NationStates Jolt Archive

Here are some pictures !

http://img319.imageshack.us/my.php?image=type994bv.jpg

http://img136.imageshack.us/my.php?image=type9912xw.jpg

http://bbs.defence.co.kr/html/bbs/data/landarms/type99.gif

It's belived to have a 155mm gun, some people think it is a type 98G but the turret seems different to me. Please post your oppinon.

The turrets reactive armour looks like it is trying to mimic Chobham,especisally near the mantlet. The lower turret profile would seem to indicate a new auto loader too.



Here are some pictures !

http://img319.imageshack.us/my.php?image=type994bv.jpg

http://img136.imageshack.us/my.php?image=type9912xw.jpg

http://bbs.defence.co.kr/html/bbs/data/landarms/type99.gif

It's belived to have a 155mm gun, some people think it is a type 98G but the turret seems different to me. Please post your oppinon.

It looks like a clone of the Russian T-90:

http://naoruzanje.paracin.co.yu/t90-4.jpg

Reactive armour aside (many older Russian tanks use modular bolt-on panels these days), I doubt it represents a quantum leap forward, although the optics have improved a lot since the T-72.

This is a supreme danger to the US, if they can make it float across the Pacific Ocean and resist missile attacks.

This is a supreme danger to the US, if they can make it float across the Pacific Ocean and resist missile attacks.

Thankfully, the Chinese Navy isn't much more than a coastal defense force.

These tanks would give a serious asskicking to anybody who tried to invade China, however. Which is probably the point.

:p

These tanks would give a serious asskicking to anybody who tried to invade China, however. Which is probably the point.:p

Unless we just attacked them with missles from ships and airstrikes.

Unless we just attacked them with missles from ships and airstrikes.

Which is probably why they are improving their airforce, among other things.

Which is probably why they are improving their airforce, among other things.

We've got a better quality one, so the goal would be to strike before they could get a large numerical advantage.

It's belived to have a 155mm gun, some people think it is a type 98G but the turret seems different to me. Please post your oppinon.
The chassis looks pretty similar to the Russian tanks they probably copied from, but the turret reminds me of the Leo 2.

Thats a big gun

Not like it matters really, no-one out there has the resources to take a war to the Chinese or US mainland, and no-one ever will.

We've got a better quality one, so the goal would be to strike before they could get a large numerical advantage.

Nobody is saying china would win right now. They are quickly working on their military, and in the near future, its quite possible everything but the chinese navy will be superior to the US one(Same doctrine as US military, good quality + numbers).

The chassis looks pretty similar to the Russian tanks they probably copied from, but the turret reminds me of the Leo 2.

It reminds me more of a Challenger II to me than the Leopard 2.

Speaking strictly as a ground pounder with a fair bit of skill at ID'ing Armour, I do believe that's a Type 98G, and the turrent draws from the Leopard 2A6 (after all, the Leo Rocks, so why not? lol).

It's got a auto-loader licence from Russia, but the 125mm is a indiginous smoothbore. Chassis does draw from russian concepts (there was actually argument about weither or not they would draw from Russian or Western design but they eventually choose Russian again) but is also indiginous in design.

So it's not a clone, it simply draws from several succesful designs in hopes of making a better tank.

Which is probably why they are improving their airforce, among other things.

And people wonder why I mourn the loss of the F-14D Super Tomcat as a serving fighter. It's the best air-superiority fighter we have, but like the A-6, it's being replaced by a shiny F/A-18 (E variant this time). the T-cat was made specifically for turns and burns with the Soviet Migs and Sukhoi's the Chinese have. Although, if they're really being phased-out for a VF-1 Valkyrie, I don't mind:)

Thankfully, the Chinese Navy isn't much more than a coastal defense force.

These tanks would give a serious asskicking to anybody who tried to invade China, however. Which is probably the point.

:p


good god, the ignorance just flows liberally from you people

People's Liberation Army Navy
The People's Liberation Army Navy [PLAN] remains more or less precisely what is implied by its rather paradoxical [at least to Western ears] sounding name -- the maritime force of a continental power. The Chinese sea-faring tradition largely ended with the demise of the 15th century Treasure Fleets, and half a century of Communist state power has done little to reverse the landward focus of Chinse security planning. Large numbers of aircraft and patrol boats armed with anti-ship cruise missiles provide a formidable coastal defense perimeter. But the PLAN remains little more than a "brown water" coastal defense with limited "green water" capabilities, and no pretense of "blue water" aspirations. Despite a few recent noteworthy additions, the Chinese fleet is overwhelmingly populated with elderly and evidently obsolete units. Even the most recently constructed ships are evdidently defficient in anti-air and anti-submarine warfare capabilities.

While manifestly lacking in the robust blue-water power-projection capabilities of the United States Navy, the People's Liberation Army Navy is reasonably well postured to perform the brown-water and green-water sea denial missions with which it is tasked as a matter of national policy. The PLAN has not failed in an attempt to match the US Navy. Rather, it has made substantial progress towards mounting an assymetric sea-denial response to American power-projection capabilities, while at the same time deploying forces that are not inferior in overall combat potential to other regional maritime powers.

Beijing’s early modernization efforts primarily will benefit the People’s Liberation Army Navy and People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) over the next five years and those services can be expected to expand their areas of operations slowly as they absorb new equipment. Moreover, the frequency and duration of PLAN patrols in the East and South China Seas and the western Pacific will increase in a three phase, “crawl, walk, run” approach. By 2010, expect those operations to include frequent short duration “show the flag” ship deployments in the Western Pacific and Indian Oceans; by 2025, long duration theater-wide deployments; and, by 2050, a significant PLAN operating presence throughout Asia.

The PLA Navy is making efforts to improve its regional force projection options by improving the capability to deploy submarines on extended patrols, and outfitting surface ships with more capable air defense assets and more lethal anti-ship cruise missiles. In addition, the Navy is attempting to address weaknesses in anti-submarine warfare. Despite incremental gains, the PLAN still lacks fleet air defense, over-the-horizon targeting, and sufficient sea/air lift for major amphibious operations. The PLA is addressing these deficiencies, but does not appear likely to make significant gains in those areas until at least 2005.

History
In 1949 Mao asserted that "to oppose imperialist aggression, we must build a powerful navy." The Naval Academy was set up at Dalian in March 1950, mostly with Soviet instructors. The Navy was established in September 1950 by consolidating regional naval forces under General Staff Department command. It then consisted of a motley collection of ships and boats acquired from the Guomindang forces. The Naval Air Force was added two years later. By 1954 an estimated 2,500 Soviet naval advisers were in China--possibly one adviser to every thirty Chinese naval personnel--and the Soviet Union began providing modern ships. With Soviet assistance, the navy reorganized in 1954 and 1955 into the North Sea Fleet, East Sea Fleet, and South Sea Fleet, and a corps of admirals and other naval officers was established from the ranks of the ground forces.

The Chinese Navy imported equipment and technology from the Soviet Union when it was first established in the 1950s and developed the ability to make naval equipment with Chinese parts in a short time. In shipbuilding the Soviets first assisted the Chinese, then the Chinese copied Soviet designs without assistance, and finally the Chinese produced vessels of their own design. Eventually Soviet assistance progressed to the point that a joint Sino-Soviet Pacific Ocean fleet was under discussion.

A procurement policy was set in August 1950 by the PLAN to build a light-duty surface warfare force. Such a force would consist of air, submarine, and torpedo boat elements. For the construction of new vessels, the Bureau of Shipbuilding Industry was created in October 1950 and was based in Shanghai . With the guidance of the Soviets, the Chinese developed a joint agreement with the Soviet Union for the license production of five different kinds of ships in the Soviet Navy in June 1953 those being: frigates, medium-sized torpedo submarines, minesweepers, large submarine chasers, and torpedo boats.

The Shipbuilding Industry Management Bureau in 1954 created the Ship Product Design Branch, which later was renamed the First Ship Product Design Office. The Bureau built and operated six shipyards and two construction sites for the PLAN. From 1955 to 1960, the shipyards produced more than 100 ships. In 1954, the Ship Model Testing Institute was created by the First Ministry of Machine Building (MMB). The same institute was enlarged and renamed the Ship Science Research Institute of the First MMB and the Ministry of Communication. The MMB organized the Ship Product Design Institute with four additional institutes in 1958. The PLAN, in 1958 as well, developed research institutes dedicated to the study of ship design, underwater weapons, hydro-acoustics, and navigation. The PLAN developed the Science and Technology Research Division. Universities in Shanghai , Xian, Dalian , and Wuhan developed research bodies dedicated to the study of shipbuilding, naval weapon systems, and training equipment. "The Agreement on the Assistance to the People's Republic of China by USSR for Building Warships by the Chinese Navy" was signed on February 4, 1959 between China and the Soviet Union , which allowed the Chinese to begin receiving designs and parts for the license production of submarines, two kinds of guided missile ships, and a hydro-foil torpedo boat.

The Navy Party Committee submitted a report to the CMC to clearly define the policy goals of their naval modernization, which included: the development guided missile capabilities, and the continual development of the navy’s conventional equipment, the creation of a submarine force, the development of small and medium sized surface ships. The Ship Indus trial Management Bureau was absorbed by the Third MMB in 1960, whereas the Military Ship Overall Design Office, which was under the Ship Product Design Institute, was expanded into seven offices with new emphases on the development of torpedoes and navigational instruments. Additionally, a test base for the development of large ships was created in Wuxi , which helped lay the course for more research and development.

Through the upheavals of the late 1950s and 1960s the Navy remained relatively undisturbed. Under the leadership of Minister of National Defense Lin Biao, large investments were made in naval construction during the frugal years immediately after the Great Leap Forward. During the Cultural Revolution, a number of top naval commissars and commanders were purged, and naval forces were used to suppress a revolt in Wuhan in July 1967, but the service largely avoided the turmoil. Although it paid lip service to Mao and assigned political commissars aboard ships, the Navy continued to train, build, and maintain the fleets. In August 1960, the Soviet Union retracted its support of the Chinese in the development of the PLAN by pulling its advisors and ceasing the supply of technology and materials, forcing China to develop its navy by itself. As a solution, the Chinese created research bodies to fill the gap that Soviet Union had left in research and development in order to continue the modernization and development of its navy. The Warship Research Academy , or the Seventh Academy of the Ministry of National Defence, was created in June 1961. The Seventh Academy focused the research and development of ships, weapons systems, equipment, and the assimilation of imported technology.

The Seventh Academy was also responsible for the creation of other research institutes dedicated to creating various ship designs, including nuclear submarines and propulsion systems. Additional research institutions were created after 1963, when the Sixth MMB was created. These institutes were specialized in various aspects of naval research, such as machine building, instruments, technology, and information.

The cumulative efforts of the various research bodies helped China become more capable of domestically developing a navy by duplicating imported technology and producing needed parts. By the mid-60s, the Seventh Academy became capable of developing China ’s first-generation of naval vessels, such as nuclear power submarines, survey ships, destroyers, frigates, and various naval weapons systems.

In the 1970s, when approximately 20 percent of the defense budget allocated to naval forces, the Navy grew dramatically. The conventional submarine force increased from 35 to 100 boats, the number of missile-carrying ships grew from 20 to 200, and the production of larger surface ships, including support ships for oceangoing operations, increased. The Navy also began development of nuclearpowered attack submarines (SSN) and nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN). However, the PLAN lacked surface-to-air missile (SAM) protection for its ships, which were equipped solely with guns and had no surface-to-surface missiles (SSMs). And it had very little anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability.

In the 1980s the Navy was developing into a regional naval power with some green-water capabilities. Naval construction continued at a level somewhat below the 1970s rate. Modernization efforts encompassed higher educational and technical standards for personnel; reformulation of the traditional coastal defense doctrine and force structure in favor of more blue-water operations; and training in naval combined-arms operations involving submarine, surface, naval aviation, and coastal defense forces. Examples of the expansion of China's blue-water naval capabilities were the 1980 recovery of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in the Western Pacific by a twenty-ship fleet, extended naval operations in the South China Sea in 1984 and 1985, and the visit of two naval ships to three South Asian nations in 1985. In 1982 the Navy conducted a successful test of an underwater-launched ballistic missile; in 1986 the Navy's order of battle included at least one Xia-class SSBNs armed with twelve CSS-NX-4 missiles and five Han-class SSNs armed with six SY-2 cruise missiles. The Navy also had some success in developing a variety of ship-to-ship, ship-to-shore, shore-to-ship, and air-to-ship missiles. In the late 1980s, major deficiencies reportedly remained in antisubmarine warfare, mine warfare, naval electronics (including electronic countermeasures equipment), and naval aviation capabilities.

Although naval personnel comprised only 12 percent of PLA strength, the PLA Navy ranked in 1987 as the third largest navy in the world in 1987. The Navy consisted of the naval headquarters in Beijing; three fleet commands - the North Sea Fleet, based at Qingdao, Shandong Province; the East Sea Fleet, based at Shanghai; and the South Sea Fleet, based at Zhanjiang, Guangdong Province - and about 2,000 ships. The 350,000-person Navy included Naval Air Force units of 34,000 men, the Coastal Defense Forces of 38,000, and the Marine Corps of 56,500.

China's 1,500-kilometer coastline was protected by more than 100 diesel-powered Romeo- and Whiskey-class submarines, which could remain at sea only a limited time. Inside this protective ring and within range of shore-based aircraft were destroyers and frigates mounting Styx antiship missiles, depth-charge projectors, and guns up to 130mm. Any invader penetrating the destroyer and frigate protection would be swarmed by almost 900 fast-attack craft. Stormy weather could limit the range of these small boats, however, and curtail air support. Behind the inner ring were Coastal Defense Force personnel operating naval shore batteries of Styx missiles and guns, backed by ground force units deployed in depth.

China's Naval Strategy
The PLAN seeks to push its maritime defense perimeter further seaward. This change in operations will require newer, more modern warships and submarines capable of operating out to the Ryukyu Islands and into the South China Sea. At these extended ranges, the platforms will have to be better armed to enable defense from all methods of attack. The Navy has been conducting research and acquiring foreign technology in an effort to improve the broad range of naval warfare capabilities; it also is acquiring new classes of ships that will be better suited for operations out to the limits of the East and South China Seas.

The PRC believes that the greatest potential for sea conflicts might erupt at the East China Sea and the South China Sea. Thus, the “Emergency Mobile Force” is assigned to the East Sea Fleet and the South Sea Fleet. Although the North Sea Fleet has a better equipment, yet generally speaking, the total combat capabilities of the East Sea Fleet and the South Sea Fleet are superior to others.

Operations
The semi-annual People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) out-of-area deployments and port visits are maritime diplomacy conducted as an integral part of Beijing’s global and regional engagement strategy. These goodwill deployments demonstrate China’s slowly emerging “blue water” capability and presence. Although China’s naval fleet is not on par with U.S. technological standards, these port visits highlight to lesser-equipped regional actors that next to the U.S. and India, it is China that can project regional influence and presence into the western Pacific and Indian Ocean. This recent voyage to European waters compliments Chinese diplomatic initiatives with the European Union geared towards securing entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO), that is expected in November.

Since 1980, 15 groups of Chinese naval ships have visited 20 countries. In 1989, the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) conducted its first port visit to a U.S. port since the 1949 Communist Revolution, when DAXIN AXT-81 Zheng He visited Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Zheng He was named after the head of the 15th Century Ming Dynasty trade fleet, who ventured as far as the African coast. With the US now China’s 2nd largest trading partner and biggest foreign investor, the symbolism of sending Zheng He was fitting. The next U.S. port call wasn’t until eight year later, when three PLAN warships visited Pearl Harbor and San Diego, California in 1997. Since then, PLAN warships have been conducting semi-annual “out of area” deployments. In 2000, PLAN warships conducted two major deployments, one that brought them as far as South Africa and the other to the U.S. West Coast. In the spring of 2001, PLAN warships conducted one deployment to India and Pakistan. China's Premier Zhu Rongji recently concluded a 4-nation trip to Europe where he furthered trade relations and was ensured European Union (EU) support for Beijing’s pending World Trade Organization (WTO) bid, which is expected in November this year. The EU and China are also in the process of negotiating a free access Sino-EU maritime pact.

Two ships of the Chinese Navy left Shanghai August 23, 2001 for a goodwill visit to Germany, Britain, France and Italy. The two ships - the Shenzhen, a guided missile destroyer, and the Fengcang, a support vessel - were both designed and manufactured in China, and will visit the European continent for the first time. The ships will travel over 23,000 sea miles in 85 days, equivalent to circling the earth via the equator. Wu Fuchun, commander of the naval ships, said that this visit marks that Chinese naval ships have now journeyed to five of the world 's continents, across three oceans. The newest indigenously produced addition to the fledgling blue water fleet of China's People's Liberation Army Navy, the Luhai-class guided missile destroyer, Shenzhen, emerged from the Dalian shipyard in August 1998. Following the successful completion of sea trials in late 1998, Shenzhen joined the Zhanjiang-based South Sea Fleet on 1 January 1999. It previously conducted an out-of-area deployment to Africa in 2000.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/plan-overview.htm

People's Liberation Army Navy Air Force
The mission of the PLAN Air Force or PLANAF, is to provide air defense of ports and naval installations as well as air protection for fleet units. Other tasks that fall within its purview include ASuW, maritime reconnaissance, aerial minelaying, ASW operations, ground attack, and limited logistics support. The Naval Air Force would augment the PLAAF during hostilities (and vice versa).

The PLANAF operates a mixture of B-6 BADGER and B-5 BEAGLE bombers; Q-5 FANTAN, F-6 FARMER, and F-7 FISHBEDs. The PLANAF also fields SUPER FREOLON and DAUPHIN helicopters and small transports.

An unidentified NAF Division is reported to have conducted a number of night training early 2003, conducting three night training exercises over water. This coupled with efforts to train ground crews in night operations allowed the division to more than double its night training time compared to previous years. This training was done to meet requirements of the new MTEP. The report goes on to state that the division created manuals for flight and ground crews on night operations, possibly indicating that the formulation of tactics and doctrine is evolving at the unit rather than national level. [Liberation Army Daily 8 Feb 2003 (PLA Activities Report February 2003)]

taken from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/plan-af.htm

Even an F/A-18E should be able to ake on Fishbeds.

First off before you all get scared, the Chinese military cannot project itself 100 miles outside its borders. It is a bureaucratic morass, and it doesn't even have the technology to support itself. Sure this tank looks pretty, but that doesn't matter because quality is what counts.

Oh the tank's are good, you'll have to give'em that. Not quite up to the standard of tanks now, but enough to put up a pretty good fight.

The Chinese army isn't MENT to project force outside of 100 miles. It's ment to protect it's own boarders. That's about it, and that's what you should be happy about.

They might not be able to invade you, but if you try and invade them, you'll have to wallow through meter high piles of your own dead for the entire length of China, lol.

Piece of crap, like anything and everything else made in China. For good tanks you shouldnt go past Russia with the T-80 and T-90, the EU and perhaps even the USA as secondary alternatives.

Piece of crap, like anything and everything else made in China.

I'm willing to bet that a rather significant proportion of your computer was made in China.

well that would be an apt explanation of why it break down like a mofo :D

Although most computer components are manufactured in Taiwan or S.Korea, China doesent really have a developed microchip industry ...

Piece of crap, like anything and everything else made in China. For good tanks you shouldnt go past Russia with the T-80 and T-90, the EU and perhaps even the USA as secondary alternatives.

And what are you basing your "piece of crap" comment on? maybe a source? after all, you must have extensive knowledge of armour and MBT's in specific to make such a statement?

Oh the tank's are good, you'll have to give'em that. Not quite up to the standard of tanks now, but enough to put up a pretty good fight.

First off the MBT itself is a piece of crap. It isn't good at all. I don't even think it will be a match.


The Chinese army isn't MENT to project force outside of 100 miles. It's ment to protect it's own boarders. That's about it, and that's what you should be happy about.

Okay, that made no sense what-so-ever.

They might not be able to invade you, but if you try and invade them, you'll have to wallow through meter high piles of your own dead for the entire length of China, lol.

Why would we invade them? No reason. I'm more concerned about them invading Taiwan. And your comment was pretty stupid I think.

Ridiculous. China has no overseas military aspirations. The Navy is really for self-defence. What's the use of navy when your main enemy has already controlled the ocean between the two states? We would look for smarter ways to counterattack the US.

Ridiculous. China has no overseas military aspirations. The Navy is really for self-defence. What's the use of navy when your main enemy has already controlled the ocean between the two states? We would look for smarter ways to counterattack the US.

You have to do it with a lot better then museum pieces like MiG-19s. The Chinese military would be target practice.

You have to do it with a lot better then museum pieces like MiG-19s. The Chinese military would be target practice.

Of course the most preferred way of conducting relations between the two states would be peaceful negotiations. As long as China remains one of the largest states in the world with an advancing economy that fuels American spending and that America holds a military upperhand against China, I can hardly foresee war. :)

First off the MBT itself is a piece of crap. It isn't good at all. I don't even think it will be a match.


Why? Do you have the plans or something? I'd like to see the specs for this against other MBTs today's army fields. Would be nice to see how the performance levels work out.

As big as that tank looks - it definitely has a very low profile. I like that. But honestly, I don't see much clone-resemblence, neither to the T-90, the Leo2A6, the M1A2 Abrams, nor the Challenger2. Then again, it's a main battle tank, so of course they all resemble each other because of their purpose.

It looks more like kit-bashing with take what's big, good looking, and working well: et voilà - Chinese battle tank.

(Isn't that how the Japanese learned to built good cars?) :p

Speaking strictly as a ground pounder with a fair bit of skill at ID'ing Armour, I do believe that's a Type 98G, and the turrent draws from the Leopard 2A6 (after all, the Leo Rocks, so why not? lol).

It's got a auto-loader licence from Russia, but the 125mm is a indiginous smoothbore. Chassis does draw from russian concepts (there was actually argument about weither or not they would draw from Russian or Western design but they eventually choose Russian again) but is also indiginous in design.

So it's not a clone, it simply draws from several succesful designs in hopes of making a better tank.



Type 98G has a 140mm cannon, and slightly different turret.

Piece of crap, like anything and everything else made in China. For good tanks you shouldnt go past Russia with the T-80 and T-90, the EU and perhaps even the USA as secondary alternatives.


Wow, look at the ignorance..So your saying an M60 could beat a type 98 ??

Why? Do you have the plans or something? I'd like to see the specs for this against other MBTs today's army fields. Would be nice to see how the performance levels work out.


It supposedly performs like the T-94 blakc eagle and the M1A1.

Looks like a pretty modern and well-designed tank to me.
Unlike of the early models which were really modified Russian tanks.

So that's where all that steel went!

You have to do it with a lot better then museum pieces like MiG-19s. The Chinese military would be target practice.



The Chinese air force, known as the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), is the third largest in the world. The PLA Air Force was formally organised in 1949. Its origins, however, can be traced to the 1930s when the Chinese Communist forces acquired aircraft belonging to the Nationalist Government. The force was further increased in 1946 with captured Japanese aircraft and in 1949 when the Communists gained control of mainland China.

The 1950s heralded a period of rapid modernisation with the Soviet Union supplying large numbers of jet aircraft and providing aircrew training. The PLA Air Force saw some impressive actions in the 1950s Korea War and the 1958 Taiwan Strait crisis. Deteriorating Sino-Soviet relations climaxed in 1960 when the Soviets recalled their technicians and withdrew military aid. By then, however, China had aircraft production facilities in the Northeast and some experience in jet aircraft production. China began to build MiG-17 jet fighter under Soviet license in the late-1950s. By the late 1960s, China was able to begin series production of a range of Soviet designs including fighter aircraft, bombers, transport aircraft, and helicopters.

Today, the PLA Air Force consists of 330,000 personnel, operating some 3,500 aircraft, over 1,000 surface-to-air missile systems, and several thousand anti-aircraft artillery. As a result of China’s ongoing force reduction and military modernisation, the size of the PLA Air Force has been decreasing since the mid-1980s, with most of its obsolete aircraft based on the 1950s-era Soviet designs being retired from service.

While the service continues shrinking in quantitative terms, the same is not necessarily so qualitatively. The modernisation of the PLA Air Force has introduced some momentous advances in terms of both service hardware and capability. During the past decade the PLA Air Force has purchased over 120 Russian-made Sokhoi Su-27 and Su-30 fighter aircraft, and is accepting indigenously produced third-generation aircraft such as the J-10, J-11 and JH-7. At the same time, elderly aircraft such as J-7, J-8 and Q-5 are being upgraded with better advanced avionics and weapon suites to enhance their performance. The next generation stealthy fighter aircraft is also currently under development.

Additional to the progress in combat aircraft, the PLA Air Force is quickly developing its capabilities in new areas such as the aerial refuelling tanker aircraft, airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft, airborne electronic warfare/countermeasures (EW/ECM) aircraft, long-range transport aircraft, advanced training aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The PLA Air Force is also obtaining the latest weapon systems including the Russian-made S-300 (SA-10/-12) surface-to-air missiles, R-77 (AA-12 Adder) medium-range air-to-air missiles, and accurate-guided ground strike weapons.

Although the PLA Air Force is still generally regarded as obsolete compared to Western air forces, it has already made some impressive progress in the past decade. As the PLA is transforming itself from an obsolete giant to a smaller, but more capable and modernised force ready to fight a local war under high-tech conditions, the PLA Air Force is expected to play a more important role in the future of warfare.

'The Chinese People's Liberations Army Air Force will soon have a fifth generation fighter jet to replace the aging J-6, J-7, J-8, J-9, MiG-21.
The new J-10 is a Joint Chinese-Israel operation.
The Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) and the 611 institute began development of the J-10 during the 1980s, as part of an effort to produce a single-engined, single-seat multi-role, fighter to replace the obsolete J-7 fighter and the Q-5 attack aircraft.
In looks the J-10 appears to be very similar to the Euro Fighter Typhoon,
CAC has carried out full tests on 10 prototypes the last being 28 June 2002 when Number 1008 flew its madden flight.
A J-10B has been earmarked as a possible Carrier-based version.
With a reported take off weight of 42,00lb, the J-10 is about 1/3 lighter than the Su-27K deployed aboard Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov, allowing it to operate more easily from a smaller deck, and take off with full load from a Russian-style ski-jump.
China has sharp teeth! Now!

J-10 (http://www.warchina.com/newimg/j10-a-1.jpg)

Not to mention their building- this (http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/Shenyang_XXJ_-_3side_CG.jpg)
J-11(SU-30) (http://music.jnu.edu.cn/air-net/WM-PIC/C-1/F-X/J-11/J-11(Y).jpg)
J-17 (http://www.pakistanidefence.com/images/Wallpapers/JF17ThunderWP_1.jpg), along with MiG-23's, MiG-25's and MiG-21's, so please learn your facts before saying all they have is MiG-19(Piece of crap, even when it joined russian air force in 1959.)

It supposedly performs like the T-94 blakc eagle and the M1A1.

Do you mean the T-94 and the M1A1 have the same performance specs?

Looks like a pretty modern and well-designed tank to me.
Unlike of the early models which were really modified Russian tanks.

So that's where all that steel went!

Hmmm, that would be amusing. There was a spate of thefts dealing with government property like manholes, railroad rails and fence fittings. I wonder if we could reclaim it by walking away with the turret or something, claiming that was the missing stuff. =p

Actually I doubt they are on the same level as an M-1(or varient) Challenger or Leo2

Thankfully, the Chinese Navy isn't much more than a coastal defense force.

These tanks would give a serious asskicking to anybody who tried to invade China, however. Which is probably the point.

:p

Did the PLAAF Information Officer give you this to post? The very best aircraft is only about equal to the venerable F-15 which is being replaced.
The pilot quality of the PLAAF is in question as one of ther best pilots was the knucklehead who rammed the P-3 a few years ago.



The Chinese air force, known as the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), is the third largest in the world. The PLA Air Force was formally organised in 1949. Its origins, however, can be traced to the 1930s when the Chinese Communist forces acquired aircraft belonging to the Nationalist Government. The force was further increased in 1946 with captured Japanese aircraft and in 1949 when the Communists gained control of mainland China.

The 1950s heralded a period of rapid modernisation with the Soviet Union supplying large numbers of jet aircraft and providing aircrew training. The PLA Air Force saw some impressive actions in the 1950s Korea War and the 1958 Taiwan Strait crisis. Deteriorating Sino-Soviet relations climaxed in 1960 when the Soviets recalled their technicians and withdrew military aid. By then, however, China had aircraft production facilities in the Northeast and some experience in jet aircraft production. China began to build MiG-17 jet fighter under Soviet license in the late-1950s. By the late 1960s, China was able to begin series production of a range of Soviet designs including fighter aircraft, bombers, transport aircraft, and helicopters.

Today, the PLA Air Force consists of 330,000 personnel, operating some 3,500 aircraft, over 1,000 surface-to-air missile systems, and several thousand anti-aircraft artillery. As a result of China’s ongoing force reduction and military modernisation, the size of the PLA Air Force has been decreasing since the mid-1980s, with most of its obsolete aircraft based on the 1950s-era Soviet designs being retired from service.

While the service continues shrinking in quantitative terms, the same is not necessarily so qualitatively. The modernisation of the PLA Air Force has introduced some momentous advances in terms of both service hardware and capability. During the past decade the PLA Air Force has purchased over 120 Russian-made Sokhoi Su-27 and Su-30 fighter aircraft, and is accepting indigenously produced third-generation aircraft such as the J-10, J-11 and JH-7. At the same time, elderly aircraft such as J-7, J-8 and Q-5 are being upgraded with better advanced avionics and weapon suites to enhance their performance. The next generation stealthy fighter aircraft is also currently under development.

Additional to the progress in combat aircraft, the PLA Air Force is quickly developing its capabilities in new areas such as the aerial refuelling tanker aircraft, airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft, airborne electronic warfare/countermeasures (EW/ECM) aircraft, long-range transport aircraft, advanced training aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The PLA Air Force is also obtaining the latest weapon systems including the Russian-made S-300 (SA-10/-12) surface-to-air missiles, R-77 (AA-12 Adder) medium-range air-to-air missiles, and accurate-guided ground strike weapons.

Although the PLA Air Force is still generally regarded as obsolete compared to Western air forces, it has already made some impressive progress in the past decade. As the PLA is transforming itself from an obsolete giant to a smaller, but more capable and modernised force ready to fight a local war under high-tech conditions, the PLA Air Force is expected to play a more important role in the future of warfare.

'The Chinese People's Liberations Army Air Force will soon have a fifth generation fighter jet to replace the aging J-6, J-7, J-8, J-9, MiG-21.
The new J-10 is a Joint Chinese-Israel operation.
The Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) and the 611 institute began development of the J-10 during the 1980s, as part of an effort to produce a single-engined, single-seat multi-role, fighter to replace the obsolete J-7 fighter and the Q-5 attack aircraft.
In looks the J-10 appears to be very similar to the Euro Fighter Typhoon,
CAC has carried out full tests on 10 prototypes the last being 28 June 2002 when Number 1008 flew its madden flight.
A J-10B has been earmarked as a possible Carrier-based version.
With a reported take off weight of 42,00lb, the J-10 is about 1/3 lighter than the Su-27K deployed aboard Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov, allowing it to operate more easily from a smaller deck, and take off with full load from a Russian-style ski-jump.
China has sharp teeth! Now!

J-10 (http://www.warchina.com/newimg/j10-a-1.jpg)

Not to mention their building- this (http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/Shenyang_XXJ_-_3side_CG.jpg)
J-11(SU-30) (http://music.jnu.edu.cn/air-net/WM-PIC/C-1/F-X/J-11/J-11(Y).jpg)
J-17 (http://www.pakistanidefence.com/images/Wallpapers/JF17ThunderWP_1.jpg), along with MiG-23's, MiG-25's and MiG-21's, so please learn your facts before saying all they have is MiG-19(Piece of crap, even when it joined russian air force in 1959.)

The pilot quality of the PLAAF is in question as one of ther best pilots was the knucklehead who rammed the P-3 a few years ago.

Maybe they actually wanted to bring the plane down. Ramming is an effective way to do so (Used to great effect by some aces in WW2), and if he was a good pilot, well, he could probably pull it off.

[/conspiracy theory] :p

Did the PLAAF Information Officer give you this to post? The very best aircraft is only about equal to the venerable F-15 which is being replaced.


Try reading it. Their best right now are on that level but they are developing stealth and 5th gen fighters. They do not have them in production as far as the public can ascertain.

Did the PLAAF Information Officer give you this to post? The very best aircraft is only about equal to the venerable F-15 which is being replaced. I think the information is from Sino Defence (http://www.sinodefence.com), which maintains that it is neither a mouthpiece of the corrupt PRC establishment, nor a biased nationalistic pro-US rag. Of course, they could be lying. God bless the internet.

Originally Posted by Canada-Germany
Oh the tank's are good, you'll have to give'em that. Not quite up to the standard of tanks now, but enough to put up a pretty good fight.

First off the MBT itself is a piece of crap. It isn't good at all. I don't even think it will be a match.

Again, source? I mean, you're making a pretty decisive statement about a MBT, you got anything to back that up? OR are you just slinging insults? You don't think it will be a match? So... you've got some sort of inside scoop the rest of us don't have?


Quote:
The Chinese army isn't MENT to project force outside of 100 miles. It's ment to protect it's own boarders. That's about it, and that's what you should be happy about.


Okay, that made no sense what-so-ever.

Try reading it again. But hell, I'm a nice guy, so I'll spell it out for you:

The Chinese Army isn't ment to project force outside of 100 mile. Ie: The army was created as a force to, hey look at that, defend China, and that's about it.

And that's what you should be happy about. Ie: you should be happy that the chinese army was created as a force to only defend china, otherwise, had they international territorial asperations, they would take that huge army of theirs and invade other people. And that would be bad.

Quote:
They might not be able to invade you, but if you try and invade them, you'll have to wallow through meter high piles of your own dead for the entire length of China, lol.

Why would we invade them? No reason. I'm more concerned about them invading Taiwan. And your comment was pretty stupid I think.

Wasn't saying that you, whatever country you are, WOULD want to invade them, simply that if a country were to try due to whatever reason, that's what would probably happen. The Chinese are very territorial and nationalistic.

Well thats great that you think my comment was pretty stupid. I defend your right to have your own opinion. I just wish your would actually put some research or actual knowledge into your post instead of slinging around generalities and insults.

And the US and Russia et al are working on 6th generation. China is 10-20 years behind the West.


Try reading it. Their best right now are on that level but they are developing stealth and 5th gen fighters. They do not have them in production as far as the public can ascertain.

And the US and Russia et al are working on 6th generation. China is 10-20 years behind the West.

Considering how far they had to go when they started, I'd say they're doing a fair job of catching up.

Do you mean the T-94 and the M1A1 have the same performance specs?





The T-94 "Black Eagle", was designed to deafeat most western tanks, and the type 99 is suppose to perform like the T-94. And China already has a replacement for the type 98 in development that outperforms the Leclerc and M1A2 with tusk.

Funny thing, japan has a way superior navy than china, and so does tiwan...

Sheesh, is that it? 40$ bucks and a chinese buffet are all I'd need to take it out :D !

If it performs like their subs, the Chinese are in serious trouble. The US uses Depleted uranium for a reason.

The T-94 "Black Eagle", was designed to deafeat most western tanks, and the type 99 is suppose to perform like the T-94. And China already has a replacement for the type 98 in development that outperforms the Leclerc and M1A2 with tusk.

"In development", well then, lets all run in Ph33R!

I wouldnt be surprised if an equal force of AMX-30's and AMX-10RC's took on the best equipment china could put on the field, as equivilents(The latest AMX-30's in the French army, and the AMX-10RC's with HOT).

Funny thing, japan has a way superior navy than china, and so does tiwan...

Superiour in what way? In blue water, I'll conseed Japan's superiority, but Brown or Green water, as long as it's within China's own bounderies (ignoring any coastal defences), Japan would get pounded.

Taiwan? *cough* lets just say that if America were slow to move to defend taiwan, navy wise, the Taiwanese navy would get it's ass kicked into the ground.

"In development", well then, lets all run in Ph33R!

I wouldnt be surprised if an equal force of AMX-30's and AMX-10RC's took on the best equipment china could put on the field, as equivilents(The latest AMX-30's in the French army, and the AMX-10RC's with HOT).

Assuming all else were equal, I would. You're putting light tanks up against MBT's. the AMX's wouldn't have the staying power.

Not like it matters really, no-one out there has the resources to take a war to the Chinese or US mainland, and no-one ever will.
I wouldn't want to rule out the possibility of an invasion of India. Not in the foreseeable future, but...

Assuming all else were equal, I would. You're putting light tanks up against MBT's. the AMX's wouldn't have the staying power.

But then Bradleys took out T-72's in Iraq. Alot comes down to training.

These tanks would give a serious asskicking to anybody who tried to invade China, however. Which is probably the point.

:p
Not if the ground forces had Javelins and lots of them. Heh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javelin_anti-tank_missile


Of course, the things are a complete bitch to lug around but they work really, really well.


Heh heh, looks like we already sold some to Taiwan as well.

But then Bradleys took out T-72's in Iraq. Alot comes down to training.

Yes, when you have the supporting firepower of an M-1A2 by you, you can consintrate on laying down fire on targets. Don't forget however, that the T-72's used in Iraq did not have all the nessasary equipment, communications, and ammunition. Hell, they were short on gas and armour. The T-72 used were also a generation, what? 3 MBT? The Type 98's are 5th gen MBT's against light armour.

AMX's use... 105mm shells? A single hit from a 105mm shell won't kill a Type 98 and, at max, maybe disable it, where as a single hit from a 125mm (or whatever upgraded equivilant the tank may be using as it's upgraded) shell will kill a AMX.

I did, of course, say "all else being equal" ie: the training,

edit: whoops, made a mistake, the AMX-30 is a MBT... it's just a 2nd gen MBT, something like the M60. I do believe that the 30's armour is fairly light though, it consintrates more on menouvourablity.

Not if the ground forces had Javelins and lots of them. Heh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javelin_anti-tank_missile


Of course, the things are a complete bitch to lug around but they work really, really well.


Heh heh, looks like we already sold some to Taiwan as well.

Ohh, so Taiwan can now kill 10 Type 98's, lol.

Taiwan is infamous for it's stupidity in how much they buy, ammo wise. They have enough missiles to last their airforce all of 10 minutes in a full on war. Assuming they LAST 10 minutes and don't get bombed on the ground because some lazy conscript forgot to watch the radar screen, lol.

Ohh, so Taiwan can now kill 10 Type 98's, lol.

Taiwan is infamous for it's stupidity in how much they buy, ammo wise. They have enough missiles to last their airforce all of 10 minutes in a full on war. Assuming they LAST 10 minutes and don't get bombed on the ground because some lazy conscript forgot to watch the radar screen, lol.
Given China's naval capabilities, they won't be able to get more than 10 T-98s over to Taiwan anyway.

Given China's naval capabilities, they won't be able to get more than 10 T-98s over to Taiwan anyway.

You might quite possibly be right now. In the next 10 or so years, that will be fairly wrong however.

In anycase, who needs heavy tanks when you can blow their airforce out of the sky in a short engagment and rain explosives on them until you kill everything on the ground, followed by airdroping troops in with light armour.

Note: This Stuff Won't Happen.

which is a good thing, ;)

It supposedly performs like the T-94 blakc eagle and the M1A1.


The T-94 is distinct from the Black Eagle.

The T-95 is considered a competitor to the Black Eagle. The T-84 is an advanced version of the T-80, developed by the Ukraine. The Black Eagle is also a development of the T-80 but is Russian and has many differences over any other T-80 version.
(I'm assuming you confused the T-95 and the T-84 with the Black Eagle)

Considering how far they had to go when they started, I'd say they're doing a fair job of catching up.
It helped that Clinton essentially gave them an all access pass to a bunch of our military secrets.

That beastly thing makes our Abrams look totally obsolete! :eek:

That beastly thing makes our Abrams look totally obsolete! :eek:
Considering their armor won't stop a DU Sabot round, no they don't. Modern tanks fighting abilities come down mainly to crew training and the best-maintained equipment as it generally comes down to the first solid hit. Size of the gun is much less important at this point.

Considering their armor won't stop a DU Sabot round, no they don't. Modern tanks fighting abilities come down mainly to crew training and the best-maintained equipment as it generally comes down to the first solid hit. Size of the gun is much less important at this point.

I know that the Front armour of a T-90 can take a DU sabot round, but I'm not sure of the Type 98.

It helped that Clinton essentially gave them an all access pass to a bunch of our military secrets.

Leave politics out of this thread please. It doesn't matter if little green men gave them the plans. I was kind of hoping this would stay on the technical capabilities and comparisons only.

Considering their armor won't stop a DU Sabot round, no they don't. Modern tanks fighting abilities come down mainly to crew training and the best-maintained equipment as it generally comes down to the first solid hit. Size of the gun is much less important at this point.

Damnit, if you have the specs, post them up! I want to see where you guys are basing all this from.

No. Only the west has the technology to produce the laminated Chobham style of armor (US+UK use Chobham while the French and Germans use a slight variant) While the high end Russian tank reactive armor can approche the laminates in stopping heat rounds they can't stop kinetic penetratior (sp)
Russia will probably be able to feild a tank with laminate armor in 3-5 years but not in great numbers due to cost. Their is no eta on a Chine version of lamiante armor and I wouldn't hold my breath. Laminate armor may now be obsolete as a spun fiber plastic armor shows great promise at 1/4 the weight.


The T-94 "Black Eagle", was designed to deafeat most western tanks, and the type 99 is suppose to perform like the T-94. And China already has a replacement for the type 98 in development that outperforms the Leclerc and M1A2 with tusk.

Superiour in what way? In blue water, I'll conseed Japan's superiority, but Brown or Green water, as long as it's within China's own bounderies (ignoring any coastal defences), Japan would get pounded.

Taiwan? *cough* lets just say that if America were slow to move to defend taiwan, navy wise, the Taiwanese navy would get it's ass kicked into the ground.


Tiwan is getting Arleigh burke class destroyers.., China's navy's ass would be handed to them by japan.

Damnit, if you have the specs, post them up! I want to see where you guys are basing all this from.


The PLA and Chinese government havent realeased them yet, pictures are from a military parade in china a few weeks ago(thats what it said), only info is that it is based on the black eagle platform with armor comparable to the T-95, and an 152mm gun.


1 more thing, North Korea may be recieveing T-95's in the future.

Tiwan is getting Arleigh burke class destroyers.., China's navy's ass would be handed to them by japan.

You think 3 or 4 AB class destroyers will turn the tide? It wouldn't have been a close contest before they got them, and it won't be a close contest AFTER they get them.

As good as the Japanese navy is, it would lose if it engaged in combat in a brown or green water area near China's coast.