PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

Russia and China are holding joint naval drills amid North Korea tensions
http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-and-china-will-hold-joint-naval-drills-to-show-unity-2017-9

The Okhotsk Sea has weather & hydrologic conditions similar to those in the Arctic, so this training may be useful for the PLAN there too.

Good video! But it didn't mention the future Kra Canal!
http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/how-a-thai-canal-could-transform-southeast-asia/?allpages=yes

https://larouchepac.com/20170117/major-breakthrough-kra-canal-potential

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/Economy/Influential-Thais-in-push-for-Kra-Canal-project:

As the region's largest economy, China would clearly be the biggest beneficiary of a Kra Canal. According to a 2017 report published by the Stockholm-based Institute for Security Policy, more than 30% of the world's seaborne trade and 80% of China's energy imports pass through the Malacca Strait, a choke point that Beijing fears could be blocked by the U.S. or some other rival power. To reduce its dependence on one vulnerable route, China has been building overland pipelines, roads and railways through Central Asia, Pakistan and Myanmar, and is contemplating opening a northern sea route to Europe through the Arctic.

Russian merchant fleet & VMF would also benefit by shortening of sailing time between Black/Med. Sea, the Indian Ocean & her Far East coast.
Assessing the Sino-Russian Baltic Sea Drill
https://jamestown.org/program/assessing-the-sino-russian-baltic-sea-drill/

Subscribe The Youtube Channel For The Latest Videos...

https://www.youtube.com/c/militarystuffvideos

PLA Navy destroyer (Sovremeny class) "Hangzhou" (No 136) after modernization



The destroyer "Hangzhou" with number 136, is the first of four destroyers pr.956E 956EM that were acquired by China in Russia in the late 1990s and mid-2000s.
In 2015 began its modernization, the ship and now on Chinese military forums have published photos of the destroyer in the final stage of the modernization in December 2017.


Artillery remains the same


'Uragan' SAM system replaced by HQ-16 (Chinese version of the Shtill) in a 32 cell VLC launcher


Anti-Ship Missiles  Moskit/Sunburn  replaced with YJ-12 (based on the Kh-31) with max range of approx 400km. Can accelerate to mach 4

More at link below
https://dambiev.livejournal.com/1047675.html

Experts say the task has become more pressing after a series of mechanical failures and crashes, as Beijing pursues global navy ambitions.

The J-15 was based on a prototype of the fourth-generation Russian Sukhoi Su-33 twin-engined air superiority fighter, a design that is more than 30 years old. It was developed by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, a unit of state-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China.
With a maximum take-off weight of 33 tonnes, the aircraft is the heaviest active carrier-based fighter jet in the world, used on China’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning

China needs to develop the new fighter jet as it plans to create at least four aircraft carrier groups to fulfil its global navy ambitions and defend its growing overseas interests, Beijing-based naval expert Li Jie said.
“In order to improve the combat effectiveness of the Chinese aircraft carrier strike groups, it is necessary to develop a new carrier-based fighter,” Li said, adding that the FC-31 stealth fighter could be used as a model to replace the J-15.


China’s FC-31 is a newer generation stealth fighter that made its first flight in 2012, and is smaller and lighter than the J-15.
Lieutenant General Zhang Honghe, deputy head of the PLA Air Force, also told the South China Morning Post that a “new carrier-based fighter to replace the J-15” was being developed.

The need to develop a new fighter jet has become more pressing after a series of “unpardonable mechanical failures” that have killed one top PLA pilot and injured another.
Two sources close to the military told the Post there had been at least four crashes involving the J-15, although only two of them have been reported by state media.
“The J-15 is a problematic aircraft – its unstable flight control system was the key factor behind the two fatal accidents two years ago,” one of the sources said.

Pilot Zhang Chao, 29, died in a crash in April 2016 as he tried to save his J-15 fighter jet, whose flight control system was breaking down during a mock landing on an aircraft carrier, according to state media reports.
Three weeks later, his colleague Cao Xianjian, believed to be in his 40s, was seriously injured as he tried to deal with the same problem on a J-15. It took him more than a year to recover.
All J-15s were grounded for three months after the crashes, which undermined morale in the air force and navy. The navy called for an investigation after Zhang’s death, the sources said.
“But the aviation experts at first refused to acknowledge that the J-15 has design problems,” one of the sources said. “They only agreed there were problems after Cao encountered the same trouble.”
‘At least 12 crew members killed’ in Chinese military plane crash
Many of China’s home-grown fighter jets have had problems with their engines, aircraft design and modifications. But a PLA Navy veteran said that instead of carrying out more test flights, pilots were pushed to fly the warplanes, even though they had faults.
“Of course it’s impossible to prevent any accident from ever happening during training. But unlike their counterparts in Western countries, Chinese air force pilots are asked to work around these mechanical errors,” the navy veteran said.

IMO China should have just bought Mig 29kubs right from the start instead of home building su 33's

The FC 31 was always a carrier bound jet. China always lies to keep the pundits off balance. Why else would an expensive jet like that be developed ? It wasn't developed just as a side project for export.

Pierre Sprey wrote:IMO China should have just bought Mig 29kubs right from the start instead of home building su 33's

The FC 31 was always a carrier bound jet. China always lies to keep the pundits off balance. Why else would an expensive jet like that be developed ? It wasn't developed just as a side project for export.

China wanted to buy the Su-33 from Russia for years, but Russia refused. It was probably the same with the MiG-29K.
Thats way the bought the technology from Ukraine insted.

This is their 1st naval deck fighter copy, & they rushed it to service.

At the end of the day, the Chinese reverse engineered the J-15 design from an incomplete prototype of the Sukhoi Su-33 that it acquired from Ukraine. While Chinese engineers might have gained considerable insight into the Flanker design from the T-10K-3 and other Su-27 derivatives in Beijing’s possession, because they did not develop the jet or its systems, they do not fully understand the airframe due to some of the traditional limitations inherent to reverse engineering. These gaps in knowledge probably led to the some of the problems the Chinese are now encountering with the J-15 design.
https://taskandpurpose.com/china-j-15-fighter-jets/?email=tsavolion69%40aim.com&acquisition_source=tp_lead_gen&newsletters_tp=newsletter_tp_daily&newsletters_hp=newsletter_hp_job_opportunities&newsletters_hp=newsletter_hp_career_advice

Now it came to a dead end & they realized that nothing can be done to fix the stability problem. Perhaps the J-10/20 could be navalized, but I doubt they'll do it.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-10#Variants

The J-20 has similar dimensions as the F-111; it will need a bigger CV/N to deploy it in optimal #s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20#Specifications
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-111.htm

walle83 wrote:

Pierre Sprey wrote:IMO China should have just bought Mig 29kubs right from the start instead of home building su 33's

The FC 31 was always a carrier bound jet. China always lies to keep the pundits off balance. Why else would an expensive jet like that be developed ? It wasn't developed just as a side project for export.

China wanted to buy the Su-33 from Russia for years, but Russia refused. It was probably the same with the MiG-29K.
Thats way the bought the technology from Ukraine insted.

They wanted only few of them to copy them. And everyone know what they did with su-27. They would have done the same with mig-29k.

But who cares ? According to some here chinese have the best technology they should be able to make a carrier based fighter by their own ...

walle83 wrote:

Pierre Sprey wrote:IMO China should have just bought Mig 29kubs right from the start instead of home building su 33's

The FC 31 was always a carrier bound jet. China always lies to keep the pundits off balance. Why else would an expensive jet like that be developed ? It wasn't developed just as a side project for export.

China wanted to buy the Su-33 from Russia for years, but Russia refused. It was probably the same with the MiG-29K.
Thats way the bought the technology from Ukraine insted.

Interesting. That was years ago now. Politics have have changed between china and Russia. Russia would probably sell them now. Especially with India bitching and moaning about their kubs. Maybe india was the only reason that they didn't sell them.

Tsavo Lion wrote:This is their 1st naval deck fighter copy, & they rushed it to service.

At the end of the day, the Chinese reverse engineered the J-15 design from an incomplete prototype of the Sukhoi Su-33 that it acquired from Ukraine. While Chinese engineers might have gained considerable insight into the Flanker design from the T-10K-3 and other Su-27 derivatives in Beijing’s possession, because they did not develop the jet or its systems, they do not fully understand the airframe due to some of the traditional limitations inherent to reverse engineering. These gaps in knowledge probably led to the some of the problems the Chinese are now encountering with the J-15 design.
https://taskandpurpose.com/china-j-15-fighter-jets/?email=tsavolion69%40aim.com&acquisition_source=tp_lead_gen&newsletters_tp=newsletter_tp_daily&newsletters_hp=newsletter_hp_job_opportunities&newsletters_hp=newsletter_hp_career_advice

Now it came to a dead end & they realized that nothing can be done to fix the stability problem. Perhaps the J-10/20 could be navalized, but I doubt they'll do it.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-10#Variants

The J-20 has similar dimensions as the F-111; it will need a bigger CV/N to deploy it in optimal #s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20#Specifications
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-111.htm

China has to buy Russian if they want to get this sorted. And they have to. The carriers are built. They only have 20 or so of these carrier jets. China and Russia should build a joint naval fighter.

I think Russia would play ball this time.

Isos wrote:

walle83 wrote:

Pierre Sprey wrote:IMO China should have just bought Mig 29kubs right from the start instead of home building su 33's

The FC 31 was always a carrier bound jet. China always lies to keep the pundits off balance. Why else would an expensive jet like that be developed ? It wasn't developed just as a side project for export.

China wanted to buy the Su-33 from Russia for years, but Russia refused. It was probably the same with the MiG-29K.
Thats way the bought the technology from Ukraine insted.

They wanted only few of them to copy them. And everyone know what they did with su-27. They would have done the same with mig-29k.

But who cares ? According to some here chinese have the best technology they should be able to make a carrier based fighter by their own ...

China built the J-20 and still had to buy su 35's to cover the gaps. And the su 35's were deployed to the South China sea of all places. That doesn't put Chinese tech in a good light.

Why doesn't China just buy Russian and take their time developing their own at a brisk pace ? Instead they make themselves look bad.

The J-20 isn't direct Su-35 counterpart, they complement each other. They want to invest in their own industry & master production of everything their military may need. Naval aviation is especially dangerous business, & mishaps happen often even in the most experienced USN. These r growing pains, just looking good isn't their main goal.

So far China has launched surface vessles with a total of about 100.000 tons in 2018 (7 months). This is a huge number and probably will continue to grow next year.

Tsavo Lion wrote:The J-20 isn't direct Su-35 counterpart, they complement each other. They want to invest in their own industry & master production of everything their military may need. Naval aviation is especially dangerous business, & mishaps happen often even in the most experienced USN. These r growing pains, just looking good isn't their main goal.

Yes but China would be better off if it had a more trustworthy relationship with Russia.

China just does these shameless copies to save a few bucks and then wonders why Russia wont sell carrier ready jets.

China is building a blue water navy ffs. If there really is so few of these jets and they have problems then the carrier program is way further behind thn anyone realizes

They r not exact copies, otherwise we wouldn't be discussing this. They do it to save time also in order to catch up with others faster. W/o domestic production, they'll need to import fighters like India, Indonesia, both Koreas & Vietnam do now.
Even if they'll be stuck with smaller fighters until J-15 is fixed or a new 1 is built, it won't greatly affect their carrier ops in the China Seas. Land based fighters can always be called to help.

The Chinese Navy is not about preparing for a fight with the US. It is about the prestige of building a blue water navy with the power projection capability that it entails.

Not having a solid batch of carrier jets looks bad on them. I am all for the Chinese navy. The world desperately needs a balancing force on the water to balance the USA. Which is why I think China should stop worrying about letting Russia do some of its work. A joint naval jet would be the best idea. They talk about sharing carrier decks in the future anyway

Russia could have even built them a Sthorm carrier. (that's going too far)

The real combat capabilities of China's giant fleet are clearly exaggerated
https://vz.ru/world/2018/7/13/932028.print.html

To be able to balance the USA, they must be able to fight the USN & USAF.
"They talk about sharing carrier decks in the future anyway."
That's possible, but please post relevant quotes with references.
"Russia could have even built them a Shtorm carrier." India didn't want it, although they need a CVN even more; the PRC builds her own CVs now & may build a CVN later after a nuclear icebreaker is built 1st. I doubt they'll want to order Shtorm, there's no urgency in that, besides, Russia will not build it for China as to not damage her relations with India & not to arm a future potential enemy.

Tsavo Lion wrote:The real combat capabilities of China's giant fleet are clearly exaggerated
https://vz.ru/world/2018/7/13/932028.print.html

To be able to balance the USA, they must be able to fight the USN & USAF.
"They talk about sharing carrier decks in the future anyway."
That's possible, but please post relevant quotes with references.
"Russia could have even built them a Shtorm carrier." India didn't want it, although they need a CVN even more; the PRC builds her own CVs now & may build a CVN later after a nuclear icebreaker is built 1st. I doubt they'll want to order Shtorm, there's no urgency in that, besides, Russia will not build it for China as to not damage her relations with India & not to arm a future potential enemy.  

Its fun to read how people always downplay the PLA. What is intresting is how their capibilities are growing and what direction and goals they have. China has gone from a green-water navy to a basicly blue water-navy in less then 20 years. That is a fantastic achievement.
Could they today fight against the enitre US Navy and USAF, no.
Could they fight them on equal terms in 10-15 years, most likley.

China has this planned out and is steaming ahead with full speed.