The Modernization of Chinese Military Power

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 10:47 AM
link   
I thought I might start a forum post that can be used to keep track of China’s military aviation efforts into modernization. What follows is by no means a complete or comprehensive list of aircraft under development but maybe a starting point for discussion on the many programs that the growing Chinese military is, or may be undertaking in modernizing its aviation wing.
Disclaimer: I sourced many different public domain sites on the net for the below info. Specifications are subject to change as info is released by official sources close to the programs mentioned.

Fighter aircraft:

J-20 Mighty Dragon:
Probably the most well-known stealth aircraft that is in the public domain and considered China’s first 5th generation fighter. The J-20 (PLAAF designated “project 718”) was developed by the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group. It took its first flight Jan. 11 2011 and is expected to be operational by 2019 according to Gen. He Weirong. This will be very dependent on whether China can find or produce an engine suitable for the aircraft, were as reports indicate that the current engines aren’t up to the task of its intended design. Recent development tests show the J-20 carrying dummy long and short range missiles it its 4 weapons bays.



J-31 / J-21 Gyrfalcon:
Another twin engine 5th generation fighter. Designed by the Shenyang Aircraft Corp. It is similar in design and apparent role as the F35 and may be a direct result of the secrets gleamed by Chinese espionage on the F35. It took it maiden flight Oct 12th 2012 and is said to be using 2 Russian RD-93 engines (18-20K lbs thrust class). Sun Cong, the J31’s lead designer has said that he hopes the J-31 would someday be used as a carrier bases aircraft.



J-10B Vigorous Dragon:
An upgraded version of the J-10A model also known as the “super 10”, it features a diverless supersonic air inlet, an IRST sensor, RAM coatings, an AESA radar and many minor fuselage tweaks over the J-10A. It took its first flight in 2008.



Attack/bomber aircraft:

J-16 Flanker:
The J-16 is a strike aircraft designed and manufactured by Shenyang Aircraft Corp. It is an upgrade to the J-11BS with longer range and upgraded avionics and basically a copy of the Russian Su-30MK2. It was first seen in 2012.



H-18 (rumored):
A medium sized and ranged stealth bomber developed by 601/SAC. Designed to replace the H-16 bomber. A prototype or mock-up is rumored to have been built in 2013. Not much else is known about this aircraft.



H-20 (rumored):
Supposedly similar in design to the B-2 this Xian Aircraft Co. designed aircraft has been reported to be on the fast track. It is called the “strategic project” and again is rumored to carry a rotary weapon pod and use four engines. Other details are not know yet or even if this aircraft exists or ever will exist.



Transport:

Y-20 Kunpeng:
Built by Xi’an Industries this four engines cargo aircraft is supposed to give the PLA a 2700+ mile range while carrying a 145,500 lbs. payload. It took its first flight Jan. 26th 2013.



Drones:

Wing Loong:
This MQ-9 Reaper based UAV started its design phase in 2005 and first flow in 2008. Like the Reaper it is able to carry air to surface missiles and has a flight endurance of around 20 hours.



Divine Dragon:
Another mystery Chinese project. This may be a Chinese version of the X-37 or a test bed for a future manned Chines space plane. It supposedly has one test flight under its belt sometime in 2010.



BZK-005 Giant Eagle:
The BZK-005 is a medium/ high altitude long endurance UAV. It said to have a cruising speed of just over 100mph, a service ceiling of 26, 200ft and a payload of 330 lbs. Developed by BUAA, the prototype was revealed in a promotional Video in 2006.



BKZ-006/WZ-6:
A RATO (rocket assist take off) and parachute recovered UAV that was seen at the 60th National Day military parade in Oct. 2009. It is about 14 ft. long and stay aloft for 12 hours.



BKZ-009/WZ-9:
Designed with a low RCS by GAIC this UAV is similar in design to the Global Hawk but smaller. With a 500 mph speed, 60k ft. ceiling and 500 mile range it is designed for strategic recon. and first flew in 2009. I couldn’t find any other pictures of this aircraft other than a static model.



Guizhou (Soaring Dragon):
High altitude endurance UAV, designed by Changdu Aircraft Corp., is operated by the PLAAF for recon. and possible anti-ship warfare. The original design for this UAV, also similar to the Global Hawk, was first seen in 2011 and then was redesigned and reported to have flown in 2012 . It features a joined wing configuration and is one of the largest aircraft to feature this wing type. It is aprox. 47 ft long, has a cruise speed of 466 mph, 4350 mile range and a 10 hour endurance.



Sharp Sword:
This is a flying wing design UAV similar in shape to the Sentinel but about twice the size. It is supposed to have internal weapons bays and folding wings for possible carrier deployment if China can master the tech involved. It took its first flight Nov. 2013





posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Jeezuz don't they actually have aircraft designers in China?
Seems like all those aircraft look like aircraft from other countries development....
The Chinese are being assisted by the NWO as the "new enforcers" of the 21 century......the Banks will have a new
Military arm.......America is going down hill faster than ever......simply bleeding its secrets out every orfice......
even the ruskies aren't exempt from all the theft of design....who is leaking this stuff to everyone?



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by stirling
 


Let's see, the F-22 and the F-35 both are looking at 20+ years from award to in service. China is looking at 6? 7? for their RQ-170 copy. And about half that for some of their manned aircraft copies. Why wouldn't they?



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by stirling
 


lol, all tech is stolen or borrowed or modified.

How far would the US be without German rocket scientists?



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


Good old China. Rather than design your own *hit, just steal someone else'.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by EA006
 


You think that if the US or any other country had the opportunity they wouldn't do the same thing? Just look at the F-117 and find out how wrong you are. The only reason that it ever flew was because of the Soviets.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I know this. That's what they do at area 51.
It just pisses me off.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Whether they are original or not is irrelevant. What is important is what capabilities they individually possess in conjunction with how quickly and widely they can be fielded.

You can cope with being half as good if you have three times as many.

The more I look at China the more I think we are going to regret blowing the western worlds current and future air combat funds on the F-35.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


I am curious how one claims to have a stealth fighter and drone when they can be seen on radar as easy as anything else they have with those giant exhaust outlets ticking out? These can be seen with IR and heat seeking missiles miles away. China is just as bad as Iran at the laughable crap they make.

If its not directly made by Russia they have no military power worth worrying about.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Exactly. We spend all the money on R&D and testing these designs thoroughly, so why not use that resource since we seem not to be able to stop the bleeding if sensitive info into China. They can go from drawing to actual aircraft in such a short amount of time because all the hard work has been done for them and they may not have to test their aircraft as thoroughly as we do.

I'm sure if another country was way ahead of us in military tech, you can bet your bottom dollar the US would be trying there best to steal the secrets, it's not exclusive to one country or the other.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   

superman2012
reply to post by stirling
 


lol, all tech is stolen or borrowed or modified.

How far would the US be without German rocket scientists?



Your point is precisely why I never ..ever.. sell China short. Especially for surprises in Military numbers or ability. If they were inventing it themselves, it would be subject to the same timelines of trial and error, sometimes through blood more than tears, to get something in the air and reliable.

China simply steals it, which isn't something I'm making a moral issue of as much as a simple observation of their shortcut past R&D time/costs.

They also tunnel like moles and small glimpses of what they've done in that area leaves me with a cold feeling for how much could very easily be sitting out of Satellite view, fully by design and with that in mind, unless war breaks out some day. That would be the Chinese way. Walk almost silently, with a stick big enough to change nations with.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


They seam to be more concerned with RCS from a head on POV and not as much from the sides and rear. This would tell me that they are either confident enough that they won't need a small departing RCS after they have neutralized the target or they are building these weapons as a first strike into areas that can't mount a lengthy counter offensive if a brutal initial attack is mounted.....ie. Taiwan.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Who care when their RQ-170 copy is not stealth and has not even left the runway. They have no clue how to make anything truly stealth while we are making planes that you cant even see at all, let alone all the UFO's that are not balls of light are ours.

I have seen F-16s up and disappear and a Blackhawk go completely quite only a football field away from me. My friends and I were just getting back to his place one night and the chopper was flying right by the coast as he lives on the water. It had its lights flashing and sounded just like a normal Blackhawk and then nothing right in front of us. My friends looked at me and said WTF! That made me smile! Only after seeing the Navy Seal version did I know what it really was since McDill AFB is right south of me.

Hell, you wont even hear the B-2 until its to late at low levels. Seeing one fly up the river my parent's live on at 300 feet was by far the coolest thing I have ever seen yet. You sure heard it when it passed but when it turned away it was pretty quiet for a plane that big. The B-2 is 70's tech, Given the huge computer advancements, The U.S. mil hardware that is publicly known is a facade for the foolish today. This is the only reason why our Generals and Admiral laugh at China and Russia anymore unless they are trying to sell a new program.

Every public program goes over budget because the rest secretly goes to another classified non public one.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Sammamishman
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


They seam to be more concerned with RCS from a head on POV and not as much from the sides and rear. This would tell me that they are either confident enough that they won't need a small departing RCS after they have neutralized the target or they are building these weapons as a first strike into areas that can't mount a lengthy counter offensive if a brutal initial attack is mounted.....ie. Taiwan.


That does not matter with Heat. That turd is a joke and they know it. They are just trying to frighten their small neighbors or get contracts for selling it to the Arabs and others who know no better.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


The RQ-170 and other designs are inherently stealthy. That's one of the advantages of a flying wing design. Not to mention that they had full access to the Sentinel while it was in Iran. They had access to every stealth feature on that aircraft, but they couldn't make their stealthy?



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


The F-22 and F-35 have large nozzles, and don't have a problem with IR signatures.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I've also read that the current engine in the Sharp Sword is not the production engine. They just took an off the shelf motor to get flight test done and that it will have a smaller profile engine eventually.

That seams to be a going theme for Chinese aircraft, either not having the right engine or struggling with making an engine suitable for what they need.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000

superman2012
reply to post by stirling
 


lol, all tech is stolen or borrowed or modified.

How far would the US be without German rocket scientists?



Your point is precisely why I never ..ever.. sell China short.


One could argue farther. Just look how long it took them to get a working Atlas rocket. The American Army designed Redstone rocket was the first to successfully launch into space. We probably would have made a better rocket design had the Germans not steered us in that direction. The whole problem back then was stability. The Russians used logic to figure that out by having four engines tilted out a little bit, du! China's lack of ingenuity is killing them, its copy and rush crap out. All we have to do is keep feeding them BS designs that will never be good.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


The Chinese and Russians both have huge engine development problems. I talked to a Russian pilot several years ago who told me that when they would take off in a Condor, they'd have to sit on the runway for two minutes at full power. If none of the engines failed, they'd release the brakes and take off.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Sammamishman
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I've also read that the current engine in the Sharp Sword is not the production engine. They just took an off the shelf motor to get flight test done and that it will have a smaller profile engine eventually.

That seams to be a going theme for Chinese aircraft, either not having the right engine or struggling with making an engine suitable for what they need.


Its not the size. Its the whole design. The Whole engine either needs to be inside or have very advanced nozzles like ours that are still a very top secrete design even though you can see distant pics of them, up close is a no no. Why? I wont tell! The Russians do not have them so neither will China.





new topics
top topics
 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join