China Military News & Updates

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
That "kid" had no business around a live grenade. His superiors should have seen that when he couldn't throw a dummy. It is their fault it happened only showing the incompetence of PLA training.

PLA has been in divisions since before Soviet times. Divisions are part of Soviet make-up. Brigades don't make up divisions if the division level is being abolished as it is in China's reduced units. Just look at Group Army 27, divisions were cut down to brigades but the GA was still left intact, just less troops and equipment formed into a brigade reduced from a division. GA 27 is really just an overpopulated division, but it still has all the bureaucracy of a Group Army. You see, Russia has figured out that this method is obsolete because they have been in several wars while China is still stuck in limbo not knowing what to do.
 

Necrosis Factor

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
"Vanguard military exercises in China experimented with combat methods with the PLA's new battalion battle-group; it featured 2200 troops that centered on a battle-group augmented by mechanized infantry, artillery, engineering, communication, ECM and army-aviation elements from non-organic sources. The core of the battle-group was drawn by the 1st Tank Battalion of the 58th. The battle-group exercise was divided into four parts -- strategy-planning, mobilization, long-distance maneuvers, and ended with a live fire joint-operation against the “Blue Army” from the Beijing MR at Jinan MR’s Combined Arms Tactical Training Base (CATTB) in Queshan. The exercise was also open to 179 foreign military students representing 67 countries from the National Defense University and the Nanjing Army Command College."

Look at their recent exercises..

“Stride-2009”

The 2008 Defense White Paper foreshadowed the emphasis on ground force training seen in 2009, stating, “The [PLA] Army has been moving from regional defense to trans-regional mobility. It is gradually making its units small, modular and multi-functional in organization through appropriate downsizing and structural reform…”

“Trans-regional mobility” focuses on moving units within China from one of its seven Military Regions (MR) to another. Multi-mode movements (by ground, rail, water and/or air) have been reported in the PLA press for at least a decade including some cross-MR movements. These exercises do not represent armed invasions of foreign countries, but the lessons learned in trans-regional mobility exercises could be used outside of China if countries permit movement of PLA units through or over their territory.





REFER TO China-Defense.com
Very academic website
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
I already stated they had experimental battle units. A few modernised battalions does not equal a reformation of the entire PLA Ground Forces. They have several different experiments running like a Styker type brigade to a full combat brigade. The vast majority of it STILL operates on the Soviet model.
 

nandu

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,913
Likes
163
FACTBOX - Facts about the Chinese air force

(Reuters) - China gave a rare public showing of an air base to military attaches and foreign reporters on Tuesday, as it seeks to modernise its own forces and build export markets.

Here are some facts about China's air force.

- The People's Liberation Army Air Force grew out of aircraft left behind by retreating Nationalist forces at the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. Soviet aid then bolstered its ranks, enabling China to start manufacturing its own versions of Russian aircraft like MiG-15s, MiG-17s and MiG-19s.

- The air force has not been engaged in serious, large-scale combat operations since the 1958 Taiwan Straits crisis, when its planes and pilots were outflown by those of Taiwan, which operated U.S.-made jets with far-better-trained crew.

- Today, China boasts the world's third-largest air force, with about 400,000 personnel and some 2,000 combat aircraft. That compares to more than 2,300 for the United States, and around 400 for Taiwan.

- Along with the development of its aeronautics industry, China has developed a more formidable design capacity. Its most advanced aircraft currently in service, and for the United States and Taiwan the potentially most threatening, are Russian Su-30 and Su-27 fighters. China is now developing its fourth-generation J-11.

- Last year's Oct. 1 parade marking the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic of China featured bombers, unmanned aircraft, reconnaissance and rescue helicopters.

- Modernisation has included developing an inflight refuelling capacity, to give its fighters a greater reach, and early warning aircraft.

- China also exported planes, mainly to Pakistan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Iran, North Korea and Zimbabwe, and it is starting to promote the J-10, a more modern fighter produced in China.

- China has air bases throughout the country, with many in southern and eastern provinces facing Taiwan. At least seven ring the capital Beijing. Some bases share runways with civilian airports, while others have tunnels hollowed out of mountains to

protect aircraft from aerial bombardment.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
724
PLAAF Deployments in Tibet
Manish Girdhar
E-Mail-.
The Air Force of the People’s Republic of China (PLAAF) is the third largest in the world after the US and Russia, in terms of numbers of aircraft. It is the largest air power segment in India’s neighbourhood, primarily in relation to its ability to operate from the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). Also called Xizang Autonomous Region, TAR is the second largest province-level autonomous region of the People's Republic of China (PRC) created in 1965, its area spanning over 470,000 sq mi/1,200,000 km2. The largest autonomous area is Xinjiang Autonomous Region. TAR has an average elevation of 4,500 metres and the Tibetan Plateau has the highest elevation geographically.

Significantly, the PLAAF’s chain-of-command is organised into four levels: Headquarters Air Force (HQ AF); seven military region air force (MRAF) headquarters; air corps and command posts; and operational units. HQ AF is organised administratively into four first level or major departments – headquarters, political, logistics, and equipment – and their subordinate elements (second level departments, bureaus, divisions, offices, and sections). The PLA's military region (MR) headquarters is responsible for combined operations, and the MR Air Force (MRAF) commander, who is also an MR Deputy Commander, is responsible for flight operations within the MR. The seven MRs are Shenyang, Beijing, Lanzhou, Nanjing, Guangzhou, Jinan, and Chengdu. Each echelon below HQ AF from the MRAF headquarters to the lowest level in the chain-of-command mirrors this administrative structure.

Of the seven MRs of the PLA, only two are opposite India. Lanzhou is opposite Ladakh sector, Chengdu is off India’s North-East and part of the Central Sector. These MRs are further sub-divided into Military Districts (MD). The MDs facing India are:

Chengdu MR – The two MDs in this region are Yunnan opposite Myanmar and Xizang (which is part of TAR) opposite Assam, Sikkim and Arunachal.

Lanzhou MR – South Xinjiang MD is opposite Uttarakhand, HP and Ladakh and East Xinjiang MD faces India adjoining Ladakh.

PLAAF Deployment

In the Chengdu MR, PLAAF has two Fighter Divisions (FDs) comprising of J-6, J-7, J-10 and Su-27 aircraft and one Transport Division (TD). In Lanzhou MR, there are two FDs comprising of J-6, J-7G, J-7II, J-8I, J-8F and J-11 aircraft and one Bomber Division (BD) having H-6 bomber aircraft. The current location of all these FDs is outside TAR.

Airfields

The TAR spans the mentioned MDs of the two MRs which are opposite India. There are 14 airbases in these two regions from where PLAAF can launch air operations. The established bases are Hoping, Bangda, Shiquanhe, Bayixincun (in central Tibet opposite AP) and Kongka. There are two airfields in Lhasa Prefecture, airfields at Shannan, XIgaze and additional four that can be made operational quickly. Many have runways of 4000m length and their average altitude is 4000m. At these altitudes, both the aeroplane and fliers are affected, their performance curves dropping quite sharply with altitude. These airfields as per the photographs available seem to be lacking in permanent infrastructure like hangars and blast pens. Thus, PLAAF will have to position the necessary supplies, FOL and other manpower and material from the mainland in order to sustain operations here. This build up will take time and can be easily monitored, giving Indian forces the necessary warning to react. A major international airfield has been constructed at Nyingchi in SE TAR which is less than 20 kms from the Arunachal border.

Air Defence Set Up

Radar Cover – Two Radar Regiments (RRs) have been deployed by PLAAF for the surveillance of Tibet and South Xinjiang region. These regiments cover the flights from the mainland and monitor Indian air activities along the Sino- Indian border. Medium and high level cover in TAR is fairly good in spite of the fact that vintage radars are still in use. Considering the elevated locations of the PLAAF radars, it is quite likely that movement of Indian strike aircraft may be picked up well before they enter Tibet air space. However, low level cover is virtually non-existent due to terrain as well as fewer radars. VA’s and VP’s have limited low level cover as well.

Airlift capability of PLAAF in the TAR is severely restricted due to altitude at which most of the airfields are located. To place the issue in perspective, it would be well worth noting that most of the PLAAF airfields in TAR are at a higher altitude than Leh and Thoise. Thus their performance will be much lower than that of the Indian Air Force Il-76 flying from Leh on a day when surface temperatures are around 25-30 degrees Celsius. To conceive of operations like a Battalion Group drop would be virtually impossible from the point of view of the success probability that such drop may have. Similarly heli-borne operations are extremely difficult to execute. A Mi-17, which can lift 3000kg at sea level, would lift a mere few hundred kilogrammes at altitudes in excess of 3km. Contingency of an heli-borne assault in this region has a remote chance of success.

Strike element of PLAAF is centred on J-10 and the Su-27/30. Other aircraft in the inventory have extremely limited capability. Airfield infrastructure, though in existence, cannot support sustained operations due to unpredictable and inclement weather. TBA is located widely separated from the base. Strategic targets in mainland India such as airfields in eastern region are more than 500 km from PLAAF strike bases in TAR. Air Defence infrastructure, radar cover in particular is virtually non existent almost entirely due to terrain restrictions.

However, PLAAF infrastructure in TAR has considerably improved over the last four to five years. In consonance with the modernisation of PLAAF aircraft fleet, the capabilities to launch operations from airfields have also been enhanced. The rail link which begins at Golmud and goes up to Lhasa, completed in 2006, adds a new dimension to Chinese build up in TAR. There are plans to extend the rail network up to the Tibetan town of Dromo, which is near Nathu La in Sikkim. The Karakoram highway is to be widened to 30m from its present 10m to permit heavy vehicles to negotiate this route. While superficially meant to augment the carrying capacity from Karachi port into China, the military implications are obvious.

While the lay of the land gives advantage to the PLA for surface operations, the runway elevations hinder air operations. The PLAAF capability in TAR is severely restricted but this disadvantage can be offset to some extent by taking-off with full armament and minimal fuel loads and carrying out in-flight refuelling to extend radius of operations of its combat fleet. However if diplomatic relations between Myanmar and China continue to improve and Myanmar allows PLAAF to operate from its bases, PLAAF shall pose a serious challenge.

(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views either of the Editorial Committee or the Centre for Land Warfare Studies).
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Trying to sell J-10


Even the RAF Attaché says J-10 is third generation. Add that to what Putin already said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
724
Chinese firms boost nuclear threats

Unchecked proliferation by Chinese firms has undermined a global effort to keep nuclear and missile technology out of the hands of terrorists.

The transfer of such technology to countries such as Pakistan and Iran, which are considered vulnerable to an attack by terrorists or rogue insiders, is the cause of much anxiety in the international community. Kicking off the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington this week, President Obama described nuclear terrorism as the "single biggest threat to U.S. security."

Richard Fisher, a senior fellow of Asian military affairs at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the very fact that Mr. Obama can point to the threat of nuclear terrorism is in no small part attributable to China's proliferation of nuclear and missile technology since the 1970s.

However, "the Obama administration is making no connection between the threat of nuclear terrorism and China's role in making it possible," he said.

A report by the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control Center (WINPAC) this year linked Chinese companies to nuclear and missile programs in Pakistan and missile programs in Iran. It said China was a primary supplier of advanced conventional weapons to Pakistan, which it described as China's most important partner in military technology cooperation.

One of the clearest transgressions in this relationship took place in 1995, when state-owned China Nuclear Energy Industry Corp. (CNEIC), a subsidiary of China National Nuclear Corp. (CNNC), exported 5,000 ring magnets to the A.Q. Khan Research Laboratory in Kahuta, Pakistan. Ring magnets are critical parts of high-speed centrifuges used to enrich uranium to weapons grade. The facility was named for the creator of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, who in 2004 confessed to supplying nuclear technology to Libya, Iran and North Korea through a black market.

Currently, CNNC is collaborating on nuclear power projects in Chashma in Pakistan's Punjab province. The CIA says entities in China continue to sell technologies and components in the Middle East and South Asia that are dual-use and could support weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and missile programs.

Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, said China is a problem because it has been essential to Pakistan's nuclear program. "If you subtract China's help, Pakistan wouldn't have a nuclear program," he said.

Not everyone agrees that such proliferation activity has the support of the Chinese government.

Charles Freeman, a former assistant U.S. trade representative for China affairs who is currently at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said while there are "obvious holes" in Chinese efforts to prevent proliferation, the export of dual-use technologies in the region is not supported by the government in Beijing.

"As a general government policy, nuclear proliferation is something the Chinese government seeks to control," he said.

Mr. Freeman said China has in some instances helped check proliferation. While transferring technology to Iran in the past decade, for example, the Chinese blew the whistle when they realized that Iran was a proliferation concern.

A U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the subject, said: "Beijing is mainly concerned about trade, so when the issue is a dual-use technology transfer, it is more inclined to see the glass as half full and less inclined to take steps to prevent the sale.

"If they see a transaction that's clearly not legit, they would be more likely to get involved," the official added.

According to Ken Lieberthal, a former senior director for Asia on the National Security Council and currently at the Brookings Institution, there also have been some instances in which the Chinese stopped transfer of technology after the U.S. called their attention to proliferation concerns.

Wang Baodong, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said, "China is strongly committed to safeguarding and strengthening the international nonproliferation system. It is firmly against nuclear proliferation in any form."

He noted Chinese President Hu Jintao's attendance at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington this week as proof of China's "unambiguous attitude toward nonproliferation."

The bulk of China's proliferation activities took place in the 1970s, '80s and the early '90s. Since then, Chinese entities have continued to engage in proliferation activities. Since the early '90s, Chinese firms have been the subject of U.S. sanctions for violation of the Arms Export Control Act, Export Administration Act and the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act.

Mr. Wang said the U.S. sanctions against Chinese entities were "unwarranted" and based on "allegations," which he described as "unfounded."

China has enacted export-control legislation, but implementation of those laws has been spotty, said David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security. He said there is a "real need for China to better implement its export-control laws."

But Mr. Wang said China has established over the years a "comprehensive set of policies that prohibit Chinese entities from involving in proliferation activities."

Mr. Fisher, meanwhile, noted that China's export-control laws came onto the books "years after it had undertaken a large part of its proliferation activities." He contends that China has sold enough nuclear and missile technology to Pakistan, Iran and North Korea to spur secondary proliferation among those states.

"China has continued to its proliferation goals through its client states," he added.

Mr. Fisher finds it disquieting that China would continue to broaden its nuclear relationship with Pakistan, given the threat posed to Pakistan's nuclear arsenal by potential rogue insiders and terrorists on the outside. "If China were to go to Pakistan and take back its nuclear and missile technology, that would fundamentally reduce the threat of nuclear terrorism," he said.

A U.S.-India civilian nuclear deal struck by the George W. Bush administration has further complicated the situation. Pakistan, citing extreme power shortages among its major cities and towns, is seeking a similar deal with the U.S.

Mr. Milhollin said it's naive of the U.S. and the West to think that they can export nuclear reactors to India and not expect other countries to sell similar technology to Pakistan. "If the U.S. can sell to India, why can't China sell to Pakistan, or Russia sell to Iran?"
 

Necrosis Factor

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
Trying to sell J-10


Even the RAF Attach� says J-10 is third generation. Add that to what Putin already said.
The Chinese use different terminology in describing generations. 5th in Western standards is 4th to them, and 4th is 3rd.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
The Chinese use different terminology in describing generations. 5th in Western standards is 4th to them, and 4th is 3rd.
It isn't Chinese terminology he is using. He is a RAF officer so it Western 3rd generation, just as Russia said it was.
 

Necrosis Factor

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
It isn't Chinese terminology he is using. He is a RAF officer so it Western 3rd generation, just as Russia said it was.
By all measures the J-10 is a 4th gen figher. HUD, it's AL-FN31 propulsion, FILAT and FLIR targeting capabilities, multi-function display, BVRAAM and ground attack capability. All of these the J-10 possess. He is using the Chinese description to describe a Chinese jet.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
New Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
By all measures the J-10 is a 4th gen figher. HUD, it's AL-FN31 propulsion, FILAT and FLIR targeting capabilities, multi-function display, BVRAAM and ground attack capability. All of these the J-10 possess. He is using the Chinese description to describe a Chinese jet.
by chinese criterion, F22 is a 4G bird while Flankers/F15 and J10 are 3G birds.

In fact,rafale and EF2000 are also 3G birds by Chinese criterion,because rafale and EF2000 has no revolutionary change and leading edges than F15/flanker and J10.

Instead, those rafales and EF2000 in service might be ass-kicked by last version F15 , Flankers ,F16 and J10,because their avionics and radar has not been upgraded and been outdated .

IMO, both rafale and EF2000 are failed projects and expensive white elephants. the two project cost much and have no real tech leap over the last G bird such as M2000 ,F15 and Flankers.
 
Last edited:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
By all measures the J-10 is a 4th gen figher. HUD, it's AL-FN31 propulsion, FILAT and FLIR targeting capabilities, multi-function display, BVRAAM and ground attack capability. All of these the J-10 possess. He is using the Chinese description to describe a Chinese jet.
No, he's using the Western description to describe the Chinese jet. He isn't Chinese, he's BRITISH. Upgraded F-4s and F-5s have better avionics than the J-10, it doesn't make them 4th generation. It makes them beefed up 3rd generation which is what the J-10 is.
 

Necrosis Factor

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
No, he's using the Western description to describe the Chinese jet. He isn't Chinese, he's BRITISH. Upgraded F-4s and F-5s have better avionics than the J-10, it doesn't make them 4th generation. It makes them beefed up 3rd generation which is what the J-10 is.
You're extremely stubborn.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0182.shtml

The Chengdu (CAC) J-10 fighter, China's fourth generation multi-role fighter aircraft, will be the most advanced fighter in the PLAAF's inventory once introduced to service. The J-10 programme (Project No.10) has been under way for over a decade. Six prototypes have been built by 2001 and these aircraft are reported being undertaking extensive test flights at CAC's test site.
http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/j10.html

China's 4th gen J-10 fighter redesigned, upgraded by Pakistan as FC-20
http://militarystrat.wordpress.com/...ter-redesigned-upgraded-by-pakistan-as-fc-20/

Being a lightweight multi-role fighter-bomber, the J-10 has great export potential. The aircraft will probably be more affordable than its European counterparts. China is believed to have taken a giant leap forward in fighter development, and produced a true fourth generation fighter.
http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/j-10/


What more do you want? You are just merely speculating he is using a Western definition. Being british doesn't mean he's restricted to using Western descriptions for Chinese jets.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
You shot yourself in the foot. It's clear that this expert is using the Chinese categorization by comparing it to an early F-16, which is obviously 4th gen.
Not at all. An upgraded F-5 is more advanced than an F-16A. The bar has been set at where the J-10 stands. Beefed up third-generation. Once the J-10B comes out, it will be 4th generation.
 
Last edited:

Necrosis Factor

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
Not at all. An upgraded F-5 is more advanced than an F-16A. The bar has been set at where the J-10 stands. Beefed up third-generation. Once the J-10B comes out, it will be 4th generation.
So you're saying the F-16A is not 4th generation? Haha...
 

Agantrope

New Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,247
Likes
77
So you're saying the F-16A is not 4th generation? Haha...
Come on... Read his post properly. He never mentioned like that.

Upgraded F-5 > F-16 that doesnt means the F-16 is not a 4th gen AC.

Generation in my post is in accordance with the western and not the Chinese one :)
 

Necrosis Factor

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
Armand is saying the J-10 is a 3rd generation fighter because a military "expert" called it so without any reference to which classificaiton scheme (CHINESE or WESTERN) EXCEPT for the fact that he said it's comparable to the F-16A, which is clearly 4th gen. Therefore the J-10 is 4th gen in Western standards, and 3rd Gen by Chinese definition.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Western experts are not calling the J-10 4th generation because it doesn't have the components to put it on par with modern 4th generation fighters. You already have it out of the mouth of a RAF officer and a published military analyst who have examined it first-hand that it is 3rd generation.

Another attaché said that the technology of its wheels, among other aspects, means that it could not be used on board any aircraft carrier that China may build, underscoring how far the PLA still lags behind Western militaries. The expert said: "The West is still far ahead. We have so many decades of technology and such a depth of research and capability that they just don't have yet. They are about a generation behind.
 

Articles

Top