China Military Watch

Manu · Post by **Manu** » 09 Jan 2011 11:23

One can laugh all one wants, but we are not the US (they may have their own reasons for hyping J-20 given that Gates Babu is cutting costs everywhere) - BUT - everything China needs to conduct war - air, naval, land - whether they begged, borrowed or outright stole - is contained in-house and can be manufactured in numbers.

In a time of war, they do not have to rely on the benevolence of foreign suppliers.

Even in these times, quantity is its own quality.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jan 2011 11:32

but todays wars are short sharp 2 week affairs. more than that the world economy cannot bear it and chances of going nuclear also increase. in that timeframe, anyone with a adequate stock of spares, consumables, service people and the means to protect and move their to where they are needed should manage fine.

I recall the same argument in 1990s when chinese internet posters bragged about making the J8 and J7 inhouse and they would produce 1000s of them in a years long peoples war while india depended on imported spares. the situation is neither india or china can afford to fight each other for months let alone years..it wont be a well contained killbox like iraq far away from home shores against adversary 1000x weaker which gives US the luxury of fighting wars for years.

so in the end, it doesnt matter imo for a war. ofcourse there are other benefits like immunity to pressure in peacetime, price gouging , work shares, tot etc pros and cons.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jan 2011 11:37

Manu wrote: In a time of war, they do not have to rely on the benevolence of foreign suppliers.

Except oil.

Manu · Post by **Manu** » 09 Jan 2011 11:50

Fair point.

But they are crawling all over Africa and Central Asia to cover that as well.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jan 2011 12:00

Manu wrote:Fair point.

But they are crawling all over Africa and Central Asia to cover that as well.

Sea lanes.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 09 Jan 2011 12:03

off topic but people interested in the FB-23 proposals may look at these pages

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... 0/all.html
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... 0/all.html

Ah yes, membership is required to view the images.

Manu · Post by **Manu** » 09 Jan 2011 12:04

Shiv,

Your rejoinders are good, but you do realize I am making a Sino-Indian comparison, and not Sino-US?

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 09 Jan 2011 12:17

Indian Navy's capability to put up a effective naval blockade could be questioned as India has few high endurance vessels which would be need to counter large number of chinese subs. India can only stop oil being transported from Middle-east and Africa not from South America. China can simply order the ships to take a longer route via Mediterranean and Panama.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 09 Jan 2011 12:19

Pratik_S wrote:Indian Navy's capability to put up a effective naval blockade could be questioned as India has few high endurance vessels which would be need to counter large number of chinese subs. India can only stop oil being transported from Middle-east and Africa not from South America. China can simply order the ships to take a longer route via Mediterranean and Panama.

which means that they go around the world and thus increasing cost and time manyfold.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jan 2011 12:24

Manu wrote:Shiv,

Your rejoinders are good, but you do realize I am making a Sino-Indian comparison, and not Sino-US?

But you spoke of endless manufacture without foreign inputs, which would be required to replace attrition in a prolonged war lasting months or years, and the capacity to manufacture without foreign assistance becomes important as in World War 2. If the war is a short one the ability to manufacture in house without foreign assistance will not matter - and in that case even a Pakistan can fight, survive and live to fight another day with India and an India can do the same to China. So that ability to manufacture becomes irrelevant in a short intense conflict.

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 09 Jan 2011 12:30

ravi_ku wrote: which means that they go around the world and thus increasing cost and time manyfold.

Yes, but that cost of losing a war is much higher.

Manu · Post by **Manu** » 09 Jan 2011 13:14

shiv wrote:
Manu wrote:Shiv,

Your rejoinders are good, but you do realize I am making a Sino-Indian comparison, and not Sino-US?
But you spoke of endless manufacture without foreign inputs, which would be required to replace attrition in a prolonged war lasting months or years, and the capacity to manufacture without foreign assistance becomes important as in World War 2. If the war is a short one the ability to manufacture in house without foreign assistance will not matter - and in that case even a Pakistan can fight, survive and live to fight another day with India and an India can do the same to China. So that ability to manufacture becomes irrelevant in a short intense conflict.

Ceteris paribus, ability to manufacture critical defense equipment is ALWAYS a good thing (why else have we been harping on indigenization for the longest time?). Your clever arguments notwithstanding, that will decidedly be an advantage that China will enjoy in a Sino-Indian confrontation.

If Oil is a problem for China, it is a bigger problem for us. If Sea Lanes are a problem for China, they are not very well defended for us either. Nov 26 attackers all came via sea route.

One cannot predict how long, or short future wars will be (although the current thinking leans towards short, sharp exchanges).

Perhaps, the COAS knows more than either of us: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/libra ... irna01.htm

Link

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jan 2011 13:56

Manu wrote: One cannot predict how long, or short future wars will be (although the current thinking leans towards short, sharp exchanges).

Saar whether my responses seem clever to you or not is irrelevant and I would appreciate it if you explained those Latin words.

Surely you cannot be talking of "prolonged conflict" between India and China on the lines of World War 2? I think it does not require the Chief of Army staff to tell us that such a prolonged conflict is more likely to go against India for all the reasons that you have yourself mentioned.

But sir, please take one step forward from where you stand. You know that such a prolonged conflict would be worse for India. I know it. Why then should we deliberately aim for just such a conflict by planning for a long war where we attempt to outlast the Chinese? It will not be too difficult to predict that a prolonged war of that type between China an India would leave both nations exhausted the way Britain and Germany were exhausted after WW2. If you accept that (as I do) what should the plan be in an India China scenario?

You are welcome to come up with your own ideas on this, but as I see it - once we accept the data that I have mentioned above it can mean only one of two things:

1) Either do not fight a war with China
or
2) Aim to escalate the war to such a high level that no matter what punishment India takes the Chinese too take severe and unacceptable punishment in a short time.

Nothing short of this is either desirable or feasible.

Fighting for weeks and months on end, blocking Chinese fuel supplies etc are meaningless talk simply because the Chinese may not think like you do. Even if we successfully block Chinese supplies , the Chinese will not be waiting for a long term war of attrition where oil supply problems will hit them hard in the long term. In the absence of a cease fire they will escalate the conflict to a very intense level to force a conclusion long before oil supply issues affect them In such an intense conflict scenario - we either inflict equal damage on them or do a massive land grab, or lose.

So when you talk of oil supply blockage to China and Chinese manufacturing independence you are of necessity referring to the sort of conflict that could occur in a US-China scenario and not a India China scenario. The amount of manufacturing of ships, submarines, aircraft or missiles that China could do in a month or 6 weeks of intense war would hardly make a big dent on such a short war of intense and mind numbing attrition. If the war lasts longer - we will be in trouble. Unless we have our tactics planned out to punish them severely within that time span. Planning for a longer war is planning for losing a war. Any war should be finished off real quick. Its as simple as that. That explains the "current thinking" that you mention.

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 09 Jan 2011 14:29

ULFA military chief in China: top UNLF leader
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/ulfa- ... r/735281/0

New Delhi:Paresh Baruah, the military chief of the banned outfit United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), seems to be enjoying hospitality in China as his presence in the neighbouring country has been confirmed by the arrested head of a Manipuri militant group.

United National Liberation Front (UNLF) chief R K Sanayaima alias Meghen, arrested last month in Bihar by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), confessed during interrogation that he had met the elusive 'commander-in-chief' of ULFA during the 2010 Shanghai World Expo.

Highly-placed sources said the Manipuri militant leader also told NIA investigators that both of them had intensive talks in Shanghai about the activities of the two outfits, future plans, arms procurement, and the casualties suffered during the offensive launched by security forces.

The Shanghai World Expo was held between May 1 to October 31, 2010.

Sources said 54-year-old Baruah has been mostly based in Yunnan province of China bordering Myanmar but he frequents northern Myanmar's Kachin areas.

Interestingly, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna had informed the Rajya Sabha last month that India had taken up with China the issue of Baruah's presence in that country in the wake of reports that Chinese authorities have issued a visa to him.

"Government has seen media reports of such visit. The matter was taken up with the Chinese side, which has denied his presence in China...," Krishna had said.

The ULFA leader, against whom an Interpol Red corner notice was issued on February 14, 1997, has been steadfastly opposed to any peace dialogue with the government to bring a lasting peace in insurgency-hit Assam, even though most of his colleagues including 'chairman' Arabinda Rajkhowa are ready for talks.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jan 2011 15:20

barua can find a job in china, use some of his ill gotten gains to open a tandoori restaurant there and live happily every after on the money he has looted.

as for assam and india he doesnt exist and there is no way for him to crawl back and reclaim any 'mindshare'. its over, finished, done for - the rest of ulfa leadership is out on bail preparing for talks and will likely float a political outfit making the right sound AGP type noises before next election, some will join the Cong(I) ... all in all absorbed into the wide river....

Manu · Post by **Manu** » 09 Jan 2011 15:30

Hi Shiv,

Answer to your first part: Click

As for the rest, if you read my original post, it was my contention that China being able to manufacture all of its defence equipment indigenously is a great advantage (I maintain that even now, and would be surprised if anyone could could convince me otherwise). I did not bring in Oil or Sea Lanes or length of War - you did. Hence, all else equal, the indigenization advantage remains. India procures her equipment and know how from all over the world, literally (and belatedly) - Russia, UK, France, Israel, US, Italy and even Brazil (Embraer jets). I do not think that is a great plan vis-à-vis China.

When you chose surgery as your vocation, the world of politics (or at least journalism) lost a great mind. You moved the argument completely in as little as 3 posts.

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 09 Jan 2011 15:53

I agree with Shiv. The next hot war, if we fight China, is going to be bloody short. Not the Kargil sort we experienced. I would go out on a long handle and conjecture that maybe the outcome of the next war will be decided within the first 3-4 hours. Whoever, takes out enemy airfields, troop concentrations, key bridges and communications choke points within the first couple of hours wins. You would need a higher sortie rate, and being able to fight enemy penetrations to a standstill. We would need to have the capacity to push through some deep penetrations into enemy territory on the ground so as to destabilize his offensive plans, and these columns will have to be protected from aerial attacks.

Coupled with this scenario, you can expect cyber attacks on our communication, financial and power infrastructure so that a fear psychosis can be created in the public mind and bring the Indian government to the negotiating table at a total disadvantage. I would reckon that the earlier precursor of an attack like this would be a high volume campaign in the public space led by the 'liberal, bleeding heart left-wingers' on some topic.

The objective of our naval assets should be
1) Prevention of attacks by enemy submarines, surface ships in and around the Bay & the Arabian Sea. In such a short war, more than the economic value of loss of shipping, it will be the psychological impact;
2) And if, we have a SSBN, ready, then the objective would be to lie undetected close enough to strike Mainland China, if we are close to a major defeat, nukes (even TNE's) are used, chemical/bio weapons are used;
3) Have a separate fleet ready to inflict punitive damages on Pakistan- Karachi, Gwadar, so that they do not risk any adventurism. It will be difficult to defend on both sides.

Whatever happens, the next hot war may take a few days to complete, but it's outcome will be decided in the first 3-4 hours.

On a different thought, I would think that unless China is completely and 100% sure of a swift and decisive outcome, they would just keep increasing their claims, inch by inch, sort of a slow choking of India using their blow hot-blow cold-but never let up strategy.

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 09 Jan 2011 15:57

I know that I am only going to get a lot of flak for this but I am going to say this anyways. While most posters here are posting about how we should not shake with fear because of J-20, I find that some here are giving the impression of doing exactly that by showing their insecurity. All the ridiculing and jingoistic sneering is making us look most childish. Some people are sneering at J-20 saying that it will be nothing in compared to PAK-FA. OK..agreed. But if you truly believe that then why the need for all this jealousy and insecurity? In fact, I am finding DavidD to be behaving in the most commendable fashion on the face of all this jingoistic childishness...and this is coming from an Indian.
Get some confidence guys. We have PAK-FA and hopefully AMCA will also materialize soon. Why the need for so much insecurity?

Ridicule is exactly the required response. Jealousy and insecurity?
Wah, wah, some piskology. It seems to me someone is out to cause mischief.

Anyway I agree with

We have PAK-FA and hopefully AMCA will also materialize soon.

The AMCA has to materialize in the next decade, because it is the future of Indian fighter/strike aircraft development and not the PAK-FA. As has been explained by an IAF officer, the PAK-FA is wholly a Russian design.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jan 2011 16:36

Manu wrote:
Answer to your first part: Click

As for the rest, if you read my original post, it was my contention that China being able to manufacture all of its defence equipment indigenously is a great advantage (I maintain that even now, and would be surprised if anyone could could convince me otherwise). I did not bring in Oil or Sea Lanes or length of War - you did. Hence, all else equal, the indigenization advantage remains. India procures her equipment and know how from all over the world, literally (and belatedly) - Russia, UK, France, Israel, US, Italy and even Brazil (Embraer jets). I do not think that is a great plan vis-à-vis China.

When you chose surgery as your vocation, the world of politics (or at least journalism) lost a great mind. You moved the argument completely in as little as 3 posts.

Please leave out the personal refs - they are needless rhetoric. I believe I have been misunderstood and must set the record straight.

I cannot recall saying that China's manufacturing ability is not an advantage. What I have been unable to understand apart from the Latin is how you imagined that I was not taking that into account when I made my replies to you.

If an amateur (such as myself) outside the field of military thought can figure out that the ability to manufacture weapons indigenously is an advantage, surely the people in the business have already figured that out. China has an advantage. The only question for us is "Do we try and help China along by competing (and chasing China) in an area where they have an advantage, or do we do something to bypass or neutralize that advantage"

If we decide to chase them - we need to up our manufacturing capability and technology. No sane Indian can argue against that (and please don't find that meaning in my words). But this is a chase, and a chase by definition means we are behind and we have no idea when we can catch up and if it should so transpire that war occurs before we catch up, the result will be exactly the same as it would be if war occurred tomorrow.

What plan can we have in a conflict with China which can end with an advantage to us long before we catch up in manufacturing? Surely we must not play to their strengths and try and hit them where we can match them - import or no import. The conclusion that I have reached is the ability to wage an intense war that may lead to intense attrition for us, but will inflict the same damage or more on China too in such a short time that the manufacturing advantage does not have time to kick in and make a difference. The oil blockade if any will only be an irritant that neither affects India nor China a great deal as both will use war reserves and local oil production for war.

Let me put it bluntly. What we threaten China with is exactly what Pakistan threatens India with, and what China threatens the US with - i.e unacceptable pain and no gain. This is not something that India should deliberately provoke, but should be the response to a war provoked/started by China. In the long term we may reach a stage where we are manufacturing everything in house - but I see the possibility of prolonged war with China even more remote at that stage.

Dharma · Post by **Dharma** » 09 Jan 2011 18:42

After remaining peaceful for most of the year, Chinese troops entered Indian territory in the fag end of 2010 along the Line of Actual Control in south-eastern Ladakh region and threatened a contractor and his team to halt work on constructing a 'passenger shed'.

The Chinese troops, which included motor-cycle borne personnel of People's Liberation Army, entered Gombir area in Demchok region in Jammu and Kashmir and threatened the civilian workers who were building the shed, the plan for which was cleared by the state rural development department, according to details accessed by PTI. The incident took place in September-October last year in a village about 300 km south-east of Leh district headquarters.

An official report, which was prepared after a meeting of officials from the civilian administration, army, central security agencies and Indo-Tibetan Border Police, stated that a passenger shed was approved at an estimated cost of Rs two lakh to be built at 'T' point in village Gombir under the Border Area Development Project of Ministry of Home Affairs. The Chinese army personnel came to the 'T' point and asked the contractor to stop the work, the report said.

more in this news report..
http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/ ... 10109.htm
I had posted the same article as a new topic by mistake in the forum..but could not delete it as it was locked..I kindly request the moderators to delete it if necessary as i am locked out from editing it..sorry for the inconvenience..thank you

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 09 Jan 2011 19:11

Regarding the J-20's edge alignment, after being inspired by a poster on another board and looking over some photos, it appears that its canards and main wings are indeed edge aligned. The leading edges are aligned on the same side, but the lateral and trailing edges are aligned on the opposite sides. For example, the slightly swept back trailing edge of the left canard appears to be aligned with the slightly swept forward trailing edge of the right wing. That the canards are dihedral is still a stealth disadvantage, but at least edge alignment doesn't appear to be one.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Jan 2011 20:06

Mystery surrounds Chinese stealth fighter

When around Christmas pictures started appearing of a previously unknown Chinese fighter jet, they triggered a lively debate among military enthusiasts and aviation experts around the world, writes Kathrin Hille in Beijing. Did the nose resemble that of the F-22, the American stealth fighter? Was the rear a copy of Northrop Grumman’s Black Widow or did it look more like a MiG?

The interest is understandable. The photos and videos give first indications of how far China has come on its first stealth fighter, a programme it has been working on for more than ten years. According to US military officials and defence analysts, it is likely to take another ten years until it gains the potential to become a threat.

What the test footage shows is that the 611 Institute in Chengdu, the defence technology group leading the project, has managed to build a hull with stealth characteristics, borrowing heavily from US as well as Russian models.

“But they lack a suitable engine,” says Tai Ming Cheung, an expert on Chinese defence technology at the University of California, San Diego. “Judging from the development cycle of their earlier fighter, the J-10, it will be another eight to ten years until this aircraft can fly.”

He points out that China still lags far behind the US and Russia in both shipbuilding and even more in aviation.

Nevertheless some see the leaked pictures as a message to Robert Gates, the US defence secretary who is visiting China from Sunday. The US has long called for more transparency from China on its weapons programmes. Now Beijing has granted at least a peek through the fence.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 09 Jan 2011 21:07

Gates Clarifies China's Stealth Capabilities

During the press conference Gates said China "may be somewhat further ahead in the development of the aircraft than our intelligence had earlier predicted."

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 09 Jan 2011 21:47

DavidD wrote:Regarding the J-20's edge alignment, after being inspired by a poster on another board and looking over some photos, it appears that its canards and main wings are indeed edge aligned. The leading edges are aligned on the same side, but the lateral and trailing edges are aligned on the opposite sides. For example, the slightly swept back trailing edge of the left canard appears to be aligned with the slightly swept forward trailing edge of the right wing. That the canards are dihedral is still a stealth disadvantage, but at least edge alignment doesn't appear to be one.

How that helps RCS reduction? and makes plane stealthy?

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 09 Jan 2011 22:56

A few points on China subs leaving slime trails across IOcean and manufacturing base.

China's serious subs (as in those they use) are all diesel and though can go to sea, till now have been hanging around brown water areas. Their nuke ones are all disputed to be too noisy or unmaintainable at sea for long durations. SSBNs have never gone for even one single deterrence patrol nor even attempted a "Barents sea stockade" style operations, despite more than 25 years since roll out. We can say these are stories planted by west or us. But then PLA or PLAAN has not officially denied these serious allegations against the most survivable of its deterrence thingies as other countries like US and Russia, use these info during negotiations on anything to do with state power. Nor have we seen a nuke sub of PLAAN surface in say, Malacca straits, let alone Gulf coast or East Africa. Nuke subs need food and supplies in between and diesel subs need fuel. China has not yet demonstrated it can run that serious a logistics chain for that long.

Only last year basic elements of their surface fleet (again not enough to take on even a single Delhi class or an Arliegh burke, which both operate in high-seas ALL THE TIME with decent to excellent logistics chains supporting them ) went up to Red Sea areas, only after piracy became a top attention grabber in "CNN International" and obviously their adoring public asked the party honchos on why no crisp uniformed chinese officers are not leading those pirates away, rather than scrawny scooter-helmeted SDREs. But again, that move took a long time and major planning. Still they did nothing more than planting "military scenario" type stories of "outing an Indian Kilo" etc

Regarding manufacturing base during war. Their WS10 saga and our constant harping on indigenization proves it is next to impossible to cut off that links of spares supply chains that goes out of the country. Yeah, they can manufacture a few 10s more, but cost/lead time to testing, training etc makes a modern weapon system next to impossible to induct in a few weeks. One reason why I suspect Khan is moving to UCAV is to deal with this issue, when they say, have to deal with the Chinese in war time. UCAV cuts down on a lot of training, testing (even if a few components fail, they can put another online real quick) etc and can provide the numbers needed to shore up attrition during a prolonged war. we hear a lot of noise about "F22s flying around with UCAVs in a leash" etc so, the "slightly greatest Generation" gets preserved till deep into war....

For khan, UCAV seems Phase2 of reducing weapon induction lead times. Phase 1 being accurate smart weapons operated by their not so "Greatest Generation".

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 10 Jan 2011 00:04

nice top view.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 10 Jan 2011 00:26

Manu wrote:Shiv,

Your rejoinders are good, but you do realize I am making a Sino-Indian comparison, and not Sino-US?

malacca straits. fortress A&N. need I say more ? the geographical advantage in favour of India is considerable.

pratik, you can forget about effective deployment of subs by PLAN this side of the straits. consider range and the choke points. any sub crossing there would likely be seen by naked eyes. then there is the problem of range and cruise speed of diesel subs. they are good for defending in and around home waters, not aggressive ocean denial over long ranges.

I didn't get the rest of your post, what does high endurance vessel got to do with anything ? btw, not only oil, trade as well.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jan 2011 01:19

This Chinese seem to be doing what the Japanese seem to have done in WWII. ????

If so, this a very good development for India.

NYTimes :: U.S. Will Counter Chinese Arms Buildup

BEIJING — The Pentagon is stepping up investments in a range of weapons, jet fighters and technology in response to the Chinese military buildup in the Pacific, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Saturday on the eve of his visit to Beijing.

Despite billions of dollars in proposed Pentagon budget cuts that Mr. Gates announced this past week, he said that the Chinese development of its first radar-evading fighter jet, as well as an antiship ballistic missile that could hit American aircraft carriers, had persuaded him to make improvements in American weaponry a priority.

The American weapons that Mr. Gates was referring to included investments in a new long-range nuclear-capable bomber aircraft, which the Pentagon had stopped developing in 2009, as well as a new generation of electronic jammers for the Navy that are designed to thwart a missile from finding and hitting a target. At a Pentagon briefing on Thursday, Mr. Gates said that the jammers would improve the Navy’s ability to “fight and survive” in waters where it is challenged.

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 10 Jan 2011 02:14

Is it a coincidence that the Chinese unveiled their stealth aircraft, with their typical intrigue, shortly after India and Russia finalized their agreement to jointly fund the PAK-FA? I, think not. Imagine the psychological impact of the news that India would have access to fifth generation aircraft much sooner then China, and mind you not just any 5th generation aircraft but a first rate one! It must have rattled their "Honor and Dignity", their sense of being the rightful leader/ruler of Asia, their rightful place as up-and-coming super power war violated, by those SDRE Indians no less! They must have felt demoralized and dejected. This is why the Chinese politbureau decided to perform this drama of "leaked" photo's, video's and fake first fligth (eventhough the thing isn't anywhere ready to take to the air), to show the Chinese people and the world that they are no second fiddle to India and that they don't need Russia to develop their own 5th generation aircraft. To reassure themself and bluff the world into believing that the insecure and nervous lizard is infact a fearsome dragon. This explains why the Chinese are monitoring this thread so closely.

The Americans, for their own purposes of course, go along with the fearsome dragon bit. But the SDRE Indians, at least in this forum, are not the least bit impressed.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Jan 2011 03:02

Kanson wrote:
DavidD wrote:Regarding the J-20's edge alignment, after being inspired by a poster on another board and looking over some photos, it appears that its canards and main wings are indeed edge aligned. The leading edges are aligned on the same side, but the lateral and trailing edges are aligned on the opposite sides. For example, the slightly swept back trailing edge of the left canard appears to be aligned with the slightly swept forward trailing edge of the right wing. That the canards are dihedral is still a stealth disadvantage, but at least edge alignment doesn't appear to be one.
How that helps RCS reduction? and makes plane stealthy?

What edge alignment does is that it deflects all the radar signals in one direction instead of randomly in all directions. It essentially focuses the radar return, so the receiver has to be in a fairly specific position to be able to detect the aircraft.

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 10 Jan 2011 03:27

"The US has long called for more transparency from China on its weapons programmes. Now Beijing has granted at least a peek through the fence."

Transparency is not allowed by the Chinese totalitarian regime - telling the truth/being accountable to its own people - is NOT allowed by party rules. Forget the rest of the world.

naren · Post by **naren** » 10 Jan 2011 03:30

Multatuli wrote:Is it a coincidence that the Chinese unveiled their stealth aircraft, with their typical intrigue, shortly after India and Russia finalized their agreement to jointly fund the PAK-FA? I, think not. Imagine the psychological impact of the news that India would have access to fifth generation aircraft much sooner then China, and mind you not just any 5th generation aircraft but a first rate one! It must have rattled their "Honor and Dignity", their sense of being the rightful leader/ruler of Asia, their rightful place as up-and-coming super power war violated, by those SDRE Indians no less! They must have felt demoralized and dejected. This is why the Chinese politbureau decided to perform this drama of "leaked" photo's, video's and fake first fligth (eventhough the thing isn't anywhere ready to take to the air), to show the Chinese people and the world that they are no second fiddle to India and that they don't need Russia to develop their own 5th generation aircraft. To reassure themself and bluff the world into believing that the insecure and nervous lizard is infact a fearsome dragon. This explains why the Chinese are monitoring this thread so closely.

The Americans, for their own purposes of course, go along with the fearsome dragon bit. But the SDRE Indians, at least in this forum, are not the least bit impressed.

You hit the nail on the head.

The very idea of "leaked photos" is stupid - doesn't this put a big dent on the supposed "indestructibility" of the great rising super power - that its not even able to keep secret its top most military project !

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 10 Jan 2011 03:41

A LMAO joke I missed from Carlo Kopp-mian's first diaper-change after the recent J20 strip-tease was his claiming "the J20 is soup-e-rear in stealth" to JSF/PAK-FA due to "chined nose" a la Raptor. I think he forget the single piece canopy and sprayed on tan, that makes the Raptor so 5th gen.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Jan 2011 05:25

shiv wrote:
Manu wrote:
Answer to your first part: Click

As for the rest, if you read my original post, it was my contention that China being able to manufacture all of its defence equipment indigenously is a great advantage (I maintain that even now, and would be surprised if anyone could could convince me otherwise). I did not bring in Oil or Sea Lanes or length of War - you did. Hence, all else equal, the indigenization advantage remains. India procures her equipment and know how from all over the world, literally (and belatedly) - Russia, UK, France, Israel, US, Italy and even Brazil (Embraer jets). I do not think that is a great plan vis-à-vis China.

When you chose surgery as your vocation, the world of politics (or at least journalism) lost a great mind. You moved the argument completely in as little as 3 posts.
Please leave out the personal refs - they are needless rhetoric. I believe I have been misunderstood and must set the record straight.

I cannot recall saying that China's manufacturing ability is not an advantage. What I have been unable to understand apart from the Latin is how you imagined that I was not taking that into account when I made my replies to you.

If an amateur (such as myself) outside the field of military thought can figure out that the ability to manufacture weapons indigenously is an advantage, surely the people in the business have already figured that out. China has an advantage. The only question for us is "Do we try and help China along by competing (and chasing China) in an area where they have an advantage, or do we do something to bypass or neutralize that advantage"

If we decide to chase them - we need to up our manufacturing capability and technology. No sane Indian can argue against that (and please don't find that meaning in my words). But this is a chase, and a chase by definition means we are behind and we have no idea when we can catch up and if it should so transpire that war occurs before we catch up, the result will be exactly the same as it would be if war occurred tomorrow.

What plan can we have in a conflict with China which can end with an advantage to us long before we catch up in manufacturing? Surely we must not play to their strengths and try and hit them where we can match them - import or no import. The conclusion that I have reached is the ability to wage an intense war that may lead to intense attrition for us, but will inflict the same damage or more on China too in such a short time that the manufacturing advantage does not have time to kick in and make a difference. The oil blockade if any will only be an irritant that neither affects India nor China a great deal as both will use war reserves and local oil production for war.

Let me put it bluntly. What we threaten China with is exactly what Pakistan threatens India with, and what China threatens the US with - i.e unacceptable pain and no gain. This is not something that India should deliberately provoke, but should be the response to a war provoked/started by China. In the long term we may reach a stage where we are manufacturing everything in house - but I see the possibility of prolonged war with China even more remote at that stage.

Gotta agree with you here. While China does have some advantage, it's not nearly big enough to make war palatable. Too little to gain, too much to lose. That's why I find all the "China's gonna attack after the Olympics, no, wait, it'll be 2012" stuff ridiculous. You should always be prepared, but talking as if war is imminent is just faulty analysis.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 10 Jan 2011 05:33

Multatuli wrote:Is it a coincidence that the Chinese unveiled their stealth aircraft, with their typical intrigue, shortly after India and Russia finalized their agreement to jointly fund the PAK-FA?

It must have rattled their "Honor and Dignity", their sense of being the rightful leader/ruler of Asia, their rightful place as up-and-coming super power war violated, by those SDRE Indians no less! They must have felt demoralized and dejected.

To reassure themself and bluff the world into believing that the insecure and nervous lizard is infact a fearsome dragon. This explains why the Chinese are monitoring this thread so closely.

AGreed.
The entire event is for PR and nobody questions the capability of the PRC/

PRC hold on the east asia and its reputation as the dominant in the east asia theater would be dented if it did not show that it can counter any new weapon system in Asia such as FGFA

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Jan 2011 05:47

Sid wrote:nice top view.
http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/1729 ... 269398.jpg

I would agree with that. All in all the "leaks" have ensured that I will never fail to recognize this machine from any angle I guess. From some angles it is a handsome looking aircraft and with no access to the logic behind the particular design choices made we can only criticize or admire what we get to see.

One of the thoughts I have had is a recollection of forum posts when one of the LCAs was doing "high speed trials". The news would come out that "high speed trials are on" - and for weeks and months we would hear nothing further. Made me wonder what would cause a gap between a high speed trial and a first flight. I wonder what actually happens? Do some red lights come on or do some parameters on telemetry give unhappy readings?

There is one absolutely clear photo of the J-20 with its nosewheel off the ground (which I have on my HDD). And I have seen at least one image of the tail chute deployed but not billowed. So yes things have happened but the first flight is either delayed or has not been made public. Before anyone says anything about "secret" first flights - I won;t believe anything less than photos on a non foggy day.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jan 2011 06:00

And I have seen at least one image of the tail chute deployed ..........

That, I believe. happened at the end of a high speed test. I do not think that was part of a landing sequence.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Jan 2011 11:33

shiv wrote:
Sid wrote:nice top view.
http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/1729 ... 269398.jpg
I would agree with that. All in all the "leaks" have ensured that I will never fail to recognize this machine from any angle I guess. From some angles it is a handsome looking aircraft and with no access to the logic behind the particular design choices made we can only criticize or admire what we get to see.

One of the thoughts I have had is a recollection of forum posts when one of the LCAs was doing "high speed trials". The news would come out that "high speed trials are on" - and for weeks and months we would hear nothing further. Made me wonder what would cause a gap between a high speed trial and a first flight. I wonder what actually happens? Do some red lights come on or do some parameters on telemetry give unhappy readings?

There is one absolutely clear photo of the J-20 with its nosewheel off the ground (which I have on my HDD). And I have seen at least one image of the tail chute deployed but not billowed. So yes things have happened but the first flight is either delayed or has not been made public. Before anyone says anything about "secret" first flights - I won;t believe anything less than photos on a non foggy day.

The J-10 took 8 months to taxi. If this plane was gonna fly on 1/7 then it most likely didn't start taxiing in December. I think first flight is basically a formality at this point. High speed taxiing and lifting the nose is basically flying already, as these days you can basically gather almost all of the data you need out of a first flight by just doing that. If something does go wrong during initial flight testing(i.e. only mild, basic maneuvers), then it's usually a production mistake(like the F-14, I think) rather than a design problem, because essentially the design problems can be detected during the taxiing phase.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 10 Jan 2011 12:15

Acharya wrote:
Multatuli wrote:Is it a coincidence that the Chinese unveiled their stealth aircraft, with their typical intrigue, shortly after India and Russia finalized their agreement to jointly fund the PAK-FA?

It must have rattled their "Honor and Dignity", their sense of being the rightful leader/ruler of Asia, their rightful place as up-and-coming super power war violated, by those SDRE Indians no less! They must have felt demoralized and dejected.

To reassure themself and bluff the world into believing that the insecure and nervous lizard is infact a fearsome dragon. This explains why the Chinese are monitoring this thread so closely.
AGreed.
The entire event is for PR and nobody questions the capability of the PRC/

PRC hold on the east asia and its reputation as the dominant in the east asia theater would be dented if it did not show that it can counter any new weapon system in Asia such as FGFA

Thanks a bunch for the thoughts, I had been wondering what would make the face obsessed Chinese to make such a fool of themselves by this nautanki.

There is no other reason why CPC head would make such a fool of himself by making such a pomp and show to look at a cardboard cut out.

Some Chinese must be losing face and some song and dance needed to boost their morale.

amit · Post by **amit** » 10 Jan 2011 12:33

The law of unintended consequences are setting in. The West is going to milk this event and the "aircraft carrier" mizzile to wrangle more funds for the military industrial complex. Note Gates recent statement. All the while they'll have a grin on their faces when nobody is looking.

We SDRE's can sit on the sidelines and watch the fun!

Nobody, much less the Panda or its doggy, look at us as a serious threat. I mean look at us we are cheering the IOC for a punny little aircraft which is probably half the size of the super dooper Chinni "invisible" aircraft.