AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
What happened to the guy that marched into this forum and declared, "China had no AWACS whatsoever!"
EU Considers Lifting China Arms Embargo
- Thread starter jatt
- Start date
- Status
China still has a need to peek at western standard arms.
Buy samples from EU for reverse engineering.
For example, the Chinese made sub , inside their systems and workmanship are sub par level. clearly showing lagging in industrialization level.
Have working sample of Eu system will set the standard for chinese industry to follow.
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/plan-submarines-thread-ii-48-3746.html
Buy samples from EU for reverse engineering.
For example, the Chinese made sub , inside their systems and workmanship are sub par level. clearly showing lagging in industrialization level.
Have working sample of Eu system will set the standard for chinese industry to follow.
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/plan-submarines-thread-ii-48-3746.html
Armand2REP
New Member
Well, you can politely call me a n00b all you want but I can cite examples for each.
Turbofan, WS-10 as evidence by the need to continue to order from Russia placing one for 100 AL-31s as early as last year or the need for GEs on the ARJ-21, or the need for AL-222s on the L-15.
Turboshaft, the need to order PWs for the Z-10 prototypes or the need to team up with Russia for the MLH.
Sonar, they still rely on sonar models sold by France in the 90s for dipping helos and Song SSKs and newer models from Russia for other needs.
Diesels, Propulsion for Song and Yuan class are still German diesels.
Avionics, we don't have to go any further than PAF to see even they don't want Chinese avionics. If that isn't enough we can go to the Chinese satellite state of Burma and see a MiG-29SMT beating out J-10.
Quiet nuclear turbines, how many reports we have heard over the years, first from US Silent Service stories of Hans scaring the whales to the Shangs being detected by Japan before they even entered their territorial waters.
Quality Steel, all we have to do is look at the suspension on PLA IFVs, they couldn't handle the course in Chelyabinsk for Peace Mission 07.
Satellites, Thales makes most of China's com sats.
Naval aviation, that copy of a Kunetsov carrier exhibited at the Wuhan naval engineering college... on land. Or the recent failure to acquire Su-33 from Russia.
AESA, no AESA
And the list goes on...
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Sound like Europe is the same bind since you can't lift the embargo without the US because so many components come from the US.
WS-10's been put on the J-11B in production by images we've seen, the Al-31F's were prolly for the J-10 or replacing past engines (apparently they ahve short life spans). But it's obvious that China's got bottlenecks in the engine department, I don't think anyone's denying this.
The wuhan mockup's obviously based on the varyag - it'd be stupid to put a mock up of a carrier which doesn't exist. And obviously it's on land, they're not planning to test the seamen's (heh) sea sickness vunerability - should it be flying instead? 0.o
Nuclear subs - hmm do you have relaible reports of the Hans and Shang's being that freaking loud? Anyway the Han's would've been better since they've been upgraded to the G variant.
The Mig-29 deal was probably due to logistics (seeing as myanmar already operates the Mig-29) - if you're implying the Mig-29 won because of it's "performance" then I think you'd be mistaken. Quite a few weapon deals take in factors much more important than the mere capability of a platform I believe.
And you should take reports on PAF and J-10 with a huge grain of salt - perhaps current J-10 avionics aren't as good as European equivalents, becuase the PAF's facing India and they'd obviously want the best of the bunch, but we don't have 100% confirmed reports from reliable sources that they're wanting euro avionics yet.
As for AESA, the KJ-2000, KJ-200, Type 052C (most likely J-10B when it enters service) all show examples of indigenous AESA's.
I'm sure a few of the other more experienced members can rebut your other claims : / A few of my answers here might be wrong as well though, but a good portion of your assumptions are underestimative (lol if that's a word)
hmm, I wouldn't say you are a noob, but you don't really seem to get the entire picture. It would helpful if you actually follow each of the situations below and you get an idea of their strength and weakness.
Your mention of AL-31 and AI-222 only proves that China already has non-European options available, so European options are not required. For FWS-10, it is already in mass production for J-11B and will only be a matter of time before FWS-10A is ready for J-10. Mind you, even if FWS-10A is ready, they might still pick variants of AL-31FN, since the latter's improved variants could offer better performance. In that case, PLAAF would be picking based on performance rather than being the only choice.
They are not using any Russian sonar on indigenous ships. The kilo subs they imported also don't have the flank array sonar you see on their SSNs and Yuan.
As for the naval carrier, it's built because they are planning to put Varyag into service and they need to train their naval personnel to operate it and test out the sensors in that configuration. It really has nothing to do with the Europeans or even the Russians at this point.
First for commercial grade turbofan engines, China certainly cannot match advanced Western companies, but Russian airliners are using Western ones. I certainly wouldn't say that Russians absolutely need Western engines. The point is as long as they have acceptable quality homemade engines, they wouldn't absolutely need European options.
Your mention of AL-31 and AI-222 only proves that China already has non-European options available, so European options are not required. For FWS-10, it is already in mass production for J-11B and will only be a matter of time before FWS-10A is ready for J-10. Mind you, even if FWS-10A is ready, they might still pick variants of AL-31FN, since the latter's improved variants could offer better performance. In that case, PLAAF would be picking based on performance rather than being the only choice.
They do have a need for turboshaft, but they can certainly get it from the Russians if they need it. I would say PWC is the better option, but it's not European. And in the case of Z-10, they are actually delaying mass production until domestic turboshaft WZ-9 is ready.
There is no question that China got a lot of help in the sonar department from the French in the 90s, but there is no evidence that the latest ones on 054A, Z-9C and 093 are still using that. In fact, we've seen posters showing Chinese developed TLAS that they are exporting and the domestic versions should be similar to that.
They are not using any Russian sonar on indigenous ships. The kilo subs they imported also don't have the flank array sonar you see on their SSNs and Yuan.
Yep and they obviously haven't needed the lifting of European embargo to use these engines, have they?
Please try to follow those threads first. China did not offer J-10 to Burma. JF-17 probably, but there is no reason SMT can't beat Mig-29. If China hasn't formally signed a deal to export J-10s to Pakistan, what makes you think Burma would jump the line? As for avionics, has PAF actually seen the latest China has to offer and chose what they got from Europeans ahead of that?
That kind of stuff is strategic, not something Europe would export to China imo.
China believes that Baosteel is producing high enough quality steel to be used on their first indigenous carrier. They refused to import this from the Russians. I doubt they'd do it from the Europeans.
it's possible that they get some parts from the Europeans, but again, they are already getting all they need. None of the current launch plan are dependent on European embargo being lifted. A while ago, the Swiss refused to sell China their latest atomic clock for the compass navigation system, but China managed to get past that situation with their ground station I think.
The got all they need from the Ukrainians regarding naval fighter program already. The domestic naval flanker has already made its first flight.
As for the naval carrier, it's built because they are planning to put Varyag into service and they need to train their naval personnel to operate it and test out the sensors in that configuration. It really has nothing to do with the Europeans or even the Russians at this point.
They got KJ-2000, KJ-200, Y-8 High New 4, the radar on 052C. btw, J-10B appears to be the first domestic fighter to use AESA radar. Care to point out which operational European fighter is using AESA radar?
Armand2REP
New Member
WS-10As have been put on prototypes we've seen. We've also seen a complete squadron without any engines at all but no squadron with a full set of WS-10A. The AL-31Fs are indeed for the J-10, but if they can master an AL-31 replacement, there is no reason not to stick it on the J-10.
PLAN has been studying carrier design since long before 1985 when they purchased the HMAS Melbourne to strip her flight deck. It has been 30 years and the best they can do is copy Varyag inch by inch. The Kuznetsov design was a disaster from day one, copying it will only end with more trouble. Converting an engineering school into a land based ship model is beyond the naivety of avarice. I'm just waiting for the day they try to land a Flanker on it to collapse the roof.
Let me dust off my old Jane's article...
"The Han-class SSNs are quite noisy and vulnerable to detection by ASW capabilities... Submariners have reported when the Han pings, it disorients whales and may cause them to beach. " Jane's Defence Weekly, 13 August 1997 p.14.
Not quite as I remembered but it is safe to say, the Han was a disaster.
Shang was detected off the territorial waters of Japan and ended up causing so much embarrassment for the Chinois they added an apology.
Well my prime example is Pakistan. PAF wants French radar and missiles for a reason, because they are better than Chinese. China must import engines for a reason, because they can't make them. Pak Army wanted Ukrainian engines, French auto transmission and thermal sights in MBT-2000 for a reason. Because Europe's are better. Why else would you pay more money when your dear ally is supposed to be equal to the West?
As for Burma, I don't know the details but they have been buying Chinese equipment outright for a long time, it is a bit of a coup for them to pick Russia when China has a good product in J-10. The export prospects of the current model aren't looking too good unless Pakistan gets it and sticks more EU avionics in it.
Yeah, right... KJ-2000 is a failed attempt to buy an Israeli AWACs set, KJ-200 is in a million pieces, Type 052C is "supposed" to be an attempt at a high power X-band phased array. None of that is an example of an AESA.
Reason I'm here is to dig through the propoganda for evidence of China's rise. I know they are rising, but not as fast as everyone thinks.
Maggern
Junior Member
Typhoon?
It's PESA I believe.
Armand2REP never learns. He doesn't believe he can be wrong in these issues, so won't bother to read what you tell him to.
- Status