What's new

China All Su-35 news

How do you know those SAM systems are 'highly capable' in the first place? Ever thought of that?


It proved at least one thing: that bombing is capable and more than the PLA have done.


How do you know when the PLA have no comparable combat experience?

My post must have struck a cord with you.

First, SAMs are as tested the fighter jets mentioned above, the problem is the west has been too scared to even deploy any of their fighters to go up against any modern SAMs.

Secondly, Whats the difference between the West and China? China conduct exercises dropping smart bombs as part of their training. They don't target foreign civilian government buildings and alleged military installations.

Finally, American military's mentality is pretty well known, when the going gets tough the Americans stalls or retreats. That sums up American military adventurism post WWII.
 
My post must have struck a cord with you.
A funny bone, to be exact. :lol:

First, SAMs are as tested the fighter jets mentioned above, the problem is the west has been too scared to even deploy any of their fighters to go up against any modern SAMs.
So how many of those Western jets did these SAMs shot down?

Secondly, Whats the difference between the West and China? China conduct exercises dropping smart bombs as part of their training. They don't target foreign civilian government buildings and alleged military installations.
We dropped bombs on test targets as well.

Finally, American military's mentality is pretty well known, when the going gets tough the Americans stalls or retreats. That sums up American military adventurism post WWII.
Iraq and Afghanistan would beg to differ.

You sounds like a twelve yr old. Your 'logic' certainly reflects it.
 
Well, can't say how capable PLA is, but do you agree that they at least have some capability, is it more or less than Saddam's forces?
There is no comparison between the PLA of today to the Iraqi Army of Desert Storm. I will bring it up again -- but the PLA predicted that the US-led alliance would suffer casualties similar to the Vietnam War in winning over Iraq. That prediction seriously embarrassed the PLA and led to the reforms that we see today. I say this kindly -- look at the PLA today and you will see the US military all over.

But at the same time, the US military today is not the same as we were in Desert Storm. It may sounds strange but I was both blase and amazed at what we did in Desert Storm in terms of overwhelming an enemy. I was blase at how well we integrated our forces and attacks but amazed at the scale of it, as in utter domination of the battlefields (plural). All armies practices combined arms tactics to some degrees, even back in WW I, but no one did it on the scale that we did as in Desert Storm, and it was the scale of it that shocked military professionals worldwide. That does not mean we found no flaws in what we did. In fact, analysts immediately took apart successes to find flaws and ways to eliminate or reduce the factors contributed to those flaws. No one, not even the technically minded Germans, did it as swiftly as we did. The depth of self criticisms also shocked military professionals worldwide. It started from the top the rapidly poured, not merely trickled, down to the unit levels. I still remember the briefings outlining how we performed in generating sorties and how it could have better support the air war. The self criticisms portions lasted longer than the self congratulatory speeches.

Like it or not, your PLA is at best as half as professional as the US military. An obvious sign of that arrogance is how military badged cars flaunts traffic laws in China.

Rules of the road in the People's Republic of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A vehicle with a government or military plate are not subject to the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China (中华人民共和国道路交通安全法); they may run red lights, drive in the wrong direction or weave in and out of traffic.
Is this true? In the US, a local sheriff can handcuff a general or admiral easily.

If there is a shooting war between US and China, your PLA will be 'shocked and awed' again. Except this time it will be far worse than being red faced over a report.
 
There is no comparison between the PLA of today to the Iraqi Army of Desert Storm. I will bring it up again -- but the PLA predicted that the US-led alliance would suffer casualties similar to the Vietnam War in winning over Iraq. That prediction seriously embarrassed the PLA and led to the reforms that we see today. I say this kindly -- look at the PLA today and you will see the US military all over.

But at the same time, the US military today is not the same as we were in Desert Storm. It may sounds strange but I was both blase and amazed at what we did in Desert Storm in terms of overwhelming an enemy. I was blase at how well we integrated our forces and attacks but amazed at the scale of it, as in utter domination of the battlefields (plural). All armies practices combined arms tactics to some degrees, even back in WW I, but no one did it on the scale that we did as in Desert Storm, and it was the scale of it that shocked military professionals worldwide. That does not mean we found no flaws in what we did. In fact, analysts immediately took apart successes to find flaws and ways to eliminate or reduce the factors contributed to those flaws. No one, not even the technically minded Germans, did it as swiftly as we did. The depth of self criticisms also shocked military professionals worldwide. It started from the top the rapidly poured, not merely trickled, down to the unit levels. I still remember the briefings outlining how we performed in generating sorties and how it could have better support the air war. The self criticisms portions lasted longer than the self congratulatory speeches.

Like it or not, your PLA is at best as half as professional as the US military. An obvious sign of that arrogance is how military badged cars flaunts traffic laws in China.

Rules of the road in the People's Republic of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is this true? In the US, a local sheriff can handcuff a general or admiral easily.

If there is a shooting war between US and China, your PLA will be 'shocked and awed' again. Except this time it will be far worse than being red faced over a report.

Thank you for at least thinking that we are about half as professional as Americans.

Talking about IRaq war of 03 BTW.

So, do you think you can just as easily steam roll us as you did there? Do you think we are trained the same? Do you think any of our men will surrender like the Iraq army? Do you think the equipment difference is as big.

Also the Germans attacked France, another great power, not a middle eastern nut case.

Lastly, to me professionalism isn't the same as readiness. Our men are well trained, our officers are university graduates, our weapons developed and maintained by experts, That I believe is professionalism.

Readiness is another thing all together.

Now there are obviously things wrong with the army, but that is more of a thinking China won't go to war and thus, some may be a tad more relaxed than they should be. But with the recent, developments, you don't seriously think China isn't even a little prepared for war?



As a side note, I never supported a war with Japan or US. Not because of afriad of loss, but how do you achieve victory? In the sense of a treaty is signed. Same applies to US.

You think China or US will negotiate for peace if there is a defeat? I doubt that, same applies to Japan. So how would victory be achieved,, occupation of Tokyo, or Beijing? How likely do you think either is going to be.

The CCP's legitimacy lies in protecting the people, the minute they admit defeat is the minute they lose their power so I doubt they would admit defeat. As to Japan, seriously, we both seen how they fight. And we can barely hurt US mainland short of Nukes, and that would be bad, cause of MAD.
 
Talking about IRaq war of 03 BTW.

So, do you think you can just as easily steam roll us as you did there? Do you think we are trained the same? Do you think any of our men will surrender like the Iraq army? Do you think the equipment difference is as big.
We will decimate the PLAAF. We will drive the PLAAF from any airspace and we will inflict great damages on many PLAAF bases, to the point that the PLAAF will be rendered either impotent to contribute to the Chinese side of the war or be destroyed completely. We may not do as quickly as we did to the Iraqis back in Desert Storm, but we will achieve the goal of taking Chinese airspace away from the PLAAF.

It is unlikely that there will be a ground war. I will concede that the PLA is too powerful for that. But if we are to set foot on Chinese soil, we will gain some ground temporarily to help prosecute the air war deeper into China. I am not privy to any 'Top Secret' war plans but I am confident that in a shooting fight between US and China, the air war will dominate even more than Desert Storm. So no, I do not expect PLA troops to surrender simply because they will not have anyone to surrender to.

Also the Germans attacked France, another great power, not a middle eastern nut case.
My point was that the Germans are known to be an exacting and methodical people. No different with warfare. So it does not matter who they attacked in history. What mattered was that the Germans were impressed at how quickly we began to analyze the successes of Desert Storm. You should understand that in any event that contains high unpredictability and uncertainty like a war, eyewitnesses memory are crucial and their testimonies should be recorded as soon as possible. It does not matter if you find contradictions, from on high and down low. As long as you can record their testimonies you can correlate or discard later when time permit. We began the process sooner than expected.

Lastly, to me professionalism isn't the same as readiness. Our men are well trained, our officers are university graduates, our weapons developed and maintained by experts, That I believe is professionalism.

Readiness is another thing all together.
Then you have an incomplete understanding of professionalism. Yes, it is not the same as readiness. But professionalism directly influences on how readiness is achieved in terms of metrics and if the direction of readiness is appropriate. For example, since China have access to only one ocean, the Pacific, it would be foolish for the PLAN to have the same amount of aircraft carriers as the USN -- at this time. So if the PLAN is readied but the PLA and the PLAAF have to beg for money because of clashing egos among your generals and admirals, then your readiness is misplaced.

Now there are obviously things wrong with the army, but that is more of a thinking China won't go to war and thus, some may be a tad more relaxed than they should be. But with the recent, developments, you don't seriously think China isn't even a little prepared for war?
Against US? No, China is not prepared. Not even halfway. Your generals and admirals know this.
 
"
AIN asked about the short takeoff demonstrated during the opening day’s performance. Bogdan said the takeoff run was about 250 to 300 meters, thanks to Su-35S’s thrust vectoring and high thrust-to-weight ratio. “Short takeoff is another useful feature of the thrust-vectored Sukhoi fighters,” he said. “We demonstrated it before on the Su-30MKI. More power available on the Su-35S allows me to set the plane into high pitch upon liftoff and then make a sharp turn.”"

High Thrust-to-Weight Propels Su-35S's Paris Demo

Why India not buying Su 35. Its a great machine than Su 30 MKI. Even Super Sukoi may come closer to Su 35 but its not Su 35... please shed some light on it
 
We will decimate the PLAAF. We will drive the PLAAF from any airspace and we will inflict great damages on many PLAAF bases, to the point that the PLAAF will be rendered either impotent to contribute to the Chinese side of the war or be destroyed completely. We may not do as quickly as we did to the Iraqis back in Desert Storm, but we will achieve the goal of taking Chinese airspace away from the PLAAF.

It is unlikely that there will be a ground war. I will concede that the PLA is too powerful for that. But if we are to set foot on Chinese soil, we will gain some ground temporarily to help prosecute the air war deeper into China. I am not privy to any 'Top Secret' war plans but I am confident that in a shooting fight between US and China, the air war will dominate even more than Desert Storm. So no, I do not expect PLA troops to surrender simply because they will not have anyone to surrender to.


My point was that the Germans are known to be an exacting and methodical people. No different with warfare. So it does not matter who they attacked in history. What mattered was that the Germans were impressed at how quickly we began to analyze the successes of Desert Storm. You should understand that in any event that contains high unpredictability and uncertainty like a war, eyewitnesses memory are crucial and their testimonies should be recorded as soon as possible. It does not matter if you find contradictions, from on high and down low. As long as you can record their testimonies you can correlate or discard later when time permit. We began the process sooner than expected.


Then you have an incomplete understanding of professionalism. Yes, it is not the same as readiness. But professionalism directly influences on how readiness is achieved in terms of metrics and if the direction of readiness is appropriate. For example, since China have access to only one ocean, the Pacific, it would be foolish for the PLAN to have the same amount of aircraft carriers as the USN -- at this time. So if the PLAN is readied but the PLA and the PLAAF have to beg for money because of clashing egos among your generals and admirals, then your readiness is misplaced.


Against US? No, China is not prepared. Not even halfway. Your generals and admirals know this.

Question :

When you occupied Iraq you had more air bases around. And Iraqis had no capability to damage them in any sense. On the other hand when the US invades China from it's east;

- 3 air bases in Japan
- 2 air bases in ROK
- 1 air base in Guam

And only the one on Guam is politically legitimate to use in such an invasion. The Japanese might not create that much problem, what I don't see ROK is going to make US use that bases easily for such an invasion.

Second, China has every capability to damage or completely destroy those bases. It's missle force today is overwhelming for any defence since they can send hundereds of them (a considerable amount of them from mobile sites which makes them harder to locate and shoot from air).

I'm not talking about ASAT technology since we don't know how many US satellites it will be able to shoot and what would be it's impact. I will also not talk about Carrier Killer missles because according to my observations about the US military they will keep them out of the game until they are sure about the carrier killer missles won't function.

So I'm quite doubtful that it will be as easy as you think. However even if happens, at the moment an american soldier steps on the Chinese soil (which means PLAAF is losing) than probably you will see an SLBM fired from type094 going to the Washington to kill your president. Don't you think China will press doom's day button if you humiliate them like that?
 
A funny bone, to be exact. :lol:


So how many of those Western jets did these SAMs shot down?


We dropped bombs on test targets as well.


Iraq and Afghanistan would beg to differ.

You sounds like a twelve yr old. Your 'logic' certainly reflects it.

What's funny was when our volunteer army made an absolute total mockery of the the 'invinsible' American military you know when and how :lol:

US has NEVER defeated China and never EVER will. You can bet your 1 bedroom apartment on that son. US can't even beat Iraq and Afghanistan :lol:
If the US fought the PLA now, the PLA would make mince meat out of the overrated and grossly overhyped US military.

Now get back to what you do best.... Grab that playstation controller and play your game kiddo :lol:

Go on now....
 
We will decimate the PLAAF. We will drive the PLAAF from any airspace and we will inflict great damages on many PLAAF bases, to the point that the PLAAF will be rendered either impotent to contribute to the Chinese side of the war or be destroyed completely. We may not do as quickly as we did to the Iraqis back in Desert Storm, but we will achieve the goal of taking Chinese airspace away from the PLAAF.
only if the US moves most its forces to this fictional war within china(let us not forget china has even greater manufracturing capability(amount) than the US and has the capability to strike all near by air bases-carriers included), this would leave vast gaps and duties elsewhere in the world completely unfulfilled. but then things would probably go nuclear so i guess those gaps and duties dont really matter anymore. then again the current goal is not to fight the US, the PLA knows it cannot win in the air or the water in a long war with the US, its goal to be able to cause such losses for the US that they would not fight unless their very core interests are affected(which any chinese leader would take care to avoid)


It is unlikely that there will be a ground war. I will concede that the PLA is too powerful for that. But if we are to set foot on Chinese soil, we will gain some ground temporarily to help prosecute the air war deeper into China. I am not privy to any 'Top Secret' war plans but I am confident that in a shooting fight between US and China, the air war will dominate even more than Desert Storm. So no, I do not expect PLA troops to surrender simply because they will not have anyone to surrender to.
basically the US will have as much luck physically occupying china as the PLA does physically occupying the US(assuming they magically get teleport to the US)
 
Some news on current topic.
Taken from russian media militaryparitet-com_ttp_data_ic_ttp_6009_ which in turn translated from chinese article mil-news-sina-com-cn_2013-07-23_0929732367-html (replace '-' with '.' and '_' with '/' except "2013-07-23". Chinese expert reports his opinion on su-35 deal.
Su-35's (Irbis) radar is more powerful then general fighter airborne radar. By capabilities of this radar U.S. advantage in stealth aircrafts can be significantly pulled down. Then he counts some other su-35's new features. Then he talks about benefits of buying su-35. Some general words and finally: China is very interested in 117s engine. China is still in demand for Russian engines. Also China needs to look carefully at Irbis radar. And at last China wishes to have new russian long range missiles. Since Russia refused to sell single parts or subsystems China needs to buy the whole system i.e. su-35. Also he mentioned that su-35 can help to close gap until J-20 and J-31 will be ready for production.
 
In so far the whole Su-35 deal is still just Russian media reports. I am not sure if any of the stats claimed by the Russians are true since there has not been a third party testing. On the outset, the Su-35 does not stand out as anything different from its predecessors, and the much hyped Irbis radar, which is not even AESA, has not had third party testing and evaluation either.

I think it is prudent to say that, until China has thoroughly evaluated the Su-35, a purchase is still very unlikely. The deal of course can serve a closer ties between China and Russia, but I think more concret building blocks of this relationship is the oil and gas deal.

With all that said, until the contract is signed, all we hear is just rumor.
 
I wonder if Russia hypes up their weapons. Also, they make up claims saying China will purchase their Su-35.
 
Old news. That Russian general was sacked. I guess for talking nonsense.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom