2025 Victory Day parade thread (workup, 3rd Sept)

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Agree with that. One doesn't need a nuke to destroy an early warning radars because they are so huge, fragile and fixed that intercontinental conventional strike can destroy them. I guess in the past, accuracy was an issue but not anymore.

Regardless of whether the strike is conventional or nuclear, an attack on a nation's strategic deterrent, which includes early warning infrastructure, risks triggering a nuclear response.

 

[BillRamengod]

Regardless of whether the strike is conventional or nuclear, an attack on a nation's strategic deterrent, which includes early warning infrastructure, risks triggering a nuclear response.

This thread is not place for this matter.
Moreover, the nuclear consensus of our era has already been shattered — by Ukraine's drone strikes against Russian strategic nuclear deterrent platforms, and by US's bunker-buster attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities.
Let's just wrap it here.

 

[bsdnf]

Regardless of whether the strike is conventional or nuclear, an attack on a nation's strategic deterrent, which includes early warning infrastructure, risks triggering a nuclear response.

Ukrainians attacked Russia's strategic bomber fleet and Voronezh-DM strategic early warning radar.

Where is the nuclear response? I can't find it.

 

[Deino]

via a friend!

Here we go, the satellite pictures of the ground equipment that will be displayed on September 3rd, and here is some analysis from a chat group - was it an insider leak?
Anyway, take it with a grain of salt, but can't freaking wait, they are once again surprising us with so many new goodies, just another 40 days!

Drone formation,
Naval GJ-11
WZ-10
CCA1,2/CAC wingman
UUV

Armored vehicle
Fourth gen MBT (Hybrid propulsion, two crew, FCS family concept) and its fire support vehicle (manned? unmanned?)
99AG MBT
Type 05B

Hypersonic club formation
New scramjet cruise missile (DF-XX?)
DF-17
DF-27

Strategic missile formation
DF-41
DF-31AG
JL-3 SLBM
Chinese "midgetman" (US MGM-134A Midgetman equivalent???)

Air Defense formation
HQ-9B/C
HQ-32???
HQ-19
HQ-29

More might join later, as these Sat pics were from June.

 

[Blitzo]

via a friend!



View attachment 156365View attachment 156364View attachment 156363View attachment 156362

Drone formation,
Naval GJ-11
WZ-10
CCA1,2/CAC wingman
UUV

Armored vehicle
Fourth gen MBT (Hybrid propulsion, two crew, FCS family concept) and its fire support vehicle (manned? unmanned?)
99AG MBT
Type 05B

Hypersonic club formation
New scramjet cruise missile (DF-XX?)
DF-17
DF-27

Strategic missile formation
DF-41
DF-31AG
JL-3 SLBM
Chinese "midgetman" (US MGM-134A Midgetman equivalent???)

Air Defense formation
HQ-9B/C
HQ-32???
HQ-19
HQ-29

Nice summary and images, though both the pictures and the descriptions were on the first page of this thread as well (to be fair it moves fast).

 

[bsdnf]

Yankee said in a paid program that the J-16 might be equipped with new missiles, and the large number of Z-20Ts also shows deterrence against ROCA.

Basically like: You guys are always worried about airports being taken by air-assault unit, yet your anti-airborne drills only deal with light infantry, assuming that the air-assault unit lack sufficient attack helicopter support? Now face our Z-20T fleet

Guess what, today the Z-20T was photographed in a rehearsal with a new ATGM. Although it actually appeared on CCTV news a few times in the past few years, it can be regarded as an official public display

 

[gelgoog]

I do wonder about engine performance. The US ITEP engine replacement program for the BlackHawk was supposed to give like 25% fuel savings over the T700.

Operating well loaded helicopters from mainland China to Taiwan at low altitude will be kind of a stretch if the engine performance is similar to the original one.

 

[bsdnf]

I do wonder about engine performance. The US ITEP engine replacement program for the BlackHawk was supposed to give like 25% fuel savings over the T700.

Operating well loaded helicopters from mainland China to Taiwan at low altitude will be kind of a stretch if the engine performance is similar to the original one.

early civilian version of the WZ-9, the AES100, had the following performance: takeoff output below 1000 kW, SFC 0.285 kg/(kW·h), and a weight of 215 kg.

The latest model's published data shows a takeoff output of 1100 kW, SFC 0.276 kg/(kW·h), weight unknown

for the WZ-10, we only know its 1600 kW rated output power , SFC should not be significantly different.

 

[Tomboy]

I do wonder about engine performance. The US ITEP engine replacement program for the BlackHawk was supposed to give like 25% fuel savings over the T700.

Operating well loaded helicopters from mainland China to Taiwan at low altitude will be kind of a stretch if the engine performance is similar to the original one.

IMO, Chinese turboshaft and turboprop still have a long way to go before reaching toptier status. AES100 is stated to have a SFC of 0.276kg/kwh while T901 is stated to have a SFC of under 0.24kg/kwh. It's not a bad engine and can compete with western alternatives although most are modernised/upgraded decade old designs. But since turboshaft/prop often share cores with turbofans and given that Chinese turbofan development is going quite well the situation might change soon but generally turboprop/shaft variants lag behind turbofans in dev time.

 

[gelgoog]

So it is probably only slightly better than the T700. Hopefully they are working on better performing helicopter engines.

Most US Cold War era gear was designed for operations in Europe vs the Warsaw Pact. So range was less of a concern. China needs long range aircraft for operations in the Pacific.