antiterror13
Brigadier
yes agree that Vietnam can't cope to keep up, no hope at all. ... But when you mention numbers .... be more mindful
China's Defense/Military Breaking News Thread
- Thread starter swimmerXC
- Start date
- Status
yes agree that Vietnam can't cope to keep up, no hope at all. ... But when you mention numbers .... be more mindful
antiterror13
Brigadier
Interesting how much increase Chinese defense spending in 2023
It is a huge increase for the US .. can the US afford it? the percentage to US Federal revenue is 858/4,896 = 17.5%
The deficit now is $1.2T, 25% of Fed revenue .. getting higher and higher .. scary
Just for the interest, the US now paying almost $0.5T ... wowww
It is a huge increase for the US .. can the US afford it? the percentage to US Federal revenue is 858/4,896 = 17.5%
The deficit now is $1.2T, 25% of Fed revenue .. getting higher and higher .. scary
Just for the interest, the US now paying almost $0.5T ... wowww
Last edited:
As I outlined previously, there was a rationale for using PPP
Military procurement in Vietnam only accounts for 21% of overall military spending as of 2021
Vietnam has to consider the Chinese Army on its northern border, which means Vietnam has a disproportionately large land army component which is composed of conscripts who are paid proportionately even less than Chinese "volunteer conscripts"
In terms of the nominal currency value against its *equilibrium* PPP level, China's currency would have to increase by 66% whereas Vietnam's would have to increase by 165%.
---
EDIT These 66% and 165% figures are both in comparison to the USD. When you look at a PPP calculation using China as the base currency, Vietnam's currency would have to increase by 59% to reach the PPP level with reference to China. That's similar to the 66% difference between the USA and China. In the future, I expect international PPP comparisons will be done with reference to the Chinese RMB, as the RMB sets global price levels more than the USD these days.
---
We had a discussion some years ago in the Future Orbat Thread on the merits of nominal versus PPP figures when discussing military spending comparisons between the US and China. The arguments for using PPP also apply to a China and Vietnam comparison
So for these key reasons, even using PPP still likely understates the level of Vietnamese military spending when compared to Chinas
Last edited:
They didn't really talk about the strategy to deal with it - why would they?
But they did talk about some roles of the B-21. That it's going to be a command & control center and communications facilitator for penetrating counter-air. Will operate as a forward command post and the communications will be huge help to F-35's MADL. This is as opposed to having to communicate via E3/E2D in the back like they do right now. Doesn't revolutionize warfare but it's a step in the right direction of the sorts of concepts they foresee dominating the future. Helps a lot to have someone determine courses of actions and coordinate between different elements and the strike package when you're forward in the environment. Of course it can also handle strike missions.
Sitting here as a layman it looks like the a platform like the B-21 is just going to be necessary to operate in a high intensity EW conflict. Especially as more and more things become unmanned, communication lag and interference will be huge problems. So having something stealthy that can operate in advance would help alleviate or counter these side effects.
So how do you deal with these stealthy hubs? Probably you'll need to also push EW emitters forward somehow to maximize effectiveness as well as develop better anti-stealth to take out these hubs. Maybe much more distributed EW emitters like EW-specialized UAVs to further block communications, etc.
Of course, you'll also need your own stealthy hub as well and that might be what the H-20 shapes up to be.
Your average PLA-watching OSINT community be like (and I'm not just talking about India-based PLA-watching OSINT):
China's defense budget has never reached 2% of her GDP ever since the late 1980s.
Meanwhile, India's defense budget is already close to 3% of her GDP.
Even if China's actual military budget adds another 1% (which is a huge sum considering China's GDP size) to the publically-announced GDP value, it would still be less than the near-3% GDP ratio of the Indian defense budget.
FFS, TB-001 and Akinci are UAVs of different classes. TB-001 is a MALE class, and Akinci is a HALE class. How can they even be comparable?
China's defense budget has never reached 2% of her GDP ever since the late 1980s.
Meanwhile, India's defense budget is already close to 3% of her GDP.
Even if China's actual military budget adds another 1% (which is a huge sum considering China's GDP size) to the publically-announced GDP value, it would still be less than the near-3% GDP ratio of the Indian defense budget.
FFS, TB-001 and Akinci are UAVs of different classes. TB-001 is a MALE class, and Akinci is a HALE class. How can they even be comparable?
Last edited:
Salvo size is what matters because you're trying to overwhelm the enemy's air defense. If it took neglible amounts of time to recharge, there's no reason for Patch to be talking about salvos sizes of 16-24. Presuming 10-30 seconds per cell launch, just a full salvo would take around 8 minutes to launch. So on interference, I would assume prep time for the next salvo must take a significant amount of time.
As to the original question; who knows how long it takes to recharge...
Let's assume without basis that the Burke can devote 1% of it's generator power to energize VLS because radars are extremely power-hungry. It's probably about 1-2 kW per element on something like a 3000-element AESA along with other radars that are maybe 150 kW a piece. Not to mention all the other electrical needs.. 1% of Burke's total 7500 kW would be 75 kW trying to power 96 VLS cells. From some brochures it looks like 61-cells uses maybe 268 kW for 440+115 Vac. Naively, a 96-cell would consume 422 kW. So if we assume 422 kW consumption during the entire launch sequence then it uses about 56.3 kWh. That would work out to 45 minutes to recharge after launch.
Let's cut down this estimated time by an order of magnitude to account for errors. So say 4 minutes to recharge after launch. 10-30 seconds per missile would probably be taxing on the OpFor's missile defense systems. If the next round comes a few minutes afterwards, it's as if you're starting anew. There will be no existing load on OpFor's defenses, so it does affect overall firepower output.
The goal is to overwhelm OpFor's defenses, not simply to lob missiles.
Can you stop posting bad takes from social media just to dunk on them? We don't need to know every bad take there is and it's not productive for us to laugh at them.
This isn't what the forum is for.
As for the TB-001 and Akinci, their operating altitude is not the big reason for their payload differences, but rather than MTOWs.
TB-001 has a MTOW of 3.2 tons, while Akinci has a MTOW of 5.5 tons.
Stuff such as advanced sensor fusion was kind of already pioneered by the PLA with J-20 and the twin seat J-20?
I don't see B-21 as going to be more than US' contemporary to H-20. Whichever one makes it into service first, they're gonna come close enough to eachother anyways.
The real race is getting drone swarm and wingman drones up and working. Both H-20 and B-21 are going to benefit massively from that, but even normal J-20 will be elevated to something like a 5.5 gen if the drones are good enough.
Sure, feel free to delete that post if you want.
Geography makes India not a major threat.
The himalayas are terrain where a small number of well equipped troops can easily hold endlessly against a huge less sophisticated enemy.
That aside, the Indian regime is a very slow learner. There is a reason SK tries to avoid conflict that much with China that many (most even?) believe they would go as far as directly refuse aid to US if America invaded China.
China has the industrial capability to make and sustain tens of thousand loitering munitions at anyone within close enough distance.
So smart nations such as SK realized a long time ago that you do not want a land war at any cost with China. Unless you have your own drone swarms and comparable industrial power.
India is very slow on the uptake, but basically if they ever are stupid enough to try, it would be impossible for them to break the Himalayas line, and even if China never steps 1 foot over the India border, they can de-energize all of northern India through bombing without even eating too much into their high end cruise missile stockpile.
- Status