You are at netAirspace : Forum : Air and Space Forums : Military Aviation

Chinese Intelligence

Your online Air Force Base.
 

miamiair (netAirspace FAA) 24 Jan 11, 11:47Post
Via E-Mail

With the surprise rollout and high-speed taxi tests of China’s newest J-20 fighter, a stealth prototype, the U.S. Navy’s top intelligence official admits that the Pentagon has erred in its estimates of the speed with which Beijing is introducing new military technology.

The aircraft’s existence was not a surprise to the intelligence community, but “one of the things that is . . . true is that we have been pretty consistent in underestimating the delivery and initial operational capability of Chinese technology weapons systems,” says Vice Admiral David J. Dorsett, deputy chief of naval operations for information dominance and director of naval intelligence. Two recent examples of mis-analysis have been the J-20 fighter and the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile. Moreover, there is evidence that China’s advances include high-performance engines and missiles that display a new level of technical maturity and performance.

“In terms of the [J-20] stealth photos, it’s not clear to me when it’s going to become operational,” Dorsett says. “Do we need to refine our assessments better? I think so.”

Other Washington-based intelligence officials say they are watching the J-20’s testing with interest. “They have done several high-speed taxis with the nosewheel off the ground,” says another veteran analyst. “They could still be working out some kinks before they try an actual first flight.”

There also are a lot of unknowns about the aircraft’s real importance.

“Operational impact is a tough call to make at this point, given that this plane, even if it flies, is not going to be a full-up fifth-gen [aircraft],” the analyst says. “In essence, this is going to be a novelty for the next decade before it starts to roll off the series production lines and gets to the line units in any numbers that would impact any of our mission planning. A lot of things can happen, good and bad, between now and then to either speed this up or severely put the brakes on things.

“As far as radar cross section goes, this is not [a Lockheed Martin] F-22, nor should we be thinking that they are going for low RCS right out of the chute,” he says. “We have to keep in mind that this is the first attempt and it’s also the very first prototype of that first attempt. There’s a lot of tweaking . . . before they get to the final version. I see too many people . . . making sweeping assessments. That has always been a mistake.”

Engines have been an Achilles’ heel for Chinese high-performance aircraft. The Chinese have not produced an indigenous engine that has the performance they need for a world-class fighter. Under earlier military doctrine, which favored mass over advanced technology, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force was equipped with adapted versions of 1950s-era Soviet aircraft designs using old-technology engines. Analysts offer different assessments of China’s first high-performance engine, the Shenyang WS-10; but recent images of the J-11B fighter—China’s bootleg version of the Sukhoi Su-30—appear to show a nozzle design that differs visibly from the Russian AL-31F and resembles that of WS-10 engines displayed at air shows.

Dorsett downplays the immediate impact of the new fighter and new anti-ship missile.

“I’m more worried about Chinese game-changing capabilities in nonkinetic [areas such as information dominance, network invasion and electronic warfare],” he says. “I am most concerned about China’s focus on trying to develop [the ability] to dominate the electromagnetic spectrum, to counter space capabilities and to conduct cyberactivities.

“The other concern I have is China’s ability to become operationally efficient in a sophisticated, complex, joint war-fighting environment,” Dorsett says. “I don’t see China with those capabilities now. I do see them delivering individual components and weapon systems [such as the J-20 and DF-21D], but until they acquire proficiency [with them], how competent are they really going to be?” The Chinese military’s self-proclaimed timeline is mid-century, Dorsett notes. In that context, he denies that the Pentagon is overestimating its threat.

“I’m not alarmed,” Dorsett says. “I am intrigued by developments and am quite interested in the quantities and different types of technologies that we didn’t expect or overestimated.”

There is a marked relationship between China’s booming economy and its military buildup, he points out. But there are equally obvious shortfalls.

“The Chinese don’t have a great integrated ISR capability or an anti-submarine capability at all,” Dorsett says. “They don’t demonstrate a sophisticated level in joint war fighting. They are at the early stages of operational proficiency across the board. What would be dangerous is underestimating the timeline of synchronizing these various elements.”

Dorsett returned to the unexpected appearance of the J-20.

“How far along are they?” he asks. “I don’t know. They clearly have an initial prototype. Is it advanced and how many trials, tests and demos do they have to go through before it becomes operational? That’s not clear to me.”

However, the evidence of the design’s sophistication is mounting. The J-20 is supposed to carry new weaponry with some of it tucked away internally. China is continuing an effort to expand the military’s air-to-air missile inventory. Although Avic officials have not discussed what comes after the PL-12A radar-guided medium-range missile, new information suggests that work is progressing on several enhanced versions. These include a combined solid-motor, ramjet-powered PL-21. The missile, with a single inlet for the ramjet, may have undergone ground tests last year.

Work may be slightly more advanced on the PL-12D, a ramjet upgrade of the basic PL-12 with more modest changes to the airframe and less endgame maneuverability than the PL-21 would feature. ­Chinese industry also appears to be working on the PL-12C with smaller aft control fins for internal carriage on the J-20. The mid-body fins are believed to be similar to the basic PL-12 and PL-12B with improved electronic counter-countermeasures.

The close-in battle would use the PL-10, whose design may resemble South Africa’s Denel A-Darter. China’s ability to increasingly use standoff weapons, also in air-to-ground and anti-ship missile roles, is already affecting planning among potential adversaries. Japanese military officials are ­showing interest in missiles with greater ranges to be able to engage Chinese threats earlier, and there are discussions in the U.S. about the need for weapons with greater engagement ­capability.

Dorsett also expanded on earlier remarks about the DF-21D missile by U.S. Navy officials.

“U.S. Pacific Command’s assessment is that it has reached an initial operational capability,” he says. “They’ve tested it over land sufficient times that the missile system itself is competent and capable. Could they start to employ that in a fielded, operational environment? I think so. However, there is a question of fusing all the information they need for targeting. There are still some [unknowns] about how proficient they would need to be to fully deploy it at this point.”

Meanwhile, the Navy has changed its assessment of the DF-21’s ability to threaten a ship. Until now, the service has essentially rated as “poor” the possibility of China’s hitting an aircraft carrier with a ballistic missile.

“The technology that the Chinese have developed and are employing in the DF-21 system has increased their probability of hitting a maneuvering target with a salvo of several missiles,” Dorsett says. “What that probability is, we don’t know. I’m assessing that they don’t know. To our knowledge they haven’t test-fired this over water against a maneuvering target.”

That leaves Dorsett with the problem of improving intelligence-gathering to make the Pentagon’s predictions more reliable.

“One area we haven’t made much progress on was processing, exploiting and disseminating [data],” he says. “It’s high on our list for the upcoming year. We’re tackling imagery exploitation first. I think an awful lot can be automated. You don’t need to look at every piece of electro-optical imagery. You need tools that alert you to key issues.”
And let's get one thing straight. There's a big difference between a pilot and an aviator. One is a technician; the other is an artist in love with flight. — E. B. Jeppesen
DXing 24 Jan 11, 17:50Post
Fox News had an article yesterday on their site that perhaps sheds some light on how the Chinese got so far so fast, not to mention the Russians as well. Both may have had a little help from Serbia of all places.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/01/23 ... echnology/

BRUSSELS – Chinese officials recently unveiled a new, high-tech stealth fighter that could pose a significant threat to American air superiority — and some of its technology, it turns out, may well have come from the U.S. itself.

Balkan military officials and other experts have told The Associated Press that in all probability the Chinese gleaned some of their technological know-how from an American F-117 Nighthawk that was shot down over Serbia in 1999.


But no matter where they got the technology, we had better start working on a way to counter it.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
AndesSMF (Founding Member) 24 Jan 11, 17:53Post
The Chinese will self-implode before they become a problem to anyone else.
Einstein said two things were infinite; the universe, and stupidity. He wasn't sure about the first, but he was certain about the second.
44Magnum (Founding Member) 24 Jan 11, 21:26Post
DXing wrote:But no matter where they got the technology, we had better start working on a way to counter it.

If the Serbian military could manage it in 1999, it really shouldn't be a problem for the United States over a decade later.
AndesSMF (Founding Member) 24 Jan 11, 21:29Post
44Magnum wrote:
DXing wrote:But no matter where they got the technology, we had better start working on a way to counter it.

If the Serbian military could manage it in 1999, it really shouldn't be a problem for the United States over a decade later.

That shootdown was due to the carelessness of the mission back then. IIRC, the fighter was being sent along the same corridor every night. The Serbs easily figured this path out, and waited for the bomb bay doors to open. This was how the 'stealth' was defeated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F ... bat_losses
Einstein said two things were infinite; the universe, and stupidity. He wasn't sure about the first, but he was certain about the second.
ANCFlyer (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 24 Jan 11, 22:50Post
AndesSMF wrote:The Chinese will self-implode before they become a problem to anyone else.

Disagree.

They will continue to be a major power. Much like the former Soviet Union was in the 20th Century, the Chinese will be in the 21st . . .
LET'S GO BRANDON!!!!
AndesSMF (Founding Member) 24 Jan 11, 22:57Post
ANCFlyer wrote:Disagree.

Just recall what many stated about Japan not too long ago. Where is Japan now but an afterthought in the world?

Many can simply talk about wonders over the Chinese, but it glosses over two huge problems that cannot be denied.

First, their one child policy has created such a dearth of women that a lot of men will never find someone to marry. Imagine what happens to a country that literally has millions and millions of men w/o family responsibilities.

As to their economy, it is a joke. The internet is full of videos of empty cities that the Chinese have built. Shanghai alone was building Manhattan size office space every year for a long time. It is full of empty buildings.

The world's biggest mall sits virtually empty, in China.

And as already witnessed in the US, all bubbles pop, and nothing pretty comes out of them. The Chinese bubble makes the US bubble appear so small. And when they pop, China will first have to worry about China.
Einstein said two things were infinite; the universe, and stupidity. He wasn't sure about the first, but he was certain about the second.
ANCFlyer (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 24 Jan 11, 23:06Post
AndesSMF wrote:
ANCFlyer wrote:Disagree.

Just recall what many stated about Japan not too long ago. Where is Japan now but an afterthought in the world?

Many can simply talk about wonders over the Chinese, but it glosses over two huge problems that cannot be denied.

First, their one child policy has created such a dearth of women that a lot of men will never find someone to marry. Imagine what happens to a country that literally has millions and millions of men w/o family responsibilities.

As to their economy, it is a joke. The internet is full of videos of empty cities that the Chinese have built. Shanghai alone was building Manhattan size office space every year for a long time. It is full of empty buildings.

The world's biggest mall sits virtually empty, in China.

And as already witnessed in the US, all bubbles pop, and nothing pretty comes out of them. The Chinese bubble makes the US bubble appear so small. And when they pop, China will first have to worry about China.



I'm not denying China has it's issues . . .

What I'm saying is, what the Soviet Union was in the 20th Century, China is today - save the ability to borrow TRILLIONS from them. They are a force to be reconned with. We should pay more attention. When China's bubbly bursts, we'll pay, right along with the Chinese, unfortunately. A lesson that will be hard learned . . .
LET'S GO BRANDON!!!!
ShanwickOceanic (netAirspace FAA) 24 Jan 11, 23:18Post
We're getting further away from Military Aviation all the time, but it's an interesting discussion nonetheless; perhaps a move or split might be in order.

AndesSMF wrote:millions and millions of men w/o family responsibilities.

AndesSMF wrote:The Chinese bubble makes the US bubble appear so small. And when they pop, China will first have to worry about China.

That's millions of angry men with nothing holding them back from going out and kicking some ass when it all comes crashing down. Either the whole thing melts down into civil war, or just the right kind of nutjob sees that coming and leads them on some kind of military adventure (Taiwan anyone?). That could get real ugly real fast. A China on the brink is quite possibly more scary than a strong, or even mid-bubble, China.

Or maybe I've just been reading too much Tom Clancy :))
My friend and I applied for airline jobs in Australia, but they didn't Qantas.
DXing 24 Jan 11, 23:32Post
AndesSMF wrote:
44Magnum wrote:
DXing wrote:But no matter where they got the technology, we had better start working on a way to counter it.

If the Serbian military could manage it in 1999, it really shouldn't be a problem for the United States over a decade later.

That shootdown was due to the carelessness of the mission back then. IIRC, the fighter was being sent along the same corridor every night. The Serbs easily figured this path out, and waited for the bomb bay doors to open. This was how the 'stealth' was defeated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F ... bat_losses


Correct AndesSMF, they ripple fired a whole batteries worth of SA-3 rockets along the predicted flight path and scored a lucky shootdown. You have to wonder, after the lesson learned in WW2, as well as in Vietnam, about sending aircraft down the same corridor more than once what the commanders were thinking. Hopefully they learned that stealth does not equal invincibility in all cases.

But as to the Chinese fighter, I was speaking more to the air to air capability. The ability to detect this aircraft by fighters passive detection systems or by AEWS means will be crucial to defending against it.

AndesSMF wrote:First, their one child policy has created such a dearth of women that a lot of men will never find someone to marry. Imagine what happens to a country that literally has millions and millions of men w/o family responsibilities.


What that creates is the ability to wage wars of attrition with soldiers that have no one waiting at home and therefore nothing to lose. Like it or not, for populations that are run by dictators, and easily deprived of outside information, war is often a way to shift concern from problems at home to problems abroad. I am not saying it is a certainty but definitely a possibility. Thus the problem of a Chinese military buildup. At some point to take by force what they cannot buy will be an enormous temptation.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
Click Click D'oh (Photo Quality Screener & Founding Member) 25 Jan 11, 00:06Post
AndesSMF wrote:Just recall what many stated about Japan not too long ago. Where is Japan now...


Second largest national economy in the world despite being in a two decade long recession...
We sleep peacefully in our beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on our behalf
JLAmber (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 25 Jan 11, 01:42Post
Click Click D'oh wrote:
AndesSMF wrote:Just recall what many stated about Japan not too long ago. Where is Japan now...


Second largest national economy in the world despite being in a two decade long recession...


Third behind the US and China, by every available analysis:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... y_GDP_(PPP)#cite_note-0

The concerning thing about China is that they're going to need more land before long. They already occupy Tibet and small parts of disputed Indian territory (amongst others), which could cause an interesting clash between the world's two billion plus populations. With so many spare men, China wouldn't find it difficult to assemble a truly massive army (should they be so inclined). Let's hope they're happy with their role as the world's cheap goods factory.
A million great ideas...
Click Click D'oh (Photo Quality Screener & Founding Member) 25 Jan 11, 01:54Post
JLAmber wrote:Third behind the US and China, by every available analysis:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... y_GDP_(PPP)#cite_note-0


Well, that's what I get for not actually checking first.
We sleep peacefully in our beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on our behalf
AndesSMF (Founding Member) 25 Jan 11, 02:03Post
The problem, from an economic standpoint, is that China derives its power solely from selling their crap to other countries. A war, any war, would simply shift the focus from manufacturing in China to other parts.

As to fighters fighting because they have nothing to lose, IMHO that is a reason why NOT to fight. After all, if you have nothing to fight for, what would you fight for? Those who have more to lose tend to fight harder in order to avoid losing what they have.

China, IMHO, is nothing but a bogeyman. And a Chinese stealth fighter is a joke. If after all these years Chinese made crap is still crap, I highly doubt that any other thing will turn out better.

And to top it off, all this cheap manufacturing has come at the expense of a poisoned environment.
JLAmber wrote:They already occupy Tibet and small parts of disputed Indian territory

Militarily, it is well-known that India developed an atomic capability to use against China, not Pakistan. China merely sneezes wrong, and India came come in, 'save' Asia, and reap the rewards for decades to come.
Einstein said two things were infinite; the universe, and stupidity. He wasn't sure about the first, but he was certain about the second.
DXing 25 Jan 11, 05:39Post
AndesSMF wrote:As to fighters fighting because they have nothing to lose, IMHO that is a reason why NOT to fight. After all, if you have nothing to fight for, what would you fight for? Those who have more to lose tend to fight harder in order to avoid losing what they have.


Soviet soldiers in WW2 had nothing to lose, except their lives if they retreated. As long as the government behind you has total and absolute control, you either move forward at their direction or you die. No hope in dying by refusing to go, hope that things will get better if you do, therefore, just like the Soviet soldiers, they will go forward.

Until countries like the United States regain the ability to manufacture stuff, it will be bought from countries like China, Vietnam, Thailand, and other third world producers. There was a great piece on the news tonite though about how we could go about regaining our manufacturing base, a lot has to do with automation and the use of tax credits to develop and install the technologies but that will be glossed over by our President and the Chinese still have a undervalued currency and hundreds of millions of workers doing things on the cheap for us to overcome.

One thing the Chinese are very very good at though is gathering both commercial and military intelligence. They are probably better at it than we are.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
da man (Space Guru & Founding Member) 25 Jan 11, 10:11Post
Don't forget about another source of Chinese knowledge of stealth technology... OUR OWN ENGINEERS:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7396083.html
HONOLULU — A former B-2 stealth bomber engineer was sentenced to 32 years in prison Monday for selling military secrets to China in the latest of several high-profile cases of Chinese espionage in the U.S.

Chief U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway said Noshir Gowadia, 66, would likely be in his late 80s by the time he is released if he gets credit for good behavior in prison. Gowadia was convicted in August on 14 counts, including communicating national defense information to aid a foreign nation and violating the arms export control act.

Gowadia's sentencing came just weeks after China conducted a flight test of its new J-20 stealth fighter during a visit to Beijing by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The Jan. 11 flight was held at an airfield in Chengdu, where prosecutors said Gowadia delivered an oral presentation on classified stealth technology in 2003. Chengdu is a center for Chinese fighter aircraft and cruise missile research and development.
AndesSMF (Founding Member) 25 Jan 11, 17:34Post
DXing wrote:Soviet soldiers in WW2 had nothing to lose, except their lives if they retreated.

The Germans would treat them far worse than Stalin. They had plenty to lose w/o Stalin having to threaten them. He egged them on in defense of their motherland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Motherland_Calls
Einstein said two things were infinite; the universe, and stupidity. He wasn't sure about the first, but he was certain about the second.
DXing 25 Jan 11, 21:23Post
AndesSMF wrote:
DXing wrote:Soviet soldiers in WW2 had nothing to lose, except their lives if they retreated.

The Germans would treat them far worse than Stalin. They had plenty to lose w/o Stalin having to threaten them. He egged them on in defense of their motherland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Motherland_Calls


They would be shot by the NKVD if they retreated, especially in the battle of Stalingrad. The Germans would not automatically shoot them if they surrendered as the Germans needed slave labor to complete a number of tasks so that German males could be freed up for military service. Stalin did not threaten them, he promised them what would happen if they retreated, they would be shot as traitors to the motherland. Even those that were repatriated after being captured were then interned by the Soviet government to determine whether they were considered traitors or were legitimately captured. If it was found that you committed treason, you were shot. Given a choice between pushing foreward and perhaps being lucky enough to survive the war, versus being shot if I refused to go foreward, I think going foreward would be my choice.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
AndesSMF (Founding Member) 25 Jan 11, 21:34Post
Interesting...guess you learn something new every day. But how would the Chinese react in case of war?
Einstein said two things were infinite; the universe, and stupidity. He wasn't sure about the first, but he was certain about the second.
CO777ER (Database Editor & Founding Member) 26 Jan 11, 00:34Post
da man wrote:Don't forget about another source of Chinese knowledge of stealth technology... OUR OWN ENGINEERS:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7396083.html
HONOLULU — A former B-2 stealth bomber engineer was sentenced to 32 years in prison Monday for selling military secrets to China in the latest of several high-profile cases of Chinese espionage in the U.S.

Chief U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway said Noshir Gowadia, 66, would likely be in his late 80s by the time he is released if he gets credit for good behavior in prison. Gowadia was convicted in August on 14 counts, including communicating national defense information to aid a foreign nation and violating the arms export control act.

Gowadia's sentencing came just weeks after China conducted a flight test of its new J-20 stealth fighter during a visit to Beijing by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The Jan. 11 flight was held at an airfield in Chengdu, where prosecutors said Gowadia delivered an oral presentation on classified stealth technology in 2003. Chengdu is a center for Chinese fighter aircraft and cruise missile research and development.

Traitor
MD11Engineer 27 Jan 11, 12:54Post
ShanwickOceanic wrote:We're getting further away from Military Aviation all the time, but it's an interesting discussion nonetheless; perhaps a move or split might be in order.

AndesSMF wrote:millions and millions of men w/o family responsibilities.

AndesSMF wrote:The Chinese bubble makes the US bubble appear so small. And when they pop, China will first have to worry about China.

That's millions of angry men with nothing holding them back from going out and kicking some ass when it all comes crashing down. Either the whole thing melts down into civil war, or just the right kind of nutjob sees that coming and leads them on some kind of military adventure (Taiwan anyone?). That could get real ugly real fast. A China on the brink is quite possibly more scary than a strong, or even mid-bubble, China.

Or maybe I've just been reading too much Tom Clancy :))


The Chinese are copying the Singaporean model (not really a free, democratic society, the country is basically ruled by one party controlled by the family of Lee Kuan Yew, the former president). Unlike the cleptocratic dictators e.g. seen in Africa or the Marcos´s in the Philippines, Lee realised that the general population didn´t mind being ruled by an authoritarian ruler (in fact they like the stability and low crime coming along with a police state. I know even people who grew up in Communist east Germany, who regret that crime rates increased after the opening of the wall. A political police keeping close watch on the population also, as a side effect, catches a lot of ordinary criminals.) as long as their economical standard of living keeps on improving.
The Chinese lreadership realizes exactly this as well. As long as the Chinese economy grows and people become richer, they are not going to demand personal freedoms and ignore that the leadership enriches itself and will tolerate a certain level of corruption.
But if local functionaries become too greedy and impoverish the local population through excessive corruption, riots occur, as happens regularly in remote Chinese provinces, where loval party functionaries act like aristocrats. If it becomes too much for the central government in Beijing, police or army will be dispatched to stop the unrest and a few provincial functionaries will be executed for corruption.

The crisis comes if the Chinese economy will suffer a big slump, when the government can´t fullfill it´s promise of continued economic growth anymore on a larger scale. Then their position might become endangered and they might resort to an even more agressive and expansionist nationalism (which in a tamer form has already replaced communism as the state ideology) and start putting serious pressure on their smaller neighbours (the South China Sea issue comes to my mind).

Jan
AndesSMF (Founding Member) 27 Jan 11, 18:47Post
Always a good explanation, Jan. {thumbsup}
MD11Engineer wrote:The crisis comes if the Chinese economy will suffer a big slump, when the government can´t fullfill it´s promise of continued economic growth anymore on a larger scale. Then their position might become endangered and they might resort to an even more agressive and expansionist nationalism (which in a tamer form has already replaced communism as the state ideology) and start putting serious pressure on their smaller neighbours (the South China Sea issue comes to my mind).

This to me is a given, that China will suffer a terrible slump. The end results I don't know.
Einstein said two things were infinite; the universe, and stupidity. He wasn't sure about the first, but he was certain about the second.
 

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

LEFT

RIGHT
CONTENT