China Flanker Thread II

[Semi-Lobster]

It makes sense that the PLA would choose J-15 as carrier plane, if at least for training - They already have experience operating J-11, and when starting out on something new you want to removed whatever is not directly related to the problem - hence a derivative of a proven platform. This does not mean that they mark J-15 as their standard for carrier fighter.

I was under the impression the JL-9H would the PLANAF's carrier trainer?

 

[plawolf]

China really needs a small scale conflict with some south Asian countries to further boost development in these type of planes. Without demand, it will take a long time for this to enter service and even longer for a new generation of naval fighters.

I swear your posts gets more fanciful with each passing day.

China does not need any conflict, as that eats up resources otherwise intended for the economy and/or hardware procurement. In addition, it damages China's image, and gains little useful insight, since there is little challenge, and hence little of value to learn, beating up on a hopelessly outmatched foe.

 

[A.Man]

China really needs a small scale conflict with some south Asian countries to further boost development in these type of planes. Without demand, it will take a long time for this to enter service and even longer for a new generation of naval fighters.

Few Good Videos For You To Update Your Mind Set
(not the best in the world, but good enough to give you a peace of mind)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[kursed]

J11A in Pakistan during Shaheen (Eagle) - 1.

 

[no_name]

China really needs a small scale conflict with some south Asian countries to further boost development in these type of planes. Without demand, it will take a long time for this to enter service and even longer for a new generation of naval fighters.

China actually watches the US quite closely. I was told that before breaking off military ties after the 89' incident china took the effort to pretty much swallowed all the instruction and training manuals they can find regarding the organisation and structure of the US armed forces.

 

[Geographer]

China does not need any conflict, as that eats up resources otherwise intended for the economy and/or hardware procurement. In addition, it damages China's image, and gains little useful insight, since there is little challenge, and hence little of value to learn, beating up on a hopelessly outmatched foe.

Wars improve a nation's military. War tries out the equipment and training out for the first time in real life. The United States military learned a ton from World War II, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, the Persian Gulf War, and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The U.S. military has a changed a lot just since 2003. A military without a war to fight is like a football team that only scrimmages against itself. War separates the good equipment from the useless, good leaders from bad, good tactics from bad, etc. Tactics that worked in carefully arranged exercises often fail against a real, thinking enemy. The U.S. military is the most dominant in the world partly because it has an incredible amount of war-fighting experience. China has nothing since 1979. Nothing! Is there a single Chinese officer at the rank of Colonel or lower that has seen combat? I would guess not. They call it "battle-tested" for a reason.

 

[Lion]

Wars improve a nation's military. War tries out the equipment and training out for the first time in real life. The United States military learned a ton from World War II, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, the Persian Gulf War, and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The U.S. military has a changed a lot just since 2003. A military without a war to fight is like a football team that only scrimmages against itself. War separates the good equipment from the useless, good leaders from bad, good tactics from bad, etc. Tactics that worked in carefully arranged exercises often fail against a real, thinking enemy. The U.S. military is the most dominant in the world partly because it has an incredible amount of war-fighting experience. China has nothing since 1979. Nothing! Is there a single Chinese officer at the rank of Colonel or lower that has seen combat? I would guess not. They call it "battle-tested" for a reason.

Too simply write off Chinese as no war experience since 1979 is some kind of white man supremacy mentality. Training can't substitute real war. But if training is so useless then all nation military shall forgot abt training. Is this what you are trying to tell us?

PRC has a booming economic that it can provide better realistic training and logistic than most nation. If you follow China military development. In the past 3 years, PLA has lauch 2 very massive exercise that involved few divisions fighting a long range war spreadin across few thousands kilometres.

If we goes by yr theory. Then Iraq armed forces in 1991 Gulf War I shall have wimp the coalition forces or inflict significant damages since they fought a 8 years war with Iran from 1980 - 1988 while US and most western countries hardly had a war in 10 years time. So Iraq have a war experience armed forces with just 3 years gap when they fought the US in 1991. What happen and the outcome , Mr Geographer? May I ask you?

Iraq armed forces had plenty of sergent to colonel and Bridge General who had plenty of war experience in 1991. LOL....

 

[KingLouis]

Too bad there is no opportunity for the PLA. Even though china can send some peace keeper for get experience but so far china only send out support units. The flotilla at the Gulf of Aden helps a lot for PLAN but it use every limited equipment and Somali pirate are not real soldier.

 

[Deino]

... happy Eastern !

 

[antiterror13]

Wars improve a nation's military. War tries out the equipment and training out for the first time in real life. The United States military learned a ton from World War II, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, the Persian Gulf War, and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The U.S. military has a changed a lot just since 2003. A military without a war to fight is like a football team that only scrimmages against itself. War separates the good equipment from the useless, good leaders from bad, good tactics from bad, etc. Tactics that worked in carefully arranged exercises often fail against a real, thinking enemy. The U.S. military is the most dominant in the world partly because it has an incredible amount of war-fighting experience. China has nothing since 1979. Nothing! Is there a single Chinese officer at the rank of Colonel or lower that has seen combat? I would guess not. They call it "battle-tested" for a reason.

How about Japan, South Korea, Canada, Vietnam, Germany, France, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the list goes on

even the USA hasn't really got anything since the lost of Vietnam war, I wouldn't consider Gulf War I and II is a war, let alone Afghanistan, it was a "genocide"