Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Share
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2527
    Points : 2525
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:39 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:China had the entire might of the PLA on the border of Vietnam and couldn't even hold it

    What?
    PLA used a limited contingent against Vietnam (no massive mobilization or allocation of forces) and set very limited goals, which they met and then f'ed off.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1178
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:58 am

    Fishing boats can't cut everywhere either, the SOSUS will have redundancy with multiple sensors, cables, etc. The PLA & CCP didn't want to pick up a new fight after the long civil war ended on the mainland with Taiwan & S. Korea being supported by the USA.
    The French were together with UK, Germans, Americans & Russians during the Boxer Rebellion; they can now only intervene with success in Libya, their former African colonies & keep French Guiana, New Caledonia & Tahiti from going independent. In 2008, after losing 10 soldiers, they left Afghanistan: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/aug/20/afghanistan.france
    The British Empire lost an army there in 1842:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Afghan_War

    It lost again in 1919: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Anglo-Afghan_War

    Russia infamously lost to Japan in 1905: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Japanese_War

    Together with the USA, both later defeated Germany & Japan in 1945. But, if not for the heroic Chinese resistance against the Japanese in China, Russia could have been invaded in E.Siberia & the Red Army would have been unable to send fresh divisions West to fight the Germans. Just because China lost some wars in the past, it doesn't automatically mean it will loose future wars.
    Don't underestimate them.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18633
    Points : 19189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:23 am

    Just because China lost some wars in the past, it doesn't automatically mean it will loose future wars.

    Of course it does not, but you can obviously argue that tactics are vastly more important than numbers... otherwise there is no way Japan or Germany could have occupied most of asia and europe respectively during WWII.

    If Russia had a fleet 100 times larger than it has now then that would not make it more effective or more powerful... what it would do is make it bankrupt to build and operate such a bloated force.

    Production numbers for China are not the only factor to consider.

    A conflict between Russia and China is almost impossible... they are far more sensible than that and neither views military force as a first or second option to solve their international problems.

    America on the other hand thinks regime change is a legitimate and legal option but only for them.

    A growing Chinese navy will enable them to spread their influence and support their efforts around the world.

    The west has been exploiting africa and central and south america for a couple of centuries now, but have done little to improve infrastructure and development.

    China has been investing and actually helping african countries to develop. Trade where both partners profit and develop. A better developed africa and central and south america is a good thing for the world, but the west does not like that idea. They love their first, second and third world model and want that to remain... so eventually they are going to have to challenge China... China will need a decent navy when that happens... and I think their best chance of having a decent navy is cooperation with Russia... they already deploy a lot of Russian designed technology anyway, and Russian navy tactics and systems are designed to face NATO type threats.

    I have said before if pure numbers are what it is all about the Russians could easily pump out hundreds of 1980s technology ships, but what would be the point?
    They already have such vessels in reserve... a quick overhaul and they could be operating, but they want better than that.

    China is just producing what it can and there is nothing wrong with that, but one on one you can't really compare them.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Isos on Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:17 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    They now have large CG backed by people's militia & the Navy & will stop any fishing trawler not fully manned by Chinese nationals.
    Don't compare the Ching Dynasty China to today's PRC. The French weren't fighting any Chinese armies in Indochina. The Vietnamese were supported by China & USSR, & the French & later the Americans lost, as they did in Korea in 1953. U r grasping for straws.

    Those Vietnamese and Filipino trawlers cross that line everyday and that SOSUS net is far too wide to monitor every inch of it.  There really is nothing they can do to stop them.  The French fought Chinese armies in China, they sank the only modern fleet they had built without a single loss.  China had the entire might of the PLA on the border of Vietnam and couldn't even hold it. the French occupied the entire country from the time China lost it to the time they handed it over to the Americans.  

    You don't need to cross the T today just push some buttons to launch missiles. You also need good datalinks, communication and good radars.

    No need of combat experience to push buttons. All the modern navies have 0 combat experience in naval wars. All the guys that participated to the falklands or first golf war or israelo-arabs navals wars or indo pakistani naval wars are not in the navy anymore.

    US have never experienced the lose of one carrier with 5000 people on bord. Wesern countries are shoked when one soldier die in afghanistan what would be their reaction to 5000 dead in a carrier sinking.

    What would make them lose near their shores is the bad quality of their equipment which is in my opinion very bad in terms of quality because it is a mix of western and russian copies.


    Last edited by Isos on Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:28 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Isos on Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:25 am

    @TsavorLion even US SOSUS doesn't detect russian subs. What makes you think that a chinese would detect western ones ?

    Chinese technology is far behind western's. That's a fact. This SOSUS could protect a port from swimmers and subs in small space but not all the coast.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 12224
    Points : 12703
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  George1 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:52 pm

    Statistics: the naval composition of the Chinese Navy as of 01.01.2018

    The presented statistical study takes into account warships of the main classes (nuclear and non-nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, littoral warships, seagoing landing ships) with a total displacement of 2000 tons (above 1000 tons). that component of the Navy, which is capable of projecting force to remote regions of the world. The ships transferred to the fleet (decommissioned), starting from 01/01/2018, are included in the initial data for reference - they are not included in the total number of ships or in the total displacement. The names of the ships are given in Russian transcription, tested for compliance with either established (traditional) writing, or dictionary phonetic transcription.



    https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/195967.html
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:38 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:

    What?
    PLA used a limited contingent against Vietnam (no massive mobilization or allocation of forces) and set very limited goals, which they met and then f'ed off.

    What?
    PLA used 600,000 soldiers and suffered 10% casualties, it was one of the most humiliating defeats in modern times.  They were fighting a war like it was 1914 in 1979. Even the Viet were surprised at how easily they defeated them.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:47 pm

    Isos wrote:

    You don't need to cross the T today just push some buttons to launch missiles. You also need good datalinks, communication and good radars.

    No need of combat experience to push buttons. All the modern navies have 0 combat experience in naval wars. All the guys that participated to the falklands or first golf war or israelo-arabs navals wars or indo pakistani naval wars are not in the navy anymore.

    US have never experienced the lose of one carrier with 5000 people on bord. Wesern countries are shoked when one soldier die in afghanistan what would be their reaction to 5000 dead in a carrier sinking.

    What would make them lose near their shores is the bad quality of their equipment which is in my opinion very bad in terms of quality because it is a mix of western and russian copies.

    The US and French navies have the most combat experience in recent times. It is all centered around aviation assets as that is the nature of naval warfare today. We have built a small level of experience ourselves but it was rather disastrous with the loss of two aircraft in one deployment. It is still combat experience and valuable lessons are learned.
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2527
    Points : 2525
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:00 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:

    What?
    PLA used a limited contingent against Vietnam (no massive mobilization or allocation of forces) and set very limited goals, which they met and then f'ed off.

    What?
    PLA used 600,000 soldiers and suffered 10% casualties, it was one of the most humiliating defeats in modern times.  They were fighting a war like it was 1914 in 1979.  Even the Viet were surprised at how easily they defeated them.  

    Nope, only about 200k crossed into Vietnam. The rest remained in the PRC.
    The aim was to stop at the gates of Lang Son and lure back PAVN forces stationed in Cambodia. Both USSR and USA were kept in the loop about the operation and its limited scope. Ultimately and upon facing C3 difficulties and failing to force Vietnam to leave Cambodia, PRC kept its promise to the Americans and Soviets, PLA trashed the place and left with the keys to Hanoi.

    Ergo Vietnam was warned to stay in their place, albeit PLA's tactical setbacks (from which they got lessons learned).
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Isos on Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:23 pm

    The US and French navies have the most combat experience in recent times. It is all centered around aviation assets as that is the nature of naval warfare today. We have built a small level of experience ourselves but it was rather disastrous with the loss of two aircraft in one deployment. It is still combat experience and valuable lessons are learned.

    Combat experience has nothing to do with this. They send a carrier with tens of frigate bomb unarmed countries. Would this "combat experience" help them if tmr an oscar fires 72 oniks on their carrier ? No.

    Actually it is the opposite most of their soldier feel invincible because they don't lose any of them during those wars. If one carrier is destroyed, the crews of the other carrier will be paralized when facing subs that they can't see or groups of bombers launching their missiles 1000km away.

    The loss of the 2 jets is because of the bad ship and lack of money to buy new equipment. A deployment mission for a carrier to bombs terrorist doesn't give you anything more than bombing practice target. That has nothing to do with conventional wars.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1178
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:57 pm

    Isos wrote:even US SOSUS doesn't detect russian subs. What makes you think that a chinese would detect western ones? Chinese technology is far behind western's. That's a fact. This SOSUS could protect a port from swimmers and subs in small space but not all the coast.
    Even if so, the Chinese SOSUS is newer & will be more concentrated in key areas of coke points & therefore may be more effective.
    When deployed, any ship & sub is on a war footing; it doesn't matter if weapons r being used or not. Training is conducted with or w/o actual shooting. Damage control & using radars, sonars, C4IR, actual or simulated, is part of it. The BSF "sank at least one and possibly two of the Georgian patrol boats." http://www.ponarseurasia.org/sites/default/files/policy-memos-pdf/pepm_048.pdf

    A PRC pilot forced USN EP-3 to land on Hainan, & a PLAN SSK surfaced in the middle of USN CSG:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incident

    https://thediplomat.com/2015/12/the-chinese-submarine-threat/

    So on that score they all have combat experience.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:57 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:

    Nope, only about 200k crossed into Vietnam. The rest remained in the PRC.
    The aim was to stop at the gates of Lang Son and lure back PAVN forces stationed in Cambodia. Both USSR and USA were kept in the loop about the operation and its limited scope. Ultimately and upon facing C3 difficulties and failing to force Vietnam to leave Cambodia, PRC kept its promise to the Americans and Soviets, PLA trashed the place and left with the keys to Hanoi.

    Ergo Vietnam was warned to stay in their place, albeit PLA's tactical setbacks (from which they got lessons learned).

    They mobilised 600k, 200k went in the first wave, when that was defeated they sent another 200k which had supporting units in China.  The PRC failed at it's goals and showed that the PLA was truly a paper tiger.  They made reforms, but the true nature of the PLA are each military district is its own fiefdom.  They truly have no concept of Joint Doctrine.  The officer corps is full of corruption where positions are paid for with bribes rather than merit and loyalty to the communist party.  They operate by strictly drawn plans that have no flexibility, if it doesn't follow the plan they have no idea what to do.  They are not trained to fight on a fluid and rapidly changing battlefield. Even if you gave the Chinese military all of the best equipment in the world, without proper leadership it is worthless.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:43 pm

    Isos wrote:

    Combat experience has nothing to do with this. They send a carrier with tens of frigate bomb unarmed countries. Would this "combat experience" help them if tmr an oscar fires 72 oniks on their carrier ? No.

    Actually it is the opposite most of their soldier feel invincible because they don't lose any of them during those wars. If one carrier is destroyed, the crews of the other carrier will be paralized when facing subs that they can't see or groups of bombers launching their missiles 1000km away.

    The loss of the 2 jets is because of the bad ship and lack of money to buy new equipment. A deployment mission for a carrier to bombs terrorist doesn't give you anything more than bombing practice target. That has nothing to do with conventional wars.

    Combat experience for major navies revolves around naval aviation. The one's going into combat are the pilots. If they get close enough to be shot at by other ships they have already screwed up. This has been the standard since the end of the WWII. Lesser navies have lower standards, but we are not talking about lesser navies unless we are talking about China who has no reliable aircraft to fly from its carriers. That is why I said they should consider using it like the Japanese use the Hyuga class, at least they can see some usefulness.

    The loss of a MiG-29K and an Su-33 in the same deployment is devastating. We will see how serious they are at maintaining the capability, $400 million for a boiler refurb is not instilling confidence in me when we were promised a super carrier not so long ago.
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2527
    Points : 2525
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:44 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:

    Nope, only about 200k crossed into Vietnam. The rest remained in the PRC.
    The aim was to stop at the gates of Lang Son and lure back PAVN forces stationed in Cambodia. Both USSR and USA were kept in the loop about the operation and its limited scope. Ultimately and upon facing C3 difficulties and failing to force Vietnam to leave Cambodia, PRC kept its promise to the Americans and Soviets, PLA trashed the place and left with the keys to Hanoi.

    Ergo Vietnam was warned to stay in their place, albeit PLA's tactical setbacks (from which they got lessons learned).

    They mobilised 600k, 200k went in the first wave, when that was defeated they sent another 200k

    I doubt that. It was just 200k PLA in 'Nam, the rest were in China pulling off landing exercises and supporting or possibly rotating.

    PS. Fast forward to 2018, PRC owns the entire South China Sea, not bad for them.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:50 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    Even if so, the Chinese SOSUS is newer & will be more concentrated in key areas of coke points & therefore may be more effective.
    When deployed, any ship & sub is on a war footing; it doesn't matter if weapons r being used or not. Training is conducted with or w/o actual shooting. Damage control & using radars, sonars, C4IR, actual or simulated, is part of it. The BSF "sank at least one and possibly two of the Georgian patrol boats." http://www.ponarseurasia.org/sites/default/files/policy-memos-pdf/pepm_048.pdf

    A PRC pilot forced USN EP-3 to land on Hainan, & a PLAN SSK surfaced in the middle of USN CSG:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incident

    https://thediplomat.com/2015/12/the-chinese-submarine-threat/

    So on that score they all have combat experience.

    If you call flying too close to an aircraft that ends up killing the Chinese pilot combat experience you might as well stop now. Aviation training in China is similar doctrine to the Soviet doctrine. It is antiquated and not useful against the modern NATO doctrine. Yes, sinking Georgian patrol boats is combat experience for our navy, something China doesn't have.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:52 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:

    I doubt that. It was just 200k PLA in 'Nam, the rest were in China pulling off landing exercises and supporting or possibly rotating.

    PS. Fast forward to 2018, PRC owns the entire South China Sea, not bad for them.

    The Viet say one thing, the Chinese say something else. Who is more reliable I leave to you. If China owned the South China Sea the French would not be able to sail freely and conduct training in it.
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2527
    Points : 2525
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:54 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:If you call flying too close to an aircraft that ends up killing the Chinese pilot combat experience you might as well stop now.   Aviation training in China is similar doctrine to the Soviet doctrine.  It is antiquated and not useful against the modern NATO doctrine.  Yes, sinking Georgian patrol boats is combat experience for our navy, something China doesn't have.  

    China has money and industrial base to compensate. It's the same scenario for USA vs Japan right before Pearl Harbor
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2527
    Points : 2525
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:57 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote: If China owned the South China Sea the French would not be able to sail freely and conduct training in it.  

    It's EEZ so all this is allowed during peace time. PRC owns the place when it comes to extracting and developing energy resources; and they control it at any given time if war breaks out.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:59 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:

    China has money and industrial base to compensate. It's the same scenario for USA vs Japan right before Pearl Harbor

    As we have seen with the Arabs, money to buy the best equipment does not translate into combat capability. China doesn't even have access to the best equipment much less the leadership to properly use it.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:02 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:

    It's EEZ so all this is allowed during peace time. PRC owns the place when it comes to extracting and developing energy resources; and they control it at any given time if war breaks out.

    China claims it, no one recognises it. You don't see them drilling out in disputed areas do you? Rosneft is drilling in Vietnam waters claimed by China, all China could do was shake its fists.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7245
    Points : 7339
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  PapaDragon on Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:20 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:
    Vladimir79 wrote:If you call flying too close to an aircraft that ends up killing the Chinese pilot combat experience you might as well stop now.   Aviation training in China is similar doctrine to the Soviet doctrine.  It is antiquated and not useful against the modern NATO doctrine.  Yes, sinking Georgian patrol boats is combat experience for our navy, something China doesn't have.  

    China has money and industrial base to compensate. It's the same scenario for USA vs Japan right before Pearl Harbor

    Vladimir is definitely right here. That war with Vietnam was total clusterf*ck for China, textbook epic fail on all parameters.

    Nobody disputes their naval construction capacity but if that recent live combat situation they had in Africa (can't remember exact country) is any indicator they have very long way to go before being usable combat force.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Isos on Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:25 pm

    Combat experience for major navies revolves around naval aviation. The one's going into combat are the pilots. If they get close enough to be shot at by other ships they have already screwed up. This has been the standard since the end of the WWII. Lesser navies have lower standards, but we are not talking about lesser navies unless we are talking about China who has no reliable aircraft to fly from its carriers. That is why I said they should consider using it like the Japanese use the Hyuga class, at least they can see some usefulness.

    The loss of a MiG-29K and an Su-33 in the same deployment is devastating. We will see how serious they are at maintaining the capability, $400 million for a boiler refurb is not instilling confidence in me when we were promised a super carrier not so long ago.

    Argetina had only 6 exocet missiles and they almost won against UK that has centuries of combat experience and that had two deployed carriers ... naval war are made with missiles and radars, your crew must be good with computers, not experienced at war. Their carrier were even targeted but they manage to jam the missiles because french helped them. If they had another 24 jet annd a hundred of exocet more ...

    Fighter bombers from the ground can also target ships by staying far away from its air defence missiles. You don't need a carrier for that. Again Argetina proved it.

    Chinese j-20 looks more like a missile carrier with long legs than a fighter. The main threat is the US carriers not its f-35. So for defending their mainland it is more than enough. That is based on soviet doctrine of massive missile strike that doesn't require state of art technology. The carriers will need to stay far away where f-35 can't do anything. It's funny to say western navies are doing exercice there but the day there is a big incident they will become easy targets specially french one because they have 1 carrier so those ships don't have airborne escort to protect them.


    The loss of a MiG-29K and an Su-33 in the same deployment is devastating but it has nothing to do with the deployment. If they have trained the crew normaly that would have occured in the barents sea because the ship is old and they don't take care of it.

    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2527
    Points : 2525
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:31 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:

    It's EEZ so all this is allowed during peace time. PRC owns the place when it comes to extracting and developing energy resources; and they control it at any given time if war breaks out.

    China claims it, no one recognises it.  You don't see them drilling out in disputed areas do you?  Rosneft is drilling in Vietnam waters claimed by China, all China could do was shake its fists.  

    I think they have a two-tiered claim, maximum and desirable. Rosneft's plot is beyond their desirable area, so they let it pass.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1178
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:52 pm

    There was a 2nd fighter that followed the EP-3 to Hainan. Contrary to what ist pilot said, he could have flown to Vietnam instead.
    In 1979 war there, China didn't use its AF at all. If the USSR didn't issue a threat, the PLA was likely to try yo capture Hanoi. They have plenty of cannon fodder to do it. Now, their SOF hone their skills:
    http://www.atimes.com/article/pla-conducts-drills-in-tibet-against-terrorism-invasion/?utm_source=The+Daily+Report&utm_campaign=80797b36b8-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_07_24_12_04&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1f8bca137f-80797b36b8-31607385

    Their Marines trained in Xinjiang & Yunnan:
    http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-01/02/c_134970580.htm

    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/can-china-copy-the-us-marine-corps-15051
    Chinese Troops Arrive in Syria to Fight Uyghur Rebels
    http://jcpa.org/chinese-troops-arrive-syria-fight-uyghur-rebels/

    As stated by the current US Pacific Command chief Admiral Harry Harris: “China is now capable of controlling the South China Sea in all scenarios short of war with the United States.”
    http://www.atimes.com/article/short-war-china-already-controls-south-china-sea-us-admiral/

    Their guerillas, mostly peasants, learned to fight well in a civil war & kicked the Nationalist army who earlier fought the Japanese to Taiwan in 1949. "In the 20th century, the Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong partially credited his 1949 victory over Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang to The Art of War. The work strongly influenced Mao's writings about guerrilla warfare, which further influenced communist insurgencies around the world. ..Ho Chi Minh translated the work for his Vietnamese officers to study. His general Vo Nguyen Giap, the strategist behind victories over French and American forces in Vietnam, was likewise an avid student and practitioner of Sun Tzu's ideas." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Tzu
    The PLA saved NK from being defeated & occupied by the USA. Their regular soldiers & marines also do physical exercises & hand to hand combat training as a matter of routine. So, it's very close to real combat. Even w/o recent combat experience, they can learn quickly.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:52 am

    Isos wrote:Argetina had only 6 exocet missiles and they almost won against UK that has centuries of combat experience and that had two deployed carriers ... naval war are made with missiles and radars, your crew must be good with computers, not experienced at war. Their carrier were even targeted but they manage to jam the missiles because french helped them. If they had another 24 jet annd a hundred of exocet more ...

    Fighter bombers from the ground can also target ships by staying far away from its air defence missiles. You don't need a carrier for that. Again Argetina proved it.

    Chinese j-20 looks more like a missile carrier with long legs than a fighter. The main threat is the US carriers not its f-35. So for defending their mainland it is more than enough. That is based on soviet doctrine of massive missile strike that doesn't require state of art technology. The carriers will need to stay far away where f-35 can't do anything. It's funny to say western navies are doing exercice there but the day there is a big incident they will become easy targets specially french one because they have 1 carrier so those ships don't have airborne escort to protect them.


    The loss of a MiG-29K and an Su-33 in the same deployment is devastating but it has nothing to do with the deployment. If they have trained the crew normaly that would have occured in the barents sea because the ship is old and they don't take care of it.

    The aircraft used against the Royal Navy were part of the Aeronavale of Argentina, that is a naval asset.  Like I said, naval combat experience post WWII is based around aviation.  

    The J-20 is part of the mystique paper tiger.  Chinese claim they have AESA but don't, they claim they have operational engines but don't. If they did we would not keep exporting to them.  They bought the Su-35 more to reverse engineer its subsystems than to actually use it just as they bought the Kilos, tore them down and never used it.  That above all tells us more about the true state of their technical level.  

    Conducting combat ops is far more rigorous than training, at least the way we do it.  The Americans and French train the way they will fight and then they put it to the test, reevaluate and improve.  The way we do it is more experimental than practical which is why I am thinking keeping a carrier is really just a proving ground to sell naval aviation products.  

    The French carrier has been modernised to hold up to 40 Rafale and they modernised the 2 E2-C Hawkeye.  They have sufficient assets to keep watch over their fleet.  The Rafale have been updated to F3R standard which includes AESA and Meteor integration.  They are more than a match for what China would throw at them.  Their biggest problem is running out of ammo.

    Sponsored content

    Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:52 am