JSRGetting rich from oil rents is not a great place to be in. It’s as much about what the money is being spent on as it is how much you have. That’s really all I’m going to say about how good or bad a position Russia is in right now.
so you think Chinese can spend money wisely than Russia/Japan. It was not the earth quake that closed Japanese reactors. pretty soon Japanese will not afford its military.so why Chinese will be any different?. you cannot play with aging manpower for too long. thats why i give you example of modern diesel tank engine. you dont want Tanks to break down in battlfield or maintainance hog. for T-90MS there is more modern V92 diesel engine.
http://uralvagonzavod.com/products/special_products/45/
One or two tanks does not matter but once you multiply this with several thousand tanks. It eats away into operational budget and hence no offensive army.
Not trying to pick a fight here, but it’s funny that you say “if”, because it currently doesn’t…
It is known fact that Chinese have invested heavly in Africa and Chinese simply dont have any military to protect it despite world second largest budget. Neither Japan or Russia has wasted this scale of money.
JSRI dont want to be rude but in all honesty saying “China could overtake Russia on few show-off projects massively financed by the government but it’s hardly sustainable on the long run.” is nowhere close to being objective.
The problem is Russia is getting richer faster than any other country while China is getting under debt faster than Japan. China simply dont have the surplus money for developing offensive armed forces which requires heavy tranport and long endurance engines.
Like it or not, right now, China can produce literally anything their Army needs. Sure one can point out engine purchases but still this is although important not really significant when you look at the big picture. Especially when you see ws-10. And I cannot help but wonder what will you guys say when J-20 starts to fly with ws-15. Are you guys going to accept China caught Russia??
China simply cannot produce high quality, low weight and high power (T-90MS 1130bhp) diesel engines. Russia can export tanks in bigger quantities and tank normally does not weigh more than 50 tons. I would rate Russian armed forces mobility higher than Chinese.
http://chtz-uraltrac.com/articles/categories/37.php
The weight of the diesel engine В-92С2 is only 1020 kg: that is less for more than twice if compared to the weights of the diesel engines AVDS-1790 (USA), C12V (England), UDV-12-1100 (France). The overall capacity of the diesel engine В-92С2 exceeds theirs for 1.5 – 4.5 times, its fuel efficiency under working conditions is more for 5 – 25%.
I see China as one of the significant powers. Baring some crazy crises, it will be the largest economy in a decade and this will probably meant it will have a comparable military spending to USA at that time which IMHO probably will be much larger than what Russia can spend. Even now, It has the second largest budget. This will reflect on the capabilities.
China cannot become significant power any more than Japan. Unless it control resouces for which it needs true Blue water navy and long distance aviation in reasonable quantities.
So contrary to your claim of China having second largest defence budget. It does not have the military reach and experiance to protect its own investment against 4th graded army. so most of defence budget may not be properly spent rather stolen. If Russia has this scale of investment in third world (See Syria example). Its ships and aviation will be all over Sudan.
http://www.china.org.cn/world/2012-05/04/content_25303399.htm
China facing thorny issue in Sudans
JSRThat happened in India. IAF Mig-21 Bisons also have RAM coatings to reduce RCS.
Also dont forget F-15C could be using un upgraded radars from early 1980s. Any 30 year old radar will have difficulty against low RCS target and i dont think any one uses modern jamming during friendly exercises.
JSRThe current king of the Hill the Bugatti Veyron is designed by Hartmut Warkuss and approved by Ferdinand Karl Piëch himself. The car itself was tested in Ehra Lessien in Wolfsburg. The development was paid for and commisioned by Wolfsburg. Period.
And before someone comes again and say they will have a faster car in America a new Veyron is on the line as well.
By the end of the year, VW group will comprise of Lamborghini, Bentley, Seat, Skoda, Porsche, Audi, Ducati, MAN, Scania, VW, Bugatti, and few other marques on his Highness Winterkorn’s command from Wolfsburg.
Or you are still going to tell me most of VW tech is developed in China?:rolleyes:
I am not saying all VW tech is developed in China (70% of Auto R&D is in supplier network anyways small to medium size firms) but China is the most profitable and largest market for VW group. VW simply cannot relay on bankrupt EU. and VW has small market share in US. without Chinese market VW simply would not have money to collect so many brands. 40% of capital is with foreign this despite running profitable operations.
JSRAnd of cause, China’s jet engines, will just like anything else in the military industry, will surpass russians’ in the near future.
Russian enjoyed a head-lead, thanks to having been industried about 100-150 years earlier than China, and thanks to the huge investment in its defense industry during the cold war era.
It is incorrect statement to make that huge investment in defense industry led to Russia lead during Cold war period. when Russia GDP itself was 10 times smaller than current period and lack of hard currency didnot provide the CNC machines & supercomputer infrastructure to leap into next generation. More accurate statement is more techncial manpower was used to achieve modest results.
But the lead can only get you this far, I think prety much everyone and their dogs, including Russians themselves who are not in some serious denial mode, can figure this very obvious thing out.
Tu-95/142 can stay in air for 44 hrs and Blackjack over 22 hrs. even Su-34 will do for 16 hrs. Not even Chinese leadership has any confidence on Chinese made engines either. They will never travel in aircraft with Chinese made engines for next 30 years. and this compromised there work when ever they are in air.
So this is very unhelpful, sometimes even pathetic, when Russian “fanboys” here always love to bring the “Russian invincible engine techniques” out whenever there is a talk among Chinese military industry etc.
Well China has bought more than 1000 Salut engine and that not includes Ulfa/Saturn production. First AL-31FN were design at Saturn and production shifted to Salut. The total quantity may well be 1500 hundred engines for AL-31 family alone. Add several hundred D-30 class engines. and the result is pretty obvious to see China cant make reliable and long endurance engines.
Its kind like an aging man, whose prime is long gone and even in financial troubles now, bragging how he still own a better watch he bought 50 years ago comparing to a new rich guy who is about to get a expensive watch a week later, you know, kind of enjoying his last bragging right when it is still last.
Well Shanghai the most wealthiest/educated city in China is aging faster than Tokyo. when you create bogus economic growth based on land sales the cost of living goes faster than people can afford to live with decent standard.
http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/05/04/shanghai-a-rich-old-city-with-few-kids/#axzz1u3Wdn0Bm
JSRThe F22s of the road are designed in Wolfsburg or on authorization from Wolfsburg. Why go for 4.5++ Gen.
Bitte schön:D
F-22 of the world are not design in wolfsburg. they are more akin to Eurofighter. More mass produced and cheaper to maintain.
F-22 will be more like Buggati Veryon or Ferrari Enzo.
Russia can make hand made cars with similar design and performance but with British racing engine.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11935565
Russian supercar Marussia challenges Ferrari and Lamborghini
JSRSo JORN is the only defence project that had issues in its development? The F-35, Nimrod MRA4, the Littoral Combat Ship, Seawolf class have all been absolutely trouble free from start to finish?
Problem is JORN is Australlia efffort alone. and the rest of products are far more complex than making simple a radar. radar is stationary product that dont need aerodynamic and stress testing.
JORN is operational and is by global standards a fairly unique capability. It’s benefits to the ADF are significant, and far above that which could have been obtained using technology available from overseas. Remember that was a wikipedia article, not a classified DoD document :rolleyes:
There is nothing unique about JORN. THe only thing unique about its slow development and changing the contractors.
http://www.airforce.gov.au/JORN/JORN_Fact_Sheet.pdf
Based on the 1987 Defence White Paper, Joint Project 2025 (JP2025) was initiated to build a further two OTHRs. In 1991, a contract was awarded to Telstra, in cooperation with GEC-Marconi, to build two operational OTHRs that would form JORN. After considerable project difficulties, responsibility for the project moved to Lockheed Martin and Tenix (who formed the RLM Group) in 1997, and in 1999 1RSU moved from Alice Springs to RAAF Base Edinburgh to remotely operate the Alice Springs OTHR from the JORN Coordination Centre. In 2003, RLM Group delivered two JORN OTHRs to the Australian Defence Force. These radars, along with the Alice Springs radar, comprise JORN in its current form. During the period where the JORN project was unable to deliver an operational system, the Alice Springs radar continued to receive a number of upgrades based on DSTO research and development.
JSRHave a look at, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JORN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nulka
http://www.cea.com.au/!Global/Directory.php?Location=Home:Home
Are you aware that one of Aus biggest shipbuilding yards is owned by BAE Systems?
you should read about your own links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JORN
The failed Telstra contract prompted the project to enter a fourth phase: completion of the JORN and its subsequent maintenance using a new contractor. In February 1997 Lockheed Martin and Tenix received a contract to deliver and manage the JORN. Subsequently during June 1997 Lockheed and Tenix formed the company RLM Group to handle the joint venture.[5] An operational radar system was delivered in April 2003, with maintenance contracted to continue until February 2007.[6]
As a consequence of the duration of its construction the JORN delivered in 2003 was designed to a specification developed in the early 1990
Re E-2 see the following, it even has a photo of a RSAF E-2 half way down the right hand side:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_E-2_Hawkeye
Also, see the RSAF’s own site re the E-2 replacement, the modified Gulfstream (which is not an E-3:D):
In relation to RAAF F-35 orders, if you can’t see the technical side of the issue, think of the political and why the current Aus federal government won’t confirm orders for the aircraft until currently identified issues are resolved. If you can’t do that, take the advice provided by aussienscale above.
not Singapore. Singapore is not raw material producers so it cannot be compared to Australlia.
see the nickname on right side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Saudi_Air_Force
Nickname RSAF
There is no issue with JSF except it is expensive as rate of production per year assumed cannot be achieved with such complex aircraft with global industrial chain. so every one is waiting for later production batches. . and it is illogica for RAAF that paid $6b for 24 F-18E. the most overpriced deal for standardized aircraft in production. and it is not willing to pay similar price for JSF.
http://rpdefense.over-blog.com/article-australia-looking-at-average-us70m-per-jsf-102135388.html
JSRThe Aus DoD won’t confirm its F-35 orders until the US DoD is happy with the performance and supportability of the aircraft, i.e. that all identified issues have been resolved. To do otherwise is really just walking into a potential world of (extreme) pain for no purpose.
Nope. US has just reduced order intake per year. It does not mean they have stopped the orders. It is Australlia that has stopped the orders for 3 years completely. and that only concerns 12 aircraft.
So, for example, selling motor vehicles to the middle east and the US is only done to support the mining industry? Selling high speed catamarans to operators around the globe (Austal and Incat) is done for the same reason? And providing financial services across the south Pacific also?
Yes the Aus share of F-35 is small, but that’s not the only program local suppliers are involved in. Most are civil.
Is this an economics or geography forum?:(
The RSAF and the RAAF are structured in very different ways due to the very strategic circumstances of each nation. Aircraft such as the F-5 and E-2 don’t fit the RAAF’s agenda, but the more costly to buy and operate P-3, C-17 and 737AEW do. Also, the RAAF is happy to leave rotary wing aviation to the army (and navy). The Aus and Singapore navies are also structured very differently for the same reason.
Given the ongoing cooperation between the RAAF and RSAF I suspect each has a high degree of respect for the other.
These very low end engineering products that no big ship building firms want to invest in it. Engines are owned by MAN. I am not going to parse out all the electronics and communication systems.
http://www.mandiesel.com.au/0000002/Home.html
You simply not admitting that Australlia simply dont have any high end engg. skills so it cannot give any expert advice to countries that are actually making complex weopon systems. Now even China can alteast create its own AWACS. RSAF has E-3 not E-2 for decades now and soon airfrorce size will be 5 times RAAF. and it comes down to economics of having boat load of hard currency and not pretending to be engineering power of customizing foreign products.
JSRThe “cut” is in fact rescheduling those payments in what is known as the “forward estimates”. I don’t see an alternative given the US DoD program rebaselining. By way of background the Aus DoD regularly underspends its budget due to slower than expected payments for major projects as a result of schedule delays. The political overtone to the issue is that the government here has declared that the federal budget will return to surplus in 2012-13 after running comparatively (by OECD standards) small deficits for a few years following the global financial crisis.
. Australlia has only ordered 2 aircraft. Now US orders are already more than 100 untill 2017. Now Australlia is deferring decision on 12 aircraft untill 2015. So there wont be any money for that untill 2015. so ur not likely to see that 12 aircraft untill 2020 in operational service. There is no such thing as ordering 100 aircraft at this point. Australlia may well be the second largest user of JSF on long term considering the trends in other countries.
Yes mining is a large sector of the Aus economy, as it is in countries like Canada and the US. Unlike Saudi Arabia though, Aus does have manufacturing and service sectors – cars, pharmaceuticals, aerospace components and assemblies, military ship building, education of international students. Sure the high value of the AUD is currently hurting those sectors, but once the global economy really begins to recover from the current economic situation that will change.
Mining is pretty much the only sector in Australlia. as the rest of sector merely servicing the mining sector. Every thing else is just assembling foreign brand. RSAF size is now almost 3 times of RAAF and still maintianing world 2nd largest trade surplus.
Australlia has very minor contracts in JSF supply chain. There is claim of $300m worth of contracts. and but we dont how long that $300m will last as most of JSF production is now delayed. and the same will happen to submarine. Most of Aust. weopons programes have delays and overpriced as Australlia lacks the skills to properly estimate the cost and complexity of customized things it is purchasing. It is complete dependency. Only standardized things with active assembly line like F-18E can come within reasonable cost.
JSRDo you actually know what you are talking about? If you are talking about exports the Su-34 has none and Russia isn’t an export customer! And the RAAF ordered 24 SH around 2007, has taken delivery of the first ac in 2010 and deliveries are already completed and the type is combat ready in RAAF service if I’m not mistaken. Dunno when Russia placed the first order for Su-34s, but the first was actually delivered on 15th December 2006. We have 2012 and there are still just 10 in service with no front line unit being operational at this point in time.
I am not sure you understand this thing. Su-34 has strike targets at 8000km in 7.5hrs including refuelling time.
. It gives alot more freedom of not depending on carrier and allied bases to strike Middleast. and in coming 10 to 15 years. That flexibility will deciding factor. F-18 is not so much usefull for long flight.
http://www.9abc.net/index.php/archives/18823
http://defense-update.com/20101119_su-34.html
JSRAustralia’s deferment has zip to do with the JSF or the program, it is all about domestic politics and a very desperate government who have sent the country broke in less than six years clutching at straws to save their rear ends
well $4b is cut. and half of the cuts coming from JSF. I can only forsee Austallia buying JSF in small quanities of one or two a year. and that $40b Submarine programme will not see first Sub before 2025.
Australlia has joined Norway/Saudi resource based economy with complete dependence on external suppliers.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/treasury/bn-stripped-from-defence/story-fndbwnla-1226346325432
Budget 2012 $4bn stripped from Defence
JSRSame race & culture? I’ve been to both countries, met many Russians & Chinese abroad, lived with Chinese, etc. You’re talking total, utter, garbage. What planet do you live on? :confused:
I think he didnot explain properly. what he means is government mentality that produced pretty similar approaches. both have higher savings rate, foreign reserves, budgetery resources relative to need, large infrastructure spending, military modernization. distaste of Arab spring & Japan. slow measured decline of west.
there slight differences as Chinese believe in economic integration and shared prosperity to some extent. Russian dont. They want to create dependency vassals with sufficently strong and longer reach military to squeeze others.
JSRGround mission excerises at Dingxin, west China, including standard ground attacking mission and some mission on take out “enemy”s ground air defense systems.
you need special weopons and jammer and those jammers need power supply. THere is no way those engines are capable doing it with that airframe.
JH-7 is simply too slow compared to Flanker.
And since when under/over power( in terms of thrust-weigth ratio) has some strong correlation with range or even speed? last time i recall the current longest ranged aircrafts are usually “underpowered” comparing to fighter, and world fastest manned aircrafts are also pretty much very very underpowered.
So lets quit being amatuerish and employing amatuerish reasoning methods OK?
range and speed has direct connecition with power. If you want to take decent amount of weopon load and internal fuel for strike. try to lift 3 Tons fuel tank with JH-7 Plus 3 ton weopon load. There is no evidence JH-7 can carry 6 tons externally.
Also, with a stone-age tubrojet engine, its quite understandable why Su-24 is short-legged.
stone age. First try to create 25000 lbs turbo jet in China. Infact Su-24 is one the most successfull export bomber from 1970s. More than Tornado/F-111.
JSRIn PLA’s internal military excerises, J/H-7 can take down air defense and ground targets much better comparing to Su-30 thanks its far better electronics.
what kind of weopon and external jammer that JH-7 uses that make it better.
Su-30 atleast can fly higher and with more mach#
And we all know in terms of ground attacking abilities, Su-30 is still better than Russian current Su-24 fleet.
Su-24 carries ET which Su-30 cannot. There plus and minuses in each platform.
Better range, better electronics and better ground-attacking abilities, so I guess J/H-7 score at things that matters for today’s fighter-bombers.
underpowered JH-7 has better range?. It hasnt been seen with bigger ET than 1500L. I have doubts about its internal fuel capacity due to small wings.
Sign In
