Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Hongjian
Citing the People's Daily, it is claimed that this 12k ton ship is built to military standards and is capable of slamming into a 20.000 tonne ship (and a 9000 tonne ship - subtle hint at the Japanese Shikishima-class coast guard cutter) without incurring major damages to itself. A 5000 tonne ship can be sunk 'to the ocean floor'.

This is literally a media outlet stoking an uneducated public's nationalism. Remember when the a minor collision in undisputed Japanese waters caused a major diplomatic issue? Can you imagine how bad that would have been if the Japanese actually sank the fishing vessel in that incident? Imagine the Japanese reaction if the CCG rammed and sank one of their vessels? That seems like a hugely escalatory move that would not be in China's interests; the fastest way to get more USN assets deployed to your front door would be to attack Japan.

No, the reason the vessel is larger is so that the CCG can maintain longer deployments at Senkakus. They don't have the forward bases there to refuel like in the SCS; by keeping their ships there longer they can create an image of de-facto control.

In other word, more maritime confrontation than actual conflict sparkling.

Yet Japanese media claimed that 'recently armed' CCGs are the sight or dangerous plays, considering how China really put more efforts to cruise Diaoyu Island with them.

A 12k ton ship is needed. Since China's previous CGCs were rather small and worse armed, they stood no chance against the huge and very well armed Japanese cutters.
In any way, China always stood to lose. If the japanese purposely sank a smaller Chinese ship by ramming while it violates the japanese claimed waters, China's only option would have been to swallow that loss without any physical retaliation (because the USN). So, the obvious answer is to pit a larger ship that cant be easily sunk by ramming attacks by the now-smaller japanese vessels, and thus allowing China to assume full control over the escalation level, so that the entire conflict wouldnt even come to this. If the Japanese feel that they cant drive off two 12.000 ton ships off-course by ramming and pushing, they have two options: Retreat in shame or try to light them up with their 20 and 35mm guns. The second option will be very risky, because these 12k ton ships are better armed with a 76mm rapid firing gun, as well as possibly two 30mm chainguns. So, the only way for the Japanese to sink them is by calling an JMSDF Destroyer to sink them with heavy weapons. And this would mean war, which isnt in the interest of both countries. This is clearly brinkmanship, but it is exactly what the Hawkish President of China, Xi Jinping, actually wants now. The slow, but steady increase in China's nuclear arsenal (especially now after the reform and creation of the "Rocket Force", which also would command organic sea-based and air-based nuclear assets), as well as the fast growth of the navy and airforce, is basically aimed to provide China with the big gun that can be pointed at the rival's head while both of them are arm-wrestling and pushing with their bellies, until one of them blinks.

All in all, China's decision to escalate the island dispute with Japan wont change the balance all too much, since the USN is already there in force with 3 more carrier groups. The USN wont start a war with China when coast guard ships are bumping each other. Anyone who thinks otherwise isnt being realistic tbh. And with the 12k ton ships, there wont be much bumping going on after all, because of reasons stated above. I'd rather expect a mini arms-race to break out, with Japan responding by building 20.000 ton coast guard cutters, that are to be answered by Chinese 40.000 ton coast guard cutters "armed" with a reinforced ice-breaker hull and so on and so forth.

@Dysta

Where do you get the stats for the 12k tonne class? I never read anything about its maximum speed. Anyway, speed isnt even needed to enforce a maritime claim, if you have the displacement and armament to resist all hostile attempts to evict you with physical means. If you are an elephant, the hunter cant play bumping with you anymore, but either have to resort to the elephant-gun (AShMs), or retreat in shame.

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

@Dysta

Where do you get the stats for the 12k tonne class? I never read anything about its maximum speed. Anyway, speed isnt even needed to enforce a maritime claim, if you have the displacement and armament to resist all hostile attempts to evict you with physical means. If you are an elephant, the hunter cant play bumping with you anymore, but either have to resort to the elephant-gun (AShMs), or retreat in shame.

I got the reference from china.com in simplified Chinese:

http://military.china.com/important/111 ... 03137.html

Well, if speed is really matters, then lighter and nimble LCS will do far better jobs than 10k ton of cutters (you may say LCS is a warship, but for military perspectives, coast guard ship is also a warship). Freedom and Independence classes will immediately answer the 76mm deck gun with Griffons and Hellfires, and forget about the title of Coast Guard, Navy, or whatever the name was fashioned. Like you said, war ensures if it really happens.

Technically, any vessel from just a crew holding a pistol, or a ship mounted with a CIWS, are also classified as an armed unit that Coast Guards shouldn't be fooled with. If the fastest coast guard ship acknowledge these threats, it will be the first to response with, be it tail-gating (ramming at stern area, since slower ship cannot escape with inferior speed), water cannon exchange, or even uplink target to Navy/Air Force with FCRs.

This logic applied for both JCG and CCG, if pitting each other happens, both sides of military will definitely intervene, and that's rarely matters which side of Coast Guard ships escape first.

1st Phase of AGM-158C LRASM Anti-Ship Missile Inflight Tests on F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Completed
The U.S. Navy's NAVAIR (Naval Air Systems Command) just released a new picture showing a Super Hornet from Patuxent River’s Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23 facility carrying a model of the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) during a flight test Jan. 6 over Patuxent River, Md. This flight completed the first phase of inflight loads testing for the weapon program. With load testing completed, the U.S. Navy will now focus on noise and vibration tests.
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ew&id=3447

At least some teeth:

http://news.usni.org/2016/01/07/navy-ai ... nd-of-2016

timeline seems unusually fast...

ORIGINAL: DeSade

At least some teeth:

http://news.usni.org/2016/01/07/navy-ai ... nd-of-2016

timeline seems unusually fast...

w00t!!! I wonder if the NSM can be launched from the existing Mk 141 4X launcher used by the Harpoon? If so, this could seriously increase the ASuW and land attack capabilities for the USN, (and probably most of the civilized world) almost instantly.

So, news,news, news ! [:D]

1. Project 22800 "Karakurt"
"Almaz-Antey" vs KBP
Instead of Pantsir-M "Almaz-Antey" want to install "small Redut" with 9M100 missile only(8 cells module,in each cell one 9M100 ,unknown quantity of modules)


10-15 km range
10 km height
~1000 m/s
three spectre head (IR,near IR ,UV) and command guidance
can fit 4 in 1 Redut cell
This "small Redut" supported by one of "Arbalet-D" AESA radar station
small ships variant:

or corvette variant:



"Almaz-Antey" have support from "Almaz" design bureau
good things in "Almaz-Antey" proposal ,
- 9M100 "smarter" than 57E6 (57E6 only command guided, 9M100 have three spectral head and command guidance)
- more channels than in one Pantsir module
- VLS , so simultaneous attacks from different directions can be deflected (in this case Pantsir can atack 4 target in 45° or 2 in 90°)

KBP Pantsir also have good things
- price of Pansir module + Pozitiv radar is better than 9M100 VLS + Arbalet radar + Pozitiv radar (for Pantsir module + Pozitiv
(with 32 57E6 included)~650 millions rubles , for "Almaz-Antey" proposal it is somthing like ~700millions only for radars )
- range of 57E6 5km better than 9M100
- price of 57E6 better than 9M100 (4 vs 18 millions rubles)
- KBP pomise new missile with 24km range ,soon [:)]
- Did I mention low price? [:D]

So , how 22800 will look like in reality is very interesting question
Pansir module?

or two AK-630 + this "Poliment-Redut Minor" ?

http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/bmpd/380 ... iginal.jpg

This battle still ongoing

2.New SR-10 plane

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5vek4J-86E

There is people in VVS who dont like Yak-152 as "first day" trainer plane
they main arguments :
- propeller-powered aircraft as "first day" trainer give wrong habits
- Yak-152 have problem with engine ( plan to install german engine and now dont know what to do [:D]) , SR-10 use AL-55 (one, in Yak-130 there is two AL-55)

So , this is SR-10



vs Yak-152


3.project 1155 Admiral Tributs
From state contract 0173100000813000679
According to state contract for repair of Admiral Tributs, MR-145 "Lev" (Kite Screech) removed from ship,

and MR-123 "Bagira-M" will be installed instead

here is simple MR-123 "Bagira" ,also in variant MR-123.02 mod 3 included in "Bagira-M",:


and here is AESA MR-123 "Bagira-M" with "Sfera" (optical and IR channels,laser rangefinder )



But most intresting part is work for battle information managment system "Sigma":
"7. Conjugation lines of targeting for radars MR-123.02 mod.3
"Bagira" L/S and P/B, MR-123 "Bagira-M", SAM "Kinzhal" (nose,
stern) and PUS "Purga";"

possibilities, possibilities ,anyway Admiral Tributs will be first project 1155 with AESA radar (maybe this radar even can guide Kinzhal missiles, who know what this "conjugation" means [:)])

ORIGINAL: Triode

vs Yak-152

Russia isn't alone with this development:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hongdu_Yakovlev_CJ-7

Yet it seems neither China nor Russia are really interested in Super Tucano-ski. As you stated, a bad start for new pilots.

And using them as the cheaper manned bomb truck against IS doesn't fare much of purpose either.

http://defence-blog.com/news/photos-of- ... opter.html

Rumor said that PLA has adopted Sino-Gyrocopter, named "Hunting Eagle", after nearly 2 years of test.



The footage of live demonstration can be found on YouTube, which is started at 2014:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKcpZJwZAPM

ORIGINAL: NakedWeasel

ORIGINAL: DeSade

At least some teeth:

http://news.usni.org/2016/01/07/navy-ai ... nd-of-2016

timeline seems unusually fast...

w00t!!! I wonder if the NSM can be launched from the existing Mk 141 4X launcher used by the Harpoon? If so, this could seriously increase the ASuW and land attack capabilities for the USN, (and probably most of the civilized world) almost instantly.

Almost sure it can't. At least not without major modifications to the launcher itself.

New Seeker Allows Tomahawk Block IV to Engage Targets Moving on Land or at Sea:
http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2016-01-13-Raytheon-completes-active-seeker-test-for-Tomahawk-cruise-missile
B-52H Now Able to Drop 8 JDAMs from Weapons Bay:
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2016-01-13-Boeing-Delivers-Six-Enhanced-B-52-Bomber-Weapons-Bay-Launchers#assets_117

So Tomahawk IV will uses better active seeking radar for the next batch. It is now a Harpoon in steroid. But what about the fate of LRASM?

ORIGINAL: Dysta

So Tomahawk IV will uses better active seeking radar for the next batch. It is now a Harpoon in steroid. But what about the fate of LRASM?

LRASM development and integration continues (the USN mounted it to a Super Hornet just last week). Tomahawk anti-ship developments have been a stop gap effort.

LRASM is approved for Air Launch and has been tested with VLS so it will work.

The OASuW Increment 2 (Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare) competition will be completely open and start by FY 2017.It is expected the LRASM will compete against the joint Kongsberg/Raytheon offering of the Joint Strike Missile (JSM) for air-launch needs and an upgraded Raytheon Tomahawk cruise missile for surface-launch needs and anything else that may sneak in.

Metal thingy :

Not so long ago I request adding RLK "Zaslon" on project 20385 ships (4 X-band, 4 S-band ,AESA, 200 km range, datalink for 9M96D)
based on this pictures from MSMS-2014



now we can compare 3D to reality ,installation of RLK mast on "Gremyaschiy":

2nd LRIP specimen of the J-20 appeared, code numbered 2102. The first LRIP 2101 appeared just 25. Dec last year. Things will go quite fast now, as these LRIP planes go to the PLAAF Flight Test Regiment for the development of combat doctrines, crew and maintenance familiarization/manual-creation and the training of the first batch of flight instructors.

An IOC by 2017 seems plausible.




The J-10B, which was in a similiar state back in 2011-12, had a LRIP batch of 8 planes. I would expect roughly as many for the J-20 LRIP batch too.

Chinese Su-35(SK?) to be delivered by Q4 2016!

http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/2588456

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Chinese Su-35(SK?) to be delivered by Q4 2016!

4 plane , hull numbers 0319,0320,0401,0402 (first two number of series , in each series there is 20 airframe)

ORIGINAL: Triode

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Chinese Su-35(SK?) to be delivered by Q4 2016!

4 plane , hull numbers 0319,0320,0401,0402 (first two number of series , in each series there is 20 airframe)

Yeah, still damn fast of a delivery. The PLAAF seems to urgently need more advanced 4.5 gen planes until the J-20 is deployed in numbers.