dark light

crobato

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,711 through 1,725 (of 3,939 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Report:N.Korea performed first-ever nuke test-What's next? #2550038
    crobato
    Participant

    KJI is threatening to launch a nuclear missile unless he gets 1 on 1 talks with the USA. So far, the man has followed through (apparently) on every threat he’s made. As far as I’m concerned, he just signed his death warrant. Granted, nK ICBMs (and apparently nuclear weapons) are failures so far, but you never know, do you? Cut off all aid, period. If the people want to sit in huts and starve, so be it.

    The thing is, the guy is trying to get the US attention. And he’s doing it because he perceives a threat behind him—China. He knows that China has connections within his own military, and might have plans to kick him out, turn the country into a transitional dictatorship/authoritarianship based on the Beijing model, then with the aid of South Korea, turn the country into a free Economic Zone based on the Chinese model. Not to mention the PLA buildup around his borders.

    Why the Chinese are outraged at his behavior is because he gave his word to the Chinese that he won’t explode a nuke. So the deed is in every violation of what Kim discussed and apparently agreed with the Chinese leadership, which is now looking red faced after their assurances to the US, Japan and South Korea on this.

    North Korea is a humanitarian bomb waiting to happen. As much as the terrible the plight of people in Iraq, at least they still have food to eat. The NK is a Sudan waiting to happen in north east Asia. No country wants that in their border, not the least the Chinese. Given a few more years, the NK has two choices, one is to collapse or two, follow market reforms (they’re starting to acquiesce on the latter but grudgingly).

    in reply to: J-10 versus LCA-AESA #2550084
    crobato
    Participant

    Thanks for that details. But for for me it looks like, that the J-10 has still some way to go. Compared to the Rafale it has reached F1-level, which has to be follwed by a F2, F3 and F4 f.e. Otherwise the J-10 will be a waste of money and fall behind the Su-27/J-11 in capabilities.

    I’m not disputing this. Currently J-10 appears to be only testing its air to ground capabilities. J-10 are spotted using GE at the Dingxin base, and not far from the base, you see a bombing range right in the desert. At the same time, there are J-11s in that base too, and its air to ground abilities is no better.

    The bottomline is that the J-10 and the J-11 are running neck to neck on this. Presumably, and it is a safe bet, that the J-11B variant is going to use a sibling of the radars used in the J-10, J-8F and offered in the FC-1. Because all four aircraft’s radar are based on the same radar family, you need to follow the events following the most transparent of these fighters, which is the FC-1. If you follow what the FC-1 is going to have, that is a pretty good bet, its going to mirror those abilities in the other three aircraft.

    I must clarify too, that for long range standoff weapons, the PLA policy for this requires a two seater minimum. Workload issues. That’s why the Su-30MKK is a two seater, that’s why the JH-7 is a two seater. Being a single seater, and no clarity that Sukhoi has licensed the two seater design, the J-11 isn’t going to go far into the AGM business other than LGBs, the Kh-29T, and ARMs, as these are “easy” to use missiles. For standoff missiles and antiship missiles, you need to a two seater. Unless China gets to reverse engineer a UBK.

    Similarly, don’t expect single seater J-10s to do much of the AGM business either. The two seater J-10B bears more watching. But again, I don’t think the J-10B is better in the bomb business than a JH-7A or future variant thereof, as it is easier to support larger missiles on the bigger airframe or wing, or it gets a bit jiggly.

    in reply to: The J-10 / Lavi connection #2550087
    crobato
    Participant

    My question again, on what expertise that the Russians have had about the Lavi program which qualified them to judge on the Lavi content in J-10 program? Can you please be specific? I think this is a valid question to ask. How can it be “wrong” to ask such a question?

    According to what is suggested, SIBNIA may have assisted in the structural analysis. It sounds to me that if they have helped they were helping to fit the engine.

    I think MiG may have helped. The J-10’s variable ramp intake along with the braces look very similar to the one the MiG 1.44—which also have this braces. In fact, the MiG 1.44 is the only other plane to have such braces. If you look at the FC-1, the original design has strakes in the wing root. MiG loves strakes, it worked on the MiG-23, so they put them in the MiG 1.44 and their Project 33 concept. Although in the end, the later FC-1 prototypes removed them. This also suggests that Russian input can be thrown out as easily as they are taken in.

    I don’t think the Russians played a part in avionics and if they did, the input was thrown out. When China seriously considered the Zhemchug radar for the J-10, presumably Russians are going to be consulted with its integration. Actually I don’t see how SIBNIA could work on this, it is MiG again that has more experience integrating with this radar since this radar, also known as the Zhuk ME, is the radar used in MiG-29 upgrades.

    But China went back to a locally developed radar instead, using locally developed weapons. These technologies were already developed and perfected on J-8IIs. Any article or report that fails to account how development on the J-8II contributes to the J-10 becomes somewhat discredible.

    in reply to: Report:N.Korea performed first-ever nuke test-What's next? #2550529
    crobato
    Participant

    I can’t agree with China cutting off all food and fuel. The NK regime isn’t going to topple over this. Rather, millions of innocent Korean children will only starve or freeze to death. And yes, winter is coming soon.

    For humanitarian reasons, you simply cannot do this.

    Invasion and war will only lead to more suffering for the poor North Korean people. It will surely lead to human casualties much greater than Iraq so far, and the human calamity—the refugees—will make Iraq look like a picnic.

    No one gains from a human disaster in the Korean peninsula. Not any nation bordering it, and certainly not from the Korean people.

    This is an extremely delicate situation which there is no clear answer.

    in reply to: Chinese News, Photos, and Speculation #10 #2550535
    crobato
    Participant

    Oh yeah, you’re correct. At first I thought that was a reflection highlight.
    It’s also true of the J-10B in the picture.

    in reply to: Chinese News, Photos, and Speculation #10 #2550684
    crobato
    Participant

    Hard to say. We know those 3rd Division birds were photographed either in January or February of 2006.

    The pics of J-10s with the PT04 can only be after PT04 came out and painted, which makes it spring. These planes didn’t have those GPS like sensors either.

    Something about Dingxin base. I noticed there were bomb ranges nearby. Planes could be testing air to ground weapons. Can’t rule out J-10s and J-11s being developed for that.

    in reply to: Why is the F-2 never mentioned? #2550690
    crobato
    Participant

    The AIM-7M (100 km range) is the next best thing to the AIM-120.

    I don’t think the AIM-7M reaches 100km as much as I don’t think the R-77 reaches 100km either.

    in reply to: Why is the F-2 never mentioned? #2550696
    crobato
    Participant

    So many AFs considered a stronger engine as least important, when it comes to overall performances.

    I don’t think so. Even the Russians have adopted Boyd’s concepts to some degree. A high TWR is fundamental to those concepts and every trend in fighter aviation is moving to increase that further.

    in reply to: Why is the F-2 never mentioned? #2550701
    crobato
    Participant

    Actually does anybody kown the status of AAM4?

    In service since 2004, upgraded between 24 to 26 F-15EJs currently.

    in reply to: Why is the F-2 never mentioned? #2550704
    crobato
    Participant

    I have to smile. The same outdated knowlegde. The flying performances are determined by the drag-thrust and lift-weight ratios at first.
    Main factor of drag is the frontal area and the aft-section, where all F-16 variants do not differ much! The wing raise is offset, by a smoother composite one, which offfers much more lift too. Through a fixed inlet every F-16 is limited to Mach 2 at all, no matter how much thrust you will install.
    Back to the basics. A F-16C/D 50/52 weight-in with ~9 tons for ~28 qm of wing area, when the F-2 is ~9,5 tons for ~35 qm.y.

    What matters for me is the acceleration. TWR is fundamental to shifting energy states (Boyd’s EM principles) aka transient performance. How fast, for example you can gain back your energy after you bleed them. Having a higher TWR isn’t about maximum speed as you implied, it is in the ability to shift energy states.

    in reply to: J-10 versus LCA-AESA #2550731
    crobato
    Participant

    Cobrato, two points:

    1. Carbon fiber composites DO ABSORB radar energy. Glass fiber ones don’t..
    2. Reflecting radar energy is just ONE means of RCS reduction. Absorption is a major factor. Otherwise how will you justify the RAM coating?

    RAM Coated Carbon fiber composites can be in fact practically a black body (ie it absorbs the energy completely).

    Yes, but they’re also frequency selective. Given their molecular structure, only certain wavelengths are absorbed. For carbon fiber to be explicitely used for this, they have to be specially designed against a specific and intended frequency (I don’t know the formulas), and I don’t think most structural carbon fiber composites had this priority originally in mind.

    in reply to: J-10 versus LCA-AESA #2550734
    crobato
    Participant

    I can not see that. The FC-1/JF-17 offers a range of 1600 km on internal fuel at height and a ferry-range of 3000 km. Hard to reach by an ordinary MiG-29, when a SMT will do. Your range estimates about the J-10 are very optimistic.
    The J-10 is a striker mainly, where speed and ceiling are of secondary importance. I prefer to ignore your comparison of J-8 and MiG-31 for obvious reasons.

    Sorry, but the J-10 wasn’t designed solely as a striker. It was indeed meant for air to air.

    The clear proof is the selection of the radar. The Chinese had three choices, and for a J-10 they choose what was clearly an A-A type radar with still pending A-S/A-G integration.

    The first is from the Russian Phazotron firm. This radar is the Zhemchug, which is pretty much identical to the Zhuk-ME being planned for the MiG-29 upgrades. A number of Zhuk ME was said to have been tested with J-8IIs as a preliminary to this. Suffice to say, the radar needs no introduction here and it is quite multirole, with a wide assortment of A-A and A-G weapon supports.

    The second reported radar choice is Leihua’s JL-10A radar or a variant of such. This radar is the one used on the upgraded JH-7s and JH-7As. So yes, it has passed PLAAF’s approval. This is China’s first successful multirole radar and fire control system, capable of supporting A-A armament like the PL-8, PL-5, PL-11 and PL-12, A-G and A-S weapons like the YJ-91 (Kh-31 copy), YJ-8X antiship missiles, and various LGBs.

    But the PLAAF chose the third option, which was NRIET’s KLJ-3 aka Type 1473 by PLA designation. The radar lacked the multirole functionality of the other two, and both A-G and A-S integration is way behind the JL-10A. But the A-A performance of this radar must have been enough to consider this radar over the two alternatives. Siblings of this radar appear in the J-8H/F versions (KLJ-1), the J-7G (KLJ-6E) and now even on the FC-1.

    in reply to: J-10 versus LCA-AESA #2550750
    crobato
    Participant

    I am asking the same question I asked in the PAF thread….if the J10 is so far down the development path and is getting inducted into the PLAAF, why is PRC not releasing the details of the induction process for this “4th Gen” aircraft.

    Is it cuz they are still scratching their heads trying to figure out the procedures. They have never done this before either :confused:

    The PLA never releases details of anything. Literally. Never in their history I have ever seen them mention numbers.

    The defense military complexes like CPMIEC, AVIC, etc,. are not part of the PLA. You only hear specs released by the complexes when it comes to looking for potential export markets. You will only hear specs of the J-10 when it’s approved for general export.

    For example, we don’t have actual specs of most J-8IIs variant except for the F-8IIM which was the export model, and the planes they sent to the US for the Peace Pearl upgrade.

    in reply to: J-10 versus LCA-AESA #2550756
    crobato
    Participant

    A good guess about that will be the data of the similar size F-2.
    Not much composites with the J-10 gives it an empty equipped weight of around 10 tons, when the MTOW is around 22 tons.

    I kind of doubt that, the J-10 isn’t going to weigh more than a J-8II, which comes in around 9200-10,000kg empty, is much longer, has a larger wingspan and two engines. Furthermore, the J-10 should exceed the J-8II’s TWR ratio, and the latter has a combined afterburner thrust of 13,200kg to 14,000kg depending on engine variant.

    crobato
    Participant

    Some news just before the test.

    The Sunday Times October 08, 2006

    China on alert over a nuclear neighbour

    Michael Sheridan, North Korean/Chinese border

    THE North Korean refugee had one request for her captors before the young Chinese soldiers led her back across the steel-girdered bridge on the Yalu River that divides two “socialist allies”.

    “She asked for a comb and some water because she said that if she was going to die she could not face going to heaven looking as dirty and dishevelled as this,” recounted a relative of one soldier who was there.

    What happened next is testimony to the rising disgust in Chinese military ranks as Beijing posts more troops to the border amid a crisis with North Korea over its regime’s plan to stage a nuclear test.

    The soldiers, who later told family members of the incident, marched the woman, who was about 30, to the mid-point of the bridge. North Korean guards were waiting. They signed papers for receipt of the woman, who kept her dignity until that moment. Then, in front of the Chinese troops, one seized her and another speared her hand — the soft part between thumb and forefinger — with the point of a sharpened steel cable, which he twisted into a leash.

    “She screamed just like a pig when we kill it at home in the village,” the soldier later told his relative. “Then they dragged her away.”

    Such stories are circulating widely among Chinese on the border, where wild rumours of an American attack on nuclear test sites have spread fears of a Chernobyl-type cloud of radiation and sparked indignation at the North Koreans. “I’ve heard it a hundred times over that when we send back a group they stab each one with steel cable, loop it under the collarbone and out again, and yoke them together like animals,” said an army veteran with relatives in service.

    As international tensions over North Korea have soared, China has deployed extra combat units of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to man the border from the Yalu River in the south to the Tumen River near Russia – evidently fearing the risk of chaos and collapse.

    The troop trains were rolling even on the Chinese mid-autumn festival on Friday. Civilian traffic on a main line was halted to allow one train to pass, with carriages jammed with glum soldiers in camouflage uniforms and flat cars carrying olive-green military vehicles.

    And while a few off-duty men strolled with their sweethearts under the full moon along the banks of the Yalu, others watched from outposts at the silent, darkened shores of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

    “All visits by Chinese have recently been stopped,” said a local official. “They gave us no reason for it.”

    The bomb test could come as early as today, the eighth anniversary of Kim Jong-il’s ascent to the top of the North Korean Workers’ party and one day before South Korea’s foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, seeks election as secretary-general of the United Nations.

    Last Friday, North Korea’s traditional allies, Russia and China, joined in a UN security council warning that a weapons test – likely to be in a disused mine 6,000ft underground in Shijung district near the Chinese border -would attract “universal condemnation”. It has put the Chinese under maximum pressure to restrain Kim. Japan’s new prime minister, Shinzo Abe, is due in Beijing today to urge on the effort and the leader of South Korea is coming to make the same plea on Monday.

    China’s dilemma is that its ruling elites are still bound to those of North Korea by a like-minded political authoritarianism. President Hu Jintao has even praised North Korea for keeping to its Stalinist politics, a view he may be repenting now that Kim has brought China to the brink of a nuclear crisis.

    Beijing’s main fear is that if Kim tests a bomb – the CIA believes he has enough plutonium for four; other US experts think more – then Japan will feel it has no choice but to acquire its own atomic arsenal. That would destroy the balance of power in northeast Asia that has kept the peace since the end of the second world war.

    China’s secondary fear is that if Kim’s regime collapses, hundreds of thousands of desperate, hungry North Koreans, some armed, will flood across its border to sow unrest and instability.

    The Chinese regularly round up small groups of escapees. But uncounted thousands have slipped into the towns and villages inhabited by ethnic Koreans in the border provinces, building gleaming new towers and labouring in fields of fat corn.

    China’s prosperity lures the poverty-stricken but has failed to convince North Korea’s leaders to deviate from their course of rigid state control.

    “Why are they poor?” asked a local official, who was drinking heavily in a bar at festival time. “Because that gangster Kim Jong-il spends all the money on nuclear weapons!” Several Chinese soldiers have died in clashes with rogue North Korean soldiers who have crossed the border, shot up buildings and, in one case, robbed a bank with their AK-47s.

    A PLA platoon leader was killed last year while catching five North Koreans who had attacked a hotel, robbed guests and kidnapped the manager, according to state media. Shots were fired yesterday as five North Korean troops crossed into the southern side of the demilitarised zone that separates the two countries.

    The Chinese authorities are also irate over an influx of counterfeit US dollar bills and vast quantities of fake Viagra from North Korea. Some 50,000 Chinese gamblers a year are estimated to cross the other way to squander their money, much of it suspected to be the fruits of official corruption, in a North Korean casino.

    The sense that Kim’s regime is losing control lies behind the Chinese military buildup. But some South Korean MPs fear China could grab territory from the north in the event of a collapse.

    Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,711 through 1,725 (of 3,939 total)