China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 07 Dec 2020 00:20

Cain Marko wrote:We are discussing this in the context of the IN - there is little doubt that PLAN have more than enough infra and assets to manage a lone Indian CBG (65k ton or not) in their neighborhood. The article earlier in the thread points to the fact that Chinese capability keeps on increasing - whether it is good enough to tackle the might of USN is questionable

The IN and the USN have a huge difference in terms of what it expects from aircraft carriers and how it will have to maneuver within its near abroad and AOR and beyond in the future. So what the IN is seeking to do from its carriers is best understood through the lens of what the IN expects from its carriers rather than what the USN is doing or plans to do in the future. So it shouldn't be the case that " If we can't sail into the SCS like the USN may be then we don't need an AC". The IN is the SME here. It no doubt has vast abilities to do the sort of academic and wargaming required to formulate doctrine and develop concepts of operations for different contingencies so unless you (I don't) have insight into that process, it is going to be difficult to evaluate, with a degree of accuracy, whether what the IN wants is feasible (technically) and advantageous in terms of meeting the maritime sea control, defense, and force projection needs of the nation over the next 3-4 decades. You simply can't apply the formula that since China is preparing to defeat the USN then that is the standard that all of INs measures must be held by.

Cain Marko wrote: One just questions its usefulness for the IN - if the main purpose is sea control, managing the IOR and TSP, and flag waving - what is the need for a 65k CV?

Starting with 65K, 45K, 10K is not a good approach. These are "derived" numbers based on capabilities that you seek. Both qualitative and quantitative capability. You don't start off with a number, but end up with one. So instead of looking at displacement and working backwards to see whether it is in the IN's interest to ask for Carrier X or Y, it is better to invest time in understanding what the IN wants the carrier to be capable of doing. Again both quantitatively (air wing composition, diversity etc) and qualitatively (how much do you want to sustain at sea, how do you support the future fleet with the AC, how many underway days must you be capable of supporting ops for etc etc etc). All these factors then work themselves into ship design and you end up at a displacement. So while physically, you may not be able to see any or much difference in a 40K carrier and a 60K ton carrier, the additional size and displacement isn't there just for giggles. So best to see what's leading the requirements towards an increase in size, displacement and capability. Is there an operational need. Has this need been vetted with a rigorous assessment scrub and some wargaming or is it just in there for fun. What is that additional capability buying you? Survivability? More performance/lethality/firepower? More ability to sustain certian missions for longer and farther out?. These all all the metrics that you start with and the IN no doubt would be having those internal analysis as it ended to a set of decisions for IAC-1 (why was it not 20K ton?) and for any future carriers.

You see this approach applied in prior generation of aircraft carriers and even the current crop. The French wanted the persistence and qualitative flexibility of the US CVN's and the CdG does provide them that, minus the scale and quantitative capability. The Brits wanted/valued the ability to house and sustain a large air-wing for duration and were willing to shed the requirement for speed, persistence (conventional) and air-wing diversity. They ended up with a larger carrier (to sustain up to 3 dozen 5GFA for some duration given magazine and other needs) but traded away the ability to get things like E-2, and larger aircraft onboard. So its a matter of capability which influences vessel design and air-wing compsition which all ultimately influences displacement.

chola · Post by **chola** » 07 Dec 2020 14:35

Cain Marko wrote: We are discussing this in the context of the IN - there is little doubt that PLAN have more than enough infra and assets to manage a lone Indian CBG (65k ton or not) in their neighborhood. The article earlier in the thread points to the fact that Chinese capability keeps on increasing - whether it is good enough to tackle the might of USN is questionable, but let us no kid ourselves, the IN is nowhere close to that kind of strength.. As far as QE class capability is concerned, nobody denies it (as indicated in my last post). One just questions its usefulness for the IN - if the main purpose is sea control, managing the IOR and TSP, and flag waving - what is the need for a 65k CV? Especially when crucial holes remain in operational capability.

Marko ji, a 65K ton CATOBAR is an investment in our future as a power in the IOR. The 65K ton STOBAR QE, as Brar says, is an anomaly for the UK's situation of being integrated with the USN. They don't need a carrier-launch AEW for instance because they expect that asset from their allues.

Without the CATOBAR, we are slowly condemning our carrier arm which once reigned surpreme in Asia to the second tier and possibly obsolescent.

I understand that there are holes that needs to be filled but the truth is India has the third largest military budget in the world. It cannot afford a vessel that keeps it carrier arm -- considered the pinnacle of naval power -- viable?

It would be different if India were like Russia who never really had a proper history with carriers. In that case, I would say yes let's go with subs and long ranged missiles from surface vessels. But that's not case here. We've built an institution with the Vikrant and Viraat that all but a handful of other navies would kill for. It is imperative that we continue and build on it. Stagnating or even losing it, we go from being seen as an expanding power to one that looks like it is being relegated to the second tier even in the IOR.

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Dec 2020 15:10

Probably the most dangerous chini system is a fat transport plane (it is nicknamed the "Chubby Girl" in Cheen)?

The Y-20 will have a direct impact on the LAC as that has become a logistics fight.

https://eurasiantimes.com/why-indian-ar ... al-battle/

Why Indian Army Needs To ‘Watch Out’ For Chinese Y-20 Aircraft As PLA Gears-Up For A Potential Battle?

November 26, 2020
By Aakriti Sharma

China’s transport planes will augment their capacity by 20 percent soon with the indigenously-developed WS-20 engine. Military sources have told South China Morning Post that China is testing “domestically designed engines for its military transport planes”.

The WS-20 engine will replace the Russian Soloviev D-30 engines, which currently power the Y-20 planes built by the Xian Aircraft Industry Corporation. The source told SCMP that the WS-20 engine is designed to give the planes a bigger lift and longer range, and has been installed on one Y-20 for testing.

The biggest warplane in the PLA Air Force’s fleet has a range of 7,500km (4,660 miles) and a cargo capacity of 55 tons, but the manufacturers of the new engine have claimed that it would provide a capacity of 66 tonnes.

The increased capacity would enable the Chinese aircraft to transport their most advanced tank, the 58-tonne 99A. Previously tanks had to be dismantled for transport and reassembled on arrival, said military analyst Song Zhongping.

...

The Shenyang WS-20 engine is an adaptation of the WS-10A turbofan, which powers some of the PLA’s Chinese-made fighter jets, including the J-10 and J-16.

This year, an aerial tanker variant of the Y-20 was also spotted “in an apparent aerial refueling maneuver for a J-20 stealth fighter jet”, Global Times reported. The Chinese analysts have said in a report, “Combinations of the Y-20 aerial tanker with the likes of the J-20 fighter jet and H-6N strategic bomber can significantly expand the operational range of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force”.

Y-20 pilots had told CCTV that the Y-20 will have variants like the Y-20 aerial tanker and Y-20 aerial early warning aircraft. Speculations are that a new engine could also be used on these Y-20 variants.

We have the better plane in the C-17. But we have 11 onlee and there won't be any new ones built. The Y-20 OTOH is ramping up and will be built in the hundreds and in variants from tanker to AWACS.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... -test-base

sum · Post by **sum** » 08 Dec 2020 15:41

^^ Really reaping the benefits of keeping at it despite the initial flaws and lousy designs

Literally following the BRF wishlist on how to approach engine design etc: Get it on the bench, mate it to testbeds, get niggles rectified and keep at it with $$ and sweat till the threshold is reached. Might not be world #1 but suffices for pratical usage and saves billions of $$ and provides strategic freedom and bargain power for other engine deals too ( which still need import)

I see the same story as the semiconductor repeating here where despite all the arm twisting by the west, they have carved a niche in all aspects of the semicon value chain and are now #1 in mobile sales ( if all Chini cos added up like Xaomi/Huawei/Oppo etc) and almost state of the art in processor designs, memory fab, packaging technology etc

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Dec 2020 22:08

^^^ Neither chinis nor Bharatis will be able to have flawless engines based on perfect designs like the established powers their first few times around the block. You cannot make up for time and experience. So the initial indigenous products will always involve a lot of risk. Risk costs money.

The chinis are willing to shoulder the cost of those risks because they believe the eventual rewards of a homegrown industry are greater than the cost. We are not, that is why we have engine "projects" but not an engine industry yet.

It takes billions funded steadily over years to develop an industry. The seeming cap in the millions (not billions) alloted to the Kaveri ensure that it remains just a lab project.

But who knows maybe if the PLAAF could just buy a F404 off the shelf like we could, they would have done things the same way we have. If they could buy C-17s and Sea Guardians, they might not have the Y-20 or a drone industry either.

Our access to the best phoren gear that rupees can buy is both a boon and a bane.

kit · Post by **kit** » 08 Dec 2020 22:10

deleted

kit · Post by **kit** » 08 Dec 2020 22:13

chola wrote:
We have the better plane in the C-17. But we have 11 onlee and there won't be any new ones built. The Y-20 OTOH is ramping up and will be built in the hundreds and in variants from tanker to AWACS.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... -test-base

one can buy only so much from outside.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 09 Dec 2020 00:18

I appear to be lost when I read this thread. All these wonderful machines the chinese make that will apparently cripple us as we remain unable to compete with them, yet their biggest client state is pukistan and the pukis spend their whole life shopping all over the word for jet fighters, helicopters, helicopter gunships, ships, submarines etc and when all these shopping sprees fail then they revert to china. If all this chinese maal is so good why do the pukies do what they do. Anyone???

Example

https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27676 ... 8_CSNj7SUk

Turkey Hires Washington Lobbyist to Help Clear Helicopter Sale to Pakistan

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-china ... 5M20150402

Pakistan PM approves deal to buy eight Chinese submarines: official

"The Pakistani official also said that Pakistan had been in talks with France to buy new submarines, but the proposal was declined by the French."

chola · Post by **chola** » 09 Dec 2020 00:39

^^^ Lisa, everything the pukes can get from America is better than the chini maal. Everything WE can get from the Amreekis is better than chini maal.

But as pointed out earlier in this thread -- there is only so much we can buy from the outside.

Can our 5 Rafales (even if they were fully integrated) be enough to take on hundreds of J-10s in an extended war? Can the 11 C-17s make up for scores of Y-20s now and hundreds in the future?

Even more importantly, if we do not go to war but continue in the chini mode of putting ships and aircraft into places that other can't and claim fait accompli? Competition takes place in peace-time 99.999% of time especially among great powers and especially with Cheen.

So can we afford enough gold-plated gora maal to push back in peace time? No we cannot. We need our own affordable ware instead of going to Amreeka (or France if Amreeka says no) like the pakis.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 09 Dec 2020 00:46

Very well said Chola. India ignores lessons from Chinese Industrial Revolution to her peril. Anyone that has competed against China knows that the initial products are way below standard but at throw away prices. Steadily product quality goes up.

India must replicate the Chinese model and improve, customize it and produce its own or else be sidelined and forgotten by history. You don't make history by being the largest importer in the world. That is a plaque of shame and not honor.

chola · Post by **chola** » 09 Dec 2020 02:02

^^^ Yes, it is Business 101. Even if it is crap as long as you can sell it then you're in the game. As long as you are in the game then you can get better and sell more.

At the end of the day, Pakistan might prefer Western maal but they have 150 JF-17s and getting more, have hundreds of Al Khalids and other chini IFVs and getting more and will be getting chini frigates and subs. Did the preponderance of chini systems turn the pukes into a non-threat? Of course not. The pakis settled for chini stuff because they were functional at the very least.

The truth is the chinis sell not only to the Pakis. They are now the number two arms seller in the world after the US.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 67462.html

TBH, I would kill to have a Pakistan-sized nation buy frigates and subs from CSL and MDL and fighters from HAL (even if they were always shopping around for deals from the US and Europe.)

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Dec 2020 07:01

chola wrote:Can our 5 Rafales (even if they were fully integrated) be enough to take on hundreds of J-10s in an extended war? Can the 11 C-17s make up for scores of Y-20s now and hundreds in the future?

Kindly define the time or length of extended war. One Month? Six Months? One Year? And why would an Indo-China war take that extended length of time? I am not referring to the current Indo-China standoff, but rather a full blown military conflict...with all guns blazing. I would love to know. I hope you are aware that a current, full blown war will be over in a week. By the end of that week, there will be a total destruction of either India or China's offensive capability (in that theatre) to wage a successful military campaign to achieve a victory. The sheer firepower of weaponry, combined with a precision strike capability will achieve that. The loss for the loser will be devastating, both in terms of men and material. It will be suicidal to send even more resources into the theatre, which will likely see the same result.

Also please advise that if the PLAAF moves hundreds of J-10s (and other planes) into the Tibetan theater, from which other theatres are they pulling these aircraft from and what capability deficiencies will those other theatres face from the lack of aircraft to defend those theatres? India is not the only enemy that China has. China has conflicts with virtually all its neighbours. Is the PLAAF really willing to starve their other theatres to give the IAF a bloody nose?

Also please advise on the level of serviceability of the J-10 (and other planes) to sustain a full blown Indo-China war for an extended length of time. Or is the reasoning of the PLAAF going to be that if 100 hundred are not serviceable, there are another 300 still available? Is that honestly going to be the line of reasoning?

Y-20 existed in numbers even during the present Indo-China standoff, but yet India has been able to match the numbers of men and material at the border. So what will the scores (or hundreds as you so eloquently put it) of Y-20s do in a future Indo-China War? How much material does the PLA really need to defeat India, that it will take hundreds of Y-20s?

Five Rafales? I guess the other combat aircraft in IAF service will be doing nothing and everything will be left to five Rafales to defend Indian airspace. What is the point of this un-necessary dhoti-shivering that you are doing? Really, what is the point?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Dec 2020 07:12

Lisa wrote:I appear to be lost when I read this thread. All these wonderful machines the chinese make that will apparently cripple us as we remain unable to compete with them, yet their biggest client state is pukistan and the pukis spend their whole life shopping all over the word for jet fighters, helicopters, helicopter gunships, ships, submarines etc and when all these shopping sprees fail then they revert to china. If all this chinese maal is so good why do the pukies do what they do. Anyone???

Why Sir are you asking such logical questions? Tauba, Tauba!

Please go to your place of worship (if you believe in a divine force) and do penance for such "unholy" thoughts.

Please remember these following rules;

1) Chinese have the world's best military capability. It surpasses even America.
2) Always be in awe of what the Chinese state they have achieved. Anything less, would be an insult to Mao's memory.
3) Chinese R&D is so top-notch, that they don't even have a R&D division. Whatever they make, works at the very first go.

If you still have such thoughts, I forbid you from ever posting in this thread again. Be afraid, be very afraid of the Chinese.

The only countries that buy these world-renowned military products from China are Pakistan and some African nations that have decided to become assimilated into the larger "Xi" collective. Resistance against Xi is futile. Their life, as it has been - is over. From this time forward, they will service only Xi.

chola · Post by **chola** » 09 Dec 2020 07:58

^^^ Admiral Saar! You are entirely correct! I do not know what came over me to post such drivel!

I'll stay away from posting such dhoti shivering stuff from now on.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 09 Dec 2020 09:07

Admiral Saar - Chanakya says - never underestimate your enemy, learn from him to beat him. India is not a weak nation by any standards and can defend against combined Chin-Pak offensive because of the skill of her forces. Hardware choices of Indian forces give them the ability to mount a capable defense while keeping India poor devoid of a profitable Military Industrial Complex that a) saves money, b) improves equipment availability, c) provides influence over other nations and d) provides good paying jobs to 100s of 1000s.

But like Chola pointed out, the means to mount a credible offensive are limited at least on a two front scale. And we keep believing that in the next 5 years that will be taken care of, forgetting that while new weapons come in, older ones face obsolescence and must be phased out. With a procurement system that is a disgrace, acquiring new weapons takes decades putting the forces in a continued shortage situation. The only solution is to nurture a capable, domestic MIC. The LCA, Dhruv, LCH, Arjun, Astra, Arihant, Shivalik, Akash, INSAS, Pinaka and others have laid a nascent, shaky foundation of this MIC. However, the nurturing part is missing - i.e. order of LCA MK1A moved from March to December and yet not released probably because the imported ink has dried.

Today there are 8 Rafales, tomorrow there will be 36. But the enemy will not wait and sit on their hands - they will add additional hardware too. Therefore the MK1A orders are too late. The MK1 could have been exploited to the fullest but has not been. What is it that the Ramayana taught us - "Ghar ka Bhedi, Lanka dhaaye". The perceived lack of support to the MK1 and MK1A will destroy HAL's ability to market the aircraft worldwide.

kit · Post by **kit** » 09 Dec 2020 14:18

Vivek K wrote:Admiral Saar - Chanakya says - never underestimate your enemy, learn from him to beat him.....

well said ; look at some threads promoting the F18s and F35s for the IN !!.., i would say if you want foreign stuff then lease and if you to own something buy Indian.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Dec 2020 23:12

Vivek K wrote:Admiral Saar - Chanakya says - never underestimate your enemy, learn from him to beat him.....

Simple Question. Please answer.

Q. The Chinese are eons ahead of us in manufacturing. No contest there. And that is true even in the present Indo-China standoff. Why would their advantage in weaponry (in quantity and quality) and manufacturing skills not give them a decisive win over India RIGHT NOW? The advantage is so lopsided in their favour, that war should be over before one sneezes and India should lose and lose BADLY. Why does war with China have to be an extended affair or a war of long attrition? Please explain. I would love to know.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 09 Dec 2020 23:30

Rakesh wrote:
Vivek K wrote:Admiral Saar - Chanakya says - never underestimate your enemy, learn from him to beat him.....
Simple Question. Please answer.

Q. The Chinese are eons ahead of us in manufacturing. No contest there. And that is true even in the present Indo-China standoff. Why would their advantage in weaponry (in quantity and quality) and manufacturing skills not give them a decisive win over India RIGHT NOW? Why does war with China have to be an extended affair or a war of long attrition? Please explain. I would love to know.

Admiral saar - Not sure what your angle is - forgive if I miss the point.

The way I read it, you're actually strengthening my point. You seem to suggest that India will lose either way - short war or long war because of their superior MIC. Is that a correct understanding of the question? I may not agree completely about losing. The question is - can we maintain an edge over the enemy through imports?

Indian MIC - nonexistent. Chinese MIC - in full gear. So India will fight with its existing hardware plus the 8 Rafales today (2 are trainers) and more come in by Feb. LCA besides the 20 IOC, have not added nor has any new order been placed so the 20 will fight and do a great job. So IAF will deploy 280 or so MKIs, 50+ M2Ks, 100+ Mig-21s, 6 Rafale fighters, 20 LCAs, 125+ Jags, any remaining Mig-27s.

Attrition: Will play a major role with high number of sorties and every available fighter pressed into service with IAF stretched on two fronts. So IAF may run out of spares defending the North and Western borders . However with support from SAMs and strike capability of Brahmos etc. and the existing fleet, IAF will hold the line though fleet strength could be effected. However, there may be very limited offensive deep strikes beside limited CAS in the North. In the west, if IAF can decimate PAF, that is where it may be used as an offensive force.

So not sure what you're saying. The point is simple, a domestic MIC provides higher sortie rate because of higher availability of spares even in a short war. It also provides more local jobs, influence over nations that buy from you etc. And foreign fighters become obsolete with time and with our corrupt/incompetent procurement system, finding replacements or negotiating/completing upgrades takes decades. So the only way to maintain an edge is a local MIC that keeps feeding the forces with new products. But to get a local MIC - it has to be nurtured with Orders. Making local defense producers wait for orders and payments to meet obligations to foreign suppliers is not nurturing - it is actually destroying the MIC.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 09 Dec 2020 23:34

Our Admiral is using his Nelson’s eye on their parades

Have you seen their parades ?
(not my words but Foreign Minister Jaishankar’s)

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Dec 2020 23:43

Vivek Saar, this is my point. It is very simple onlee.

Chinese have mass production. Chinese have a larger air force. Chinese have a larger weaponry on hand. India has little production. India has a smaller air force and India has a smaller quantity of weapon on hand.

And based on what the Chinese say, the PL-15 BVRAAM has a range of 300 km. What is 150 km Meteor and 110 km Astra Mk1 going to do, against the 300 km PL-15? You mentioned a domestic MIC providing a higher sortie rate. But with a 300 km range missile, how many of our aircraft will actually be around to do a second sortie? They should all be shot down from the sky in their very first sortie. You are aware that is how it works, right? I wonder how many of our pilots in Ladakh right now, realise that a war time sortie will result in 100% suicide for them. I pity those poor Mirage 2000, Su-30MKI and Rafale pilots. All going to die onlee.

And this is just one BVRAAM in the PLAAF. The Chinese Armed Forces have a strong advantage in every sphere. I wonder why the Chinese, who NEVER adhere to any agreement (neither side is permitted to use weapons at each other, at the border apparently), decided to resort to clubs with barbed wire against our troops? They should have used their superior manufacturing skills, greater weaponry and just beaten & humiliated India into submission. Back in May, there was no Rafale either. Defeat was (and still is) inevitable for India. What is holding the Chinese back? Please tell me. When you have the advantage, why not make use of that advantage? What is the point of the advantage then? For catwalk at a fashion show?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Dec 2020 23:47

And Vivek, before you hit that reply button, please think about how R&D works. How military platforms take years, sometime decades, to get up to spec. How the people who operate that machinery have to know their platform really well, in order for it to be effective.

And after you have done that, please explain how these laws apply to the rest of planet earth but it miraculously never applies to the Chinese. Why is that folks on BRF dhoti shiver at seeing large quantities of Y-20s, J-20s and immediately come to the conclusion that India is doomed.

By the way Saar, I have started on my Mandorin and Cantonese classes. Are you ready for the Xi assimilation? I certainly am. I don't even consider myself to be Indian anymore. I now a member of the "assimilated" Han race. Certainly cannot expect to join the league of the "pure" Han.

My financial portfolio has investments in the Aviation Industry Corporation of China, the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group, the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation and the Xi'an Aircraft Industrial Corporation. All hail Xi!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Dec 2020 00:00

How could a Chinese AESA radar fail? My goodness. I am shocked

Must be Fake News onlee!

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 69440?s=20 ---> A media report says that Pakistan's JF-17 Blk-3 program is delayed due to low MTBF of Chinese AESA radars along with subpar TRM reliability and other integration issues.

But if the same was reported about India's Uttam AESA, it would be believed right away and this would be the reaction of some on BRF.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Dec 2020 00:19

This is not artwork. This is an actual photo of a Chinese sixth generation plane undergoing flight testing. The artwork appearance is because it is moving at hypersonic speeds which normal cameras cannot keep up with.

Design was conceptualized and completed in one week, first flight was on 07 Dec 2020, mass production and induction will commence on Dec 14. Production rate is estimated to be around 36 aircraft per month. And 36 Rafales will take three years for delivery to be complete. Rafale was a waste of money onlee.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 10 Dec 2020 00:26

^^^ Did khan publish the form of their secretive 6th gen?

Rakesh wrote:How could a Chinese AESA radar fail? My goodness. I am shocked Must be Fake News onlee!

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 69440?s=20 ---> A media report says that Pakistan's JF-17 Blk-3 program is delayed due to low MTBF of Chinese AESA radars along with subpar TRM reliability and other integration issues.

Dont under estimate the chinese, saar! If its main radar starts smelling of bakelite like most chinese devices do, the Bundaar will switch on the AESA on one of the PL-15 it carries and then fires it forward, It will keep following the missile at a safe distance, until it finds a plane or plain. Then it fires the next PL-15 and keep following it. So on. Dont forget PL-15 has a 250km wiki-range and hence outranges LCA AESA at around 120km

(Or so the wisdom goes of this thread)

chola · Post by **chola** » 10 Dec 2020 00:44

@Vivek @Admiral

Vivek ji, I appreciate your arguments and I do not want to abandon you once the discussion gets hot! But the truth the chini mil space is secondary to my main interest in BRF and that's the indigenous systems like the LCA, Dhruv and INS Vikrant etc that I've followed here for literally decades. The chini MIC in this thread is simply a bludgeon I use to encourage the thought of an Indian MIC. If posting chini stuff leads to dhoti-shivering then I'll desist.

Admiral, you should know from my past body of posts that I see Cheen as one who doesn't like kinetic warfare and will always opt to do things in the gray zone. Overwhelming you with machines and infrastrtucture during peace time. In fact, I had advocated for kinetic warfare since Doklam and had been banned multiple times for suggesting it!

As I always say the chini MIC will be most dangerous during peace time not war. But at any rate I'll desist from posting on them because frankly I want to be around for the more important stuff (after being banned for two months out of the last three!)

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 10 Dec 2020 02:33

Rakesh wrote:And Vivek, before you hit that reply button, please think about how R&D works. How military platforms take years, sometime decades, to get up to spec. How the people who operate that machinery have to know their platform really well, in order for it to be effective.

And after you have done that, please explain how these laws apply to the rest of planet earth but it miraculously never applies to the Chinese. Why is that folks on BRF dhoti shiver at seeing large quantities of Y-20s, J-20s and immediately come to the conclusion that India is doomed.

By the way Saar, I have started on my Mandorin and Cantonese classes. Are you ready for the Xi assimilation? I certainly am. I don't even consider myself to be Indian anymore. I now a member of the "assimilated" Han race. Certainly cannot expect to join the league of the "pure" Han.

My financial portfolio has investments in the Aviation Industry Corporation of China, the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group, the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation and the Xi'an Aircraft Industrial Corporation. All hail Xi!

Extremely distasteful! Again - it is you who should read what the other person is saying before responding. I am yet again surprised by low attacks of someone who is a BRF admin. Show me a line where there is Dhoti shiver.

For your information - there is enough R&D in the LCA. It needs orders that it does not have. If this was China, an aircraft of the caliber of the LCA would have received an order of 200 copies. I suggest you use a dictionary (not in Mandarin or Cantonese) but probably in english. It is obvious you have nothing to resort to than your day-night worship of imports condemning Indian ingenuity. Personal attacks do not yield anything but flame wars - as an admin you should at least know as much!

Also for your lecture on R&D and your superior knowledge of it Can you explain why the Arjun lacks orders while the IA orders 1000s of tanks

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Dec 2020 02:39

You are unable to answer even this simple question of mine and pivoting the discussion away. Nice try. I ask again....

When a 300 km range PL-15 BVRAAM outranges the 110 km Astra Mk1 fitted on the Tejas, what is the guarantee that the Tejas is going to come home or as you put it, "....a domestic MIC provides higher sortie rate because of higher availability of spares even in a short war."

When your local and phoren planes are all shot out of the sky, what is the value of a local MIC or your phoren maal? Can you recover the planes lost or the pilots lost, even in a short war?

I will stand by my dhoti shivering comment, because that is what is going on in this thread. Propping up an enemy whose entire claim to fame, lies in deceit & lies. Not a single thing is verifiable, but 100% believable because the Chinese say so. And then use that to justify purchasing this or that.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 10 Dec 2020 06:51

Germany blocks takeover of satellite firm IMST by Chinese defence firm.

Germany has blocked the takeover of satellite and radar technology firm IMST by China Aerospace and Industry Group (CASIC),China’s a subsidiary of state-controlled missile manufacturer, on national security concerns, a government document showed on Tuesday.

IMST GmbH, Germany is a research-driven industrial engineering and design house specialising in radio technologies and microelectronics.

Germany’s relations with China have lately soured with increasing trade tensions over unfair competition by state-backed Chinese enterprises and restrictions on market access.

IMST is an important provider of satellite communication, radar and radio technology, and its know-how is crucial for national security, according to documents with German government.

IMST is also needed for necessary technology in the construction of critical infrastructure in the future, including 5G and 6G networks. “IMST is also an important partner of the German Aerospace Center . In various cases, IMST’s products and services were also the subject of deliveries to the Bundeswehr armed forces,” says the document.

While China is naive to open its market to foreign products and firms, reports citing Chinese foreign ministry sources said Beijing is unaware of the developments, but that the government always encourages Chinese companies to carry out “mutually beneficial” investments overseas.

“We hope that countries, including Germany, will provide Chinese companies that are operating normally with a fair, open and non-discriminatory market environment, and not politicise normal economic and trade cooperation, (or) use ‘national security’ as a pretext to engage.

Germany has lowered the threshold for screening and even blocking purchases of stakes in German firms by non-Europeans in a move to fend off unwanted takeover attempts mainly by state-backed Chinese investors in strategic areas.

Under the new rules, Berlin can intervene on grounds of public interest if a non-European investor buys a 10 per cent stake in a company, against 25 per cent earlier.

There have been several Chinese attempts to take over German firms, including a proposed takeover of toolmaker Leifeld and power grid operator 50Hertz in 2018.

In August, the government rejected a bid by China’s Vital Materials Co to buy PPM Pure Metals, which supplies to the German military.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 10 Dec 2020 07:09

Can our 5 Rafales (even if they were fully integrated) be enough to take on hundreds of J-10s in an extended war? Can the 11 C-17s make up for scores of Y-20s now and hundreds in the future?

Imo this quote wasn't meant literally. It was just meant to emphasize the value of domestic MIC.

Rafales probably could take down dozens of J10s at a time the PL-15 might not have 300km range or even a 100km range but that is not the point. The enviable and the true dhoti-shivering thing about chinese is that they stick with their mediocre products and produce them in hundreds or thousands. It's true with their engines, tanks, guns, ships, ACs etc. One poster pointed out that if LCA was chinese they would have ordered 200 of it by now and i think it wouldn't be far from reality.

Rakesh sir brought up the Uttam vs chinese aesa on the bandar. I don't think the trump meme was accurate. The J-17 Aesa is produced in the hundreds and even if there are issues, then chinese will solve it and hence pakis don't say "we've become sloppy" and we don't say "fake news". But for Uttam, it's not in production and as such any issues will get great attention. Combined with our habit of destroying our domestic products for one minor issue or the other and the "we've become sloppy" concerns become completely justified. If we were producing Uttam in hundreds, nobody would care about any issues either.

And this is the issue with 5 Rafales vs 100s of J10s. It gets brought up because the Mk1a order still hasn't been signed. If we were producing 20-30 LCA a year along with orders for Arjun, correcting the issues of insas (instead of buying 72k rifles here and 36k rifles there), getting Kaveri in production etc then Rafales would be the perfect cherry on top. But with things as they are, there is no cake and the cherry is just a cruel reminder of it. And this isn't the fault of the current gov or the services, this is just our habit of not believing in ourselves.

Anyway, just my 2c.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Dec 2020 08:55

saini saar, please do not call me sir

The "competition in peacetime" theory will work, only when the products are actually useable. Please do not get me wrong, no one is dismissing the Chinese threat. But just because the Chinese claim they have "XYZ" product with "ABC" capability, that does not necessarily mean that it is true. Much of their claims are hyperbole, because they suffer from superpower complex syndrome. In their maniacal quest to be a superpower, they have cut a lot of corners. That works just fine in ChiCom, where everything is censored. So when stuff does not work, no one knows about it. And yes, they continue to refine it, till it works and that is evident in the scores of platforms that they churn out. But even the stuff they induct is not rosy, despite their attempt to portray otherwise.

Now unfortunately in India, we have a tiny little problem called democracy and that democracy works hand-in-glove with our hallowed bureaucracy. Both are detrimental to local military projects ever seeing the light of day. Even phoren acquisitions suffer this fate. The bureaucrats have one agenda and the government of the day has another. Most times they are not even on the same page. And to make matters worse, the government of the day is not eternal. Every five years, we have an event called general elections and if the ruling govt loses, then the new government comes in with its own set of agendas. What the previous govt did is squashed and new plans are set in motion. None of this exists in China. It is lunacy to compare China's military programs, with that of India's.

And in the midst of all this, lies the services who have wish lists and desires of their own. Those desires and wish lists have to survive not just the guillotine of the government, but that of the bureaucracy as well. It is a miracle how our armed forces function, but they do. It is not by any means perfect, but the system - in some twisted, weird way - functions. This present govt has done a lot to unwrangle the mess, but the tentacles of lobbies and their agendas are deep and they cannot be switched off, at the blink of an eye.

Take a look at the ATAGS program. Any other previous govt (NDA or UPA) other than this one, would have gladly given up at the first barrel burst of ATAGS and bought a phoren product. Like all military programs the world over, ATAGS has developmental issues that need to be overcome. It is a miracle that the Modi Govt is sticking with ATAGS, despite whatever teething issues she has. Because this govt sees the value in the program. The army in turn also has to play along and stick with it. Despite all the myriad of issues, look at all the successes in missiles, artillery, ship building and yes even combat aircraft programs. Who would have thought when Tejas TD-1 flew on 04 Jan 2001 (almost 20 years ago), then in 2021 there would be offshoots of that program in the works?

I see that some just want to come to BRF to whine and complain about the system, but do nothing themselves to change it. Whining on BRF solves nothing. But yet, they come everyday on the forum only to whine. For what, is a mystery to me. Day in and day out, it is the same regurgitated speech --- we are only importing, we will never become strong, we are funding phoren MIC, Tejas is better than Rafale and Rafale is waste of money, etc, etc, etc. BR cannot change the system. We are a bunch of jingos onlee

Tejas Mk1 is indeed a great plane, but ask the IAF if they are willing to retire all their present combat aircraft and replace them with the Tejas Mk1 or even the Tejas Mk1A. Do you think that will pass muster at Air HQ? Rafale plays a role, Su-30 plays a role and even Tejas plays a role. But you cannot ask Tejas to do what Su-30 or Rafale does. No amount of whining on BRF is going to change that fact. The Mk1 does not even have the endurance of the Su-30 or the Rafale. Folks who don't understand the nuances of air combat operations and ORBATs are posting on BRF and giving gyan on what the IAF should buy and criticize the IAF for being import pasand. Crude Example - That is like me going from Kerala (my hometown) to Punjab, to teach my Punjabi countrymen on how to make chole bhature.

To quote Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa (retd) Sir, "The IAF is capable of giving the PLAAF a bloody nose." The IAF losses will certainly exist and will likely be high. But how much damage is the PLAAF really willing to take to teach the IAF a lesson? A wise PLAAF general will know the answer to that question and it is best that question is not answered. Saar, everyone knows the PL-15 cannot do 300 kms. Only the NaPakis believe that and they are giddy that the JF-17 will be soon armed with that missile which will give them superiority over the Rafale.

At the end of the day and numerous back and forth posts - the question is still unanswered. If the Chinese are this militarily advanced (in production capacity, local MIC, quantity and quality of weaponry) why is there now a standoff (almost a year) at the Indo-China border? What is stopping the Chinese from putting their advantage into play? Or do they actually have a military advantage at the border? Even the ones who are over awed about the Chinese MIC know the answer to that question. But to admit that is hara kiri.

But reportedly, I am one the lobbing insults. Okay!

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 10 Dec 2020 09:57

+1008

The ATAGS example sums it up really nicely. Also true that if the cheenis were *that* much ahead of us militarily, they'd have reached delhi by now. Afterall, with us, they don't have to consider the nook-bum threat like we have to, with the pukis

I think a lot of frustration comes because for some things it seems so extremely obvious what we should be doing while in reality, we do the complete opposite instead. It gets pointed out a lot of times that Kaveri and the chini WS series were at a similar stage and getting tested at the same time in Russia. Kaveri now is nowhere close to WS which has multiple variants in production. So anytime, cheenis show off a new weapon or capability, be it the Y-20 or their recent moon landings, there is some justified uneasiness.

Anyway, our system seems to have a lot of inertia built into it compared to the chinese but hopefully, when it gets going, it'll be that much more organic.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Dec 2020 10:43

Are the Chinks planning a winter surprise for us as some infer, similar to Hitler's Ardennes lightning campaign ( Battle of the Bulge) taking advantage of the ongoing political situ?Farmer's agit,state/local elections? The augurs aren't good and we may see a JV situ complicating the situ. The GOI can't drop its guard.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 10 Dec 2020 11:34

The only problem we may face with lizards may be the numbers. Crap they may be but too much crap is a problem. That is all. Rest we will believe when we see them in actual action.

Having said that we have too many gaps in our IN and IAF due to small numbers and non availability critical equipment, like towed sonar arrays or helicopters etc. Down the line it may be very problematic. Since it takes year and years to rectify this situation it would be better start asap.

chola · Post by **chola** » 10 Dec 2020 21:12

m_saini wrote:+1008

The ATAGS example sums it up really nicely. Also true that if the cheenis were *that* much ahead of us militarily, they'd have reached delhi by now. Afterall, with us, they don't have to consider the nook-bum threat like we have to, with the pukis

I think a lot of frustration comes because for some things it seems so extremely obvious what we should be doing while in reality, we do the complete opposite instead. It gets pointed out a lot of times that Kaveri and the chini WS series were at a similar stage and getting tested at the same time in Russia. Kaveri now is nowhere close to WS which has multiple variants in production. So anytime, cheenis show off a new weapon or capability, be it the Y-20 or their recent moon landings, there is some justified uneasiness.

Anyway, our system seems to have a lot of inertia built into it compared to the chinese but hopefully, when it gets going, it'll be that much more organic.

That hits the nail on the head, Saini ji. I almost never post anything about their so-called super duper claims like the rail guns, H-20, WU-14 hyperglide, etc. Check the thread. I can say I have NEVER posted on how "good" any of their super duper stuff is. Frankly, there are no pictures and they don't interest me.

The things that do interests are those that parallel our own development. So I (re)post tweets about the Y-20 and the WS-20 or the J-10/J-20 and WS-10 because I followed the LCA/Kaveri for decades and those were our rivals. I post about their carriers because I follow the Viraat and original Vikrant when I was young and then the Vikramaditya and now Vikrant intensively. The LHD/LPDs because of our LPD/MRSV program.

I do compare them with our projects and yes it is frustrating. Maybe as the Admiral says that is dhoti shivering too. I might be blind to the effect I have when I do that. The purpose I guess is to compare and hope we would support our indigenous programs and products the same way. If it comes out wrong and becomes an exercise in dhoti-shivering then I apologize.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 11 Dec 2020 11:22

chola wrote:
Cain Marko wrote: We are discussing this in the context of the IN - there is little doubt that PLAN have more than enough infra and assets to manage a lone Indian CBG (65k ton or not) in their neighborhood. The article earlier in the thread points to the fact that Chinese capability keeps on increasing - whether it is good enough to tackle the might of USN is questionable, but let us no kid ourselves, the IN is nowhere close to that kind of strength.. As far as QE class capability is concerned, nobody denies it (as indicated in my last post). One just questions its usefulness for the IN - if the main purpose is sea control, managing the IOR and TSP, and flag waving - what is the need for a 65k CV? Especially when crucial holes remain in operational capability.
Marko ji, a 65K ton CATOBAR is an investment in our future as a power in the IOR. The 65K ton STOBAR QE, as Brar says, is an anomaly for the UK's situation of being integrated with the USN. They don't need a carrier-launch AEW for instance because they expect that asset from their allues.

Without the CATOBAR, we are slowly condemning our carrier arm which once reigned surpreme in Asia to the second tier and possibly obsolescent.

I understand that there are holes that needs to be filled but the truth is India has the third largest military budget in the world. It cannot afford a vessel that keeps it carrier arm -- considered the pinnacle of naval power -- viable?

It would be different if India were like Russia who never really had a proper history with carriers. In that case, I would say yes let's go with subs and long ranged missiles from surface vessels. But that's not case here. We've built an institution with the Vikrant and Viraat that all but a handful of other navies would kill for. It is imperative that we continue and build on it. Stagnating or even losing it, we go from being seen as an expanding power to one that looks like it is being relegated to the second tier even in the IOR.

Chola sir. One of the reasons that BRFites point out as to why India cannot compete with the Dragon is because desh doesn't support homegrown products. Always looking to get something better/bigger - be it an import or some insane ASQR issued to the defence PSU. Or piecemeal type orders. Ityadi.
Now instead of buying more Vikrant class, we change goalpost and want soopah carrier. Arrey baba, first why not get the low hanging fruit. It will come much faster and will be good enough for IN's carrier heritage and IOR needs. Perfect here is truly the enemy of good.

chola · Post by **chola** » 11 Dec 2020 17:14

^^^ The 65K-ton CATOBAR is hardly a pursuit of the perfect, Marko ji. It is a decidedly practical approach for a capability that the US and Cheen put on much larger ships. Secondly, it will not be phoren. No one will be selling us a CATOBAR (unless we can finagle an US supercarrier out of mothball!)

The fact is STOBAR, even paired with the F-35, is a far inferior form of carrier air operation. It cannot launch fully loaded aircraft. It cannot launch COD, ASW and, most importantly, AEW fixed wings. You are basically hand-cuffed with this system. For the IN, operating this system only will relegate its carrier arm to the second tier.

What the IN is asking for is totally reasonable. They are not asking for a 100k ton behemoth. Even the chini and Russian STOBARs are 65K tons.

A second Vikrant would still take a decade. Yes, it will take less time than a CATOBAR but waiting a decade for an inherently compromised capability is hardly a good investment. The IN, IMO, is correct in wanting to wait a few more years for full capability with a catapult-capable carrier.

Aldonkar · Post by **Aldonkar** » 11 Dec 2020 22:49

Vips wrote:Germany blocks takeover of satellite firm IMST by Chinese defence firm.

Germany has blocked the takeover of satellite and radar technology firm IMST by China Aerospace and Industry Group (CASIC),China’s a subsidiary of state-controlled missile manufacturer, on national security concerns, a government document showed on Tuesday.

IMST GmbH, Germany is a research-driven industrial engineering and design house specialising in radio technologies and microelectronics.

Germany’s relations with China have lately soured with increasing trade tensions over unfair competition by state-backed Chinese enterprises and restrictions on market access.

IMST is an important provider of satellite communication, radar and radio technology, and its know-how is crucial for national security, according to documents with German government.

IMST is also needed for necessary technology in the construction of critical infrastructure in the future, including 5G and 6G networks. “IMST is also an important partner of the German Aerospace Center . In various cases, IMST’s products and services were also the subject of deliveries to the Bundeswehr armed forces,” says the document.

While China is naive to open its market to foreign products and firms, reports citing Chinese foreign ministry sources said Beijing is unaware of the developments, but that the government always encourages Chinese companies to carry out “mutually beneficial” investments overseas.

“We hope that countries, including Germany, will provide Chinese companies that are operating normally with a fair, open and non-discriminatory market environment, and not politicise normal economic and trade cooperation, (or) use ‘national security’ as a pretext to engage.

Germany has lowered the threshold for screening and even blocking purchases of stakes in German firms by non-Europeans in a move to fend off unwanted takeover attempts mainly by state-backed Chinese investors in strategic areas.

Under the new rules, Berlin can intervene on grounds of public interest if a non-European investor buys a 10 per cent stake in a company, against 25 per cent earlier.

There have been several Chinese attempts to take over German firms, including a proposed takeover of toolmaker Leifeld and power grid operator 50Hertz in 2018.

In August, the government rejected a bid by China’s Vital Materials Co to buy PPM Pure Metals, which supplies to the German military.

About three or four years ago, a German firm that makes robots was taken over by a Chinese firm. The German firm, KUKA makes robots for production lines in the auto and aircraft industries . Most of their robots are a bright orange colour. They supply allthe major German manufacturers and companies such as Airbus.

When the clients realised what had happened, there was uproar in the German business community and the Government resolved to put such takeovers under tighter scrutiny.

chola · Post by **chola** » 11 Dec 2020 23:22

^^^ If they can't buy it, they'll steal it.

But I would imagine it is far better to buy and get the full picture.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 13 Dec 2020 21:31

Now really,

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... ton-system

PLA border patrol unit in Tibet using new exoskeleton system

May I please ask for al Indian forces due north of Delhi to be recalled as all is now lost! Supermen are here!! (will wonders never cease?)

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 13 Dec 2020 22:53

Lisa wrote:Now really,

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... ton-system

PLA border patrol unit in Tibet using new exoskeleton system

May I please ask for al Indian forces due north of Delhi to be recalled as all is now lost! Supermen are here!! (will wonders never cease?)

Looks like walkers used by old people with hip problems and if you need these for 20kgs load, then their troops does not seem to be doing well at altitude of 5000m or have very basic fitness issues.

But I am underestimating China, discouraging Indian industry and having impure thoughts about Xitler in a yellow onesie.... 100 stribes and isolation for me