improvement in PLAAF
flying training. The PLAAF reportedly sent a sizable number of pilots with
more than 2,000 hours of flying experience to Russia for training on Su-27 air-
craft. They have also selectively increased flying training in recent years.26
The aging and difficult-to-maintain J-6 (MiG-19) fleet comprises some 1,500 combat air-
craft, or nearly 50 percent of the PLAAF, while the remaining half belongs to the reasonably
modern category. Maintaining its operational readiness must be a difficult undertaking. At
the rate of approximately 1.5 pilots per aircraft, the PLAAF would have to provide a mini-
mum of 120 to 150 flight hours annually to 4,500–5,000 of its active-duty pilots. Allowing
for those employed on staff and headquarters appointments it would mean that at least 4,000
pilots would need regular flight training. A “back-of-the-envelope” calculation would show
that to provide 150 hours of flying to 4,000 pilots at 60–70 percent rate of
serviceability/availability, the PLAAF fleet would have to fly some 285 to 333 hours per ser-
viceable aircraft per year, or 24 to 28 hours per month—a huge task by any standards. It is a
moot point if the 1,500-odd J-6 aircraft can be maintained at the 60–70 percent serviceabil-
ity level essential to generate the sortie rates for such a mammoth flying task the whole year-
round. It therefore appears that the PLAAF must usually concentrate only on the relatively
modern 50 percent of its fleet, comprising the J-8, J-7, Su-27/30, and a much smaller por-
tion of J-6 and Q-5 aircraft. Another report states, “the overwhelming majority of the flight
units’ combat regiments conducted live-ammunition targeting practice in combat environ-
ment. This type of training accounted for 45 percent of the planned annual training time.”27
This further complicates the task of assessing the real potential of the PLAAF as one would
have assumed that such live firing exercises were routine.
If all this is actually true, then the PLAAF must be maintaining a very high and nearly
unbelievable level of daily availability of its huge combat fleet; this is extremely doubtful. This
is one aspect of the PLAAF’s capability that needs more detailed data and deeper analysis. The
reason for such a long-winded analysis of the PLAAF training pattern is that without a com-
prehensive understanding of this facet of the Chinese air force, the assessment of its airpow-
er capability would be open to conjecture. Chinese rhetoric that highlights even the so-called
“successful arresting cable engagements” by the PLAAF aircraft further compounds the con-
fusion.