Well since the last boom (052B & C and 054s) there have been bit quite a pause in the new-chinese-large-surface-ship-revealed front…

looked like they waited until after the olympics to really start with the surface ship again. So far this year, all we saw were Yuans and medical ships. Clearly, China was careful to not trot out large surface ships to scare the world.

I would love to see Chinese 5th generation in 2011. Advance 4th generation makes alot of difference from Superior acceleration, altitude, range, weopon stations flexibility, 150 sensors on airframe, long time for engines and hence better uptime.

waiting for, not getting it. We’ve already covered this, with AWACs, other fighters around and ground stations networked together. The performance of an individual fighter’s radar is not as important. 5th generation birds offer the element of stealth that 4th generation birds don’t have.

it is certainly not velocity search. these are old data. Irbis can guide 4 semi-active BVR at range greater than 300Km. lock on range may well be above 400km.

lol, believe what you must. Consider this, N-001 vs 3sqm targets is listed by Chinese sources as having a search range of 80-100km, tracking range of 60 km and lock-on range of 40 km.
and you can check here http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/vvs/su30-01.htm

Radar: NIIP N001 Myech (`Slot Back’) coherent pulse Doppler look-down/shoot-down radar, detection range up to 54 n miles (100 km; 62 miles), tracking range 35 n miles (65 km; 40 miles); ability to track 10 targets and engage two simultaneously offered, but probably not available on current in-service aircraft.

you are basically saying that Irbis will have 10 times the lock-on range of N-001. I’m speechless.

an interesting case to consider is Zhuk-MSF.
Designed to have a peak power of 8 kW and average power of 2-3 kW
Against a fighter size target (I’m presuming 5 sqm here)
velocity mode search range is 245 km
RWS mode, detection range in lock-up face on is 180 km, tailing is 90 km, look down face on is 130 km, tailing is 60 km.
TWS mode detection range is 150 km.
Vs large targets like AWACS and tankers, the tracking range is 300 km.

I would think that you can do some estimation of Irbis’s performance based on this. If we base it on the brochure data, then the power of Irbis is 2 to 2.5 times that of Zhuk-MSF. If we take the quadric root of that, you get about 1.2 to 1.25 gain in range.

i really don’t think US has any trouble getting a supersonic missile if it really wanted one.

Take a look at this article, if they can create something that simulates club, they should have no problem developing a supersonic missile.

Aug. 28 (Bloomberg) — Alliant Techsystems Inc., the largest
maker of solid rocket motors, will produce at least 50 supersonic
targets for the U.S. Navy to test defenses against the Sizzler,
China’s most capable anti-ship missile, a service official said.
The Navy awarded Alliant the initial $97 million development
contract for the Multi-Stage Supersonic Target last week, which
includes targets for seven tests. It also will get the production
contract as of 2013, Captain Pat Buckley, the Navy’s program
manager for targets and decoys, said in an interview today.
Alliant was selected over competitors including Raytheon Co.
and the first target missiles are expected to be delivered in
2014, Buckley said. Minneapolis-based Alliant sees the potential
to build as many as 200 missiles over a decade at a cost of about
$2 million each, Jack Cronin, its president of mission systems,
said in an interview today.
“We are hoping that ATK and their team will develop a
product that meets our requirements at the lowest possible
cost,” Buckley said.
China purchased the Sizzler from Russia and already has
deployed it on at least eight Kilo-class diesel submarines, which
also were bought from Russia, the Pentagon said in its report on
the Chinese military released March 3.
The Sizzler is one of the “Threat D” family of anti-ship
missiles the Alliant effort will focus on, Buckley said. The
Sizzler flies at subsonic speeds until within 10 nautical miles
of a target. It then releases a rocket-propelled warhead that
accelerates to three times the speed of sound, flying no more
than 10 meters (33 feet) above sea level, making it difficult to
defend against.

A Moving Target

The missiles Alliant is building will give the Navy
supersonic targets to try to track and shoot down.
Buckley said he does not yet have an estimate yet for the
production contract’s eventual value but the plan would be to
build 10 target missiles a year for five years. The final number
to be produced is “totally unknown at this time” and will be
determined based on the military’s needs. The number of 50 “was
a ballpark swag” based on the test plans for vessels in
development, he said.
“There is a class of extremely advanced cruise missiles
that our ships are going to have to thwart,” Alliant’s Cronin
said. “Right now there is no way to test these ships against the
threats because they are that advanced. This system will more
than do that.”

Is Varyag still at Dalian?

you know, a while back, some people at SDF became convinced that they did work on the island. After that, we got a bunch of varyag photos from Dalian that had no work done to the island. So, we are not sure if those are old photos or current photos.

Everyone seems to be pretty certain that DDGs will indeed be pursued and instead of spreading my ususal cynicism, I’m infact blutly resting on these claims as I’m eager to see what the next DDG from china will be like.

I once asked interesting question, packed with my usual cynicism however at that time about the chinese ability to design gas turbine powered DDGs with satisfactory performance. By that I ment the small and cauntious quantativical ammount of the 052 series. First two then back to old steamers and then two again and back to old steam-powered ships again.
I was, like ususally mainly claimed to be just ranting with the tag that “I just hate china”, but in the mist some slight reasonable arguments did rose. Many belived that the reason why only two seccond batch 052s (052b/C) were build was that the production facilities were shifted to another shipyard. I my inturperation was that chinese were not satisfied with the performance of the CODAG propulsion build around the Ukrainian Gas turbines. IMO it’s too small for the ships of that size. So to me it seemed as there still weren’t no proper domestical large size marine gas turbines availble and thus the production of these ships were halted.

Now since then (this being about year ago or so) there have been optimistic reports about chinese procediings in gas turbine field so thus these new DDGs are really a bench mark: Will they be fitted with domestic or imported (Urkainian) gas turbines? Will they still be CODAG or peraps COGAG/GOG?
What if the DDGs are like someone said, “051Ds” eg. steam powered? Or perhaps all diesel powered (not so unlikely as it may first sound)

Like I said I’m eagerly waiting to see what will come up with this. At this time I promise to be far more optimistic than usual;):cool:

if 051 series continues, I think it will just be more steam powered ships. As for Chinese gas turbines, they are still going to be localized GT-25000. The domestically designed gas turbines probably need another 3 years before they are ready to fit into ships.

J-9 as originally defined in the mid 1960s (before the double 27 and double 26 requirements) was to be able to out dogfight a F-4 and intercept the F-105 and B-58 in all weather conditions, and have significantly greater combat radius than the MiG-21. The J-9 was the competitor to the J-8, and the later won the competition, primarily due to the unreliable WS-6 turbofan engine the J-9 was designed around.

actually, it was mainly because J-9 was too ambitious for China at that time. Even for J-10, they had contingency plans for a turbojet engine.

Hmmm I’m a former SAM technician and I never thought about whether SAMs could counter a TLAM strike eh?. The word ‘saturation’ means, in this context, to fire more weapons than the opponent can defeat. It is a dramatically successful tactic. The SAMs arrayed by the PRC are amongst the best in the world, they, like all SAMs though, have x number of ready-to-fire rounds on the launchers. If you fire x+5 TLAMs at that site then, barring freak incident, you destroy the site.

If you mix in a few Super Hornets worth of 300km ranged ITALDs with the x-5 TLAM strike you guarantee saturation. It would require a lot of TLAM’s, several hundred in fact to just open up SAM defences and knock out a few airfields, but the USN has no shortage of Mk41 cells and hitting MPA airfields, OTH sites, etc would be worth the expense.

Just to butt in a little bit, but a while back I read from a pretty good source that China was preparing 5000 HQ-9 missiles at that time. Of course, it’s not fully deployed yet, but it definitely sounded like they were preparing for some serious pounding against the 4 major civilian areas and military regions. If you add the S-300, HQ-12, HQ-7, all the anti-aircraft artillery and mobile air defense units, you seriously need a lot of missiles.