No, it is YOU who continues to look stupid.
You criticized the tilt rotor concept. Never mind that it is American. You criticized the tilt rotor in general. You said that the wing span made it unsuitable for helo duty, whatever the hell that mean. A tilt rotor is not a helo. It is a fixed wing aircraft with helo abilities. So it is ridiculous to make comparisons between a tilt rotor and a helo in the first place, then even more ridiculous to make judgement on a flawed comparison. A dirigible can take off and land vertically like a helo, but does anyone sane going to compare the Goodyear blimp with a Kiowa ? Yes, clueless Internet Chinese will.
Damn hilarious -- YOU brought on the flaws of the American tilt rotor but then brought on a speculative Chinese quad tilt rotor concept that essentially doubled whatever complications there are in a twin tilt rotor. But once again, we are dealing with 'Chinese physics' where the rules of normal physics do not apply to Chinese products. At least not in the minds of clueless Internet Chinese.
Rest assured you WILL.
Your PLA pilots do not have the institutional experience as American pilots do. Neither are your engineers. Do not boast too much about the J-20. It is unproven and still in development. It is adopted from the Russian and not a native Chinese design. You will crash and burn, 'Chinese physics' or not.
You continue to show your stupity. You boast that our PLA can only dream of "twin-rotor" Osfrey because our aviation industry is not capable. I just show you evidence that we are working on a "four-rotor" and give you an estimation date for the 1st flight test. It is not our style to boast a classified project, so I got nothing to say but to give you a time frame.
As far as this chunk "twin-rotor" with crash history so bad, the US wants to sell them off so other can continue funding this fail project. Also the limitation is why we chose to go for 4-rotor. It is remain to be seen however. Given our record, I urge not to underestimate our ability. We have not fail too many projects that we set our eyes on..
You don't catch mine, by QTR as a Quad Tilt Rotor design by Bell since 1979.
Japan soon can get there, even when there isn't any war.
A big and slow hover could be easy and valuable target for a ASM missile. And it takes much longer time to unload .... no place to accommodate upto 500 soldiers. Senkaku ? I don't think so ...
Let just compare real vehicle as Bison to V22 ... Blue Whale is not so real as US QTR or V44
US-China’s Osprey vs. Bison arms race in East China Sea
Posted on
September 20, 2013 by
StMA |
2 Comments
Zubr class LCAC or the PLA Navy’s Bison
Osprey vs. Bison in the East China Sea
By Richard D. Fisher, Jr.
East AsiaPreviewSecurity
September 20, 2013
China, Japan and the U.S. are ramping up their ability to deploy to disputed islands in the East China Sea.
Stability in the region between Taiwan and Japan, and the security of Taiwan, hinges on an arms race that will soon be accompanying the heightened paramilitary engagements between Japanese, Chinese and, occasionally, Taiwanese Coast Guard ships over who will control the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea.
For now this contest for control is confined to shoving matches largely between Chinese and Japanese Coast Guard ships, which take several days to deploy. However,
China is now developing the means to project decisive force to these islands in hours, not days. Should China gain the upper hand in this arms race there is a greater chance it will use force to occupy the islands and then set its sights on the strategically more attractive nearby Sakashima island group.
For now, though, the upper hand is held by the United States, which has just completed the initial deployment of 24 U.S. Marine Corps Bell-Boeing MV-22B Osprey conventional, or twin tilt rotor aircraft, to Futenma Base in Okinawa. This unique aircraft, by virtue of its twisting rotors and engines at the ends of its wing, can take off like a helicopter, and then cruise at about 280 miles per hour, carrying up to 24 troops or about six tons of cargo to a range sufficient to reach the disputed islands.
In a full-out surge, the 24 MV-22Bs at Futenma could potentially put about 500 troops or about 140 tons of weapons and material on the Senkakus or the Sakashimas in about one hour.
On September 17, 2013,
Kyodo reported that
current commander of U.S. Marine forces on Okinawa, Lt. General John Wissler,
told Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaimu about the Osprey, “That aircraft has the ability to reach the Senkakus, should we need to support any sort of Japan-U.S. security treaty.”
China is also accumulating rapid lift assets. The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has taken delivery of the first Ukrainian-builtZubr (Bison) large hovercraft. The first example, delivered in May, is now undergoing final modifications in Shanghai. At least three more are expected initially, but China may build many more of an indigenous version. Developed by the former Soviet Union to give its Naval Infantry the ability to rapidly invade NATO countries along the Baltic Sea,
the Zubr can lift about 500 troops or up to 150 tons of armor, weapons and material up to speeds of 66 miles per hour. With just four Zubr hovercraft, the PLAN could potentially put 2,000 troops or up to 600 tons of weapons and material on the Senkakus in about four to five hours, or it could reach the island of Miyako-jima in about six to seven hours with a much reduced payload.
If it actually came to a race between the Osprey and the Bison, getting there first would make all the difference, as without the advantage of surprise, an adequately armed defender could significantly damage incoming hovercraft or helicopters. But the outcome would also depend on the result of intensive air and sea battles around these islands. For now, the superior performance of the U.S. Lockheed-Martin F-22A fifth-generation fighter and the Virginia class nuclear-powered attack submarine provide a margin of superiority that undergirds deterrence, but this could change quickly as the PLA Air Force increases the number of capable fourth-generation fighters supported by AWACS radar aircraft, followed by fifth-generation fighters that could even the odds, especially if China decides to strike first.
Growing numbers of PLAN air defense destroyers like the new Type 052D could also help deny air dominance to Japanese and U.S. forces.
However,
China could also gain the upper hand should it successfully develop its own tilt rotor aircraft, an ambition it likely has been pursuing for most of the last decade. In a surprising revelation, an article published August 28, 2013 on the web page of the
China Helicopter Research and Development Institute (CHRDI) goes further, saying that
China is now developing a quad tiltrotor design called the Blue Whale, with the goal of carrying 20 tons of cargo at speeds in excess of 300 miles per hour, with a combat radius of 500 miles.
A model of the Blue Whale appeared at a Chinese helicopter technology expo recently held in Tianjin, at least confirming it is an active program.
Blue Whale’s performance goals are very close to a now lapsed Bell-Boeing program to develop a V-44 Quad TiltRotor, which faded with evolving heavy-lift requirements for the U.S. Army’s Future Combat System of programs, in turn cancelled in 2009. CHRDI does not reveal when they expect the
Blue Whale to enter service or how China will overcome technical challenges for a quad tiltrotor that a 2005 U.S. Defense Science Board study said would take 20 to 25 years to overcome. By 2008 to 2009 the heavy lift program was punted to the U.S. Air Force-controlled Joint Future Theater Lift program, intended to develop
a replacement for the venerable Lockheed-Martin C-130, perhaps by the late 2020s. China may think it can succeed with a quad tiltrotor design before the U.S. fields a new vertical heavy lifter. The operational implications of such a capability go well beyond the East China Sea, but may matter there sooner.
For Beijing, control of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands and the much larger Sakashima Islands, which have ports and airfields, is not simply a matter of salving historical resentments or even controlling resources; it is a contest for geostrategic position to influence the future of democratic Taiwan. From the Senkakus and especially the Sakashimas, the PLA can more easily impose an air and sea blockade on Taiwan or launch multi-axis attacks to rapidly take airfields to aid follow-on invasion forces. Before making any military moves, mere possession of these islands allows Beijing to exert far greater political pressure on Taipei to make “peace” at the expense of its virtual American ally and Tokyo. Occupation of the islands would also give Beijing greater legitimacy on which to develop latent claims to
other islands in the Ryukyu chain.
The Miyako Strait in the Sakashimas also must be passed by Chinese naval forces trying to reach the Pacific Ocean. This group of seemingly negligible islands are in fact the lock in the door that keeps the PLA Navy from cruising the Pacific at will, a key link in the so-called “First Island Chain.” For Tokyo and Washington, preserving Japanese control over these islands proves to Beijing that it cannot use force to solve maritime territory disputes, but also gives Japanese and U.S. forces a large number of island base options from which to counter China’s rapidly growing air and naval forces.
At a time when
Washington is far more preoccupied with preserving adequate strategic capabilities under threat from sequestration-enforced defense budget reductions, an expensive heavy-lift tiltrotor development program, like so many other programs, has crossed the line from “need” to “needless luxury.” But the absence of this level of capability may have consequences. Without the means to put decisive counter-invasion forces on these islands at a moment’s notice, Japan will have to consider something it has been very reluctant to do: militarize these islands. Tokyo is already considering the development of a 500 km short-range ballistic missile to defend these distant islands. Missiles, of course, fly much faster than the Osprey. On one level, China’s looming threat justifies such moves, but deploying missiles will encourage China’s buildup as well as anti-Japan factions in Taipei.
Despite its much advertised
military and political-economic pivot/rebalancetoward Asia, it remains an uncomfortable fact for Washington that
successful military deterrence of Beijing will also require that the U.S. remain ahead in a growing, multi-faceted arms race. In the East China Sea this arms race and its implications are taking shape rather rapidly.
Richard D. Fisher, Jr. is a Senior Fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center and author of China’s Military Modernization, Building for Regional and Global Reach, (Stanford, 2010).
Real or not real, it's none of your business. We have a plan. That all I'm going to say regarding this chunk "twin-rotor".
