How can and How should PLAN improve it self?

Dedicated anti ship version of tomahawk has long been retired from USN service and the missiles have been rebuilt as block IIIs. I do believe, however, that current tactical tomahawks could be used against ships, if there's nothing better to use, just like standards can be used against ships. actually, if there's no harpoons, i'd prefer to use a couple of standards rather than one tomahawk.

Also, haven't harpoons been removed from the last flight of Burkes, to make space for more VLS modules? Now they don't have any dedicated anti ship weapons, aside of penguin missiles launched from helicopter.

Gollevainen said:

no, the imaginary 168 is the 115...the logic that implifies that Chinese would build a totally new class of warship, to an existing obsolent desing after they have just scrabbed similar hull is just pure nonsense.

Click to expand...

NO, im not saying they scrapped 168. Im saying they MIGHT have. From else besides weyer taschenbuch do you draw that 168 is 115? The hull itself is not outdated, but the weapons on 167 were. The ship design clearly showed a desire to put on VLS. The rif-m has been for export for a long time. Why does the PLAN buy it to equip it's destroyer now rather than when 168 was building?

Gollevainen said:

No, only that if i want you to spread my PMs in public, ask promise for doing it! Its a basic compliment manners. It wasent a big thing and I could have (and propaply would have) posted it in puplic as well...only its a matter of principle. I wont do that to anyone else, and I expect that nobody does that to me...

Click to expand...

My apologies...

I have seen reports of 115 and 116 taking routine sailing trips. The purchase of two rif-m's, along with picutres is more than enough evidence for me. Even out knowledgeable mod typhuang knows there are two.

Admit it golly, youve been wrong before. Last fall, you claimed china had 500 type 96's, and i said China had 1500+. now whose right?:nono:

well if the arguments stays on it MIGTH- level, I see no point of making this 'fate of 116' -thread any longer.

And Yes I have been wrong ....ocassionaly...And the tank depate was good example of how the mainsite orginnaly reported something (wich i claimed and then updated the info to the one you claimed. Then I admitted that I was wrong So big deal im not ALWAYS rigth, but rigth at the most of the time ) And that has nothing to do whit the topic....

And i have read enogh of excuses of how some chinese system that fields something from russia and then there is reports (or rumours) of some purchases of the same system from russia...and offcourse meaning that chinese are building it more...like the 100 J-10 in service...

Totoro said:

Dedicated anti ship version of tomahawk has long been retired from USN service and the missiles have been rebuilt as block IIIs. I do believe, however, that current tactical tomahawks could be used against ships, if there's nothing better to use, just like standards can be used against ships. actually, if there's no harpoons, i'd prefer to use a couple of standards rather than one tomahawk.

Also, haven't harpoons been removed from the last flight of Burkes, to make space for more VLS modules? Now they don't have any dedicated anti ship weapons, aside of penguin missiles launched from helicopter

Click to expand...

.

Well Tomahawk certainly has the charectarist to be used against targets whitout sophisticated airdefences or missile defence....Lot depends on what sort of targets they are trying to destroy. But I find it odd that navy of US caliber neglets that ASuW so completely....But again lets try to avoid any china vs. US hostilityes to flame again....

The combat capability of PLAN not limited so much by its technology, it is limited by its numbers.

Disagree with me if you want to, but I'm convinced both the PLAN and the PLAAF is the technological equal of 2006 Russia. This includes only the platforms they choose to built -- so of course platforms that China doesn't have would not be the technological equal of Russia.

In areas like missiles and radars, which China thinks is very important, it is easily the technological equal of 2006 Russia. So of course Chinese technology is better than Cold War USSR!! But China lacks sufficient numbers of modern equipment (in navy and air force) for now.

This is not really a problem, since maintaining a huge standing force is expensive. The money is better off spent developing new systems, or just feeding poor people. The USSR collapsed because it's economy couldn't keep up.

So, in conclusion, China's force is SMARTER than USSR because it's more focused, and finds excellence in its focus. Don't spend money on maintaining a huge force that just sits there. Focus research on important fields to get up to world class standards. Once you have advanced technology and a big economy, then building up a massive force is easy.

Roger604 said:

The combat capability of PLAN not limited so much by its technology, it is limited by its numbers.

Disagree with me if you want to, but I'm convinced both the PLAN and the PLAAF is the technological equal of 2006 Russia. This includes only the platforms they choose to built -- so of course platforms that China doesn't have would not be the technological equal of Russia.

In areas like missiles and radars, which China thinks is very important, it is easily the technological equal of 2006 Russia. So of course Chinese technology is better than Cold War USSR!! But China lacks sufficient numbers of modern equipment (in navy and air force) for now.

This is not really a problem, since maintaining a huge standing force is expensive. The money is better off spent developing new systems, or just feeding poor people. The USSR collapsed because it's economy couldn't keep up.

So, in conclusion, China's force is SMARTER than USSR because it's more focused, and finds excellence in its focus. Don't spend money on maintaining a huge force that just sits there. Focus research on important fields to get up to world class standards. Once you have advanced technology and a big economy, then building up a massive force is easy.

Click to expand...

I concur homie!!

I would say in terms of advanced technologies, China is ahead of russia in some fields. Russia may be ahead of china in some other feilds, such as SAM technology, but China is ahead in others.

Since this thread is about naval matters, it will stick to them when i explain how china is ahead of russia in naval capabilities, and how it can even further distance itself from russia.

first off, china is one of the few nations in the world that can proudly say it has APAR technology. A huge amount of money and manpower was sunk into the development of the 52c's APAR, and the result is rewarding.

China is also a world leader in large stealthy vessels. No nation has yet feilded a stealthy vessel the size of the 52c/b. Most of russias ships are cold war missle trash cans that have huge radar signatures. Only recently, with the Talwar, has russia made some progress with stealthy hulls.

Russia's feilding of advanced weapons has stagnated since 1996. Only now have they started up again. But russia indeed does have a big lead on china in nuclear submarines. But china will catch up by the end of the decade.

Well unlike many here, I do not believe that the PLAN should concentrate on building loads of new ships.

I think it should concentrate as it is, slowly building its expertise and capabilities. I say this for two reasons:

1) In the event of a naval crisis or conflict, all the potential flashpoints are currently very close to the Chinese Coast, there is no point to build an expensive Blue Water Fleet.

2) China's massive Industrial capability. This is an ability to produce a large quantity of certain classes of ships in a very short space of time. Landing and Assaulty Craft for instance. If these are built quickly in direct response to a specific crisis, it will get the ships it needs, when it needs them. there is no need to be fancy, they could be little more than one trip wonders.

Personally I think China would be better off building fast, stealthy and heaviily armed Attack Boats. A swarm of wasps with a sharp sting will; I think, be a greater deterrent than a handful of puffing dragons.

This will probably change over time and there will be a constant aggregation of extra responsibilites as China's trade networks expand and a bigger role for more Capital ships arise.

For the meantime and for a current likely crisis, big ships are definitely not beautiful.

Sampan, hows it going? hows sinoeconomy?

You do strike a couple good points. If an enemy navy has the seas you want, small FACs would be great for kicking them out.

However...large warships do serve a purpose. They hold the seas. With SAMs and ASHM's, they can effectively control an area of ocean. Facs can clear open seas, but without large warhsips, it would be a free-for-all grab.

Even a region as small as the taiwan strait needs large warships to control, as to disrupt enemy supplies and aircraft movements in the region.

MIGleader said:

I concur homie!!

I would say in terms of advanced technologies, China is ahead of russia in some fields. Russia may be ahead of china in some other feilds, such as SAM technology, but China is ahead in others.

Since this thread is about naval matters, it will stick to them when i explain how china is ahead of russia in naval capabilities, and how it can even further distance itself from russia.

first off, china is one of the few nations in the world that can proudly say it has APAR technology. A huge amount of money and manpower was sunk into the development of the 52c's APAR, and the result is rewarding.

China is also a world leader in large stealthy vessels. No nation has yet feilded a stealthy vessel the size of the 52c/b. Most of russias ships are cold war missle trash cans that have huge radar signatures. Only recently, with the Talwar, has russia made some progress with stealthy hulls.

Russia's feilding of advanced weapons has stagnated since 1996. Only now have they started up again. But russia indeed does have a big lead on china in nuclear submarines. But china will catch up by the end of the decade.

Click to expand...

I would have to disagree with you and Roger.

Sticking purely to naval matters.

1.) Russia can has the capability, not the money, to build 1st line nuclear submarines such as the Akula II, Sierra II, Oscar II. China is just fielding its second generation SSN with a rumored Victor III quality.

Sierra:
Akula II:
OScar II:

2.) Russia can SSBN technology is several magnitude to that of PLA. China's SSBN is a derivative of Delta IV design.

Delta IV:
Typhoon:

PLAN cannot build subs with quality like these yet.

3.) PLAN does not have the capability to build a large aircraft carrier.

4.) As for Shipborne radar, Russia is ahead of China in terms of Phased Array Radar. They tested such devices with the Gorskov and employ them in the Kuznetsov carrier.

5.) Anti-ship missiles: The best Anti-ship missile in PLAN is the sunburn (made in Russia)

6.) Warships: The most powerful surface combatant in the PLAN is a Russian escort, the Sovremmeny destroyer. Nothing in the PLAN can match the firepower of the Kirov or the Slava.

7.) Most of PLAN's anti-submarine assets are Russian made (From hardware, sonar, to weapons)

8.) PLAN is not the best at building stealthy ships, the US is. Have you ever seen the sea shadow? How about the swedish Visby Class corvette?
Russia exports this ship to india

So, in conclusion, China's force is SMARTER than USSR because it's more focused, and finds excellence in its focus. Don't spend money on maintaining a huge force that just sits there. Focus research on important fields to get up to world class standards. Once you have advanced technology and a big economy, then building up a massive force is easy

Click to expand...

The chinese military is the largest in the world, it is they who spends money on a huge force that just sits their.
Russian military has seen continious combat service in Chechnya.

The current plan of the Russian military is to make it self smaller and more technology oriented, like the US.

wow, I start to feel ready bad....I have no choice than keep posting in manner that seems to detoriate china and its military...

But I seriously think that some of us lives in differnt universe than rest of us.

Chinese only radar system that matches those used by other super powers are the unknown plannar arrays on two 052C class DDGs....those are based in ukranian thecnology, itself based on Soviet systems of the Cold war's ending days. We have no knowlidge what about those systems and make claims that China is far ahead of Russia and even cold war era USSR based on TWO radar
platforms is rather absurd...not absurd but nationalistic BS.

So, in conclusion, China's force is SMARTER than USSR because it's more focused, and finds excellence in its focus. Don't spend money on maintaining a huge force that just sits there. Focus research on important fields to get up to world class standards. Once you have advanced technology and a big economy, then building up a massive force is easy.

Click to expand...

This is almoust hilarious to say about force that contains a element not even size of Bundeswere of modern weapons and vast force of men and equipment of late 50's desing. Comon, living in denial takes us nowhere. And beside, As I said I'll give you some sort of freedom, I meaned that you stick on purely naval matters and NOT COMPARE It to any other forces!!!

Are you deliberatly seeking warnings, roger?

There are no field in chinese navy, where it comes equal of Soviet VMF was in late 80's. maybe its newest ships have limited radar cross section, but thats rather little issue as you all can remember our acient depates over this matter: Chinese new naval vessels aren't Sthealth. Both 052B/Cs and Tawlars have reduced cross sections, but only slighty reduced. Aleirg Burke have similar features. True sthealth ships are those whit clean surface in both hulls and superstructuals as well as mast and other sensors. French lafayette and Swedish Visby class are the closest to real Sthealth ships at the moment.


So if any one else wants to rubb asses whit this thing, i would strongly recomendate to study little bit harder about modern naval history and devolpment. You should KNOW bit more about soviet fleet before making such stubid, immature and flaming statements!

Perkele!

SampanViking said:

Well unlike many here, I do not believe that the PLAN should concentrate on building loads of new ships.

I think it should concentrate as it is, slowly building its expertise and capabilities.

Click to expand...

I think that's a good point of view. And I think PLAN is most likely going to follow this model. Why? Because they're still trying to align ship types with a working operational naval doctrine. So I think they will continue the slow pace for a time. Plus they're trying to master not only fielding new and higher grade equipment, but I think they're working on developing better manufacturing processes.

Totoro said:

Dedicated anti ship version of tomahawk has long been retired from USN service and the missiles have been rebuilt as block IIIs. I do believe, however, that current tactical tomahawks could be used against ships, if there's nothing better to use, just like standards can be used against ships. actually, if there's no harpoons, i'd prefer to use a couple of standards rather than one tomahawk.

Also, haven't harpoons been removed from the last flight of Burkes, to make space for more VLS modules? Now they don't have any dedicated anti ship weapons, aside of penguin missiles launched from helicopter.

Click to expand...

I'll only address that the TacTom did get alot of stuff from TBIP and phase IV program. It does have the ability to hit moving targets, but I'm not sure how it accomplishes that. Perhaps a combination of real-time imagery and IR sensor. So Oscar Austins have a pretty long anti-ship reach. That is when they're all outfitted with TacTom's. Right now, there's not alot in the fleet, like you said, Oscar Austin's don't really have a dedicated ASM at all other than Penguins from the MH-60's.

Harpoons have been removed from Oscar Austin's, but they retain the ability to fit them behind the stacks if they need to. This was done as a cost savings as these vessels are purposely suited to ASW and there's no real ASuW battles foreseen. But even then, they don't travel alone.

isthvan said:

Ok, but still… Investing more money on Ludas joust wouldn’t make sense… Modernize Luhu and Luhai, maybe even Jingweis (to get ship at least to Knox level ASW capabilities) but Ludas are joust to old...

Click to expand...

I thought PLAN had modernization efforts underway for these three classes. I think Luda's are pretty old myself. Not worth upgrading at all. But that doesn't mean they still aren't useful.

Gollevainen said:

wow, I start to feel ready bad....I have no choice than keep posting in manner that seems to detoriate china and its military...

But I seriously think that some of us lives in differnt universe than rest of us.

Click to expand...

That's how I often feel. Sometimes I just can't let bad info pass as truth. Sometimes BS needs to be called what it is. And yet, it makes it look as though I'm trashing PLAN. And I'm not intentionally doing that. I never start em'. But out of respect for Totoro, Webmaster, and yourself (and heeding your warnings all the same)....I'll refrain.