LOL, excuse me? I wasn’t the one who came up with the lame-ass excuse “What I posted had nothing to do with what PLAN ships had, but rather illustration of shtil's performance against sea-skimmers and how it's engaged” when he found that he posted information that wasn’t relevant. Now who doesn’t know what?
I meant exactly what I said. I posted it to illustrate test results of an earlier version of shtil against sea-skimmers. I was clearly showing shtil was capable of handling multiple sea-skimmers. I knew exactly which ships had which. Despite not being able to understand the image I posted, you made assumptions. You for some reason without knowing what each ship equipped just talked as you did.
The hull of the 022 is the only technological advancement made. The rest of the 022 is mediocre at best. List more? I thought you were so proud of your expertise on the Chinese military? Why need me to do the work? You don’t even know how they do their ‘R&D’?
http://www.christusrex.org/www2/china/acquisition/acqpage7.html
http://www.christusrex.org/www2/china/acquisition/acqpage7.html
http://www.house.gov/coxreport/pref/preface.html
There are many technological advancements outside of the catamaran part. For example, the stealth technology on 022 and the integration with the high new series for OTH strikes. Both areas are generations ahead of what previous Chinese FACs had. As for your report, that just mentions the Chinese espionage efforts, who doesn't try to steal from their competitors. And more importantly, how many projects have received significant help from this? Do you want to name them? I mean actually go through the projects, rather than the espionage effort.
I noticed how you neatly avoided giving me a source on those figures.
what source do you need? Be a little more specific here. I find too many flaws in 90% of the English based PLA news.
Forseeable future. And how far ahead does foreseeable future mean? Of course the US is not capable of anything close to that. China’s still a developing country. How many developed countries have such high rates of growth? It’s hard to improve at such rates when you are at the top. China has a long way to go to the top.
next 25 years, that's as far their prediction is looking forward to.
I was replying to this : “Would be nice if you elaborate on why you think China has no hope of winning this arms race.”
ok
Let’s see. You claim that China can have more capability because it doesn’t have to develop some assets because it has less global responsibility. You then claim that because of that, it need only maintain 3 carrier groups. So I ask if 12 CSGs and 9 ESGs is less capability than 3 CSGs, and in reply you ask me “when did I say it's not more capability?” ROFLOL. :nutkick
It's clear what I mean, a PLAN CSG can have the same capability as a USN CSG. Since USN has global responsibility and PLAN has regional responsibility, you are talking about the entire PLAN vs the 7th fleet. So, it's less capabilities/fleet size in terms of overall navy. But for the regional scenario, you can eventually reach a parity. For example, you can have the biggest bank account in the world, but you want to help many charities, so you donate 1/5 of your donation to united way. I don't have as much money, but I donate everything I can donate to united way. Overall, you donated more, but at united way, we could be even.
You don’t even know that military ships are not always built to Admiralty standards? Many warships are being built to commercial standards in an effort to save money. Some ‘expert’ indeed. And it was you who made the cock-sure claim that “Clearly, 071 is built to military standard.” So how about backing up your claim for once instead of diverting attention?
I can't voucher for the medical ship, but the military ships have to be built by certain shipyards that are approved by PLAN. In terms of amphibious ships, only HD and Dalian are allowed to build them. Even China's largest and most advanced civilian shipyard is not allowed to built them. In the newly constructed Changxin base, they have a dock just for military ships and nothing else. How can you say these ships are not built to PLAN standards?
But they can see the mistakes made and the lessons learned over the years in the design of amphibious ships. I’m just talking about the hull design. The electronics/weapons suite isn’t likely to be far removed in complexity from other warships, and is much more likely to be far simpler based on what we can see. Any technological leap there is is made in the hull form, and not in the electronics suite.
It might not have met their cost requirements instead of their operational requirements.
There are far more lessons they can learn from frigates/destroyers. Yet, they still had them in building 167 and the Thai frigates. 071 was a huge leap for them and as far as we can tell, they probably made some curious decisions. But in the end, the most important part is that they got the product delivered on time despite having no previous experience in this. They've bought many overpriced Russian ships, but Ivan Rogov wasn't one of them.
That is assuming the costs you cite are reliable in the first place.
I would call them insiders.
And I would call that bovine manure you are producing a desperate attempt to claw back some face.
what face have I lost? People still read my PLAN blogs everyday, I seem to be doing pretty well.
CEC fuses data from sensors on board but not clear what integration it has with surrounding ships? LOL.
ROFLOL. With that sensor and weapons suite? Then Ticonderogas will be able to handle StarDestroyers.
I mean not expected. I'm not saying it has CEC, if you notice, I put a comma after CEC and then said that it fuses data from sensors on board.
Nice way of sidestepping what you know, oh exalted PLA specialist. The 071 doesn’t have the connectivity that the LPD-17s have.
it doesn't need to. It's the lead vessel in the class, the following vessels will only be improved. As we've seen with PLAN, they are big into incremental development.
You’re reading too much propaganda material.
so you say.
Not such a huge leap when they are using Russian equipment as references at least, if not outright copying them.
let's see now, they got licensed production for 176 and 630, which they have since upgraded. It looks like they used the Orekh as reference to produce their own illuminators. Sea Soul looks like bandstand from the outside, but is different on the inside. They bought the helix and shtil directly off the Russians. What else are you thinking of? The Russian equipments simply doesn't fit PLAN requirements. We have to fix each batch of AShM we buy from the Russians, because those imported ships can't fire Chinee AShM. If PLAN really has to rely on the Russians for advancements, it's dead in the waters.
Yeah, when it’s the PLA and there’s something good, it doesn’t mean it isn’t there when you don’t see it. But when it’s something bad, it can’t be there when you don’t see it.
Wow. What’s your position that the PLAN informs you abut every project they plan, and even every project they cancel? Supervisor of Propoganda?
All the major projects do get leaked. Actually, if you read my blog, you would see that PLAAF is in the same boat, but a lot of it's projects are either behind schedule, not meeting requirements or a combination. In terms of efficiency of development, PLAN is far ahead of the other 3 services.
LOL, I can see that you have reached the limit in your ability to substantiate your stand.
right
You can’t provide an alternative? LOL.
as one example, they got redundant fiber optic cable connecting up the entire main land.
Don’t blame me if you are unable to understand the differences in capability between EO satellites and SIGINT satellites.
Well, in other thread you basically spent the entire thread questioning their EO satellites. I like your saying "Long range satellite based communications, early warning (detection and localisation) of enemy naval surface assets, targeting of enemy relocatable assets, loss of SIGINT. That not bad enough for you?" would indicate that you believe they would feel the effect of loosing both EO and SIGINT satellites. Now, I personally would agree that they would feel the effect, but in the other thread, you totally discounted that their EO would be able to do the job.
How many? Are they even in service? Or did you ‘not bother to check’?
as far as we can tell from the serial numbers in pictures, there are at least 2-3 of each types of high new right now. They already have pennants that indicate they are in service. Generally, they like fielding regiments of 4 surveillance aircrafts. It's not clear whether each high new gets their own regiment or whether they share regiments. This number with certainly increase each year.
