Agreed... why do AD and Garry post there?
About the aircraft carrier plan of China
- Thread starter bjskyhorse
- Start date
- Status
yeah, I go there to read Gary's posts in the submarine forum (which are generally very informative), but that's about it.
I don't abuse moderator privilege or anything like that. I did not threaten you or delete or edit of your post. I would respond that way to your post no matter whether I'm a moderator or not. Instead of accusing me of abusing my moderator status, why don't you actually point out which of my responses are incorrect.
Well my point is they'll never catch up. There is nothing derogatory in that, but simply I don't think it is possible to build an effective fleet in the time available before others have moved on - simple as that.
The Russian had a better starting point, used ruthless of resources - and failed.
The Russian build countermoves against the US SSBN's - just to find out the american had moved on. Third time around they went bankrupt.
The Chinese will not be able to have an effective SSBN fleet, not that they can't build boats; but because the do not control the ocean - in fact I think the whole submarine game has already changed.
When the Russians found out they were being followed (an american spy told them) they realised they had been living in a fantasy world for 20 years. Even if their boats got more quiert the NATO just might have changed the game: Honestly: Why do You think the SOSUS chain fell into disuse - the internet displays homepages for reunions...???
As to the Chinese fighters: I still remember the claims the Soviets made for their planes - and the Pentagon - and what the reality was when the west from time to time got their hands on one of them. The Chinese public profile on these matters reminds me very much of the Soviet style - even down to the published picture - think the Chinese got a nicer blue though.
As to building and operating aircraft carriers - just look at the problems the french are having, and they have had a reasonably continious carrier history. I simply don't think it can be done from scratch. The Russians tried, they build aircraft carriers, but operated them??????
It is not because the chinese are stupid or incompetent - I don't think it can be done by anyone - and many can't uphold the capability.
Furthermore I don't think the Chinese go about the right way, but that may just be me. The Chinese are copying the strategy of an opponent that is the stronger - that is competing where the enemy is strong. Believe me that is the hardest way to do things.
It reminds me of the old days when the British on exercises were trying to get in below our radar, they did that all right; but when caught by the Observer Corps, they tried to fly even lower. This resulted in our ground observers looking DOWN on the Jaguars and what have you. The Observers shook their head, complaining about bits falling off the intruders, reported them regretting so much effort with so little result.
What worries me is - what I believe - the lack of realism of the Chinese leadership in persuing goal that cannot be attained. That is scary, because you then must have reservations about their rationality.
In fact I think the spying done during the cold war actually served everybody, as it gave better information than that produced by wishfull thinking.
I'm referring to Gordievsky - a highly placed Western spy in the Soviet Union: He told the West that the old men in Kremlin really believed the big Nato excersises were a preliminary to a NATO assault on the Warsaw Pact. That made President Reagan back off a bit.
As to the capability of Chinese fighters; well I simply don't believe in it, as I don't see the USA cranking production of F-22's violently up, they are not tripling the number of B-2's as far as I've seen.
The Russian had a better starting point, used ruthless of resources - and failed.
The Russian build countermoves against the US SSBN's - just to find out the american had moved on. Third time around they went bankrupt.
The Chinese will not be able to have an effective SSBN fleet, not that they can't build boats; but because the do not control the ocean - in fact I think the whole submarine game has already changed.
When the Russians found out they were being followed (an american spy told them) they realised they had been living in a fantasy world for 20 years. Even if their boats got more quiert the NATO just might have changed the game: Honestly: Why do You think the SOSUS chain fell into disuse - the internet displays homepages for reunions...???
As to the Chinese fighters: I still remember the claims the Soviets made for their planes - and the Pentagon - and what the reality was when the west from time to time got their hands on one of them. The Chinese public profile on these matters reminds me very much of the Soviet style - even down to the published picture - think the Chinese got a nicer blue though.
As to building and operating aircraft carriers - just look at the problems the french are having, and they have had a reasonably continious carrier history. I simply don't think it can be done from scratch. The Russians tried, they build aircraft carriers, but operated them??????
It is not because the chinese are stupid or incompetent - I don't think it can be done by anyone - and many can't uphold the capability.
Furthermore I don't think the Chinese go about the right way, but that may just be me. The Chinese are copying the strategy of an opponent that is the stronger - that is competing where the enemy is strong. Believe me that is the hardest way to do things.
It reminds me of the old days when the British on exercises were trying to get in below our radar, they did that all right; but when caught by the Observer Corps, they tried to fly even lower. This resulted in our ground observers looking DOWN on the Jaguars and what have you. The Observers shook their head, complaining about bits falling off the intruders, reported them regretting so much effort with so little result.
What worries me is - what I believe - the lack of realism of the Chinese leadership in persuing goal that cannot be attained. That is scary, because you then must have reservations about their rationality.
In fact I think the spying done during the cold war actually served everybody, as it gave better information than that produced by wishfull thinking.
I'm referring to Gordievsky - a highly placed Western spy in the Soviet Union: He told the West that the old men in Kremlin really believed the big Nato excersises were a preliminary to a NATO assault on the Warsaw Pact. That made President Reagan back off a bit.
As to the capability of Chinese fighters; well I simply don't believe in it, as I don't see the USA cranking production of F-22's violently up, they are not tripling the number of B-2's as far as I've seen.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Cause I'm not a mod there and I can say what I please...
I find some people on these boards very trying, particular those who argue vehemently and have NO operational or "hands on" military experience at all.I didn't call you a racist, I said you are anti-Chinese, which could cloud your judgement in certain matters.
Never in any of my posts, did I say China has an effective SSBN fleet or will have one. I will however say that China is investing a lot of money into nuclear sub development. It's hard to not see some results coming out.
well, the Western nations also have had a serious look at Fulcrums and Flankers since the Soviet breakup. They've seen that they are extremely good platforms and at least on the same level as the teen series in terms of maneuverability and such. When you have reports from Chinese flight demonstration officers that J-10 maneuvers better than flankers, that should give you an idea of its flight performance at least.
Outside of that, we've seen pictures of Chinese fighter cockpit. We know that newer fighters have modern Flight control software. We know what the performance of the engines are. There are a lot of things we can find out.
You think they just started this? They've been studying carrier design for years, they've been buying carrier scraps for years. And it will still take decades before they have decent carrier operation experience. Neither I nor anyone else have argued against that.
While a competitor has a better product, if you use that product to help you generate ideas, it speeds up your development. I do that on my job.
lack of realism of Chinese leadership? China has barely commented on any kind of aspirations outside of Taiwan. It's the China threat group that makes up this entire Chinese ambition stuff. It's the Pentagon officials trying to get extra funding for F-22 that keeps on commenting on Chinese ambitions and such. Do you think China would expand its military expenditure the way that it is doing if it's economy is not growing just as fast?
So your summarize that Chinese fighters are not available is because the procurement numbers for F-22 and B-2 are low? As I mentionned, there are certain things you can know about Chinese fighters that are quite public:
1) After J-10 entered service in China, China stopped buying su-30s and licensed production of J-11A.
2) Musharraf after visiting China, said that it's Pakistan's assessment that JF-17 is better than any fighter currently in PAF service. That includes those block 15 F-16s.
3) We know Pakistan chose J-10 over Gripen and F-16 for the Plus-one competition.
Ditto. I actually don't bother too much with the bulk of the SP articles as they are usually factually flawed. *thats the problem with sound bite sized articles - they're trimmed beyond comprehension and coherency)Cause I'm not a mod there and I can say what I please...
I do however take quiet notes at some responses as there are some very credible operators in there.
All web sites have a smattering of ill informed or uninformed posters who can ruin the colour and calibre of debate - its a matter of taking the time to switch off to some and absorb others.
Have the Poles picked up that role now? They were pretty damn handy in Mig-21's.But we were loved for being NATO's own MiG OPFOR. And kicked ass wvr.
The USSR was handicapped by always being poorer, & trying to match the entire strength of NATO, with fewer, poorer, weaker, & untrustworthy allies. Chinas GDP at purchasing parity is now larger both in absolute terms & relative to the USA than the USSRs - or the whole Warsaw Pacts - ever was. China isn't crippling its economy by trying to match the USA everywhere, in every capability, & simultaneously overmatch all of Western Europe. In 20 years time (perhaps sooner), China will probably be richer, in real terms, than the USA. China is more open to the rest of the world than the USSR was. Simply, China can (or will be able to) afford it. The USSR couldn't. And France can't. The teething problems of CdG are fairly normal for a first of class which incorporates a lot of new technology, & only seem major because they've not been followed by a succession of similar ships with the problems ironed out.
Swerve: In economics it is not so much how you handle the upturn, it is how you handle the downturn - which will come to China.
It is splendid with new technology - that is generally what drives the upturn - downturn comes when the upturn flattens: and the outdated old technology it hammered. And China has vast amounts of old technology.
It is splendid with new technology - that is generally what drives the upturn - downturn comes when the upturn flattens: and the outdated old technology it hammered. And China has vast amounts of old technology.
Undoubtedly China economy is growing and with it their military spending. It is completely possible China will be the richest nation in the world within a few decades, but some important things have to be taken into account for their future development. China still undervalues their currency which is playing a important role in their current economic success. While China mite be becoming the richest nation on earth, the have a population over 1.3 billion to take care of. China is developing serious social issue problems including pollution, health care problems (Bird Flu, HIV-AIDS), power supply, and others. Though its not to say many other nations won't have similar problems, but with China's huge population such problems will be compounded significantly. As the problems develop, it will be important to see how China deals with them, and how this will effect their defence and military initiatives in the future.
lokyuen12345
New Member
Chinese Aircraft Carrier - in service 2008
To All members,
In order to clear all your questions regarding to this topic, I wrote this articles:
PLA has got an Russian Aircraft "Varyarg" and is currently rebuilding it to be the first CHinese Aircraft Carrier (AC) in history.
The AC weapon systems are going to be using Chinese technology such as Vertical firing missles, anti-warship anti-aircraft missles, and peripheral gun firing defense system and some Russian-based technology (others). Aircraft will be using Su-33, at first PLA was hoping to develop and manufacture its own by licensed SU27 (J-11) production, but seems faced too many difficulties on "Folding the wing" and "Short-range take-off", so they are purchasing 50 SU-33 from russia, 2 will be delivering this year as a test for 100million US. Meanwhile, PLA sent a group of navy officer and soldiers to learn from russia about AC operations, maintenance and tactics.
While bombers type is still unknown, may be a variant of SU-33 or just chinese-made J-X variant.
While Yak-44 and KA-31 may also be purchasing next year, if and only if PLA "AirWarning 2000" project failed.
Other warships, destroyers submarines are already deployed and ready, and it should be after so many years for god sake...models should be 052B, 052C, 054A.
The naval base of that AC is near HoiLam Island (That island near Hong Kong and just near Macau, got a lot navy base there, I don';t know it's name in English). And is scheduled to be in service in 2008, if and only if without delays.
That's all I knew, and studied so many news from China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, I think this one should be the most realistic approach.
To All members,
In order to clear all your questions regarding to this topic, I wrote this articles:
PLA has got an Russian Aircraft "Varyarg" and is currently rebuilding it to be the first CHinese Aircraft Carrier (AC) in history.
The AC weapon systems are going to be using Chinese technology such as Vertical firing missles, anti-warship anti-aircraft missles, and peripheral gun firing defense system and some Russian-based technology (others). Aircraft will be using Su-33, at first PLA was hoping to develop and manufacture its own by licensed SU27 (J-11) production, but seems faced too many difficulties on "Folding the wing" and "Short-range take-off", so they are purchasing 50 SU-33 from russia, 2 will be delivering this year as a test for 100million US. Meanwhile, PLA sent a group of navy officer and soldiers to learn from russia about AC operations, maintenance and tactics.
While bombers type is still unknown, may be a variant of SU-33 or just chinese-made J-X variant.
While Yak-44 and KA-31 may also be purchasing next year, if and only if PLA "AirWarning 2000" project failed.
Other warships, destroyers submarines are already deployed and ready, and it should be after so many years for god sake...models should be 052B, 052C, 054A.
The naval base of that AC is near HoiLam Island (That island near Hong Kong and just near Macau, got a lot navy base there, I don';t know it's name in English). And is scheduled to be in service in 2008, if and only if without delays.
That's all I knew, and studied so many news from China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, I think this one should be the most realistic approach.
Lancer MC: Precisely.
I would phrase it even more strongly: Peoples Republic of China is a disaster waiting to happen - it is not that I'm anti-chinese; but I see to many similarities with the situation just before both WW1 and WW2 for comfort.
The bust is to come; but will China chose the way of the japanese: Starting a war before the USA was ready - or the path of the Soviet Union under Gorbachev: Turn it which way you want: This isn't going to work.
I'm afraid that it will be the first option, as there are great personal cost to the realistic approach - which few politician have the personality to stomach.
I would phrase it even more strongly: Peoples Republic of China is a disaster waiting to happen - it is not that I'm anti-chinese; but I see to many similarities with the situation just before both WW1 and WW2 for comfort.
The bust is to come; but will China chose the way of the japanese: Starting a war before the USA was ready - or the path of the Soviet Union under Gorbachev: Turn it which way you want: This isn't going to work.
I'm afraid that it will be the first option, as there are great personal cost to the realistic approach - which few politician have the personality to stomach.
Actually Varyag is still owned by Ukraine. China broke the user agreement making the terms of the exchange null and void. All Ukraine has to do is take them to court. Better to let China fix her up first.:vamp
- Status