PLA Navy Carrier/Fighters..

[vish]

Well interesting points

1) THE Chinese (unlike the Indians) don't feel a need to tell everyone what they are doing. Despite that here are a few reports for you.

Dude, what is with you and Indians? If the PLAN goes ahead with an aircraft carrier excpect every Pacific navy to make a hue and cry so as to "cash in" on the euphoria. You cannot hide the making of an aircraft carrier.

China's Reform Monitor, May 10:

Citing "high-ranking military officials," Hong Kong's Wen Wei Po
reports that China's military has confirmed plans to build an aircraft carrier fleet. The People's Liberation Army will also boost its development of anti-aircraft-carrier weaponry, and has reopened its production lines for making Hong-6M bombers, the so-called "aerial aircraft-carrier killers." The news follows a report in the Qingnian Cankao Bao claiming that Russia's Defense Ministry is mulling the sale of Su-34 bombers to China, and could collaborate with Beijing in the development of Moscow's fifth-generation fighter jets.

Everybody knows how good the Sino-Russian relationship is. Moscow is pretty pissed off at Biejing for plagarizing. By the way the above report is nothing but speculation.

And another one form the herald tribune

BEIJING: As China builds a military to match its growing economic power, its neighbors and potential rivals including the United States have puzzled over a key question: When will the Chinese Navy launch an aircraft carrier?

For decades, senior Chinese military and political officials have argued that for the country to become a great power, the People's Liberation Army Navy needs to add these potent warships to its fleet.

However, the major obstacle to this ambition is that aircraft carriers are hugely expensive.

The two 50,000-metric-ton conventionally powered carriers now under development for Britain's Royal Navy are expected to cost a minimum of $2.5 billion each. To outfit them with aircraft could cost that much again.

And, aircraft carriers do not operate alone. They need a fleet of warships, submarines and supply vessels along with advanced electronic surveillance for support and protection.
Today in Business with Reuters
Fed leaves U.S. interest rates unchanged
Trichet reinforces expectation of ECB rate rise
Barclays lines up overseas investors

For these reasons, most experts assumed a Chinese carrier was decades away.

But after double-digit increases in defense spending over much of the past 15 years, evidence is now emerging that China has a more ambitious timetable.

"I am convinced that before the end of this decade, we will see preparations for China to build its first indigenous aircraft carrier," said Rick Fisher, the Washington-based vice president of the International Assessment and Strategy Center and an expert on the Chinese military.

Fisher and other analysts note that extensive work now appears to be under way on a carrier purchased from Ukraine, the Varyag, now moored in the northern Chinese port of Dalian.

They speculate that the Varyag, fresh from the dry dock and, according to recent photographs, now painted in the navy's gray, could be used for training or even upgraded so that it was fully operational.

Not surprisingly, the Taiwan military has also been monitoring activity on the Varyag.

At a briefing in Taipei on Jan. 19, a Taiwan military spokesman, Liu Chih-chien, pointed to satellite photographs of the carrier at anchor in Dalian, where he said it had been under repair.

"Although China claimed that the Varyag will be used as a tourist attraction, the aircraft carrier would actually be used as a training ship in preparation for building an aircraft carrier battle group," Liu said.

Analysts also report that at recent international air shows, Chinese military officers have been showing strong interest in strike aircraft suited to fly from carriers.

As with earlier reports that the Chinese Navy intended to acquire aircraft carriers, Beijing denied Taiwan's claim.

"We don't know where the Taiwanese authorities got their so-called intelligence," said Li Weiyi, a spokesman for China's Taiwan Affairs Office, according to a report carried last week by the official Xinhua news agency.

Whatever the timetable, most naval experts agree that China will almost certainly build or buy aircraft carriers.

"Given China's strategic ambitions, it's a logical move," said Sam Bateman, a maritime security expert at Singapore's Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies.

"I am sure the PLAN has carrier aspirations," he said, referring to the People's Liberation Army Navy.

Bateman said that, like the United States, two of China's neighbors, India and Japan, would be anxious about the prospect of carriers in the Chinese fleet.

What is clear is that China has already invested decades of effort in its bid to gain the technology and skills needed to build and operate these warships.

Admiral Liu Huaqing, vice chairman of China's Central Military Commission before his retirement in 1997, is widely regarded as the father of the navy's aircraft carrier program.

Heavily influenced by his exposure to top Russian naval experts during his studies in the Soviet Union as a young officer in the 1950s, Liu advocated that China should have aircraft carriers as the backbone of a "blue water" navy that could deploy beyond the country's coastal waters.

In military journals published in the 1990s he wrote that aircraft carriers would ensure China's control over Taiwan and territories it claimed in the South China Sea and match the growing military power of neighbors including Japan and India.

Liu, along with other senior Chinese defense analysts, also recognized that China was becoming a major trading power and would become increasingly dependent on secure sea lanes to carry its imports of energy and raw materials and exports of manufactured goods.

They argued that aircraft carriers would give the navy the ability to keep these sea lanes open in times of conflict or international tension.

Other analysts also say that a carrier would be symbolically important as evidence of Chinese power in the same way that U.S. Navy's aircraft carrier battle groups serve as a reminder of America's global reach.

Ok so that should be enough proof that there are gonna be carriers for the PLAN forces.

Nobody is denying PLAN's ultimate aim of having an aircraft carrier. But it has been shelved indefinitely cause the PLAN has other priorities.

2)Satellite imagery needed huh to confirm? Got some imagery to show that IAC is being built? Or are we supposed to just take your word for it?

I agree, I made an error. My bad.

If you don't want to believe that the ADS is under construction then its okay with me.

3)Only Sheer arrogance would claim that the Chinese would not be able to learn them without carriers to hand. For example practicing with a large vessel to simulate a carrier for tactics practise etc. After all India has only operated STOVL aircraft on their carriers. Its a whole other ball game to learn STOBAR
Should we assume that ti wil take decades for the Pn to learn? Maybe Chinese pilots may get seconded to the Kuznetsov for training. Imagine fo the IAF gos for a non Russian aircraft. They might be prepared to offer the Chinese all kinds of incentives to continue to buy Russian including doctrine tips and clues.

The PLAN won't learn about aircraft carriers until and unless it operates one. As far as aircraft carrier operations go, the IN is pretty much among the better players in the world. The reason being we have more or less operated an aircraft carrier continously for the past four decades.

By the way, if graduating from an STOVL to an STOBAR carrier is so difficult, won't learning an aircraft carrier anew be much more dsifficult?

Further, you're speculating (hoping) too much on the Sino-Russia "relationship." How and why will Russia provide PLAN with doctrine, tips and clues?

4)As far as you know.......

4 x 2) The SU-33 is the navalised variant of the SU-27 with reinforcement in the relevant areas etc. I could use the same argument about the Indian purchase of the navalised Mig when they already fly the MIG-29.

The Mig-29K that the IN is getting is very different from the Mig-29s that the IAF operates. What I wanted to say is given China's "tech-proliferation" record, it would be surprising that it would buy 50 Su-33s. It would rather buy two, learn the lessons, and make it on its own. But why haven't we seen any news on this development thus far since 2006?

5)Actually the French and Germans are pushing for the embargo to be lifted so I guess you are kinda wrong there.

'France and Germany Move to Resume Arms Sales to China''

On January 27, French President Jacques Chirac held a joint conference with Chinese President Hu Jintao to celebrate the "Year of China" in Paris. Chirac used the occasion to publicly call for the lifting of the European Union arms embargo on China. France and Germany have succeeded in pushing the E.U. to review the embargo and have urged the E.U. to take action before the March entrance of ten new members. On February 4, Javier Solana, the E.U. foreign policy chief, was quoted in the Geneva newspaper Le Temps as saying, "It seems to me, after discussions we had a few days ago … [that] the E.U. is ready to do it."

When was Chirac in power? Quiet some time back. EU won't lift the arms embargo for two reasons: Uncle Sam and PRC's "wonderful record" of civil behaviour.

 

[mxiong]

Jiangnan Shipyard at Changxing Island, Shanghai:

 

[Myth_buster_1]

J-11 similar to F-18E/F in terms of capability?

I hope the J-11 pilot has his ejection seat primed. They have similar roles but NOT capability as even a brief bit of research will show you.

"2nd Generation" to "counter" F-35 will show up 20-30 years down the track and still won't be as capable as incremental block spiral upgraded Lightnings.

I think you are skipping the main post about upgrading of Chinese J-11 to Naval version or simply buying su-33 straight off the shelve. Either way beyond 2015 Chinese J-11 will undergo massive MLU..

1. Supersonic cruise 40,000 lbf class AL-41F engines replacing the AL-31F. A derated AL-41F was being trailed in a Russian Su-27 in 2004.

2. Thrust vectoring (TVC) engine nozzles with 2D or 3D capability. Indian Su-30MKI is equipped with a TVC nozzle.

3. Digital Flight Control System (DFCS). Trialled in the 1990s Su-37 and later supplied to India, this technology will become standard for late build Flankers. The Su-37 included redundant sidestick controls for the pilot.

4. Canard foreplanes for enhanced high alpha agility. Production hardware on Su-33 and Su-30MKI.

5. An active phased array (AESA) fire control radar replacing the N-001 series. Russian industry has supplied the hybrid array N-011M to India, built AESA prototypes, and given availability of GaAs MMIC technology globally, will have no difficulty in manufacturing an AESA over the next decade.

6. A two color band FLIR/IRST sensor replacing the OLS-30, using QWIP imaging array technology. Russian industry has been negotiating to licence EU QWIP technology, which is based on mass production GaAs MMIC technology.

7. COTS based computer hardware running COTS based software. Given the use of this technology in the current N-001VEP upgrade, we can expect its use to extend across all systems over the next decade.

8. A Helmet Mounted Display with FLIR projection capability. Such an upgrade was being discussed some years ago, and would be easily accommodated with a FLIR/IRST sensor.

9. Full glass cockpit based on digital technology. Given the current delivery of first generation glass cockpits in Su-30MK and Su-27SKM, this is a natural progression.

10. Heatseeking and anti radiation variants of the R-77 Amraamski, and extended range ramjet powered variants of the R-77. All are in advanced development and actively being marketed.

11. Advanced digital variants of the R-73/74 Archer close-in air to air missile. These have been actively marketed.

12. AWACS killer long range missiles in the 160 to 200 nautical mile range category. The R-37/AA-X-13 Arrow remains in development for the Su-35, the R-172 was recently reported as the subject of licence negotiations with India. Su-35 upgrade marketing literature depicts the use of such missiles.

13. Cruise missiles for standoff attacks. China acquired Kh-55SM/AS-15 Kent cruise missiles from the Ukraine, and is manufacturing indigenous designs.

14. Advanced jam resistant fighter to fighter and fighter to AWACS datalinks and networks. India used the Russian TKS-2 datalink to effect in the Cope India exercise against the F-15C. Further evolution of protocol software will see this technology grow to match current US capabilities.

15. Radar absorbent materials for radar observables reduction. Numerous Russian unclassified papers detail a range of technologies for surface wave suppression and edge signature reduction, with a specific aim of reducing legacy aircraft observables.

16. Aerial refuelling probes, pylon plumbing for drop tanks, and buddy refuelling stores. Production hardware available off the shelf.

These technologies will appear over the next decade on PLA Flankers, either as upgrades or as part of new build aircraft.

 

[Jliu]

I think you are skipping the main post about upgrading of Chinese J-11 to Naval version or simply buying su-33 straight off the shelve. Either way beyond 2015 Chinese J-11 will undergo massive MLU..

1. Supersonic cruise 40,000 lbf class AL-41F engines replacing the AL-31F. A derated AL-41F was being trailed in a Russian Su-27 in 2004.

2. Thrust vectoring (TVC) engine nozzles with 2D or 3D capability. Indian Su-30MKI is equipped with a TVC nozzle.

3. Digital Flight Control System (DFCS). Trialled in the 1990s Su-37 and later supplied to India, this technology will become standard for late build Flankers. The Su-37 included redundant sidestick controls for the pilot.

4. Canard foreplanes for enhanced high alpha agility. Production hardware on Su-33 and Su-30MKI.

5. An active phased array (AESA) fire control radar replacing the N-001 series. Russian industry has supplied the hybrid array N-011M to India, built AESA prototypes, and given availability of GaAs MMIC technology globally, will have no difficulty in manufacturing an AESA over the next decade.

6. A two color band FLIR/IRST sensor replacing the OLS-30, using QWIP imaging array technology. Russian industry has been negotiating to licence EU QWIP technology, which is based on mass production GaAs MMIC technology.

7. COTS based computer hardware running COTS based software. Given the use of this technology in the current N-001VEP upgrade, we can expect its use to extend across all systems over the next decade.

8. A Helmet Mounted Display with FLIR projection capability. Such an upgrade was being discussed some years ago, and would be easily accommodated with a FLIR/IRST sensor.

9. Full glass cockpit based on digital technology. Given the current delivery of first generation glass cockpits in Su-30MK and Su-27SKM, this is a natural progression.

10. Heatseeking and anti radiation variants of the R-77 Amraamski, and extended range ramjet powered variants of the R-77. All are in advanced development and actively being marketed.

11. Advanced digital variants of the R-73/74 Archer close-in air to air missile. These have been actively marketed.

12. AWACS killer long range missiles in the 160 to 200 nautical mile range category. The R-37/AA-X-13 Arrow remains in development for the Su-35, the R-172 was recently reported as the subject of licence negotiations with India. Su-35 upgrade marketing literature depicts the use of such missiles.

13. Cruise missiles for standoff attacks. China acquired Kh-55SM/AS-15 Kent cruise missiles from the Ukraine, and is manufacturing indigenous designs.

14. Advanced jam resistant fighter to fighter and fighter to AWACS datalinks and networks. India used the Russian TKS-2 datalink to effect in the Cope India exercise against the F-15C. Further evolution of protocol software will see this technology grow to match current US capabilities.

15. Radar absorbent materials for radar observables reduction. Numerous Russian unclassified papers detail a range of technologies for surface wave suppression and edge signature reduction, with a specific aim of reducing legacy aircraft observables.

16. Aerial refuelling probes, pylon plumbing for drop tanks, and buddy refuelling stores. Production hardware available off the shelf.

These technologies will appear over the next decade on PLA Flankers, either as upgrades or as part of new build aircraft.

From you or Dr Carlo Kopp?

 

[Jliu]

If that happens are you sure those Super Hornets will have a AC to return to?

To put it simply.

If you are going after a US carrier battle group, you will need the entire Soviet AVMF. It's going to take a couple of regiments of Backfires, a regiment of Bears and it wouldn't hurt to have a couple of Charlies too. Here's how you do it. First, you fly your RORSAT over the ocean hoping to find the general position of the battle group, and its general course and speed. Let's say you can tie the CVBG down to a patch of ocean, perhaps protecting convoys headed from the US and Canada to Europe. Now with your RORSAT imagry in hand it's time to refine the position. For that, you need Bears, lots of Bears. Mr. Bear flies out over the Atlantic looking and listening for the CVBG. The surviving Bears should radio back the battle group's position and course. (The emphasis here is on surviving.)

Now it's time to launch a Backfire raid. Send a couple of regiments, because you're going to lose lots of them. And, that carrier may have moved between the time your surviving Bears located it and when your Backfires get into position to launch. So, it's best to spread your launchers across a wide swath of ocean. (It also spreads the defense out too.) It's extra helpful if you have some SSGN's (Charlie class boats) too. It's tough to communicate with Charlie and not reveal his position to the ASW folks, but if you can maneuver a Charlie into a blocking position it will help your Backfire raid. So, now you've got your Charlie in position to block the CVBG and maybe even hoist a few SLCMs into the mix. Nothing better than an off threat axis attack to break up the defense.

The closer to the battle group your Backfires can get, the better. They will have better solution sets for their cruise missiles if they can actually get within radar range of the battle group. Of course, this will mean that most if not all your Backfires will get shot down by the F-18Es and Fs. But, hey bagging a CVN is worth losing your air force, isn't it? Launch lots and lots of missiles because the Ticonderogas and Burkes will be shooting down your missiles like it was target practice. Between their own radars, and the E-2, they'll have a good target solution on your missiles, so you need to overwhelm them. That's why I said bring as many regiments of Backfires as you can. Make sure you launch in close, so the F-18s won't attrit your missiles with their own AMRAAMs and Sidewinders. If you launch too far out, you won't have a good enough solution set to get all your missiles pointed at the Carrier and too many of them will be attrited before the SM-2s have at them. In the end, all you can really hope for is a few missiles will leak through and get hits on the carrier.

The PLANAAF is a joke compared to the old Soviet AVNF and has less than 1/30th of the theatre assets the Soviets enjoyed including SSN/SSK assets. The CV will just sit off Taiwan's east coast and you won't be able to do a thing to it short of a full blown nuclear conflict.

 

[mxiong]

To put it simply.

If you are going after a US carrier battle group, you will need the entire Soviet AVMF. It's going to take a couple of regiments of Backfires, a regiment of Bears and it wouldn't hurt to have a couple of Charlies too. Here's how you do it. First, you fly your RORSAT over the ocean hoping to find the general position of the battle group, and its general course and speed. Let's say you can tie the CVBG down to a patch of ocean, perhaps protecting convoys headed from the US and Canada to Europe. Now with your RORSAT imagry in hand it's time to refine the position. For that, you need Bears, lots of Bears. Mr. Bear flies out over the Atlantic looking and listening for the CVBG. The surviving Bears should radio back the battle group's position and course. (The emphasis here is on surviving.)

Now it's time to launch a Backfire raid. Send a couple of regiments, because you're going to lose lots of them. And, that carrier may have moved between the time your surviving Bears located it and when your Backfires get into position to launch. So, it's best to spread your launchers across a wide swath of ocean. (It also spreads the defense out too.) It's extra helpful if you have some SSGN's (Charlie class boats) too. It's tough to communicate with Charlie and not reveal his position to the ASW folks, but if you can maneuver a Charlie into a blocking position it will help your Backfire raid. So, now you've got your Charlie in position to block the CVBG and maybe even hoist a few SLCMs into the mix. Nothing better than an off threat axis attack to break up the defense.

The closer to the battle group your Backfires can get, the better. They will have better solution sets for their cruise missiles if they can actually get within radar range of the battle group. Of course, this will mean that most if not all your Backfires will get shot down by the F-18Es and Fs. But, hey bagging a CVN is worth losing your air force, isn't it? Launch lots and lots of missiles because the Ticonderogas and Burkes will be shooting down your missiles like it was target practice. Between their own radars, and the E-2, they'll have a good target solution on your missiles, so you need to overwhelm them. That's why I said bring as many regiments of Backfires as you can. Make sure you launch in close, so the F-18s won't attrit your missiles with their own AMRAAMs and Sidewinders. If you launch too far out, you won't have a good enough solution set to get all your missiles pointed at the Carrier and too many of them will be attrited before the SM-2s have at them. In the end, all you can really hope for is a few missiles will leak through and get hits on the carrier.

The PLANAAF is a joke compared to the old Soviet AVNF and has less than 1/30th of the theatre assets the Soviets enjoyed including SSN/SSK assets. The CV will just sit off Taiwan's east coast and you won't be able to do a thing to it short of a full blown nuclear conflict.

Defense Tech: China Close to Anti-Ship BM

 

[vish]

Defense Tech: China Close to Anti-Ship BM

Sorry to nit-pick, but please go through the discussion following the article and you'll realize how overhyped this "AShBM" is.

 

[mxiong]

Sorry to nit-pick, but please go through the discussion following the article and you'll realize how overhyped this "AShBM" is.

As if these nay-sayers knew what they were talking about...they are from neither University of National Defense nor Academy of Military Science, and they don't know half of PLA's anti-access arsenal in West Pacific.

 

[vish]

As if these nay-sayers knew what they were talking about...they are from neither University of National Defense nor Academy of Military Science, and they don't know half about PLA's anti-access arsenal in West Pacific.

This also implies that there is much more than what the USN tells us, doesn't it?

Stop name-calling people if you disagree with them.

 

[mxiong]

The birthplace of China's 1st indigenous aircraft carrier: Changxing Jiangnan Shipyard at Shanghai

 

[Always Neutral]

The birthplace of China's 1st indigenous aircraft carrier: Changxing Jiangnan Shipyard at Shanghai

But where is aircraft carrier ?

Regards

 

[mxiong]

But where is aircraft carrier ?

Regards

The steel is being cut at Baosteel right now, and the hull will be laid in two years in one of those dry docks in the picture.

 

[Always Neutral]

The steel is being cut at Baosteel right now, and the hull will be laid in two years in one of those dry docks in the picture.

Good for China. Any details on the LOA etc ?

Regards

 

[vish]

The steel is being cut at Baosteel right now, and the hull will be laid in two years in one of those dry docks in the picture.

Link please.

 

[mxiong]

Link please.

China has no habit to publicize its defense procurements, so don't expect any news link. Believe or not, as your wish.