Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13893
    Points : 14388
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 65074_original

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

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2509
    Points : 2501
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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).
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 4027
    Points : 4017
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 3030
    Points : 3028
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2509
    Points : 2501
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2509
    Points : 2501
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2509
    Points : 2501
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8385
    Points : 8469
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 4027
    Points : 4017
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.

    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2509
    Points : 2501
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 3030
    Points : 3028
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty 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.
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Wed Jul 25, 2018 1:06 am

    KiloGolf wrote:

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

    Their foreign ministry made the statement about the incident, "No country, organisation, company or individual can, without the permission of the Chinese government, carry out oil and gas exploration or exploitation activities in waters under Chinese jurisdiction. We urge relevant parties to earnestly respect China’s sovereign and jurisdictional rights and not do anything that could impact bilateral relations or this region’s peace and stability.”

    It looks like paper tiger talk to me as we don't have permission nor will we ever ask them for it.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 3030
    Points : 3028
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Jul 25, 2018 3:09 am

    The USSR didn't dare to invade the Northern PRC in 1969-1976, when it was more of a "paper tiger" then:
    Elaborating on Mao's concept of active defense—tactically offensive action with a defensive strategy—Chinese strategy was designed to defeat a Soviet invasion before it could penetrate deeply into China. Chinese strategists envisaged a forward defense, that is, near the border, to prevent attack on Chinese cities and industrial facilities, particularly in north and northeast China. Such a defense-in-depth would require more positional warfare, much closer to the border, in the initial stages of a conflict. This strategy downplayed the people's war strategy of "luring in deep" in a protracted war, and it took into account the adaptations in strategy and tactics necessitated by technological advances in weaponry. The PLA emphasized military operations using modernized, combined arms tactics for the dual purpose of making the most effective use of current force structure and of preparing the armed forces for more advanced weaponry in the future.

    The doctrine of "people's war under modern conditions" also incorporated the use of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons. China's own nuclear forces, which developed a second-strike capability in the early 1980s, provided Beijing with a credible, if minimum, deterrent against Soviet or United States nuclear attack. China repeatedly has vowed never to use nuclear weapons first, but it has promised retaliation against a nuclear attack. Chinese strategists also evinced an interest in tactical nuclear weapons, and the PLA has simulated battlefield use of such weapons in offensive and defensive exercises. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernization_of_the_People%27s_Liberation_Army#Doctrine,_strategy,_and_tactics

    .. Gaps in certain capability remain—most notably in the development of some sophisticated electronic systems and sufficiently reliable and powerful propulsion systems—but China's defense industry is now producing warships and submarines, land systems and aircraft that provide the Chinese armed forces with a capability edge over most military operating in the Asia-Pacific. Where indigenous capability still falls short, China procures from Russia and, until local industry eventually bridges the gap, it hopes that quantity will overcome quality. ..According to The National Interest, Chinese industry can still learn much from Russia, but in many areas it has caught up with its model. The vibrancy of China’s tech sector suggests that Chinese military technology will leap ahead of Russian tech in the next decade.
    Modernization efforts were originally planned to be completed by 2049. However, following the 10th CCP National Congress in 2017, Xi Jinping announced modernization to be completed by 2035. China watchers regard the revised timeline as a sign for the success of the reforms, although issues shortfalls remain, specifically in the areas of capability development and combat readiness of the Air Force and infantry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernization_of_the_People%27s_Liberation_Army



    NOW, THE PLA IS THE 3RD IN FIREPOWER:
    https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=china



    Not "a paper tiger" by any strech!


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Wed Jul 25, 2018 3:22 am; edited 2 times in total
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13893
    Points : 14388
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  George1 on Wed Jul 25, 2018 3:12 am

    the discussion has gone off-topic
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Vladimir79 on Wed Jul 25, 2018 3:49 am

    George1 wrote:the discussion has gone off-topic

    If it is about the Chinese military with some aspect of its naval forces in mind, on-topic. If discussions are sand boxed it gets rather boring.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22355
    Points : 22899
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:39 am

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

    In that case the Russian "occupation" of the Arctic and Crimea is also combat experience?

    China has money and industrial base to compensate.

    So China is more combat ready because it is prepared to accept heavy losses?

    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.

    Occupying it during peacetime when it is not actively contested does not mean they will keep it if hostilities start... you can call an Island an unsinkable carrier all you like but if any target of value on its surface can be repeatedly hit by cruise missile or standoff weapon what real value does the island hold?

    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.

    Lets pretend this was actually significant... because obviously you can't fix a cable arrester gear aircraft recovery system so the Kuznetsov must be scrapped immediately and all future work with carriers should be halted, because just fixing the minor problem and giving the ship a propulsion upgrade is just a terrible use of upgraded fighter attack like the Su-33 and MiG-29KR... I mean who could possibly benefit from having air power protecting your surface ships anywhere in the world... obviously if the combined force of NATO can defeat such aircraft then it is no good for Russia because obviously their main goal is direct confrontation with the US and NATO at sea... it is written in the rule book... Rolling Eyes

    It is a little embarrassing, but is not a fundamental issue that is already likely resolved anyway. As long as the lesson is learned then it is a good thing... that is what experience is.

    Sponsored content

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force - Page 6 Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Nov 18, 2019 6:07 am