# U.S. official notes China's military gains



## Mike Baker (29 Sep 2007)

*LINK*


----------



## Greymatters (29 Sep 2007)

Oh come on, MB, that is a bloody awful post.  One word, no descriptors? Or is this some bizarre East Coast experiment...

The article itself is good, worth reading. Too bad it does not explore the implications of a Chinese military on par with US military technology levels.  Can you say 'Invasion of Taiwan'?


----------



## Mike Baker (29 Sep 2007)

GreyMatter said:
			
		

> Oh come on, MB, that is a bloody awful post.  One word, no descriptors? Or is this some bizarre East Coast experiment...


Click on the word, then you will see the CTV article on it....


----------



## Greymatters (29 Sep 2007)

Mike Baker said:
			
		

> Click on the word, then you will see the CTV article on it....



Yes, I know - Its annoying yet funny at the same time...  :tsktsk:


----------



## Mike Baker (29 Sep 2007)

GreyMatter said:
			
		

> Yes, I know - Its annoying yet funny at the same time...  :tsktsk:


Well, sorry I can't copy and past because my computer is shagged up.


----------



## Greymatters (29 Sep 2007)

Mike Baker said:
			
		

> Well, sorry I can't copy and past because my computer is *shagged up*.



Is that some sort of vague reference to 'computer sex'...?   >

_Edit - Never mind: Someone with no sense of humour just gave me a negative while we speak (and no I dont think it was you).  Wouldnt want to offend some gutless wonder with further jests..._


----------



## Mike Baker (29 Sep 2007)

GreyMatter said:
			
		

> Is that some sort of vague reference to 'computer sex'...?   >


Your loosing it man  ;D No, something went horribly wrong a little while ago while I tried to download firefox. But any who..

I don't really think that the U.S. could even slow down, let alone stop a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, due to the fact they are so far into Iraq and Afghanistan, an Taiwan would never be able to hold out against China. I think that this will happen, but, you never know.


----------



## Greymatters (29 Sep 2007)

Now that you bring it up, surprising that the China/Taiwan deal had been out of the news for so long... it seemed like China would rattle the sabres every year over this issue.  Was there a significant incident this year that I missed?  (_Searching this right now...)_

_Edit - Considering the upcoming games in Beijing for 2008, maybe not so surprising... biggest current issue I found was a disagreement with Taiwan over the route of the Olympic torch...
(http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200709/INT20070924a.html)_


----------



## tomahawk6 (29 Sep 2007)

Mike Baker said:
			
		

> Your loosing it man  ;D No, something went horribly wrong a little while ago while I tried to download firefox. But any who..
> 
> I don't really think that the U.S. could even slow down, let alone stop a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, due to the fact they are so far into Iraq and Afghanistan, an Taiwan would never be able to hold out against China. I think that this will happen, but, you never know.



The defense of Taiwan would be a Navy show and they arent overstretched at all. A screen of attack subs would stop a surface invasion. A couple of CVA's operating to the east of Taiwan could provide a CAP and ABM defense. But if a democrat was in the White House Taiwan would be on their own. Maybe China is just waiting until that day arrives, which might expalin their funding of democrat politicians.


----------



## Greymatters (29 Sep 2007)

Something like the 'Manchurian Candidate' type of thing...?

_(Without the brain-washing part...)_


----------



## tomahawk6 (29 Sep 2007)

More likely they feel that the democarts are easier for them to work with.


----------



## Flip (29 Sep 2007)

About that J-10 fighter mentioned in the lead post article.....

This is new!-Link

The J-10 (Jianji-10, or Jian-10) is a single-engine, all-weather, multirole fighter aircraft designed by Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute (611 Institute) and built by Chengdu Aircraft Industrial Co. (CAC) of China Aviation Industry Corporation I (AVIC I).

The first batch of about 50 J-10 fighters powered by a Russian AL-31FN turbofan was delivered to the PLA Air Force (PLAAF) between 2004~2006. AVIC I is also developing an indigenous WS-10A ‘Taihang’ turbofan, which could be used on future batches of J-10 fighters.

Work on the J-10 began in October 1988 as a counter to the Soviet Union’s emerging fourth-generation fighters, the Mikoyan MiG-29 and Sukhoi Su-27. The original mission was air-superiority, but the breakup of the Soviet Union and the changing requirements shifted the development towards a multirole fighter aircraft with ‘beyond-visual-range’ air combat and surface attack capabilities. The J-10 was the first Chinese-developed fighter aircraft that approaches Western fighters in performance and capabilities.

More on link of course

Welllllll.......You learn something new every day!



> The J-10 was the first Chinese-developed fighter aircraft that approaches Western fighters in performance and capabilities.



I think this a most interesting remark...considering the source.


----------



## tomahawk6 (29 Sep 2007)

Flip the problem with modern weapon systems is that they are maintenance hogs. They require smart well trained people to keep them running and plenty of spare parts. The more complex the Chinese equipment gets we will see how combat ready their formations become. 

http://www.sinodefence.com/army/tank/type99_01.asp

http://www.sinodefence.com/army/tank/type99_20.asp


----------



## Flip (29 Sep 2007)

I just thought it a little odd given the commercial appearance of the website.

Sort of "our stuff is almost as good as the other guys stuff".

Not going to win any advertising awards.  ;D

I suspect the Chinese will have to adapt their entire military
doctrine to suit more modern kit. ( I have no idea - just spit balling )


----------



## tomahawk6 (29 Sep 2007)

I was reading an article the other day that the PRC was in danger of running out of water.

http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/50106/China_And_India_Running_Out_of_Water

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/oct/04/water.guardiansocietysupplement


----------



## CougarKing (29 Sep 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The defense of Taiwan would be a Navy show and they arent overstretched at all. A screen of attack subs would stop a surface invasion. A couple of CVA's operating to the east of Taiwan could provide a CAP and ABM defense. But if a democrat was in the White House Taiwan would be on their own. Maybe China is just waiting until that day arrives, which might expalin their funding of democrat politicians.



Are we forgetting that it was a Democrat in the White House- Bill Clinton- who ordered US two carrier groups to the Taiwan Strait in the Taiwan Missile Crisis of the mid-1990s to warn China to back off and not attempt more than the extensive "wargames" they were conducting at the time? The PLA did so, but not before they launched a couple of missiles over Taipei and into the sea beyond the Eastern part of Taiwan.

Not all democrats are Hippie Peaceniks. And remember that it was during the term of another Democratic President-  Jimmy Carter- when the Taiwan Relations Act came into its final form? HMMM???


----------



## tomahawk6 (29 Sep 2007)

It was also true that Clinton gave China the means to deliver multiple warheads too. Anyway the Chinese through their agents have given the democrats millions of dollars - illegal of course.


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Oct 2007)

Images of Chinese boomers.

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/2007107112154.aspx


----------



## tomahawk6 (9 Oct 2007)

Image of China's new attack helo. Pratt & Whitney Canada sold the engines to China which was supposed to be for a civilian transport helo. Now that the story is out there wont be anymore Pratt & Whitney engines for the PRC. This will prevent this attack helo from entering mass production, until the Chinese find a new source for engines.

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/2007108231910.aspx


----------



## GAP (9 Oct 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Image of China's new attack helo. Pratt & Whitney Canada sold the engines to China which was supposed to be for a civilian transport helo. Now that the story is out there wont be anymore Pratt & Whitney engines for the PRC. This will prevent this attack helo from entering mass production, until the Chinese find a new source for engines.
> 
> http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/2007108231910.aspx



China is excellent at cloning other's technology.


----------



## a_majoor (9 Oct 2007)

GAP said:
			
		

> China is excellent at cloning other's technology.



Beat me to the post! Turbine engines are dirt simple (ever consider how many parts are in a turbine engine compared to a piston engine?), and China already produces various turbine engines to power civil and military airplanes. The turbo-pumps for "Long March" rocket engines are a closely related technology as well. In WW II Germany produced several different types of turbojet engines (and the V-2 rocket) using _very_ relaxed quality control and material standards; so long as you are willing to accept a short service life, there is no reason home grown engines won't appear quickly for Chinese helicopters.


----------

