PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

Rafale with weapons is not stealthier than j-20. Why could it attack china that deploys permanently antistealth radr, s-300/400 and tens of different frigates and destroyers and awacs on its coast while chinese navy couldn't attack french navy because of 4 rafale in the air ?

I am the first to say China doesn't produce state of art equipment and tgey try to copy and mix western and russian weapons but they have a lot of good and some very good tools, specially from ryssia, to defend themselves and they have the advantage of number near their shores.

All of the missiles the French launched were successful. The ones you are talking about were never launched so he wasn't lying.

They lied. There was clearly a problem with the launches. They also lied on what they tried to hit because any human with eyes can see on the picture that there wasn't 113 hits on those 3 targets.

Russia detected a british sub in the middle of the sea but could find a ship on the surface ?

The def minister was clearly trying to put confusion in west militaries. Tornados and typhoon launched the same missiles as french from same location but they detected them and not french ones ? Unless you have a proof I won't believe that. This operation clearly showed that they all lie.

And didn't you say that Thales sonars which are the best have troubles finding western subs ? How do you explain that lower quality russian sonars knew where that sub was ? Another proof that western tech is not that much far away from chinese and russian.

Isos wrote:Rafale with weapons is not stealthier than j-20. Why could it attack china that deploys permanently antistealth radr, s-300/400 and tens of different frigates and destroyers and awacs on its coast while chinese navy couldn't attack french navy because of 4 rafale in the air ?

I am the first to say China doesn't produce state of art equipment and tgey try to copy and mix western and russian weapons but they have a lot of good and some very good tools, specially from ryssia, to defend themselves and they have the advantage of number near their shores.

You just assume that a French action against China would be close to their shores. The most likely conflict would be at the edge of the Nine Dash Line which is thousands of kilometres from the Mainland. There are very few Chinese aircraft that can operate that far from their bases especially with their rudimentary refueling capabilities. The first target would be the atoll airbase to limit their ability to operate far out in the South China Sea. With that eliminated the threat would be reduced to H-6 Badgers and a few aircraft that could be aerial refueled. The J-20 is not an aircraft of naval aviation nor is it designed to engage naval targets. At best it could be used against the Rafale that even with a weapons load-out is no more than 1m^2 in any aspect, not to mention the Spectra which is far beyond anything China knows how to overcome. The J-20 is only LO from the front, as soon as a second radar gets an angle on it the game is over. The French will have radars from many angles providing coverage.

I do not take into account the Su-35 into the Chinese defence equation because the main purpose of it is for them to tear it down and reverse engineer its radar, engines and flight controls. Only if they commit to a follow on order would it be likely they intend to deploy it into combat. They bought the Kilos to reverse engineer and now all of them sit idle, they never intended to use it or pay us to keep them maintained.

France would never want to fight China, but if her sovereignty is under threat she will either in an alliance or not.

Actually in New Caledonia the French have a nice setup... lots of poor natives to work the nickle mines which is used in batteries, for minimum wage and they live in squalor while the white french wealthy make up a marginal majority that have nice houses, tennis courts etc.

The French are deadly afraid that a referendum that calls for independence might lead to China coming in and offering the natives a much better deal where they aren't living in ghettos in their own country mining wealth for france.

Sadly the other colonial powers in the region like Australia and New Zealand have jumped on the anti china bandwagon to support the frogs.

Question: how do you force the submarine to surface without attacking it?

Genuinely asking.

Actually I remember reading a story by a US submarine captain... he was entering a Soviet port having a sneaky look around in a place where he was not supposed to be... they forced him to surface and he was expecting a prison cell and an huge international incident... he didn't say how he was forced to the surface but I suspect it was a group of depth charges at safe distances and the threat of them at not so safe distances.

Anyway when he surfaced he was told to leave and thanks for the anti sub practise...

There was no detail about which harbour it was but I got the feeling it was during the period when the Korean war was going on...

Vladimir79 wrote:

Isos wrote:Rafale with weapons is not stealthier than j-20. Why could it attack china that deploys permanently antistealth radr, s-300/400 and tens of different frigates and destroyers and awacs on its coast while chinese navy couldn't attack french navy because of 4 rafale in the air ?

I am the first to say China doesn't produce state of art equipment and tgey try to copy and mix western and russian weapons but they have a lot of good and some very good tools, specially from ryssia, to defend themselves and they have the advantage of number near their shores.

You just assume that a French action against China would be close to their shores.  The most likely conflict would be at the edge of the Nine Dash Line which is thousands of kilometres from the Mainland.  There are very few Chinese aircraft that can operate that far from their bases especially with their rudimentary refueling capabilities.  The first target would be the atoll airbase to limit their ability to operate far out in the South China Sea.  With that eliminated the threat would be reduced to H-6 Badgers and a few aircraft that could be aerial refueled.  The J-20 is not an aircraft of naval aviation nor is it designed to engage naval targets.  At best it could be used against the Rafale that even with a weapons load-out is no more than 1m^2 in any aspect, not to mention the Spectra which is far beyond anything China knows how to overcome.  The J-20 is only LO from the front, as soon as a second radar gets an angle on it the game is over.  The French will have radars from many angles providing coverage.  

I do not take into account the Su-35 into the Chinese defence equation because the main purpose of it is for them to tear it down and reverse engineer its radar, engines and flight controls.  Only if they commit to a follow on order would it be likely they intend to deploy it into combat.  They bought the Kilos to reverse engineer and now all of them sit idle, they never intended to use it or pay us to keep them maintained.  

Well if it is like attacking something chinese can't protect then chinese j-15 and its destroyers could attack french assests in the pacific when the carrier and the frigates are no more there. Their new nuclear sub is suppose to have VLS with land attack cruise missiles. It could even attack the carrier when it's not expecting an attack. And tgey build their ships very fast and in big numbers.

The only country that could really attack china is US.

Actually I remember reading a story by a US submarine captain... he was entering a Soviet port having a sneaky look around in a place where he was not supposed to be... they forced him to surface and he was expecting a prison cell and an huge international incident... he didn't say how he was forced to the surface but I suspect it was a group of depth charges at safe distances and the threat of them at not so safe distances.

There is a difference here. The US sub could have been destroyed legally because it was in foreugn waters. Forcing a sub to surface in the international waters is an act of war. It could defend itself and launch torpedos for real.

GarryB wrote:

Actually in New Caledonia the French have a nice setup... lots of poor natives to work the nickle mines which is used in batteries, for minimum wage and they live in squalor while the white french wealthy make up a marginal majority that have nice houses, tennis courts etc.

The French are deadly afraid that a referendum that calls for independence might lead to China coming in and offering the natives a much better deal where they aren't living in ghettos in their own country mining wealth for france.

Sadly the other colonial powers in the region like Australia and New Zealand have jumped on the anti china bandwagon to support the frogs.

The biggest problem for stability in New Caledonia is the cost of living. The public sector workers sent from Metro France get paid 1.7 times what they do back home. France also insists they they import their goods from France instead of their neighbours which increases costs further. Those high wages drive up the price for everyone and what should be a decent wage suddenly becomes poverty. If they would drop some of the colonial attitude they could get that under control. Pay the public sector less and let them trade regionally for foodstuffs. The government is also waiting on the mines to reach full production so they are forced to pay tax which they were exempt until the new cuts were at full capacity. They are intentionally avoiding it as to not pay that tax. The latest polls show of the people surveyed certain to vote 62% do not want independence to 15% who do. The rest are undecided. They are truly afraid that if France leaves there will be no one to protect them from the multinational mining companies that will swoop in and turn the government into some corrupt African knock off, not to mention militarily and their fisheries.

Isos wrote: Well if it is like attacking something chinese can't protect then chinese j-15 and its destroyers could attack french assests in the pacific when the carrier and the frigates are no more there. Their new nuclear sub is suppose to have VLS with land attack cruise missiles. It could even attack the carrier when it's not expecting an attack. And tgey build their ships very fast and in big numbers.

The only country that could really attack china is US

The PLAN could send surface action groups to Tahiti or New Caledonia to cripple their basing and harass supply lines but you are missing something. The entire French AF will be mobilised in the event of a shooting war with China. There will be all available squadrons of Rafale, M2000 and ATL2 MP defending those islands and the Chinese would have no air cover with the withdrawal of the J-15. Even if they could field all of their J-15s to attack New Caledonia the French could easily have twice as many and more advanced aircraft based there, not to mention the employment of SAMP-T to defend those bases and hundreds of air launched Exocets to sink anything coming. There is also the case of French diplomacy which made them many friends in the region that would allow them to base in other areas. Not to mention Australia who would likely come to the aid of France if China is getting so close to their shores, maybe Singapore and Malaysia would join. French SSNs could put such a hurt on Chinese SAGs I doubt they would even get that far before turning back.

Vladimir79 wrote:

Isos wrote: Well if it is like attacking something chinese can't protect then chinese j-15 and its destroyers could attack french assests in the pacific when the carrier and the frigates are no more there. Their new nuclear sub is suppose to have VLS with land attack cruise missiles. It could even attack the carrier when it's not expecting an attack. And tgey build their ships very fast and in big numbers.

The only country that could really attack china is US

The PLAN could send surface action groups to Tahiti or New Caledonia to cripple their basing and harass supply lines but you are missing something.  The entire French AF will be mobilised in the event of a shooting war with China.  There will be all available squadrons of Rafale, M2000 and ATL2 MP defending those islands and the Chinese would have no air cover with the withdrawal of the J-15.  Even if they could field all of their J-15s to attack New Caledonia the French could easily have twice as many and more advanced aircraft based there, not to mention the employment of SAMP-T to defend those bases and hundreds of air launched Exocets to sink anything coming.  There is also the case of French diplomacy which made them many friends in the region that would allow them to base in other areas.  Not to mention Australia who would likely come to the aid of France if China is getting so close to their shores, maybe Singapore and Malaysia would join.  French SSNs could put such a hurt on Chinese SAGs I doubt they would even get that far before turning back.  

I don't think lot of countries in asia would dare to join an attack on china.

What if it is the same scenario but with russia insead of china ?

Isos wrote:


I don't think lot of countries in asia would dare to join an attack on china.

What if it is the same scenario but with russia insead of china ?

I think countries would be more willing to join a defence posture, not attack, against China if they are backed by a nuclear arsenal.  France has a very good one. Australia would have little problem with it and they are getting to a decent navy in their own right.  In order for China to effectively conduct operations that far South East they would need an intermediate land base to launch aircraft, actually two or three so they could bring their true air power to bear.  A couple islands from the Philippines to New Guinea would do.    

If we were trying to attack New Caledonia we would have serious logistics problems.  An amphibious operation is not even an option.  We could launch cruise missiles at them all day.  The SAMP-T could shoot them down for a long time as well as the CAP of M2000 or Rafale.  We only have a limited number of Il-78s and with that long range required could not transfer enough fuel for anything but strategic aviation like Tu-95 or Tu-160.  Kuznetsov would have the same problem as the Chinese carriers, they just don't carry enough fuel and payload to keep a sufficient sortie rate for air strikes, it is fine for a continuous small CAP or a larger escort for a strike package of the aforementioned bombers.  If we could sneak enough cruise missiles in we could seriously damage their airbase, but not enough to put it out of action.  It wouldn't be much point to it unless we could use VDV to make an airbourne landing but you have to clear the ground and the skies of all threats before trying that.  We don't have the tankers to support that many aircraft that far.  If we had basing rights in New Guinea, that might change things.

I was thinking about a scenario of french navy attacking a russian main base like northern fleet. No NATO help only french navy.

How new yasen and older akula compare against french subs and the CdG ?

But thanks for the analyze.

SAMP-T is little bit overestimated in your scenario. First the ground radar for them is not at the level of naval ones. And I saw on a french forum where there are few serious guys where they said most of the VLS are empty of aster missiles and they have bought less missile than there are launchers. It also has no capabilities against high flying missiles like kh-22 or kinzhal.

Isos wrote:I was thinking about a scenario of french navy attacking a russian main base like northern fleet. No NATO help only french navy.

How new yasen and older akula compare against french subs and the CdG ?

But thanks for the analyze.

SAMP-T is little bit overestimated in your scenario. First the ground radar for them is not at the level of naval ones. And I saw on a french forum where there are few serious guys where they said most of the VLS are empty of aster missiles and they have bought less missile than there are launchers. It also has no capabilities against high flying missiles like kh-22 or kinzhal.

The French have improved Rubis class SSNs, they are between an Akula II and a Yasen, very quiet but not state of the art. When they get Barracuda they will be well above us in lowering acoustic signature. They couldn't approach our Pacific Fleet. The Oscars and bombers launching a coordinated saturation attack of supersonic ASMs would sink the CdG, it is just a matter of getting it timed properly.

I think you are confusing the British who only carry a few missiles in their VLS as was discovered in the Libya campaign. They don't order enough ordinance, the French do it to maintain their industry as well as their combat capability, they are the primary producer of Aster SAM and benefits the economy when they make it. The numbers of their orders are published, they have enough to equip what they would send down there.

Vladimir79 wrote:

Tsavo Lion wrote: HOW DO INDIAN SUBS COMPARE?

i think your Kilos are the same as the Chinese ones but you actually bought the missile package.  Those are being replaced by the Kalvari which is far better than anything China has.

I'm not Indian, only asked this since they operate Kilos, French & German built SSKs.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Navy#Submarines

These cat & mouse games in the Atlantic had noisy Soviet SSNs vs. USN & RN, but even they showed that they could elude Western ASW & that the American subs can be tracked: http://nvo.ng.ru/wars/2018-07-27/12_1006_submarine.html?print=Y

They can mission kill CVNs by disabling/sinking their escorts - w/o them, a CVN is a sitting duck & won't be able to come close enough to use its fighter-bombers.
China could hit French islands with her conventional armed IC/SLBMs, no need to use A/SLCMs & a CBG that far. Australia & NZ may remain neutral or even help- their economies depend on PRC to a large degree + France pissed them off both with her nuclear testing there. Why should they care if China liberate/take those colonies over? The bases in Hawaii won't be much more threatened than they r now, & the continental USA is too far away & in the long run, all may benefit from it.
As I wrote, $= power! :
https://ria.ru/analytics/20180709/1524195645.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=lentainform.com&utm_campaign=ria.ru&utm_term=1272146&utm_content=6484865

Tsavo Lion wrote:

They can mission kill CVNs by disabling/sinking their escorts - w/o them, a CVN is a sitting duck & won't be able to come close enough to use its fighter-bombers.
China could hit French islands with her conventional armed IC/SLBMs, no need to use A/SLCMs & a CBG that far. Australia & NZ may remain neutral or even help- their economies depend on PRC to a large degree + France pissed them off both with her nuclear testing there. Why should they care if China liberate/take those colonies over? The bases in Hawaii won't be much more threatened than they r now, & the continental USA is too far away & in the long run, all may benefit from it.

Good lucking finding their escorts, the French frigates are a stealth design with the RCS of a fishing trawler.  The CdG is armed with Aster so it can defend itself as well.  With catapults and buddy refueling a carrier air group can hit just as far as land based aircraft so they have a very long reach.  If China starts launching ICBMs and SLBMs there won't be much of a China left.  

Why would Australia or New Zealand care if China takes New Caledonia?  I think the answer would be obvious.  It is within easy striking distance of their largest population centres.  If China has expanded that far it is pretty clear what the next step is.  The Australian defence posture is tailored to countering Chinese aggression, they don't train with them, they don't trust them and are preparing for a Chinese expansionist policy.  It would be like Imperial Japan all over again, they wouldn't sit and let it happen.

Why would Australia or New Zealand care if China takes New Caledonia? I think the answer would be obvious. It is within easy striking distance of their largest population centres. If China has expanded that far it is pretty clear what the next step is. The Australian defence posture is tailored to countering Chinese aggression, they don't train with them, they don't trust them and are preparing for a Chinese expansionist policy. It would be like Imperial Japan all over again, they wouldn't sit and let it happen.

And they are Japan's ally which destroyed them like 80 years ago ... Not really credible.

Australia is US puppet. They do what US say.

Japan and germany were easily adopted by "allies" as allies just because US needed to contain communists and they forgot their genocide very fast. It's easy to say "nazi" germany and "imperial" japan, the reality is that nazis and their vision of life and japan and their empror were supported by their people.

They are not better than chinese in term of expension. Today NZ and Australia cares about china but tmr it will be again Japan and probably US once they will need more "ressources".

Isos wrote:

And they are Japan's ally which destroyed them like 80 years ago ... Not really credible.

Australia is US puppet. They do what US say.

Japan and germany were easily adopted by "allies" as allies just because US needed to contain communists and they forgot their genocide very fast. It's easy to say "nazi" germany and "imperial" japan, the reality is that nazis and their vision of life and japan and their empror were supported by their people.

They are not better than chinese in term of expension. Today NZ and Australia cares about china but tmr it will be again Japan and probably US once they will need more "ressources".

The US always saved the French ass and they always will. They will never stop owing them for achieving their independence. If it is not direct intervention it will be ordering their puppets to do it. That is even more reason why Australia would assist them.

I was not making an ideological comparison between Communist China and Imperial Japan, just the act of Pacific expansion and the way it would be viewed in Australia. The average Australian voter thinks just like any Westerner, US/NATO good Russia/China bad.

The US always saved the French ass and they always will.

Not really. WW2 they did nothing. They even wanted to occupy france with british. In 2003 they attack economicaly france because of the veto for gulf war.

Anyway I was talking about pacific and australian that forget that 80 years ago they were killed by their today allies which are still racists and are becoming "imperial" again.

China doesn't seem interesed by Australia.

Isos wrote:

The US always saved the French ass and they always will.

Not really. WW2 they did nothing. They even wanted to occupy france with british. In 2003 they attack economicaly france because of the veto for gulf war.

Anyway I was talking about pacific and australian that forget that 80 years ago they were killed by their today allies which are still racists and are becoming "imperial" again.

China doesn't seem interesed by Australia.

Not really, before De Gaulle even landed in France they had already set up the Provisional Government to administer liberated territories. If the Americans hadn't armed the Free French forces they could never have liberated their own country, much less they wouldn't have been able to do it without US air dominance necessary to dislodge superior German armour.

The only economic retaliation the Americans made against France for 2003 was renaming French Fries to Freedom Fries in the US Congressional cafeteria.

China seems very interested in Australia, they are buying up all the housing.

The biggest problem for stability in New Caledonia is the cost of living. The public sector workers sent from Metro France get paid 1.7 times what they do back home. France also insists they they import their goods from France instead of their neighbours which increases costs further.

It suits them to keep costs high, and to avoid the influence of neighbouring countries... it is like Georgia with South Ossetia and Abkhazia... while the borders with Russia were effectively kept closed as per agreement the Georgians had control over those regions. When Kosovo got independence and Russia started open relations with SO and Abk then all of a sudden Georgia lost their control... and likely the US told them they would support them no matter what (which technically they did) and then Georgia did something stupid...

If they would drop some of the colonial attitude they could get that under control.

This is not their first rodeo unfortunately... they know if you loosen the shackles the prisoner starts wondering what it would be like with them completely off...

They are truly afraid that if France leaves there will be no one to protect them from the multinational mining companies that will swoop in and turn the government into some corrupt African knock off, not to mention militarily and their fisheries.

I would say the French are afraid the Chinese will swoop in there and take their nickel mines (you know... like all that US oil in Iraq and Syria).

Based on how they have behaved in Africa I actually think China would be much better for them that France could ever be.

Of course the other powers in the region are afraid of China and will therefore back France despite our history of French nuclear tests in the pacific... (If they are so fucking safe then do them in Paris)...

The irony is that the other powers in the region I am talking about are Australia and New Zealand... both of which do a lot of trade with China... not so much with France... but there is definitely a colonial mentality here.

The Australian defence posture is tailored to countering Chinese aggression, they don't train with them, they don't trust them and are preparing for a Chinese expansionist policy. It would be like Imperial Japan all over again, they wouldn't sit and let it happen.

The aussies are also quite a racist bunch... they will tolerate frogs but not the chinese.

China seems very interested in Australia, they are buying up all the housing.

Are you kidding... if you have money it is a licence to print more.

Go to Sydney and buy 10 houses worth 1 million each and wait 3-4 years and then sell them for 2-3 million each... why would you not do it?

You wont get that sort of return on money in the bank...

I think the shackles holding New Caledonia back are its dependence on French transfers to the island amounting to 14% of GDP.  They have 100% literacy, power, water and sanitation rates which is paid for by the French at $1.5 billion annually.  If the French pull out the schools and public services lose their funding.  Are the Chinese going to pay that?  they would surely loan it to them, but that is a far cry from paying for it.  There is also the access to pensions and healthcare, the French have one of the best universal systems, the Chinese practically has no social safety net.   The people also speak French and can seek job opportunities in Metro France as they are citizens.  They wouldn't be Chinese citizens or able to speak the language.

The Chinese would view New Caledonia as a highly strategic base as it would bring them great influence over Australia and New Zealand and would expand their defence ring farther than they ever thought possible.  The mining would be a nice perk to pay for the occupation but the locals would be paid peanuts compared to what they get now. African miners in Chinese controlled mines only make a couple dollars an hour.

I didn't even mention New Caledonia, only "French islands" & Tahiti. That island is too close to Australia not to raise an alarm in China hands, & they know to stay away from it to avoid a confrontation.
Overall, the French Polynesia is a liability for Paris; they just keep it for prestige & in case bases in S. Pacific may 1 day be needed- just like their Islands in the Caribbean & the S. Indian Ocean.
New Caledonia, if given a choice, could join/associate with Australia or become independent. Australia's population is only 24,793,796; Indonesia population is 266,986,537 as of Saturday, July 28, 2018, or 10.7 x more: http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/australia-population/
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/indonesia-population/

What would be better for Australia's racists & bigots: be colonized by Indonesian Muslims, L. American Catholics, Indian lower castes, or Chinese Atheists, Christians, Buddhists, Conficians & Daoists? Interesting fact:

Chinese Australians are one of the largest groups of Overseas Chinese people, forming the largest Overseas Chinese community in Oceania. Per capita, Australia has more people of Chinese ancestry than any country outside Asia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Australians

In early '90s, some in the US voiced the opinion that "Russia shouldn't be holding Siberia with its huge area & natural resources". By the same token, the same can be said about Australia with its strategic location, huge area & small population.
Huge UAV spotted at Chinese production facility

The Divine Eagle UAV expected to provide an early warning line to detect threats to China’s airspace, like cruise missiles and stealth bombers, as well as be able to take on such missions as hunting for aircraft carriers in the open waters of the Pacific.
https://defence-blog.com/news/huge-unmanned-aerial-vehicle-spotted-at-chinese-production-facility.html

Even with emission control in place, a French CSG in the Indian Ocean will be lit like a Christmas tree on its way to the W. Pac/SC Sea- these UAVs based in Pakistan or Sri Lanka (not to mention Cambodia, Hainan & SCS islands) will spot it before they can be shot down. Neither France nor the US have any suitable icebreakers to sail it across the N. Pole/NSR; Russia won't provide hers even if paid for it. Btw: New stealth bomber spotted in China
https://defence-blog.com/news/new-stealth-bomber-spotted-in-china.html
In a few years, they'll have a full nuclear triad.

Tsavo Lion wrote:
Even with emission control in place, a French CSG in the Indian Ocean will be lit like a Christmas tree on its way to the W. Pac/SC Sea- these UAVs based in Pakistan or Sri Lanka (not to mention Cambodia, Hainan & SCS islands) will spot it before they can be shot down. Neither France nor the US have any suitable icebreakers to sail it across the N. Pole/NSR; Russia won't provide hers even if paid for it. Btw: New stealth bomber spotted in China
https://defence-blog.com/news/new-stealth-bomber-spotted-in-china.html
In a few years, they'll have a full nuclear triad.

China doesn't have a network of SATCOMs with the bandwidth to run a fleet of drones so they are within LOS to the command station. It is rather useless for deep sea patrols. The French carrier won't be getting that close to worry about a Chinese LOS drone. The French can sail through the Panama Canal, why would they need to go by way of Russia?

Look up the links in my earlier post: their CVN won't fit into it. Evn if it did, what is to prevent Chinese SSNs to ambush it entering/exiting it or Gibraltar (ChG is based in Toulon)?
Rafale's

Combat radius: >1,852 km (>1,000 nmi) on penetration mission with two CFTs (2,300 L), three tanks (5,700 L), two SCALP-EG and two MICA AAMs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale#Specifications

The PLAAF/N have these stuck up against it:
Su-35

Combat radius: around 1,500 km (932 mi; 810 nmi)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-35#Specifications_(Su-35S)

J-11

Combat radius: around 1,500 km https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-11#Specifications_(J-11A)

Su-30MKK

Range: 3,000 km (1,900 mi; 1,600 nmi)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-30MKK#Specifications_(Su-30MKK)

, or Combat radius 1,500 km, 950 mi, 800 nmi
JH-7

Combat radius: 1,760 km (950 nm, 1,100 mi with one in-flight refueling (estimated), 900 km without refueling (estimated)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_JH-7#Specifications_(JH-7)

+~500km range AshMs they carry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-802#China
H-6K

Combat radius: 1,800 km (970 nm, 1,100 mi)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-6#Specifications_(H-6)

+1,500 km range AshMs they may carry:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CJ-10_(missile)#Variants

It's clear that the above Chinese aircraft can hold the French CSG at a sufficient distance to keep Rafales from their targets in China. All that is besides dozens of land based AShBMs & AShMs.

Did they start operating type 095 sub ? On wiki it is written that they have completed 1 already. How do this one compare to western subs ?

I just saw the story of the japanese forcingthe type 093 to surface and it looks very bad.

And how do indian SSN compare to chinese ? The domestic build not the akula.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Look up the links in my earlier post: their CVN won't fit into it. Evn if it did, what is to prevent Chinese SSNs to ambush it entering/exiting it or Gibraltar (ChG is based in Toulon)?

It doesn't have to fit, it is a CVN, it can go around the Straits of Magellan without breaking a sweat and be to New Caledonia before the escorts.

Chinese SSNs are so loud they alter the migration patterns of dolphins, that is what prevents China from doing anything with its SSNs.

The PLAN is expected to induct a total of six boats of both variants, According to the Office of Naval Intelligence:
The Shang-class SSN’s initial production run stopped after only two hulls that were launched in 2002 and 2003. After nearly 10 years, China is continuing production with four additional hulls of an improved variant, the first of which was launched in 2012. These six total submarines will replace the aging Han-class SSN on nearly a one-for-one basis in the next several years. Following the completion of the improved Shang SSN, the PLA(N) will progress to the Type 095 SSN, which may provide a generational improvement in many areas such as quieting and weapon capacity.
Based on open source intelligence, one Type 095 submarine has been completed with two more under construction. The PLAN is expected to build a total of five Type 095 subs, which may be used as underwater escorts for future PLA carrier strike groups.
https://thediplomat.com/2018/06/image-may-confirm-advanced-anti-ship-capability-of-chinas-type-093-submarine/

Compared to the Type 093 SSN, the Type 095 SSN will include new noise reduction measures, like an integrated electric propulsion system and possibly a shaftless rim drive, single hull, and electronic noise cancellation. CSIC is also working on a separate 'quiet' submarine project, presumably to be built at its Wuhan conventional submarine shipyard. This submarine is presumably quieter than the air-independent propulsion (AIP) Type 039B Yuan submarine; it'll likely have quieting measures like a single hull, a new AIP system, and lithium-ion batteries. A new generation of Chinese submarines could help the PLAN remedy its historic technologic disadvantage against the submarines forces of the American and Japanese navies. https://www.popsci.com/china-nuclear-submarine-aircraft-carrier-leak#page-5

New Caledonia isn't worth a naval war with France. But if the FN comes to SC Sea & starts a war, their Pacific islands may get hit by BMs & SLCMs, sending tourists to other destinations & making them even more of liability agitating for independence.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

New Caledonia isn't worth a naval war with France. But if the FN comes to SC Sea & starts a war, their Pacific islands may get hit by BMs & SLCMs, sending tourists to other destinations & making them even more of liability agitating for independence.

The only ballistic missiles China has capable of hitting New Caledonia are nuclear. If they do that France will nuke China.