The 167 could carry Ka-28s, so it would not be a problem with the 115 also. Only reason why it carried Z-9s before was that they were waiting delivery for the Ka-28s.
If the hanger is meant to carry all VLS, why build a landing deck? 115 still has a landlng deck and therefore the rear structure is still a true hanger. If you want to put entirely VLS on it, you should just stretch the structure all the way to the back, instead of stepping it like the way it is now. The Luhai can carry two helo, one more than the 052B/C, so it raises the possibility that 114/115 may be more intended for ASW.
Crobato:
It is pretty much safe to assume that RIF will be installed on this ship, when long time insider information holder such as 龙耀天下,百战刀 and J-8III tell u it is the case. There is almost definitely no hanger at rear now, using picture comparisons, the hanger of 167, 168 and 170 are all about 2.7 decks in height, while the “hanger” on 115 is only 2 decks high.
I’m not convinced that the hanger will be used with the VLS instead. In the 167, the hanger is also used for four AA guns that are used for point defense. Using the Hanger for the VLS lessens the number of point defense guns and removes any credible ASW capability. The front of the ship where the HQ-7 used to be does not present enough space for a rotary cold launched VLS battery, not to mention a group of them.
VLS structures for longer range SAMs are massive enough that you have to build a new ship around them and not vice versa.
If you could put a Type 730 CIWS where the HQ-7 used to be, another Type 730 on top of the hanger on the rear, then VLS launchers on top of the hanger, you have a doable layout, but it is inferior to the 052C layout.
In my opinion, the 114/115 will turn out to be a refinement of the 167, possibly with VLS HQ-7.
Predictions, not so many good news.
US budget and trade deficits hit new heights while economic recovery sputters. US job growth is less than expected though housing is expected to go up and so will real estate values. Euro will hit US$1.40, and dollar will fall under 100 yen. Currency speculators and banks will increase buying of renminbi to record levels in anticipation that the currency will detach itself from the US dollar. China’s foreign reserves easily hits 600 million before June (540 million now).
Iraqi insurgency worsens and there will be more allegations of prisoner abuse, but won’t headline as much as 2004. There is going to be media fatigue on Iraq and more attention will go to natural disasters.
Increased global warming means stronger storms in the Pacific and Atlantic, threatening the east coast of the United States, US pacific territories such as Guam and the Marianas, US Carribean territories like Puerto Rico, and the Carribean nations. Also heavily threatened by the increased storm rate would be the Philippines, the east coast of China, Taiwan, Okinawa, and Japan.
Oil prices surge later in the year, hitting 60$ a barrel.
Sales of hybrid cars expand in the US.
There will be another high level Chinese purchase of an American company or purchase of a major stock share. This will likely involve a telecommunications or internet routing company or both.
Terrorism might be on the rise again, targeting US interests on Third world or Moslem nations. New concerns about bioterrorism will arise.
Russia will shift further to the right, and Putin will become more assertive.
China might shift further to the right despite Hu’s moderacy.
There will be new pandemic outbreaks, e.g. Mad Cow, Bird Flu, SARS.
I have always accessed that the range of the HQ-7 is about 13km to 25km depending on your slant. This is typical of a SAM of this size class (aka, something around the weight and dimensions of an AIM-7 Sparrow type missile). This should also apply to the HQ-61 and the LY-60.
As for Hui Tong’s entry, I don’t think the 114/115 can hold S-300/RIF-M. I am starting to believe that the RIF-M sale story handed out by the Russian press over two years ago may have been a preannouncement and the final order did not fall through. There seems to be a lack of subsequent confirmation backing up the order. There are similar aborted orders in the past when it felt almost sure the order would go through—the 100 Zhuk sets for the J-8II, potential A-50 sale to China, etc,.
Look out for the possibility of a naval KS-1A variant for the SAM, or the possibility that it may use YJ-63 missiles (possibly like the ones used on the 052C) instead of YJ-83 for the AshMs.
New PLAN frigate…

By the way, with regards to 115, and if people are going to be gravely disappointed that it may be equipped with HQ-7s and not some other fancy SAM system, I say be prepared for disappointment. It probably might be equipped with HQ-7 or a VLS based variation. PLAN appears to be satisfied with the latest version of the HQ-7 as a short range to point defense missile system and does not appear to be moving away from it. I can’t rule out the installation of a new naval KS-1A but we just have to wait till the destroyer “solidifies” its radar and armament layout.
Maybe a PLAAF J-11 fitted with domestic KJ radar that can fire SD-10/YJ-82 and many,many PLA goodies!
Unless it is a J-8F, then it has to be a J-11B.
There ma be different import/domestic content permutations to the J-11B that we simply have to wait and see for more information.
Examples of such permutations include:
1.) AL-31F engine with KLJ radar
2.) WS-10A engine with Russian upgraded N001 radar
3.) WS-10A engine with KLJ radar
The missile cannisters are S-300s for sure. You can tell them because the second and third ring on the cannister is close together, while the rings on the FT2000/HQ-9/HHQ-9 cannister is evenly spaced.
On the J-11B we know for sure that designation exists formally, we just don’t know exactly how the plane is changed from the standard J-11 and what is the J-11A for that matter.
The bridge superstructure looks about one deck lower on the 115 hull and the foc’sle appears significantly shorter from the bridge bulkhead to the bows. Seeings the proportions of the hulls seem similar in both 115 and 167 hull it does look, to me, that the 115 is a scaled down 167.
Frankly both looks the same size to me in relation to constants like the funnel. The number on it clearly indicates it is a destroyer too and I don’t see any point in the changes. If it was a frigate it would be a “5” in the first digit number.
Does not look to me like any of the ships are bigger or smaller. They seem to be of the same size. Numbers do not denote any plans for export, as they followed the succession of numbers from the Ludas (113 was the last). Don’t really understand the logic, or the reason for building these ships. My guess they were probably allocated long ago, was delayed, and is only finishing now.
Don’t tell me that’s not a joke. Are they actually building more Luhai class?
You’re talking about engines from a contract reported on Dec 15th with respect to aircraft built over a year ago. That fine for future production but has no relevance in the context you used it.
How many engines were previously delivered? I know about the 54 but was that all?
Lets see then:
1001-1016 16
01-18 18
01-12 12
1021-1022 2 (J-10B)Thats 48 engines. Doesn’t look like there are any left until the ones from the recent contract are delivered.
KANWA is saying that there may have been more batches that were delivered but were not reported. The number of engines reported in the news cannot be taken as absolutes, and we need to keep an open mind that the Russians may have shipped more.
Logic says there are still engines available for production aircraft from the initial order of 54 in 2001. That means the numbers don’t add up in support of all the aircraft that are supposed to be flying. If so it would indicate that some of the new color aircraft may not be new but only modified and repainted aircraft. Or maybe the 1010-1016 were repainted and delivered to the FTTC.
I think 1010-1016 were repainted sometime later in 2003. I don’t believe they would be 01 to 05. The easy way would be to just paint over the first two digits that say “10” so that you can have #11 to #16. I have another theory that 101X may be up to 10 (from #1011 to #1019) and the “10” may just be repainted over to produce #11 to #19.
So where does July come from?
That still makes 01-18 from Jan-July or 18 aircraft in 7 months. Slightly over 2.5 per month after a run of 1 aircraft per month over the previous six months.
Why do you think only 01-05 were delivered in Mar 2003? A typical delivery of PLAAF aircraft is 10. If you look at the article it mentions 01 and 05. Those would be the lead aircraft in a four plane formation so you are likely to have at least 8.
Yes. Could be as much as 10.
Why don’t you just admit the two-digit J-10s had to have been started in 2002?
Perhaps, but it was only in 2003 that news that a second production line was formed.
The J-10s built in the second half of 2002 did not appear to have their final blue camouflage or have any numbers yet, either the four digit 101X or the double digits. They only appeared to have been painted as such in early 2003.
Also there may be planes between 101X and the two digit J-10’s. One particular primered J-10 had an all yellow primer metal nose, although it had the enlarged RWR. This one was pictured with J-10 1003 in the CAC airfield. Recently, a photo of this aircraft appeared to have resurfaced in delapidated condition.
Assuming that the date in my drive could be an error, that would still be 06 to 18 five months (march to July) that would be roughly 2.4 aircraft per month.
2.4 to 2.5 aircraft per month produces about 29-30 planes, which is roughly once again, enough to fit one regiment of such size per year—as I mentioned before.
So if you have 42 engines delivered per year, about 12 engines will be saved for spares.
1011 to 1016
01 to 18
From July 2002 to July 2003 — 24 planes in 12 months.
You’re right, the photos could have been taken prior to Feb 2003, even in 2002 that you claim in the statement above didn’t happen. You have no way to know whether the photos existed in late 2002. You can only say YOU didn’t see them.
What is clear is that there are at least six of the 101X series by February. This likekly supports that production from JUly to December 2002 was about one aircraft per month. Remember, I also said we were only seeing planes in yellow primer only but already have the enlarged RWR. It’s not hard to see that these yellow planes may have end up as the 101X series.
June 2002 would be the logical time the first aircraft delivered went into production. So you now have 8 months to produce these 5 aircraft, not the two months you state. To produce 5 aircraft in two months is a production rate of 60 per year. Your timeline is wrong.
You’re dead wrong again.
You failed to consider the first of the double digit series (01 to 0X)
The March 10 2003 handover of the J-10 was specific that #01 and #05 were in that event, which implies that five planes were made before March of 2003. And these planes were separate from the 101X series which STILL existed after the handover event.
If you want to add it up, ASSUMING no plane is made after the number 1016, and no plane was made after the number 05 BEFORE the March of 2003, you have 11 planes made in 8 months, which is 1011 to 1016, plus 01 to 05.
The photo of #18 (which I can’t find at Huitong’s by the way) is a foil photo. That could have easily been photoshopped to add the number and then foiled to hid the photoshop. Number 18 would need to belong to the 44th who did not have the planes in May 2003. There are many photoshopped J-10 photos that are believed to be real. The one with the red box blocking the 5 digit number is a prime example.
I don’t think the original is photoshopped. The style of lettering is consistent with the other planes, and I don’t believe that No. 18 in that picture was ever with the 44th. The embossed pictures I have, I believe are planes still with the FTTC.
The late pictures we have of the J-10, which is likely to belong to some division, differs from the 101X and the batch that went to the FTTC. They had a more grey color, and they have lost the camouflage pattern, so the planes look very plain. They now have a five digit number in their tail root. This new paint style only appeared with J-10 photos as of 2004.
It is very likely that the highly glossed out pics of #10 and #12 we see in the CDF now represent a new batch, where the numbers could have cycled again starting from 01 and counting upwards. The numbers exist simultaneously with the FTTC planes which also numbered from 01 and above. My guess that 101X planes would also have been moved to the FTTC.