Posted on 01/09/2011 3:28:04 PM PST by Allthatucantleavebehind
U.S. Will Counter Chinese Arms Buildup
“I’ve been concerned about the development of the antiship cruise and ballistic missiles ever since I took this job,” he added. “We knew they were working on a stealth aircraft. I think that what we’ve seen is that they may be somewhat further ahead in the development of that aircraft than our intelligence had earlier predicted.”
Mr. Gates said he hoped his talks with Chinese leaders would reduce the need for more American weaponry in the Pacific. He also said that if Chinese leaders considered the United States a declining power because of the financial crisis, they were wrong.
“I’ve watched this sort of cyclical view of American decline come around two or three times, perhaps most dramatically in the latter half of the 1970s,” Mr. Gates said. “And my general line for those both at home and around the world who think the U.S. is in decline is that history’s dustbins are filled with countries that underestimated the resilience of the United States.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“So is LA.
Next idea...?”
No, not LA. .. but what is the next brilliant idea that the Chicom will release.
Are you sure they lag behind in these areas?
Aerodynamic layout/airframe is just more visualized comparing to the advancement of electronics.
I can show you many Chinese academic research papers on the advancements in these area (radar, ECMs, weaponarys) as well.
Pretty much the only thing China lags is the jet-engine part (which is the only things they sign new orders from Russia since 2005), but even in this special area, they are catching up quickly, with the brand-new jet eninges installed on the one brand-new J-20 prototype.
Btw, as for the airframe, being stealthy is pretty much decided by the airframe, you cannot turn a F-15 into a F-22 by some magical coatings.
So true. And that's my point.
Existing Eagles with superior avionics and weapons systems can still defeat EVERY SINGLE FIGHTER IN THE WORLD (Except Raptor). Stealth is not necessary when you can see them before they see you...and your missiles have a 90+% PK at 1.5 times the range.
We have far more reason to be concerned about Russian aircraft and they are a full generation behind us. The are building aircraft with F-15 level kill capabilities today. Over 90% of Chinese fighters are little better than an F4.
Again, empty chants.
One primary reason China stops ordering any flankers is because its rather one-sided in the internal military excerise where Su-27/Su-30 get pwned by Chinese J-10.
I can cited many official new sources about the very poor performance of Su-27/30 when it faces J-10 (also bulit by CAC):
For instance:
1 J-10 vs 4 Su-27s, 4:0
http://mil.jschina.com.cn/2009/1105/1664.htm
2 J-10s vs 4 Su-27s, again, 4:0
http://dh.jgjy.gov.cn/shownews.asp?news_id=1873
6 J-10s vs 6 Su-30s, 5:0, the only Su-30 surivived was driven by an highly experienced Su-30 pilot(vice commander of the only SU-30 division in China Navy), and he narrowly escaped the hunts.
http://news.ifeng.com/mil/2/detail_2010_11/15/3110056_0.shtml
The only thing prevent China from shutting-down SU-27 productions lines is that, as a twin-engine heavy fighter, SU-27/30 get much better range comparing to J-10, which is quite critical for PLAAF especially considering the hot spots in East China Sea and South China sea, however the situation changes completely once China get their J-20 ready.
Actually, just about J-10 to finish its flight test and enter service, there were quite many airforce guys in China prefer cancelling the J-10 programme all-together and save the money for more Su-27s orders.
Guess what make them changing their minds?
The Lead project director of J-10, Song Wen-cong (who is now the vice-project director of J-20), asked the Airforce to pick their best pilots with SU-27 to have military excerise with J-10, which is driven by the test pilots of J-10.
And yet-to-be-matured J-10 beat Su-27 in one-on-one air-combat by 8:1, thats why laterly the airforce shut down the liscenc production of Su-27 completely.
Considering the fact the convential airframe F-22 is not very good at air-combat comparing with the ground-breaking unique airframe of J-20 (lifting-body co-plane canards blending with leading edges), when a F-22 is facing a J-20, the result may not much different than trying to pitting a SU-27 against a J-10.
And since according to USAF’s internal military excerise, you get something like 1:144 when trying to pitting F-15s against F-22, let along the dog-fight/air-combat monster J-20, I would expect it would be quite a bit one-sided when we trying to using F-15s against J-20.
Back at you buddy.
The first time a Chinese designed and built aircraft shoots down a US designed and built aircraft be sure to get back to me. I'll eat my hat.
In fact Chinese aircraft won't even come out to play tag when US aircraft are in the YELLOW SEA!
They won't even send out their best to confront US Aircraft which have been flying for 30 years.
Yellow sea is not belong to China, and the US Navy screamed they will enter yellow sea since probably a year ago, only after the Noko repeatedly kills quite a few Soko the supposed- US army at Korea get enough nerve to conduct quite some meaningless military excerises as pathetic anwsers to the Noko’s bombardment on S.Korea’s village.
So I don’t believe there is much to brag here from the US point of view, call me when they finally get enough nerve to do something that matters, so far, as of now, looks to me they have barked alot through.
AYBABTU
What do you think of the Type 096 SSBN http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_096_submarine under development by China?
I know there are good people in CA. Can’t anyone take a joke anymore?
Everyones panties seem to be always in a wad.
I lived in CA for a few years and I am glad to be out of there.
I see why they call it the land of fuits and nuts.
It's hard to tell until the put to sea the fleet gets to listen to them. It's all about acoustics...and reliability.
Missiles are secondary as most boomers that can be heard...are followed.
If you hear them open the tubes you have to shoot them. However, if you can't hear them you can't follow them.
The 096 is likely a generation ahead of the 094 and a generation behind the Trident...roughly a Poseidon III class boat.
Again, you don't know for sure until they put to sea with a full complement.
It strikes me that the best the Chinese can come up with to wave in Gates's face prior to his visit is a fighter under development, rather than a new SSBN. I know little about the subject and rely on others like you, but this seems to be telling.
I would say SSBN is not a priority for China.
Judging by China’s location, there is very little point to build a large fleet of SSBNs.
Thats because:
From China, the minimum range required for a land-based ICBM from China that can cover the entire USA will be around 11000 km.
However, for a submarine-based ICBM, the minimum range to cover USA would be no less than 12500 km.
So China’s SLBM required much longer range to reach USA.
And you have to consider the fact, the sea near China’s border is not some deep sea like the case of USA.
Which means, to give a creditable submarine-based nuclear strike force, in theory China has to build much larger SSBNs comparing to USA to accommodate longer-ranged bigger ballastic missiles.
However, the averge depth of the sea (east china sea, yellow sea, etc) around China is only about 50 meter or so, huge SSBN will not be an option since its hard to move and easy to be spotted by anti-submarine methods.
Therefore, for China, SSBN is not their priority, at least before they get Taiwan,land-based mobile ICBMs are far more feasible and cost-efficient.
Also, China is making a big mistake. It should just have let the US to sit on its laurels. All this talk of ballistic-missile-this and stealth-fighter-that simply makes the US rouse itself, and once that happens China will never be able to catch up. The US was working on stealth concepts in the 70s, and has already gone through 3 generations of stealth fighters (the Have-Blue/F-117 types, the B-2 Spirit type, and now the F-22/F-35 type). China and Russia are only now coming up with their own systems, and at least when it comes to Russia they are able to deliver on engines and RADAR far better than the ChiComs. If the US starts cranking out technologies, China will never be able to catch up. Think of it ....it cannot match Russian engine production techniques of the 1980s, it cannot produce a PESA RADAR similar to the Soviet Zaslon produced in the mid-80s, and as for the anti-ship Ballistic missile China is crowing about ...the Soviets first tested an anti-ship ballistic missile in 1974, the R-27K Korabelnaya-4K18 (SSN-13) was operational in the 70s. So, while the Chinese have come a long way due to the reformist vision of Deng Xiaoping, they are not even at Russia/Western Europe level let alone that of the US. Yet all they do is prode and poke the US with all these 'new' weapons that are mostly just for show (ask yourself ...for a prototype, interest paint scheme on the J-20).
Furthermore, the US has very mature systems, and it is all about systems and not platforms. The new SU-35S fighter is a more superior platform than the F-15, but one has to look at the entire spectrum of systems. For instance ...that 'official' story of J-10s 'beating' SU-30s and being capable of defeating Typhoons. Well, take those same J-10s and fly them against Indian SU-30MKIs and Russian SU-27s, and against RAF or Luftwaffe Typhoons, and let's see what the results are.
China has come a long way. However, as it is, this is tantamount to a kid with a fast tricycle boasting of how he can stand up to a man with a Lamborghini. China has several decades of trying to copy Russian and Western Europe technologies before it can try to stand up to the US of circa 2010/11, and because of what it has been doing to seem stronger than it is it has virtually guaranteed that when it is at the level of current Russia/Wesern Europe, that the US will also have done much advancement.
However, it can always release 'official new sources' (sp) that show how their new J-44XYZ can defeat American hypersonic wave-riders .....1123456789 to 0.0987654321. Or how this 'inspired MiG 1/42/1.44' ....ooops, sorry ...the 100% totally indigenous Chinese J-20 (just as the 100% local Lavi ..I mean J-10, or the 100% local project-33 MiG concept ...I mean the JF-17) are Raptor beaters. Please, I would take a F-15K or a SU-35S over the J-20 any day of the weak.
Any day of the weak = any day of the week ....although in China’s case ‘weak’ also applies.
I don’t believe any news sources in China suggesting J-10 is superior to EF2000 in air-combat since the two have not even met yet, the only thing we know for sure is that J-10 beat Su-27/Su-30 very easily and consistently in almost all air-combats in China’s internal military excreises, and I provided the official links to prove that.
Actually, according to the pilot of PLAAF, nowdays the military excreises, PLAAF usually pit more Su-27 against fewer J-10 to level the groud, and the PLAAF pilots claimed when Su-27 faces J-10, its like Su-27 fall into a death trap, it cannot out-manuerve the J-10 and it cannot even retreat succesfully.
Which explained why Chinese show little interests in accquiring any further Su-27/30/35s from Russia despite of how big a hype Russian sources created to show how Chinese want their Su-27s etc.
It is rather amusing to know, just days before J-20 revealed, there are still some Russian news sources claimed China want their Su-35 now and will buy their PAK-FA after 2025.
Btw,some technique background:
Afterall, J-10’s airframe is a typical short-distance-coupling canard layout, the only other producted fighter that has this comparable layout is the French Raflafe, this airframe has superior dog-fight performance at the expense of far more complicate flight-control system and slightly-less top-speed, comparing to long-distance-coupling canards.
Thats why I am not surprised at all when rumors say that French bird beat the crap out of EuroFighter 2000 in the interal military excresise, even through tech-wise, the two should be at roughly the same level.
As for J-20’s airframe, its far better type of enhanced canard airframe (enhanced with blended strakes and huge lifting-body), wind-tunnel tests suggest such airframe offers 40%+ lifting force/tonque over even the next-best option (e.g. enhanced short-distance coupling canards), so I certainly wouldn’t worry about the performance of this monster.
I've never understood why the Chinese (and I assume you are Chinese - joined Dec 31 2010, weird/convoluted English syntax, masturbatory fantasies about the J-10 ....) think their copies are in any way comparable to advanced Western designs. The J-10 is simply a design influenced by the Lavi, and it (nor the Lavi) can never be compared to a twin-engined advanced 4.5 Gen Western fighter like the Rafale.
As for the rumors of the Rafale trouncing the Typhoon. Well, the Typhoon pilots also talked about that information, and it was quite balanced. No plane 'defeated' the other. The rumors of what you call an 'interal' military excercise had been published in a magazine, and once more information came out following the extrapolated talk of certain defeats it showed the initial statements were ...well ...'enhanced.' Although that doesn't matter ...even if a single Rafale had defeated a combined force of all Raptors and all Typhoons in the globe, it doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the J-10. The J-10, when it matures, will be more comparable to a Block 50 F-16 (note: when it is mature). It will never be comparable to a Rafale or a Typhoon. The airframes and innards simply do not allow it too.
Thus, apologies to your Chicom sensitivities ...but the Chengdu J-10 will never be more, at its best in another decade or so, than a suped-up F-16.
Rafale:
J-10:
As for the Russians vs the Chinese ....well, wake me up when the Chinese can make a functional copy of a 80s Russian engine design that doesn't require overhaul every 30 hours. For that matter, when the Chinese can come up with something that is not a copy of some existing design or concept. It is interesting that the Russians decided not to go ahead with the MiG-1.42/1.44 concept even after money started flowing in from gas/oil, yet over a decade later the Chinese are wetting themselves over the J-20.
Graphic of what the MiG-1.42/1.44 would have looked like when completed. Yet the Russians discarded the design. Well, it is good enough for their southern neighbors though, hah!
You state the the J-20 has '40%+ lifting force/tonque' (huh ...tonque???? LOL) ....interesting you have such information. Did your task-master at Chengdu send you over on the 31st of December 2010 to sprinkle information on the J-20? If so, thank him ...but ask for more advanced English diction lessons. Already the Pentagon has responded on what they think of the J-20. They are not worried. Please also tell your head of department at Chengdu that the folks at FR require someone more capable and with greater 'technique background' (whatever that is) than you. After all, all that you are leaving behind dear Allthatucantleavebehind is simply laughter. Guess you are one of those Chinese fanboys claiming the J-20 is nearly as stealthy as the Raptor because its cockpit looks like the Raptor, huh. After all, you just claimed the J-10 is comparable to a Rafale because they both have close-coupled canards (or, to use your own words, something called 'typical short-distance-coupling canard layout' based on your great 'technique background').
Thanks for the laugh. Now go get some dim sum.
I am very impressed that you still believe in whatever Russians say.
I heard Russians even enterainingly claimed PAK-FA is 20 years ahead of J-20, LOL.
But I guess, in the end, pictures worth thousands words, so I bet we all know which one is better.
No wonder you are very insecure about PAK-FA, however I think by keeping telling to yourself that “PAK-FA is far ahead of J-20 blah blah blah” maybe eventually one day you may even believe your own words, hehehe.
Anyway, lets move on, stop wasting time on topic like PAK-FA vs J-20, its meaningless because we all have seen the pictures and we all know the answer, just someone prefer to remain in denial at the moment, thus no point to discuss anymore here, hehehe.
Notice some similarities to the 'original' Chengdu J-20.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.