Best quote so far in my 3 days here on this topic.Originally Posted by dabrownguy
The best current Artillery piece in PLA is 155mm PLZ-45, In the 1997 international competition to provide Kuwaiti Army with a battalion of self-propelled artillery systems, the PLZ-45 surprisingly beat the US and European competitors to win the contract. Apart from political reasons to repay China’s support in the UN resolution to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi occupation, the excellent performance of the artillery system also played an important role in the decision. A battalion of howitzers were delivered to the Kuwait along with a full package of support, command and control, forward observer, and radar vehicles. Impressed by the artillery’s performance, Kuwait ordered additional 74 PLZ45 gun-howitzers in 2001.
And the best artillery in Indian inventory is 155mm Bhim T-6, The new Denel T-6 vehicle is called the Bhim after a hero from Indian folklore (Bhima). The turret has ammunition-loading hatches on the right and left, and a conveyor belt may be extended from either of these hatches for ammunition loading or direct feeding of the gun from a ground pile. There are two hatches on the roof of the turret. The vehicle is equipped with GPS and a fire control computer for direct laying of the gun, or firing at a target where the location is known.
Those supplies the PLA is sitting on are the targets? But if the PLA could deploy and support better weapons, wouldn't they? 155 mm guns and Kronspal copies could be devastating for bunkers.
Unless i'm mistaken on the size of the war. Then there should be barely any action. If thats the case wouldn't this be another Kargil? With proper air support bombing bunkers that have their supplies but are always running out and fighting on/off attempts by InA to capture the bunker?
The Colonel is right, both China and Russia will husband their PGMs and it will be a dumb bomb campaign for the most part.
And as regards dumb bombs, they will hurt but they cant stop the PLA. And even arty will be limited, but in my mind, probably better than the airpower, since weather in the north east is notoriously fickle.
Big difference. Instead of hitting a supply depot, you're hitting a marching column; requiring more munitions and more targetting priorities.
Why would they? Look, I'm getting tired of this. Both sides know where the battlefields are. Both sides know where are the only spots where artillery can be deployed. Both sides know the entrances and the exits. Get it?
Again, why would they? Why wouldn't they try to cut the InA's LOCs?
That is why there would not be any war. There are no strategic benefits and all anyone will win are bragging rights. And that's ALL the Chinese won in 62. Bragging rights.
Chimo
He is refering to the 1967 skirmish in Nathu La. These were company level clashes in three areas of Nathu La, where the PLA units got licked.
Comparing tanks in a Sino-India senario is pointless, as the terrain does not permit its use, except in Aksai Chin in a limited way, both sides are aware of it.So far, number of T-90 produced 100% by Indiar: 0
From: GSO
[I]...With the induction of 124 fully formed imported tanks and production of 186 tanks through Semi-Knocked Down and Completely Knocked Down kits, followed by indigenous production of 1000 tanks...
You obviously do not know much about that war and the state of the IA in that period.You are right, last time they fought was back in 1962, it only took a few days before Indian Army gave up 8000+ POWs & lost...
Sino-India war 1962
The Indian army was not wanting at the unit level, but were handicapped by a contemptuous and militarily ignorant political leadership.
As far Indian casulties are concerned they were, your data is way off the mark:
Killed - 1,383
Captured - 3,968
Missing - 1,696
The Chinese suffered heavy casulties too, but they have kept their data classified.
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
The land based version is not yet developed and is not deployed, hence I left it out.
Did I say that, I just gave a comparision to show that the InAF has the capability of neuralizing PLA AD in Tibet with the current resources on either side.And you make it sound like the planes launching the weapons are coming in unimpeded. Great!
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
You are treading in a zone where you have displayed only superficial knowledge. There are many threads in the archives, that may answer many of your doubts.
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
Really? you have give us more than 'that' to discredit my statements on page 5.
But I can't say I've read every post on this thread...
But, why is India considering purchasing Chinese made Fighter/Trainer/attacker L-15 laterly?
From my sources, this deal is close to be done as of today, 05/29/2006 between Indian Defense Minister & his Chinese counterpart. China is going to sell 30 L-15 advanced fighter/Trainer/ Attacker (aka LIFT, lead-in fighter trainer) to Indian AF.
It hasn't made the news yet but, it will soon...
I still have not seeing any good counter-statements for my opinions on page 5... I've listed my reasons with specifications & Tech datas on that same page.
Last edited by American_Raider; 31 May 06, at 01:53.
it's developed and tested. The news came out a couple of month back. You can still find the article on missilethreat and there was a thread on it at DT.
I'm saying that if there ever was an invasion, you'd see a horde of J-10s coordinated by AWACS coming over. The Indian planes would have to get through them first. But let's not turn this into a IAF vs PLAAF thread? Whether you think IAF or PLAAF is better, the point is that the launching planes would face plenty of resistance before they can start firing off.
the only source supporting that is some Hong Kong newspaper. They have never been accurate on Chinese military news.Really? you have give us more than 'that' to discredit my statements on page 5.
But I can't say I've read every post on this thread...
But, why is India considering purchasing Chinese made Fighter/Trainer/attacker L-15 laterly?
From my sources, this deal is close to be done as of today, 05/29/2006 between Indian Defense Minister & his Chinese counterpart. China is going to sell 30 L-15 advanced fighter/Trainer/ Attacker (aka LIFT, lead-in fighter trainer) to Indian AF.
It hasn't made the news yet but, it will soon...
I still have not seeing any good counter-statements for my opinions on page 5... I've listed my reasons with specifications & Tech datas on that same page.
What the hell? PLAAF would send a limited ranged fighter? Even the Flankers will barely have enough fuel for a round trip from Chengdu to Tibet. You think the J-10 can, even with out a inflight refueling probe?I'm saying that if there ever was an invasion, you'd see a horde of J-10s coordinated by AWACS coming over.
Last edited by dabrownguy; 31 May 06, at 05:09.
You would have one believe that Pakistan captured PoK from the Indian Army, when you said that ..."Ooh yet, let's not forget the 3 Pakistan & India wars. & How Pakistan still control a major part of Kashmir, an Indian providence," knowing fully well that the PA was kicked out of the Indian held region in 1947, and kicked the PA out again in 1965 and managed to capture Haji Pir, and permanently took over Kargil in 1971. Capturing PoK was never a military aim for India in either 1965 or 1971. You made a prejudiced off the cuff remark that was incorrect.
It is a ridicules assumption to think that India will by a Chinese fighter trainer, when we already have the Britsh Hawk and are building our own AJT.
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
I do some research then.
Come on. You know that you don't conduct SEAD against incoming fighters, its interception.I'm saying that if there ever was an invasion, you'd see a horde of J-10s coordinated by AWACS coming over.
There is no denying that.Whether you think IAF or PLAAF is better, the point is that the launching planes would face plenty of resistance before they can start firing off.
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
do you have any idea what the range of J-10 is? It's longer than flankers. Think about it. It's less than twice the size, but holds more than half the fuel of a flanker.What the hell? PLAAF would send a limited ranged fighter? Even the Flankers will barely have enough fuel for a round trip from Chengdu to Tibet. You think the J-10 can, even with out a inflight refueling probe?
They interviewed the developer of JF-17. He said that JF-17 has a combat radius of 1800 km and the Chinese news reported JF-17 has a range of 3500 KM. J-10 has to be doing better than that.
Far fetched speculation. Stay on the ground or you might fall pretty hard.do you have any idea what the range of J-10 is? It's longer than flankers. Think about it. It's less than twice the size, but holds more than half the fuel of a flanker.
Thats all I have to say.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
1Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Share this thread with friends: