PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

IMO, this is an objective criticism backed by facts, unlike earlier 1s from others who doubted their ability to progress so fast. The Shang & Ming Dynasties already had the most powerful blue water navies; some of their ships may have reached Australia, NZ & America before the Europeans. Their descendants r the same Chinese we see today.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3152556/Did-China-discover-AMERICA-Ancient-Chinese-script-carved-rocks-prove-Asians-lived-New-World-3-300-years-ago.html

http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/pi/index.htm

https://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/11/24/1037697982893.html

http://www.gavinmenzies.net/Evidence/18-annex-18-evidence-of-chinese-fleets-visit-to-new-zealand/

So, in a decade or 2 they'll come a full circle.

walle83 wrote:

Its fun to read how people always downplay the PLA. What is intresting is how their capibilities are growing and what direction and goals they have. China has gone from a green-water navy to a basicly blue water-navy in less then 20 years. That is a fantastic achievement.
Could they today fight against the enitre US Navy and USAF, no.
Could they fight them on equal terms in 10-15 years, most likley.

China has this planned out and is steaming ahead with full speed.

All is not going according to plan for the PLAN.  The J-15 is being scrapped after 4 losses as being unsafe and unreliable with a faulty flight control system.  The Type 0001A was put in dry dock after only a few days at sea suffering from a serious design flaw yet to be released.  The project manager is behind bars on charges of corruption.  The carrier aviation programme is turning out to be a complete disaster.

Time will tell, too many unknowns to say that! Even with negative results they'll learn what must be learned. Even as LHAs with only helicopters & UAVs they can do a lot of missions in the China Seas.
For the right $, the Russians could help in fixing J-15s. If not, prhaps
the JL-9/FTC-2000 fighter jet trainer could be fully navalized; it

can also act as a light attack aircraft. It can carry up to 2000 kg of weapons including air to air missiles and for ground attack it can carry unguided rockets and bombs. http://chinesemilitaryreview.blogspot.com/2011/12/chinese-jl-9g-naval-fighter-jet-trainer.html

The JL-9G is a modified JL-9 for aircraft carrier training. It is designed for ski-jump ramp takeoffs and simulated arrested landings (land-based). and includes a tailhook.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guizhou_JL-9#Variants

Vladimir79 wrote:

walle83 wrote:

Its fun to read how people always downplay the PLA. What is intresting is how their capibilities are growing and what direction and goals they have. China has gone from a green-water navy to a basicly blue water-navy in less then 20 years. That is a fantastic achievement.
Could they today fight against the enitre US Navy and USAF, no.
Could they fight them on equal terms in 10-15 years, most likley.

China has this planned out and is steaming ahead with full speed.

All is not going according to plan for the PLAN.  The J-15 is being scrapped after 4 losses as being unsafe and unreliable with a faulty flight control system.  The Type 0001A was put in dry dock after only a few days at sea suffering from a serious design flaw yet to be released.  The project manager is behind bars on charges of corruption.  The carrier aviation programme is turning out to be a complete disaster.

I doubt the J-15 is being scrapped, although all new projects will suffer from child diseases. U should remember that China has gone from 0 experience with carriers to full size flat tops in less then 10 years. Also the J-15 is not the preferd aircraft for the PLA, newer aircrafts, maybe based on the lighter J-31, will replace it sooner or later.
As for the 001A carrier we shall see. Remember even the USS Ford had large problems and HMS Queen Elizabeth was leaking after its first sea trails.

walle83 wrote:

I doubt the J-15 is being scrapped, although all new projects will suffer from child diseases. U should remember that China has gone from 0 experience with carriers to full size flat tops in less then 10 years. Also the J-15 is not the preferd aircraft for the PLA, newer aircrafts, maybe based on the lighter J-31, will replace it sooner or later.
As for the 001A carrier we shall see. Remember even the USS Ford had large problems and HMS Queen Elizabeth was leaking after its first sea trails.

Actually China started their carrier programme in the 1980s with the purchase of HMAS Melbourne so this has been over 30 years in the making. The J-15 suffered two crashes in testing and two crashes in operations killing four pilots. Out of a couple dozen airframes four losses is quite heavy so they have chosen to stop production. It will take many years to navalise the J-31 which still doesn't have a Chinese engine option. It is not known exactly what is wrong with the new carrier but a maiden voyage for a carrier is supposed to last 6 weeks and the Type 001A ended up in dry dock within days. The project manager was suddenly thrown in prison on charges of graft as this happened. Even if the carrier can be fixed in short time they still don't have a reliable aircraft to fly from it. They could turn it into an ASW carrier like the Japanese full of helicopters as least until a better fighter is produced.

@Vladimir do you know if may end up buying mig-35 for their carriers ? They said mig-35 is already able to land on a carrier.

India which was the main target client for mig-35 doesn't seem to be intersted to buy it so why not give it to china ? Mig is in a bad state, that would be very good for them to sell 100 fighters to china.

walle83 wrote: U should remember that China has gone from 0 experience with carriers to full size flat tops in less than 10 years.

Only the USN, Brazilian, & French Navy have flat tops now; STOBARs of Russia, China, UK, Spain, Italy, India, & Thailand with their upturned bows r not.

They said mig-35 is already able to land on a carrier.

But is it fully navalized? A C-130 also landed on a CV many times. Even helicopters must be fully navalized for continuous use at sea.
China's Workhorse J-15 Fighter Jet Still Alive and Kicking
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201807141066350508-china-fighter-jet-expert/
I agree with with him. After it's fixed, they'll likely use it on CATOBARs too until the replacement is ready.

But is it fully navalized? A C-130 also landed on a CV many times.
Even helicopters must be fully navalized for continuous use at sea.

Much more easier to navalize mig-35 for russian that worked on the modern mig-29k than j-31 for chinesz that worked on a copy of su-33.

China wants to produce her own planes, but it'll cost a lot more to make MiG-35 copy than to fix J-15, even if it's a dead end in the long run. So, since they won't be producing MiG-35 copies, I doubt they'll be importing them, even as a stop gap. In range & payload, it's inferior to the J-15. India & PRC now operate their SU-30s on land, but at sea the Chinese want to be superior to the Indians.

Odd, has no one considered Navalising the J-10 instead, granted it is a lightweight, but it should be fine for most Air engagements, that said, the Mig-29K could carry more, but i doubt India would ever give the green light.

IMO, these 2 options are the fastest stopgap until the J-15 is finally ready.

I did!

Tsavo Lion wrote:Perhaps the J-10/20 could be navalized, but I doubt they'll do it.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-10#Variants

The J-20 has similar dimensions as the F-111; it will need a bigger CV/N to deploy it in optimal #s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20#Specifications
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-111.htm

At this point, their best bet is to stick with the J-15- there is no guarantee that expensive & lengthy J-10 navalization will be successful. A new batch of pilots will need to be trained/retrained for it. Besides, is its single engine reliable enough for sea duty?

AlfaT8 wrote:Odd, has no one considered Navalising the J-10 instead, granted it is a lightweight, but it should be fine for most Air engagements, that said, the Mig-29K could carry more, but i doubt India would ever give the green light.

IMO, these 2 options are the fastest stopgap until the J-15 is finally ready.

Who cares about india ? They already gave su-35 to china, why not mig-35 if india doesn't buy it and instead buy western planes ?

China wants to produce her own planes, but it'll cost a lot more to make MiG-35 copy than to fix J-15, even if it's a dead end in the long run. So, since they won't be producing MiG-35 copies, I doubt they'll be importing them, even as a stop gap. In range & payload, it's inferior to the J-15. India & PRC now operate their SU-30s on land, but at sea the Chinese want to be superior to the Indians.

J-15 is dead and they are not satisfied with. IMO they will go for a 5th gen naval fighter which will take another 10 years to complete, probably j-31.

They will need something during those years I bet they will buy some migs.

Isos wrote:@Vladimir do you know if may end up buying mig-35 for their carriers ? They said mig-35 is already able to land on a carrier.

India which was the main target client for mig-35 doesn't seem to be intersted to buy it so why not give it to china ? Mig is in a bad state, that would be very good for them to sell 100 fighters to china.

I am rather sure they won't do that.  They would develop J-31 before trying it. China cares more about appearance of power than actual projection.

No, they care about both, & having local superiority in vital areas. If they just show the flag w/o any substance under it, others will call them "a paper tiger" & they'll loose face- the worst thing in Asia.

Vladimir79 wrote:

walle83 wrote:

I doubt the J-15 is being scrapped, although all new projects will suffer from child diseases. U should remember that China has gone from 0 experience with carriers to full size flat tops in less then 10 years. Also the J-15 is not the preferd aircraft for the PLA, newer aircrafts, maybe based on the lighter J-31, will replace it sooner or later.
As for the 001A carrier we shall see. Remember even the USS Ford had large problems and HMS Queen Elizabeth was leaking after its first sea trails.

Actually China started their carrier programme in the 1980s with the purchase of HMAS Melbourne so this has been over 30 years in the making.  The J-15 suffered two crashes in testing and two crashes in operations killing four pilots.  Out of a couple dozen airframes four losses is quite heavy so they have chosen to stop production.  It will take many years to navalise the J-31 which still doesn't have a Chinese engine option.  It is not known exactly what is wrong with the new carrier but a maiden voyage for a carrier is supposed to last 6 weeks and the Type 001A ended up in dry dock within days.  The project manager was suddenly thrown in prison on charges of graft as this happened.  Even if the carrier can be fixed in short time they still don't have a reliable aircraft to fly from it.  They could turn it into an ASW carrier like the Japanese full of helicopters as least until a better fighter is produced.

In the making perheps, not with active carriers. As for the J-15 they just started flying night ops from the Liaoning so i doubt anything will stop that project. Do u have any sources that the production has been halted?
As for the new 001A carrier it has actually left the dry dock again, not started trails again yet though.

Tsavo Lion wrote:No, they care about both, & having local superiority in vital areas. If they just show the flag w/o any substance under it, others will call them "a paper tiger" & they'll loose face- the worst thing in Asia.

They don't report on all of the problems within their military like others do. If people found out the true state of it they would lose face. They have not had a single combat operation in almost 40 years and the last they fought was a total disaster. Russia has waged war in Georgia, Ukraine and kept up combat operations in Syria. There is no replacement for actual operational experience. It is what reveals all of the problems that are not addressed on paper and leads to real solutions to fix them. China does not have this making them a paper tiger.

They did a lot of exercises at home & with Russia. Their navy did combined anti-piracy ops. in the Indian Ocean & SE Asia. Their "volunteers" recently fought in Myanmar. They shot down a BM & 2 satellites, tested nukes, sent men into orbit, probes to the Moon, have 4 SSBNs, & lifted 70% of its population out of poverty in the last~40 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chinese_anti-ballistic_missile_test
https://www.popsci.com/china-space-missile-test

The USSR threatened PRC, I remember the FM A. Gromyko saying on TV: "withdraw from Vietnam, before it's too late". That war would have lasted longer & that country could become a Chinese province if not for that. Sometimes the Chinese tiger is weak, sick, & hungry; but it always heals itself back to power. So, it may appear as a paper tiger but in reality it's not- as Sun Tzu wrote: "when weak, appear to be strong; when strong, appear to be weak".

Tsavo Lion wrote:They did a lot of exercises at home & with Russia. Their navy did combined anti-piracy ops. in the Indian Ocean & SE Asia. Their "volunteers" recently fought in Myanmar. They shot down a BM & 2 satellites, tested nukes, sent men into orbit, probes to the Moon, have 4 SSBNs, & lifted 70% of its population out of poverty in the last~40 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chinese_anti-ballistic_missile_test
https://www.popsci.com/china-space-missile-test

The USSR threatened PRC, I remember the FM A. Gromyko saying on TV: "withdraw from Vietnam, before it's too late". That war would have lasted longer & that country could become a Chinese province if not for that. Sometimes the Chinese tiger is weak, sick, & hungry; but it always heals itself back to power. So, it may appear as a paper tiger but in reality it's not- as Sun Tzu wrote: "when weak, appear to be strong; when  strong, appear to be weak".

Their SSBNs never left port, one of them sank in the harbour. That moon probe broke down within minutes of landing. The video of the space walk had bubbles in it like they were in a pool, they released the transcript of a space walk before they even launched the mission. They shot things down they had months to prepare for. Calling ethnic Chinese from Myanmar as combat experience for the Chinese military, now that is funny. Anti-piracy patrols is an action for a Coast Guard, not a Navy. When Chinese conduct exercises in Russia their tanks break down because the steel used in their torsion bars is not strong enough.

Vladimir79 wrote:

Tsavo Lion wrote:They did a lot of exercises at home & with Russia. Their navy did combined anti-piracy ops. in the Indian Ocean & SE Asia. Their "volunteers" recently fought in Myanmar. They shot down a BM & 2 satellites, tested nukes, sent men into orbit, probes to the Moon, have 4 SSBNs, & lifted 70% of its population out of poverty in the last~40 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chinese_anti-ballistic_missile_test
https://www.popsci.com/china-space-missile-test

The USSR threatened PRC, I remember the FM A. Gromyko saying on TV: "withdraw from Vietnam, before it's too late". That war would have lasted longer & that country could become a Chinese province if not for that. Sometimes the Chinese tiger is weak, sick, & hungry; but it always heals itself back to power. So, it may appear as a paper tiger but in reality it's not- as Sun Tzu wrote: "when weak, appear to be strong; when  strong, appear to be weak".

Their SSBNs never left port, one of them sank in the harbour.  That moon probe broke down within minutes of landing.  The video of the space walk had bubbles in it like they were in a pool, they released the transcript of a space walk before they even launched the mission.  They shot things down they had months to prepare for.   Calling ethnic Chinese from Myanmar as combat experience for the Chinese military, now that is funny.  Anti-piracy patrols is an action for a Coast Guard, not a Navy.  When Chinese conduct exercises in Russia their tanks break down because the steel used in their torsion bars is not strong enough.

Ok, now u r starting to sound like a troll.

China started its SSBN patrols in 2015. https://thediplomat.com/2015/12/china-deploys-first-nuclear-deterrence-patrol/
I never heard about any 094 sub sinking in any harbor, source please?
Fake space walk and bubbles?? Give us a break

walle83 wrote:

Ok, now u r starting to sound like a troll.

China started its SSBN patrols in 2015. https://thediplomat.com/2015/12/china-deploys-first-nuclear-deterrence-patrol/
I never heard about any 094 sub sinking in any harbor, source please?
Fake space walk and bubbles?? Give us a break

You might want to be careful who you are calling a troll. Consider that fair warning. Now if you want to have a serious discussion you can refer back the Xia class which sank during testing. China has had SSBNs far longer than 2015 but they never patrolled because they were afraid they would be lost at sea like the first one.

Xia class lost pier-side in 1985.

https://books.google.com/books?id=V9nsypAwGGYC&pg=PA168&lpg=PA168&dq=Type+092+sunk+jane%27s&source=bl&ots=94JsPZ9AQ0&sig=roORnALWa36Ioej-JW13AFwyq0c&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi8otjf9rTcAhXnx1kKHTyMC3wQ6AEIRjAG#v=onepage&q=Type%20092%20sunk%20jane's&f=false

Fake space walk

Vladimir79 wrote:

walle83 wrote:

Ok, now u r starting to sound like a troll.

China started its SSBN patrols in 2015. https://thediplomat.com/2015/12/china-deploys-first-nuclear-deterrence-patrol/
I never heard about any 094 sub sinking in any harbor, source please?
Fake space walk and bubbles?? Give us a break

You might want to be careful who you are calling a troll.  Consider that fair warning.  Now if you want to have a serious discussion you can refer back the Xia class which sank during testing.  China has had SSBNs far longer than 2015 but they never patrolled because they were afraid they would be lost at sea like the first one.  


https://books.google.com/books?id=V9nsypAwGGYC&pg=PA168&lpg=PA168&dq=Type+092+sunk+jane%27s&source=bl&ots=94JsPZ9AQ0&sig=roORnALWa36Ioej-JW13AFwyq0c&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi8otjf9rTcAhXnx1kKHTyMC3wQ6AEIRjAG#v=onepage&q=Type%20092%20sunk%20jane's&f=false

Fake space walk

Im shaking.
Xia class? Im talking about recent history not 35 years ago. You cant honestly compare chinas navy from 1985 to today?
Today PLAs ssbns are patroling. How often and how far can be debated. They aint sinking in any harbor thats for sure.
Yeah im seing a youtube clip where someone is desperately trying to find something wrong. All I see is space debris and camera lights.

walle83 wrote:

Im shaking.
Xia class? Im talking about recent history not 35 years ago. You cant honestly compare chinas navy from 1985 to today?
Today PLAs ssbns are patroling. How often and how far can be debated. They aint sinking in any harbor thats for sure.
Yeah im seing a youtube clip where someone is desperately trying to find something wrong. All I see is space debris and camera lights.

That is good.  You will remember to maintain civil discourse on my forum.  

I think I can compare their navy from then to now when the rest of the world has not been sitting still.  The disparity in technology only grows as the years progress.  China had access to all of the best equipment from Europe until Tienanmen.   The sonars and surface engines they are using now are of that vintage as they still make the same ones under license from France who still maintains nearly $200 million a year in arms exports using pre-Tienanmen licenses.  Space debris fly in a single trajectory, those were moving around like bubbles.  You would see camera lights in a studio and clouds that move at 10X speed for a production, which is what it was.

Vladimir79 wrote:

walle83 wrote:

Im shaking.
Xia class? Im talking about recent history not 35 years ago. You cant honestly compare chinas navy from 1985 to today?
Today PLAs ssbns are patroling. How often and how far can be debated. They aint sinking in any harbor thats for sure.
Yeah im seing a youtube clip where someone is desperately trying to find something wrong. All I see is space debris and camera lights.

That is good.  You will remember to maintain civil discourse on my forum.  

I think I can compare their navy from then to now when the rest of the world has not been sitting still.  The disparity in technology only grows as the years progress.  China had access to all of the best equipment from Europe until Tienanmen.   The sonars and surface engines they are using now are of that vintage as they still make the same ones under license from France who still maintains nearly $200 million a year in arms exports using pre-Tienanmen licenses.  Space debris fly in a single trajectory, those were moving around like bubbles.  You would see camera lights in a studio and clouds that move at 10X speed for a production, which is what it was.  

Lets just agree to disagree on that part.

As i stated before, one should look at the goals and the direction the Chines are moving against. And with what speed. When looking at that bigger picture the PLAN is moving ahead with light speed in comparesment with 98% of the rest of the worlds navies. With 22+ destroyers, 25+ frigates, ~40 corvettes, 4 SSBN, 4-6 SSN, 10-15 SSK, 5 large LPD ships and 2 large aircraft carriers launched or deployed in the last 8-10 years even you must agree that the PLA is doing quite good.

Vladimir79 wrote:Calling ethnic Chinese from Myanmar as combat experience for the Chinese military, now that is funny.  Anti-piracy patrols is an action for a Coast Guard, not a Navy.

No, those r demobilized or soldiers "on leave" from the PLA:
https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/recruit-03242015121255.html

http://nvo.ng.ru/wars/2016-10-28/1_924_china.html?print=Y

The Chinese were fighting there since 1960: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960%E2%80%9361_campaign_at_the_China%E2%80%93Burma_border

Their CG is used in SE Asia, but off E. Africa, the PLAN ships r deployed: http://www.atimes.com/anti-piracy-mission-helps-china-develop-blue-water-navy/
https://www.cna.org/cna_files/pdf/D0020834.A1.pdf

Their SSBNs r conducting deterrent patrols, SSNs deploy to the Indian Ocean, & an ice strengthened ship sailed in the Arctic & Antarctic. http://www.a-pln.org/activities/activities_view/China%E2%80%99s_Sea-Based_Nuclear_Deterrent

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/14-chinese-navy-ships-spotted-in-indian-ocean-indian-navy-monitoring-locations/articleshow/61882634.cms

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/north/story/indian-navy-chinese-nuclear-sub-indian-ocean-185695-2014-03-21

https://thediplomat.com/2015/04/chinese-nuclear-subs-in-the-indian-ocean/

http://www.chinare.gov.cn/english/gb_article.php?modid=15001

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/01/140103-antarctica-ship-icebreakers-science-ice-trapped/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Xue_Long

Their probe was intentionally crashed into the lunar surface:
https://www.space.com/2320-china-moon-probe-crashes-lunar-surface.html

walle83 wrote:22+ destroyers,
25+ frigates,
~40 corvettes,
4 SSBN,
4-6 SSN,
10-15 SSK,
5 large LPD ships
and 2 large aircraft carriers

launched or deployed in the last 8-10 years even you must agree that the PLA is doing quite good.

Looking at the results of their massive build up they are left with two carriers without planes, submarines that are so loud the Japanese are forcing them to surface in total embarrassment, destroyers that are breaking down and being towed back from the Indian Ocean, LPDs with an LCAC that can only carry a fraction of traditional ones and a bunch of missile boats that are little more than target practice for any modern navy. The Chinese greatest weakness on the water is not the lack of carrier aviation but lack of quality ASW. They are relying on antiquated French helicopter ASW from the late 80s which are practically useless against modern SSNs and SSKs which would wreak havoc on Chinese shipping lanes. Any one of their fleets could be wiped out by one or two SSNs.