China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

[Austin]

Seems like big spy scandal has been reveled by top general in China where Top Diplomat and Military personal has been caught spying for US , Japan,Taiwan , UK

Chinese general discusses spies, government stays silent

Jin talked about Senior Col. Xu Junping, who once directed the American and Oceanic department of the defense ministry's foreign affairs office but defected to the United States in 2000. Jin said Xu was extremely close to China's top military brass. "What he gave the Americans was not the number of missiles we had or some other technical details, he told them about the personalities of our leaders and their decision-making habits and processes," Jin said. "These were key intelligence."

Jin said another senior colonel, Wang Qingqian, was caught spying for Japan while serving as a military liaison officer at the Chinese embassy in Tokyo. Wang installed bugs in the offices of the ambassador and the military attaché, Jin said, and opened embassy windows periodically to allow Japanese remote-surveillance equipment to peek inside.

The biggest scandal in Jin's presentation was a civilian case involving a former senior diplomat who was later found to be providing intelligence to a foreign country where he was once assigned."Looking around the world, where else could you find a country's ambassador spying for another country?" Jin asked aloud. "Only in our country."

Jin said China's top leader was jolted into action, ordering a thorough inspection of the entire ruling elite.

"The (Communist Party) Secretary-General said we would spare no one in this investigation," Jin said.

Other cases Jin mentioned included a senior military officer accused of selling intelligence after being passed over for a promotion; a high-level official executed for long-time spying for Taiwan; another official caught years after he passed sensitive documents to the British during bilateral negotiations over the status of Hong Kong; and a government think-tank scholar who simultaneously worked for five foreign intelligence services for money.

"After decades of economic reforms, we are witnessing the lack of ideological strength and the breaching of our 'spiritual dam' leading to this recent round of betrayal," he warned.

[manum]

One thing we must also notice that...there is huge unorganized sector in India which is totally not accounted for what they earn...they they seem to be living in modesty...

Indian GDP is way larger than it is projected...There are many sectors in our cities in towns, where government dont even has guestimate of earning of Individuals...

For this we'll have to get into tax reforms and have a transparent, simple policy and accountability...and real figure will emerge, which can be baffling for many economies who think they are superior...
But It'll also show the darker side of how many Indians need care and attention to live a satisfactory, rightful life...

China must have observed what happened in India wrt. Anna demonstrations...hopefully Chinese should start doing something likewise...It'll be nice to see government reaction.

[suryag]

For starters kirana shop owners dont pay tax and dont declare any income

[D Roy]

Arrey City pe hi kyun focus karte ho. Your entire agro sector doesn't pay any tax. And it is the largest private sector in history. Not in terms of value but in terms of the sheer number of individuals in it.

The state in both PRC and FSU had to enter agriculture via collectivization. we never did. Instead we had an administered price mechanism which is half dismantled, we don't tax even the richest farmers and what's more if you can show that your dad has agro income ( in the main) you get huge concessions in Govt run institutes like JNU, for instance.

[wong]

Don't ask me to be careful my friend.

You are not talking to one of your "subjects" on some chicom server. Get that straight into your effing head.


Its about organic innovation and efficient use of capital. Neither of which you do better than India. India's ICOR is much better than yours.

And cut this bullshit about your govt spending being less than India's as a percentage of GDP. A much bigger chunk of your economy is public sector owned, while ours isn't. so it's very easy to move heads into the dividend/loss accounts of these enterprises. Your system hides huge inefficiencies which you have so far masked by making a maglev here and an airport there.

If India really had such great organic innovation and efficient use of capital it would show up in the GDP per capita. Given how proud Indians are of their new subway system, I'm sure India would love to have the maglevs and the new airports. It's time to export even more people and ask them to send back more remittances to pay for such things.

Of course India's ICOR is better than China, most countries starved for capital are. I can make the same case for Afghanistan's ICOR.

China doesn't have a debt problem. No country owning money to itself can have a debt crisis. That's ridiculous, especially for a country holding $3.5 Trillion in foreign reserves. Show me a country in the world with an internal debt crisis. It doesn't exist. Japan with 220% debt to GDP, Nope. The US has an entitlement problem, not an internal debt problem. It can print its debts away. Every economist expects the US to eventual inflate its way to controllable debt levels. There is no chance for China/US to default ala Argentina & Russia. In fact, India is much more likely to default with its huge trade deficits ($120 to $150 Billion per year) and its fake import/export with the UAE.

[shiv]

While I understand that wars and economy are interrelated - this thread is for military related issues. If anyone has to make a non military related post like the economy I request that he put in a few mouse clicks of extra effort by posting the reply in the China thread of the other forum and posting a link to that post here.

I find myself coming back to this thread to find a "Mine is longer" economy discussions while this thread is for "mine is longer" military related discussions.

[gakakkad]

@ wong Technically India has a trade surplus .India has a trade deficit if you only consider merchandise. India exports more service than merchandise.

http://www.metrics2.com/blog/2007/04/05 ... _surp.html

[rohitvats]

I really like this tag-team or relay of posts when it comes to Chinese topics...especially, the economic ones.

IMO, this thread gets tracked quite seriously to warrant the attention of 'learned' chicom members...to ensure that challenges to Shanghai stats don't go unchallenged... But the amazing part is, it is all about economics. I'm yet to see anyone discuss to give details of PLA/PLAAF/PLAN developments, ideas about their Orbat/TO&E etc...it is all mu schl*%$ bigger than you debates....pretty interesting and I guees, we at BRF keep interesting company!!!

[D Roy]

Aah the Chicom drones have lost of all pretences of coming here to build fences and tell dirty Indians that they are not interested in any kind of conflict. now the gloves are off.

See the real reason why they visit Indian forums is to simply post jpegs both genuine and doctored of the "great progress" made by their beloved masters. The whole idea is to create envy and/or intimidate.


Dear Wang,

India opened its economy a decade and a half after the Americans started outsourcing manufacturing to you.. But make no mistake in GDP per capita terms you don't have an insurmountable lead. Convergence will take place much before you or your pimp agencies in the west are projecting.

And even then, you aren't really a middle income country yet. and your gini coefficient has been progressively getting worse.
As far as remittances are concerned, your dear south-east asian ethic chicoms did more of that for much longer.

You simply add their remittances to FDI i.e keep it in the capital account. we enter it as a current account item. In fact a lot of the "FDI" that China gets is essentially remittances and/ or investment by former "boat people". Of course it also means that India's current account deficit is worse than what it looks. But then we aren't an export driven economy anyway.

But make no mistake Chicom has just as many people going to work overseas. For instance the huge number of chicom coolies who have gone to work in Africa and even had come to work on projects in India, before we decided we didn't need all their excellent skills.

Nowadays Chicom is sending even greater droves of people to study in the US and also Britain. And I suspect lot of the Wangs and Dicks over here write in from those locations.


And by the way,

I don't expect any chicom drone to have a decent discussion about the military balance. they are deployed by their masters to this thread for one purpose only,

Put on display Chicom's so called "grand economic progress" vis a vis India and thereafter advance that as a case as to why Chicom has no interest in initiating conflict with a country they consider dirty and inferior.

[eklavya]

China confronts Indian navy vessel
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/883003ec-d3f6 ... z1WdTJ9rqy

A Chinese warship confronted an Indian navy vessel shortly after it left Vietnamese waters in late July in the first such reported encounter between the two countries’ navies in the South China Sea.

The unidentified Chinese warship demanded that India’s INS Airavat, an amphibious assault vessel, identify itself and explain its presence in international waters shortly after it completed a scheduled port call in Vietnam, five people familiar with the incident told the Financial Times.

This latest example of China’s naval assertiveness has irked defence officials in India and Vietnam. China claims the South China Sea in its entirety, rejecting partial claims by Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Taiwan over the resource-rich region.

“Any navy in the world has full freedom to transit through these waters or high seas,” said one Indian official familiar with the encounter. “For any country to proclaim ownership or question the right to passage by any other nation is unacceptable.”

Vietnam’s foreign ministry acknowledged that the INS Airavat visited the country from July 19-22, but said it had no information about the incident. The Chinese defence and foreign ministries declined comment, as did the Indian government.

China’s projection of maritime power, especially into the Indian Ocean, has raised national security concerns in New Delhi, which has raised the incident with Beijing.

Hanoi is also upset by what it believes to be a deliberate provocation by Beijing, according to foreign diplomats, who said the implication of the naval challenge was that China believes it is entitled to police the South China Sea.

China and Vietnam have been trying to mend fences ever since Hanoi claimed in May that Chinese patrol boats had sabotaged Vietnamese oil exploration vessels. On Monday Vietnam’s deputy defence minister, Lieutenant General Nguyen Chi Vinh, concluded a high-profile visit to Beijing, where he met General Liang Guanglie, China’s defence minister. Both sides agreed to increase military co-operation and set up a military hotline.

An unprecedented series of anti-China protests broke out in Hanoi in June, with the clear acquiescence of Vietnam’s omnipresent security officials. The government only recently cracked down on the demonstrations.

“Vietnam has to find a delicate balance in raising its concerns over territorial issues while not pushing China too far,” said one Asian diplomat.

Rising tensions have also attracted the attention of Washington. Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, angered Beijing last year by insisting that the South China Sea was of strategic importance to the US and offering to act as a mediator.

[arnabh]

http://www.defenceiq.com/air-forces-and ... IQ_PR_2011

[VinodTK]

China rejects Pentagon report on nuke deployment against India

"Such comments are unfounded. Both China and India have always been committed to developing strategic cooperative partnership for peace and prosperity", a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said in a statement to PTI here.

[DavidD]

While I understand that wars and economy are interrelated - this thread is for military related issues. If anyone has to make a non military related post like the economy I request that he put in a few mouse clicks of extra effort by posting the reply in the China thread of the other forum and posting a link to that post here.

I find myself coming back to this thread to find a "Mine is longer" economy discussions while this thread is for "mine is longer" military related discussions.

Yes, please, I prefer comparing military wang better

Economics discussions are usually pretty pointless, there's no hard evidence for anything, and everyone gets caught up with the short term crap that are meaningless. As people get more educated and more productive, the economy will take care of itself regardless of all the economics mumbo-jumbo.

[nits]

Source - IDRW

Yet again Chinese Stealth fighter J-20 was spotted showing off its weapons bay ,bringing end to the earlier rumors that J-20 didn’t have Weapons bay , after the aircraft landed from its routine test flight PLAAF airmen were seen checking out weapons bay , it seems J-20 has been carrying out Mid flight opening of weapons bay to simulate weapons drop to check flight characteristic on the aircraft .

http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/2508/j20v.png

http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/1782/j202.png

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/4591/j203.png

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/8603/j204.png

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2968/j205.png

[Hiten]

^^
the J-20 opening the doors of its internal weapons bay

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-fE8pJMoB4

[Nolan]

looks like earlier speculations about the J20 were wrong, it has taken multiple flights since January and there is video footage of its weapon bay doors opening.

[Prasad]

Hey! Enough with the large inline pictures already! Not everyone has a T-1 internet connection! Edit them please and leave links thank you very much..

Btw, those bumps under the wings appear to be the actuators for the aeilerons. The picture of the aircraft beneath the one where its marked and you've asked the question clearly show that. Mainly the pictures from rear/side.

[Nolan]

Alright, I get the picture thing, but how come the analysis posted was also deleted?

[Nolan]

Well, if I can't post pictures,
if anyone want to see them then just go to this link
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/milita ... ek-47.html

and this is the for the WZ 10 attack helicopter
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/milita ... ter-2.html

[shiv]

Source - IDRW

Yet again Chinese Stealth fighter J-20 was spotted showing off its weapons bay ,bringing end to the earlier rumors that J-20 didn’t have Weapons bay , after the aircraft landed from its routine test flight PLAAF airmen were seen checking out weapons bay , it seems J-20 has been carrying out Mid flight opening of weapons bay to simulate weapons drop to check flight characteristic on the aircraft .

Hey that weapons bay door opens very slowly.

[Nolan]

I will post the analysis again, I think it's an interesting take on the J20, written by an American. I don't see any reason for it to be deleted.

Actually, nvm.

"China's J-20 Stealth Fighter: Secrets Revealed (PICS)"
http://www.politikalmatters.com/2011/05 ... sited.html

I will just give you a link, it does provide quite a different insight to the development+capabilities of the J20 compared to what's been previously posted in this thread. Worth taking a look in my opinion.

[shiv]

I will post the analysis again, I think it's an interesting take on the J20, written by an American.

Ahem. Does it become more credible if an American writes the analysis?

[Nolan]

Hey! Enough with the large inline pictures already! Not everyone has a T-1 internet connection! Edit them please and leave links thank you very much..

Btw, those bumps under the wings appear to be the actuators for the aeilerons. The picture of the aircraft beneath the one where its marked and you've asked the question clearly show that. Mainly the pictures from rear/side.

Thanks for the explanation, and I'm new to this forum so didn't really know how to edit pictures, my apologizes.

[Nolan]

I will post the analysis again, I think it's an interesting take on the J20, written by an American.

Ahem. Does it become more credible if an American writes the analysis?

Did I say in any way it would be more credible because the author was American? I was just stating the fact that it was written by an American, nothing else implied.

[shiv]

Did I say in any way it would be more credible because the author was American? I was just stating the fact that it was written by an American, nothing else implied.

Well many Chinese believe that American sources are more credible that Chinese sources and try to deflect criticism by saying "Chinese are not saying that, the Americans are full of praise/admiration/fear of Chinese tech" " Your statement falls exactly within that bracket, your denials notwithstanding. There was no need to mention the American author. Some of the comparisons are laughable because the F22 was designed 20 years ago and if the J-20 is comparable it is basically 20 plus years behind. Probably more.

I know Americans who are appointed as nominal MDs/CEOs of small Chinese private firms because an American face helps credibility. This is a Chinese problem. Not an American one.

[Nolan]

Did I say in any way it would be more credible because the author was American? I was just stating the fact that it was written by an American, nothing else implied.

Well many Chinese believe that American sources are more credible that Chinese sources and try to deflect criticism by saying "Chinese are not saying that, he Americans are full of praise/admiration/fear of Chinese tech" " Your statement falls exactly within that bracket, your denials notwithstanding. There was no need to mention the American author. Some of the comparisons are laughable because the F22 was designed 20 years ago and if the J-20 is comparable it is basically 20 plus years behind. Probably more.

I know Americans who are appointed as nominal MDs/CEOs of small Chinese private firms because an American face helps credibility. This is a Chinese problem. Not an American one.

I'm not Chinese. I'm a Canadian born+living in Vancouver, and I believe that kind of thinking is quite absurd, I never meant to give anyone that kind of a impression when I mentioned the author. Didn't really know there was such a stereotype on the Chinese either.

Coming from my point of view, a Westerner may not think much of the Chinese J20, because yes, so what if it does surpassed the F22 in certain aspects? It was designed twenty years ago, like you've said. But I don't think that would be the case for the
average Chinese, edging close to America's achievements ten, twenty years ago is probably a big step, or leap for them, afterall, they are a developing country, and I guess the introduction of the J20 means more than just "another fifth gen fighter" (which, there aren't many to begin with, another reason this may well be a big deal for them), it could also drastically change the air dominance and air superiority scheme within the Asia Pacific region, and whether the average American thinks it's laughable or not, it has made the job of air penetration for the U.S. a lot more difficult. The U.S. may not think it's that big of a deal, despite all this awe and "amazement" at China's "breakthrough", but for China, it is a big deal, if I'm not wrong.

For them, sometimes just catching up is enough, because they've been behind the West for what, centuries?

Would this pose a immediate threat to the US? No. But in the long term, with the US heavily in debt, and the F22s/F35s grounded, who knows?

If it does go in service before 2018, like numerous estimates have said, even if I weren't to applaud, I would've at least kept one eye open, for the future.

This probably isn't a big deal for Canada, but if the US is weakened, who does it hurt? Our economy feels it too. Canada wouldn't be where it's at today without our neighbor, true, though a lot of Canadian citizens are way too patriotic to admit.

[gakakkad]

[/quote]

For them, sometimes just catching up is enough, because they've been behind the West for what, centuries?
[quote]

A century and a half might be more appropriate. Before the 1800's asian's were far advanced.

[Nolan]

For them, sometimes just catching up is enough, because they've been behind the West for what, centuries?

A century and a half might be more appropriate. Before the 1800's asian's were far advanced.

Yeah, you know what I mean. A century and a half is a pretty long period, especially considering when they were once near, if not at the top.

[shiv]

I'm not Chinese. I'm a Canadian born+living in Vancouver, and I believe that kind of thinking is quite absurd, I never meant to give anyone that kind of a impression when I mentioned the author. Didn't really know there was such a stereotype on the Chinese either.

Sir - your personal background is as irrelevant as the nationality of the author of the article. Mentioning either of them (or both, as you have done) is a waste of words that adds no real substance to a discussion of Chinese weapons technology.

The U.S. may not think it's that big of a deal, despite all this awe and "amazement" at China's "breakthrough", but for China, it is a big deal, if I'm not wrong.

Well the Chinese are certainly making a big deal and it may well be a big deal, but it remains to be seen whether it is a big deal or not. It probably has potential, but if it really is not what it is made out to be - it is the Chinese who are bluffing themselves. If the US is laughing at others it's because they have actually been through the obstacle course that "technology" represents. For some things there are no shortcuts. To quote my favorite example, you can make an engine that works and that actually powers an aircraft - but there is a huge difference between an engine that flies 100,000 hours between major overhauls and another that degrades in 100 hours. That is the difference that technology makes. In fact the use of the expression "Fifth Gen Fighter" is an ironic joke. It is Fifth gen for the US. The US had been through four previous generations to get to fifth gen. China has not been though four generations of aircraft tech. But the Chinese do not have the confidence or the chutzpah to say J-20 is 3rd gen Chinese tech. American dominance forces them to use American jargon to highlight a Chinese product I find that funny in an ironic sort of way.

More to the point - for an Indian forum - Indian technology is going though growing pains that are somewhat similar to what China faces. Achievements in China can be seen as clearly as bullshitting from China. I believe it is important to know what is what.

Go to any major arms exhibition in the world and you find the US, Europe, Russia, Israel and a few other countries vying for space selling products that compete with each other. Customers who buy one will know very very soon if the stuff they buy actually meets specs and some companies will rapidly sink into oblivion in this competitive market if the fail. Where are the Chinese companies in this game?

The excuse? Oh I know. "Developing country". The Chinese are working hard at developing things. Good on them. They also seem to work hard at advertising and highlighting things that do not work too well. That is a problem. As far as i am concerned - I am intent on trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. The day China can start exporting arms to Malaysia or Greece after knocking the US/Europe. Russia from the competition is the time when one can say that China is coming of age. Photos and laudatory articles about the J-20 are entertaining but just do not cut it.

[Nolan]

"Sir - your personal background is as irrelevant as the nationality of the author of the article. Mentioning either of them (or both, as you have done) is a waste of words that adds no real substance to a discussion of Chinese weapons technology."


Well, if it is that big of a deal and really bothers you, I'm sorry for ever mentioning the author's nationality. Can we drop it now?

"Well the Chinese are certainly making a big deal and it may well be a big deal, but it remains to be seen whether it is a big deal or not. It probably has potential, but if it really is not what it is made out to be - it is the Chinese who are bluffing themselves."


I agree, but I just want to see what they are capable of before labeling it as another cheap knockoff or flying bathtub.


"If the US is laughing at others it's because they have actually been through the obstacle course that "technology" represents. For some things there are no shortcuts. To quote my favorite example, you can make an engine that works and that actually powers an aircraft - but there is a huge difference between an engine that flies 100,000 hours between major overhauls and another that degrades in 100 hours. That is the difference that technology makes. In fact the use of the expression "Fifth Gen Fighter" is an ironic joke. It is Fifth gen for the US. The US had been through four previous generations to get to fifth gen. China has not been though four generations of aircraft tech. But the Chinese do not have the confidence or the chutzpah to say J-20 is 3rd gen Chinese tech. I find that funny. "

I guess the engine issue is really part of the learning curve, which all would have to go through, sooner or later, correct? China is going through it, right now, and they've made progress, as we can see from the WS-10 variants and yet to be seen "WS-15". They would definitely need time before establishing/ being able to push out a polished product, but as you've said, it is a process one cannot skip.

As for the generation thing, I believe it is divided mainly based on technological specifications, capabilities, stealth, and aspects as such. So calling it third gen while the world calls it fifth gen would probably cause some confusions. Though I do believe the Chinese use the older Russian division system and calls the J20 fourth gen instead of fifth gen, but what they call it doesn't matter, it's what it is capable of that matters, and it would need to prove itself with time, but I don't think we should judge it just yet.




"More to the point - for an Indian forum - Indian technology is going though growing pains that are somewhat similar to what China faces. Achievements in China can be seen as clearly as bullshitting from China. I believe it is important to know what is what.

Go to any major arms exhibition in the world and you find the US, Europe, Russia, Israel and a few other countries vying for space selling products that compete with each other. Customers who buy one will know very very soon if the stuff they buy actually meets specs and some companies will rapidly sink into oblivion in this competitive market if the fail. Where are the Chinese companies in this game? "



I do believe the Chinese have had success with the areas of manned space missions+satellite navigation systems, and they have a lot more ambitious plans. As we've both said, there is a learning curve that you can speed up to a certain extent, but not skip in its entirety, and until the Chinese have gained as much experience as the West, the only thing they can do is to keep playing catch up. However their self-developed rockets do have a pretty good reputation, and their self developed weaponry isn't as terrible as some've said in this thread. But realistically, do you expect a child to compete with an already strong and athletic adult? It isn't really fair to expect them to be able to compete with the best from the West right now because the Western world didn't get there in one day either. They started out later, so I guess it's natural they are still lacking in certain areas, the West got to where they are today through tons of experiments, a mixture of successes and failures, and I don't expect China, or India to be able to skip that inevitable process.



"The excuse? Oh I know. "Developing country". The Chinese are working hard at developing things. Good on them. They also seem to work hard at advertising and highlighting things that do not work too well. That is a problem. As far as i am concerned - I am intent on trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. The day China can start exporting arms to Malaysia or Greece after knocking the US/Europe. Russia from the competition is the time when one can say that China is coming of age. Photos and laudatory articles about the J-20 are entertaining but just do not cut it."

Well, I doubt the images snapped are really meant to act as advertisements, though there may be a "controlled leak" to show the world they do have something on their hands, but of course, whether it works well or not, it is still too early to say. I don't expect the Chinese to have start exporting without thorough tests done beforehand either.

What exactly is this jet capable of? No one knows, so I think it's important to remain unbiased, and to keep an open mindset, don't let the negatives rush to your head immediately, don't be fooled by its pretty looks either.

I think all this comes back to one point, or a fact, which is that it's unrealistic to expect them to be on par with the best right now because they did start a lot later than countries such as Russia and the States, however, I'll admit it is nice seeing them try, and what the final result will turn out like? Time will tell.

Time is what China and India both need, give them some time, and I believe they are capable of, can and will catch up to the West. Agreed?





(Sorry if there are any spelling mistakes, or errors with grammar, I usually don't look back on the things I write, so just bear with me.)

[Rahul M]

could you please use quotes ?

[Nolan]

I think I've made myself clear enough, if you can pick out the key points in that pile of mumble jumble, I'm not here to write essays, so the only thing I will say is, time will tell.

Whether it's wonderful or terrible, do you, I or anyone for that matter, (except for a few of the Chinese involved with the J20's development) know for sure?

Just give them some time, and if it turns out to be a pile of rubbish, they will be the one enduring glares and laughs from not only themselves, but the rest of the world as well, and if it turns out to be successful, it is genuinely good for them.

[Nolan]

could you please use quotes ?

Sorry, I will next time. Wasn't really sure how to quote sections as I am new to this forum, but think I've now figured it out. Sorry, will definitely pay more attention next time.

If there are any rules/habits etc. I should be aware of, please tell me in advance, thanks

[gakakkad]

I do believe the Chinese have had success with the areas of manned space missions+satellite navigation systems, and they have a lot more ambitious plans.

LEO space flight is no longer a big deal. As far as Sat-Nav is concerned let them launch it first. Though co-incidentally both India and China are launching it almost simultaneously.

I however disagree that India or China will need to pass through the same stages as the west. Both have skipped generations in the past. For instance India first launched its satellite in 1978. That was within a few years of launching a sounding rocket. You might find it interesting that component's of India's sounding rocket were carried in a Bicycle to the test site. (late 60's)

[PratikDas]

Nolan, you make a whole bunch of generalisations without any supporting facts. Could you please point to English reputable sources for Chinese rocket precision and reliability or Chinese weapons reliability? Which customers vouch for their reliability, countries like Pakistan?

If the WS-15 hasn't been seen then how do you know it is an improvement of any sort?

Going from 100 hours to 100,000 hours is not mere 'polishing', good Sir. One is not an engine of any practical use while the other is. They are worlds apart and you can't just fix it. There is a huge amount of R&D between those two milestones.

[Nolan]

I do believe the Chinese have had success with the areas of manned space missions+satellite navigation systems, and they have a lot more ambitious plans.

LEO space flight is no longer a big deal. As far as Sat-Nav is concerned let them launch it first. Though co-incidentally both India and China are launching it almost simultaneously.

I however disagree that India or China will need to pass through the same stages as the west. Both have skipped generations in the past. For instance India first launched its satellite in 1978. That was within a few years of launching a sounding rocket. You might find it interesting that component's of India's sounding rocket were carried in a Bicycle to the test site. (late 60's)

Yeah, I said the process could be sped up to a certain extent, but not skipped in its entirety. Meaning they can take shortcuts and skip "generations", but it is still quite time consuming, and any achievement of any kind requires a lot of effort.

[Nolan]

Nolan, you make a whole bunch of generalisations without any supporting facts. Could you please point to English reputable sources for Chinese rocket precision and reliability or Chinese weapons reliability? Which customers vouch for their reliability, countries like Pakistan?

If the WS-15 hasn't been seen then how do you know it is an improvement of any sort?

Going from 100 hours to 100,000 hours is not mere 'polishing', good Sir. One is not an engine of any practical use while the other is. They are worlds apart and you can't just fix it. There is a huge amount of R&D between those two milestones.

As for Chinese rockets, their reliability records could be looked up easily. My main point was focused on the WS-10 variants and only mentioned the "yet to be seen WS-15", as there are hopes for it, but we don't know it's capabilities yet.

My original quote said a polished product, not some polishing. Whether what it is going to take for the Chinese to churn out a polished product (like the West), I do not know, but what I do know for sure is that it is going to take time.

[PratikDas]

One would think a polished product underwent some polishing? The WS-10 needs far more than that. They're flying unready concepts.

Could you please point out any self-criticism of Chinese weapons by Chinese in English media? I have yet to see such a thing. To think that they have the capability to do so is a misplaced notion. My point is that their published opinions of their technology is worth nothing.

You provide no hard references and expect to be taken seriously. It doesn't work like that here.

[Nolan]

One would think a polished product underwent some polishing? The WS-10 needs far more than that. They're flying unready concepts.

Could you please point out any self-criticism of Chinese weapons by Chinese in English media? I have yet to see such a thing. To think that they have the capability to do so is a misplaced notion.

You provide no hard references and expect to be taken seriously. It doesn't work like that here.

Yes, of course a polished product needs polishing, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is all it needs, or polishing alone would be enough to do the job. Like I've said, I'm not clear what it would take, but yes, a polished product definitely needs polishing.

As for the self-criticism part, I don't know.

[PratikDas]

Just so you know, I wasn't considering your expression of a 'polished product' literally. I know what you were trying to imply. My point is that your choice of words trivialises the effort required to improve an engine by 3 orders of magnitude, i.e. 1000 times, in hours between overhaul. If I had to guess, I'd say that one would have to completely discard one or many design concepts and/or materials in that engine, after first figuring out which ones, then discovering replacement options, testing each one individually, creating combinations of the promising options together, testing the prototype engines, and, finally, having an engine that works perhaps 10 times as well as the first one. Then repeat everything twice.