Page 56 of 259
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:01 pm
by Hongjian
The carrier mockup in Wuhan Naval Institute received some major modifications: No Ski-Jump anymore, and a much reduced island!
compared to the previous design of 2014, reflecting the Ex-Varyag/Liaoning CV (note that in late 2014/2015 the island was further reworked, possibly to simulate the altered design of the modified 2nd Liaoning-class carrier Type 001A currently under construction in Dalian Shipyard):
So, people are of course quick to assume that this change would be an indication for China's next (3rd) carrier, the Type 002, which was rumored to be some Chinese version of the Kitty Hawk, a conventional CATOBAR carrier. The steel-cutting has already happened earlier this year, when rumors by the usual leakers are to be believed.
Some signs are already there: A J-15 variant might have surfaced featuring a catapult-capable forward landing gear dubbed the "J-15T" ("T" for Tangshe "Catapult Launch"):
In any case, the near future will show whether these rumors and signs will prove to be right or wrong.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2016 12:38 pm
by Hongjian
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china ... SKCN10812X
China says pressing ahead with own anti-missile system
China's Defence Ministry confirmed on Thursday that it was pressing ahead with anti-missile system tests after pictures appeared on state television, amid anger at South Korea's decision to deploy an advanced U.S. anti-missile system.
An announcement by South Korea and the United States this month that they would deploy a Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) unit has drawn protests from China, which warned that the system would destabilize regional security.
The decision by the United States and South Korea is the latest move to squeeze increasingly isolated North Korea, but China worries the system's radar will be able to track its military capabilities. Russia also opposes the deployment.
Pictures broadcast this week on Chinese television were the third time since 2010 that China has publicly indicated tests of its own anti-missile system, state media said.
"To develop suitable capabilities for missile defense is necessary for China to maintain its national security," Defence Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun told a regular monthly briefing, when asked about the footage.
"It will improve the self-defense capability of China and is not targeting any specific country and will not affect international strategic stability," he added, without elaborating.
South Korea and the United States have said THAAD would only be used in defense against North Korean ballistic missiles and they have tried to assuage Chinese concerns, without apparent success.
A senior U.S. administration official said on Tuesday, at the end of a visit to China by U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice, that the decision to deploy THAAD did not threaten China's security.
Yang repeated that China would consider taking unspecified measures to maintain strategic balance, and dismissed assertions that THAAD was no threat to China.
"As for the technical excuses from the United States and South Korea, experts can easily see how believable this is," he said.
North Korea has launched a series of missiles in recent months, the latest last week when it fired three ballistic missiles in what it said was a simulated test of preemptive strikes against South Korean ports and air fields used by the U.S. military.
China's military is undergoing an ambitious modernization program that has included tests of anti-satellite missiles.
Hopefully, this would mean that China finally discloses a bit more about the HQ-19 ABM system - such as some real photos and useable stats.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2016 11:59 am
by jun5896
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/20 ... 51315.html
The secretary and the USFK commander were vague on details about what option is being examined to defend South Koreans and U.S. soldiers and other assets here, but sources in South Korea's military said Seoul may start discussions with the U.S. for the deployment of a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) system here that could be deployed on South Korea's second batch of Aegis destroyers. Currently, South Korea's Navy operates SM-2 missiles with a flight range of around 150 km with its three Aegis destroyers, and there have been requests for the introduction of SM-3 missiles with a range of about 500 km to enhance the country's layers of defense.
South Korea MD Plans : SM-3 + THAAD(USFK) + PAC-3
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2016 3:04 pm
by Broncepulido
The Russian helicopter shoot-down yesterday in Syria was a Mi-8AMTSh/Mi-171Sh Terminator, RF-95585, one of most avanced Russian transport and assault types, in service from December 2010 or February 2014 (I was very intrigued this morning by this same photo in the newspaper, showing an unidentified (at least for me) metallic electro-optic ball below the tail boom, now at home with a little research is clear). The "ball" was not present at December 2015 in the same helicopter:
http://syria.liveuamap.com/en/2016/1-au ... -/comments
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... ia#media-1
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2016 9:10 am
by Raptorx7_slith
U.S. Air Force declares first squadron of F-35A's combat ready!
http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaki ... /87948142/
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 1:47 pm
by Hongjian
There has been a huge update and an infodump on the wikipedia-page for the Type 346 or H/LJG-346 SAPAR, the 4-faced naval AESA that is equipped on the Type 052C and 052D Destroyers (And the Liaoning CV), sourced from a translated chinese article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_346_Radar
It is very comprehensive and talks about the development history of the radar, about how the bid went, how it had to compete against a shorter ranged C-band competitor and how it was nearly killed due to intense political maneuverings between the two design institutes. All in all, a very deep look into how the "Star of the Sea" or "Dragon Eye" (in NATO code) came to be.
But most importantly out of all, it provides for the first time semi-official specs on the performance:
For Type 346:[4][5][14]
Total number of faces: 4
Bands: S and C
S-band array size & shape: octagon with 4 meter diameter
C-band array size & shape: ≈ 0.8 to 1 square meter rectangular ea.
Number of S-band arrays: 4 (1 per face)
Number of C-band arrays: 8 (2 per face)
Maximum search range (km): > 400
Weight (t): < 16 above deck
Scan: 120°
Elevation: 0° to 90°
Cooling: Air (Type 346), Liquid (Type 346A)
Also very interesting is the information that the Type 346/A is a S and C band dual band radar. The S-band array on the basic Type 346 has more than 5000 T/R modules, giving it more than 400km range and is used for air-search, while the two C-band arrays with an unknown count of T/R modules, which sandwitches the S-band main array, takes over the role of fire-control and guidance of all variants of the HHQ-9 missiles like the standard TVM, SARH and the ARH version. The early Type 346 radar (Type 115) was close to the AN/APQ-53 radar of MIM-104 Patriot, which also featured such a dual-band design, with a main array and another FCR array on the same radar.
The improved Type 346A on the Type 052D Destroyer has further increased T/R count and uses liquid cooling, possibly for its increased peak power of with 100KW, and possibly range increases.
Now, the early picture of the Type 346 SAPAR makes sense: One can see the main octagon and the two bars ontop and below it that sandwiches the main array.
And for comparisson, the AN/APQ-53 radar of MIM-104 Patriot, which uses a similiar dual-band concept:
Still, I would say that (NATO) C-band has insufficient resolution for true FCR-like 'painting of the target' to support TVM or SARH, so I would assume that the 'FCR-like capability' of the two C-band bars on each radar are used for mid-course guidance instead, while the HHQ-9 is still an Active Radar Homing missile like the FD-2000 export SAM, as compared to the TVM-guided land-based HQ-9, which is guided by the HT-233 (NATO) G-band radar.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 5:12 am
by AlGrant
Found this on Twitter.
Not sure how accurate it is but worth a look.
https://twitter.com/alert5/status/761431599502077954/photo/1
"This chart helps you to identify all Chinese variants of the FLANKER"
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 2:39 pm
by Hongjian
It is pretty accurate in my view. Radome color, tandem-seat or not and clipped tail fins are really the main distinguishing features of each Sino-Flanker variants. Albeit, with the J-11D and J-16D (Sino-Growler), the signature wouldnt just only be "solid grey radome", but also a "canted solid grey radome".
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2016 7:13 pm
by Hongjian
https://amti.csis.org/build-it-and-they-will-come/
CSIS report about the construction of hardened shelters on those artificial islands in the South China Sea, seemingly capable of hosting regiment-sized air-groups including large bombers and AWACS/Tankers.
Most notably, all islands also have those mysterious hexagonal structures distributed all around on the shores. My hunch is that they will house defensive weapons of some sort - maybe CIWS or DP-naval-gun mounts. Some say that they might even be for VLS launchers carrying short/medium range self-defense SAM.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2016 8:11 pm
by mikmykWS
ORIGINAL: Hongjian
https://amti.csis.org/build-it-and-they-will-come/
CSIS report about the construction of hardened shelters on those artificial islands in the South China Sea, seemingly capable of hosting regiment-sized air-groups including large bombers and AWACS/Tankers.
Most notably, all islands also have those mysterious hexagonal structures distributed all around on the shores. My hunch is that they will house defensive weapons of some sort - maybe CIWS or DP-naval-gun mounts. Some say that they might even be for VLS launchers carrying short/medium range self-defense SAM.
Really nice post.
My sense though is most of this stuff dies in the first salvo but likewise anybody trying to take an island and dig in will suffer the same. Really want to be a marine on an atoll with no features able to dig into all that well while your enemy uses PGM and effect based munitions? Even in WW2 most of the islands had a mountain etc. These islands and atolls. Basically none. All you can do is dig down but only so far[:)]
Mike
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2016 10:20 pm
by Kitchens Sink
IMO, the types of Chinese defenses talked about on the SCS Islands might be pretty effective against most of the main players in the territorial dispute (Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines, Brunei). Those Countries don't seem to have a lot in the way of standoff land-attack munitions.
If Taiwan or the U.S. were involved in attacks, it would be a different story. But in that case I'd be more worried about how deep my bunker in Idaho was.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2016 10:53 pm
by Dysta
Or In my opinion, it can be a territorial deterrence with island garrisons in peace time, and first strike platforms when war is initialized.
As Mik said, this cannot be a bastion for withstand dozens of munition strikes, but China still building it regardless. Maybe hoping the hostile will attack them firstly as an 'easy prey', to buy time for other asymmetrical advantages.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2016 5:51 am
by skjold89
IMO, deployments to most* of these islands are purely political and has little defensive value. Most of these islands are from a tactical point of view simply undefendable, but having a military presence reinforces your claim as the other claimants would have to confront the other nations military forces to take any island.
Kinda similar to the Baltics, it is blatantly obvious that the Baltic states are undefendable with the current armed forces of the region and the NATO deployment in the area, but it is more the fact that no matter how few, the Russians still have to fight Americans which is bound to escalate things.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2016 8:52 am
by Dysta
ORIGINAL: Skjold
IMO, deployments to most* of these islands are purely political and has little defensive value. Most of these islands are from a tactical point of view simply undefendable, but having a military presence reinforces your claim as the other claimants would have to confront the other nations military forces to take any island.
Kinda similar to the Baltics, it is blatantly obvious that the Baltic states are undefendable with the current armed forces of the region and the NATO deployment in the area, but it is more the fact that no matter how few, the Russians still have to fight Americans which is bound to escalate things.
As the 'territorial deterrence', and militarization is the political answer of violence.
Still, China can do whatever they please with reclaimed 'sitting ducks', including for developing civilian infrastructure (which is accused by western and Japanese medias that Chinese fisheries are militarily controlled, AKA militias), to give China more reason to manage those islands, and attacking these 'ducks' will cause more political disasters, if UN does playing the role of SCS conflicts.
But something much more worrying is China did declared will build nuclear energy platforms for these islands in the future. My assumption is not the energy the islands lacks of, but using them as 'nuclear-borderline'. If war happens and hostile really attempt to take the island or destroy the military facilities, the NPP may follows (either scuttle, or 'accidentally' destroying it) to pollute the entire SCS with radiation. Then ASEAN will be extremely pissed.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2016 12:27 pm
by tjhkkr
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/exc ... li=BBnbcA1
Exclusive: Vietnam moves new rocket launchers into disputed South China Sea - sources
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:07 am
by redcoat
The UK Ministry of Defence has announced that it has ordered a third Zephyr-S Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), as part of a £13-million contract with Airbus Defence and Space (ADS).
Zephyr-S is the latest version of a highly sophisticated series of ultra-lightweight UAVs, capable of flying up to 70,000ft - twice the altitude of a commercial airliner - for up to 45 days at a time. Referred to as a High Altitude Pseudo Satellite (HAPS), it performs more like a satellite than a conventional UAV.
Coverage in the Daily Mail.
Link.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:22 pm
by mikmykWS
Nice rocket system. Will have to add the Israeli variants too!
Mike
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:23 pm
by mikmykWS
ORIGINAL: redcoat
The UK Ministry of Defence has announced that it has ordered a third Zephyr-S Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), as part of a £13-million contract with Airbus Defence and Space (ADS).
Zephyr-S is the latest version of a highly sophisticated series of ultra-lightweight UAVs, capable of flying up to 70,000ft - twice the altitude of a commercial airliner - for up to 45 days at a time. Referred to as a High Altitude Pseudo Satellite (HAPS), it performs more like a satellite than a conventional UAV.
Coverage in the Daily Mail.
Link.
Fascinating system. Wonder what the payloads are?
Mike
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:12 pm
by tipsypo
Am presuming none, and just pure surveillance.
RE: Naval and Defense News
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:29 pm
by mikmykWS
ORIGINAL: tipsypo
Am presuming none, and just pure surveillance.
I assuming a reconnaissance payload. Sorry I wasn't clear. This matters when we implement stuff.
Mike