Comparison between the Navies of India and China

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

displacedjim RE:Chinese Strategic and Tactical Challanges....part II 6/23/2005 10:10:37 AM

"displacedjim, I think that both sides were simulatingf fictional weapons. I doubt they used semiactive AAM. Also the MKI were not involved in 04 and Mirages didn't simulate MICA. So the article should be read with a pinch of salt IMHO." -- DBG ---- It is true they simulated fictional, or notional, weapons. However, the characteristics of those weapons were as stated: the USAF F-15s were limited to a semi-active AAM only, and at least the Su-30K were simulating an active AAM. The article clearly pointed out that the Su-30MKI was **not** used in the exercise. The article claimed MICA "use" on the M2000; I don't know about whether that part is accurate or not, but given the rest of the article is actually right on target and correct in every detail that I'm aware of through independent confirmation, I'd tend to give this point the benefit of the doubt. It could be that the M2000 simulated the same notional active AAM as opposed to explicitly simulating MICA. Displacedjim

Quote Reply

coolboyjay RE:Comparison between the Navies of India and China 11/27/2005 4:20:25 AM

Mithradates, going by ur past record, I would have to ask for neutral sources for each of the statements to have made. If anybody needs a refresher: Here are a list of arguments by mithradates: 1. China has the capacity to convert about 2 mln barrels of oil per day from coal. (china's consumption is 5 mln bpd, around 40% imports) 2. China would be able to send in a mechanised division into India's North East, after crossing the himalayas the swamps, 3 major rivers, the rainforests and lastly the Indian Army posts in two weeks. by the way, did u mean soldiers with automatic rifles, when u said MECHANISED?? 3. China had a 45 day strategic reserve of oil. of course, he must have overlooked this small news item: news.xinhuanet.com/english/ 2005-07/05/content_3176510.htm Kindly provide us with proof, (neutral ones please). Once u provide that, then we shall talk.

Quote Reply

displacedjim RE:Indian Ignorance of Weapons systems 11/27/2005 12:19:46 PM

"The kind of missile defense ships that I'm talking about are those with long-range SAMs(interception range of 200-250km) guided by Phased Array Radars(Detection range of 250-300km) that is integrated into the Fleet C4I. That is, one or two ships can provide air defense coverage over an entire fleet. Imagine a ship that can stop ~150 ASCMs from hitting any ship in a fleet within a 200km radius while at the same time, automatically direct the point defense systems of the entire fleet against those missiles that it's not able to intercept in time. Now India doesn't have anything like that." ---- In general, without having particularly studied either navy, I'd agree that it looks like the PLAN is more capable overall than the Indian Navy. There's also the matter of trying to actually get their respective navies into the fight, and I bet China's much larger number of various types of auxiliaries and commercial shipping that could be pressed into military service would be very important in any prolonged sea campaign. I'd also guess a similar comparison of amphibious capability would again give the nod to the PLAN. But as for your above quote, Mithradates, I wonder what PLAN ship you're talking about **today** since the Type 052B and 052C have (if I recall correctly, so definitely correct me if I'm wrong) about 48 to maybe 64 VLS missiles that are SA-10 copies (the HHQ-9), and thus have a range of 90km. Specifically, this doesn't equal the capability to stop "~150 ASCMs" at "200-250km". Displacedjim

Quote Reply

Heorot RE:mithradates Ignorance of Radar 11/27/2005 12:30:47 PM

"The kind of missile defense ships that I'm talking about are those with long-range SAMs(interception range of 200-250km) guided by Phased Array Radars(Detection range of 250-300km)" Mithradates, radars see in a straight line. Even from the highest mast, you will NOT see targets at that range unless they are conveniently flying high. That was the whole point of sea skimmers. Its impossible to see and track a missile until it's over the horizon.

Quote Reply

mithradates RE:Indian Ignorance of Weapons systems 11/27/2005 12:45:41 PM

"Specifically, this doesn't equal the capability to stop "~150 ASCMs" at "200-250km". First of all, the stated range of the HQ-9 SAM was a mistake on my part. However, 2 ships should be capable of stopping around ~150 ASCMs from hitting a fleet. Furthermore, just with some additional research, I realized that even American Aegis style destroyers only has an ASCM interception range of around 100km.

Quote Reply

mithradates RE:mithradates Ignorance of Radar 11/27/2005 12:54:17 PM

"Mithradates, radars see in a straight line. Even from the highest mast, you will NOT see targets at that range unless they are conveniently flying high. That was the whole point of sea skimmers. Its impossible to see and track a missile until it's over the horizon." Ah, but not all targets are ASCMs. Targets could be enemy aircrafts, or even short range ballistic missiles. My comment above is to show the MAXIMUM detection range of the PAR. Now as for ASCM interception, keep in mind that the PAR installed on the 052s is designed to work with input from AWACs and other airborne detection assets. So that currently, beyond the horizen interception of ASCMs out to 90 km is possible by the Chinese navy.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Indian Ignorance of Weapons systems 11/27/2005 12:56:10 PM

"But as for your above quote, Mithradates, I wonder what PLAN ship you're talking about **today** since the Type 052B and 052C have (if I recall correctly, so definitely correct me if I'm wrong) about 48 to maybe 64 VLS missiles that are SA-10 copies (the HHQ-9), and thus have a range of 90km. Specifically, this doesn't equal the capability to stop "~150 ASCMs" at "200-250km"." It's quite simple, they are the Middle Kingdom so all actual capabilities are doubled or more for public consumption. Gotta keep them happy somehow and nationalism works alot better than communism on that account.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Indian Ignorance of Weapons systems 11/27/2005 12:57:00 PM

"However, 2 ships should be capable of stopping around ~150 ASCMs from hitting a fleet." ROFL

Quote Reply

mithradates RE:Indian Ignorance of Weapons systems 11/27/2005 1:04:21 PM

Hey....I admit when I've made a factual mistake. Unlike most posters.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Indian Ignorance of Weapons systems 11/27/2005 1:12:46 PM

"Hey....I admit when I've made a factual mistake. Unlike most posters." So do I. Now 2 ships taking out 150 ascm's is ludicrous. The US Navy wouldn't get that many, let alone technology from earlier generations.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT