Why the Chinese military is only a paper dragon.

[Kompromat]

--
because it fought dozens of wars in last 60-70 years?
if they did not.. and still have all tech goodies with ops effetive human resource then?
how you rate france and gernman force as they are not in conflict for longer time than others ?

War drives technology. Germany was defeated in both wars yet it perhaps builds the best military technology money can buy.

 

[OrionHunter]

--
thanks for article..
can you able to put all china - army navy air force strength analysis like of isreal member i think name 500 did for all figter aircraft ?

OK....Here goes: China Military Strength

However this doesn't give the types of military equipment but only its numbers.

 

[pursuit of happiness]

OK....Here goes: China Military Strength

However this doesn't give the types of military equipment but only its numbers.

--
thanks ..
i got it..
but looking for NUMBER with qualitative perspective.. wrt to army navy airforce of china and posible of india too

 

[Norwegian]

War drives technology.

Yeah but the greatest inventions in human history were not war driven like useable electricity, radio waves for communication and other progresses in science and technology. They were rather commercial successes instead war success.

 

[Akasa]

China's military buildup, along with an aggressive foreign policy, has inspired a fair amount of alarm in the West. Some American policymakers consider Beijing to be Washington's only "near-peer competitor" — in other words, the only country with the military might to actually beat the U.S. military in certain circumstances.

But they're wrong. Even after decades of expensive rearmament, China is a paper dragon — a version of what Mao Zedong wrongly claimed the United States was … in 1956.

Despite a growing defense budget, China's arsenals still overflow with outdated equipment. The PLA possesses 7,580 main battle tanks, but only 450 of those tanks — the Type 98As and Type 99s — are anywhere near modern, with 125-millimeter guns, composite armor, modern suspension, and advanced fire control systems.

The other 7,130 Chinese tanks — some of which are pictured here — are the same descendants of Soviet T-55s that comprised Beijing's armored force in the late 1980s … and were obsolete even then.

It seems that most of these statements are simply skewed statistics. The article is indeed correct in stating that most of the equipment used by the Chinese military haven't been replaced by newer counterparts, but please do keep in mind that their military is also significantly larger than any other force besides the Russians and the U.S. Hence, they would have considerably bigger quantities of "modern" equipment than most other militaries even if the percentage of modernized gear may be lower at the first glance.

China also has a lot of fighter planes. Between the People's Liberation Army Air Force and the air arm of the People's Liberation Army Navy, China boasts no fewer than 1,321 fighter aircraft, an aerial armada only slightly smaller than America's.

But China's air forces likewise maintain mostly obsolete jets. Of 1,321 fighters, only 502 are modern — 296 variants of the Russian Su-27 and 206 J-10s of an indigenous design. The remaining 819 fighters — mostly J-7s, J-8s and Q-5s — are 1960s designs built in the 1970s. They wouldn't last long in a shooting war.

Same kind of logic with the above statement. The sheer size of the PLAAF means that it will still have more modern aircraft than most nations, by number, even if the percentage thereof is lower compared with the rest of the force.

The navy is in the best shape, but that's not saying much. The PLAN's destroyers and frigates are fairly new, but its first aircraft carrier Liaoning is a rebuilt Soviet ship from the 1980s. After a nine-year refit, Liaoning started sea trials in 2011.

And because it has gone into a refit, the fact that it was built in the 1980s is of much irrelevance here.

Liaoning

is half the size of an American Nimitz-class supercarrier and carries half as many planes. As Liaoning lacks a catapult, China's J-15 naval fighters must use a ski ramp to take off — and that limits their payload and range. Liaoning lacks the radar and refueling planes that give American flattops their long-range striking power.

How did the author manage to obtain the secret performance data on the Chinese naval AESA and the US one?

Submarines are another problem area for the PLAN. Just over half of China's 54 submarines are modern — that is, built within the last 20 years. Beijing's modern undersea fleet includes the Shang, Han, Yuan, and Song classes. All four classes are Chinese-built. All are markedly inferior to Western designs.

The rest of China's submarines, especially its 1980s-vintage Mings, are totally obsolete.

Still the same logic as the first two statements. Half of a 54-boat force would still comprise of more modern equipment than any other navy aside from that of the United States and Russia.

The PLAN halted production of the nuclear-powered Shang class after only building just three boats — an ominous sign. Moreover, Beijing has placed an order with Russia for up to four Kalina-class subs, signalling a lack of faith in local designs.

Kalina deal was already denied by the Russian government. As far as satellite images are concerned, yes, the Chinese are still building their nuclear attack submarines, which speaks volumes of the author's quality of research.

One of the most visible signs of China's military rise is all the 'new', locally-designed and -produced hardware. Beijing is building new ships, aircraft, drones and tanks most of it reversed engineered from Russian technology, that, on the outside, appear to be matches for Western weapons. But we know very little about China's homemade weaponry. Specifically, we don't know if any of it really works.

I have yet to read an article on this matter that doesn't resort to outdated stereotypes for the purpose of sentiments.

Many of China's "new" weapons are actually foreign designs that Beijing's state companies have licensed, stolen, or painstakingly reverse-engineered. The Changhe Z-8 helicopter was originally the French Super Frelon. The Harbin Z-9 scout helicopter started life as the Eurocopter Dauphin. The Type 99 tank is an updated Soviet T-72.

Having the design based on something else does not preclude it from being modified in such manner that allows it to adopt modern capabilities when coupled with their own research and technologies. And no, there is not one shred of evidence that the Type 99 was rooted in the T-72.

The J-20 stealth fighter prototype, for example, has flown scores of test flights since first appearing in late 2010. The large, angular plane appears to boast long range and a large payload, but its stealthiness is hard to gauge. Its avionics, aerodynamic controls, weapons, and sensors — and especially its engines — are equally questionable.

Questionable does not mean impossible.

The J-20's designers appear to be waiting on new, Chinese-developed engines to replace the prototype's Russian-made AL-31Ns. China has been working on those engines, without visible success, since the early 1990s.

The WS-10A engine has equipped the J-11B and J-16 in service, and has been powering the prototypes of the J-10B and J-15.

It's important to remember that America's latest F-35 Joint Strike Fighter first flew in 2006 and won't be ready for combat until 2016. The United States has experience developing stealth fighters; China does not. If we allow China 10 years from first flight to combat readiness, the J-20 won't be a front-line fighter until 2021. At the earliest.

Why the Chinese military is only a paper dragon - The Week

And yet the author does not take into account that China's military development is anything but linear, which would mean that to measure its military developments with that of the United States cannot be done with a simple add and subtract.

So, all this talk of a 'super military' capability of the Chinese is just so much hogwash. It's nothing but a paper tiger....errr...paper dragon at present. It would take decades to catch up with the West. In fact it can never hope to do so.

If our Chinese friends and their allies on this forum intend to troll, they need to come out with concrete facts and figures, not spew rubbish for the heck of it.

Thank you!

No worries, buddy; all of the "trolling" has already been done by you and the waste of screen space that this article has become.

 

[Kompromat]

Yeah but the greatest inventions in human history were not war driven like useable electricity, radio waves for communication and other progresses in science and technology. They were rather commercial successes instead war success.

Not all inventions are war driven.

 

[he-man]

The paper dragon gave such a thrashing to India in their 'border' skirmish that India was left promulgating paper cold start for Pakistan.

India also got huge thrashing from tiger of asia pakistan in 1965,71 and 99 wars.

 

[Echo_419]

@cirr & other Chinese members let the trolling games start

 

[OrionHunter]

The paper dragon gave such a thrashing to India in their 'border' skirmish that India was left promulgating paper cold start for Pakistan.

And you conveniently forget that your all weather stronger than steel, sweeter than honey, higher than the mountains and deeper than the ocean friend of yours got such a hammering at Nathula in 1967 they'll never forget it seeing that they lost 400 of their PLA robots and scores of gun positions and bunkers destroyed completely.

You my friend, seem to have acquired the habit of trolling from your 'all weather' buddies. Oh well, birds of a feather flock together, what?

 

[Beast]

I wonder what would have happen if our soldiers had semi automatic rifle instead of vintage .303 in 1962 however coward unlike pakis India never surrendered in 1962.

Perhaps this video will change your opinion?

 

[Sine Nomine]

Both ancient Turks and present India are big losers to paper Dragon...memmory hurts...

When did last time china defeated Turks.

 

[haman10]

paper dragon

guys be happy with this title u could have had sth like "plastic model" or "flying wood stick" and ...... as we have in iran .

the irony is that even the ones who make fun of iran , china and even russia for that matter , have yet to grow some balls and threaten any of these paper dragons , plastic models or flying wood sticks .....

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi

^ without any doubt the smartest thing someone has said in the past couple of centuries

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Of 1,321 fighters, only 502 are modern — 296 variants of the Russian Su-27 and 206 J-10s of an indigenous design.

Just over half of China's 54 submarines are modern

The PLA possesses 7,580 main battle tanks, but only 450 of those tanks — the Type 98As and Type 99s

The other 7,130 Chinese tanks — some of which are pictured here — are the same descendants of Soviet T-55s that comprised Beijing's armored force in the late 1980s … and were obsolete even then.

The question becomes, does the PLA want to replace each piece of equipment on a 1 to 1 basis? And no Country in the world has done that. Why replace thousands of B-52s when a couple hundred ICBMs can do the same task cleaner?

There was a reason Chinese Dynasties encouraged high birth rates.

Many of China's "new" weapons are actually foreign designs that Beijing's state companies have licensed, stolen, or painstakingly reverse-engineered.

Why would you reverse engineer something without making it better? Are you saying that the requirements that the French/ British/ Germany Militarys have are the same that the Chinese require?

i myself did mention several times that PLA's best contribution to modern warfare is the "human wave" tactic. glad to see the experts echo my thoughts. However, i must quote stalin (i think) who said "quantity has its own quality"

You're joking right? Human Wave tactics have been used for centuries before the PLA. And the PLA has studied modern operations, and have switched over from Peoples War.

 

[Sine Nomine]

War drives technology. Germany was defeated in both wars yet it perhaps builds the best military technology money can buy.

A lion is defeated when attacked and circled by several dogs.

 

[deepak.chauhan2312]

Let's just put it this way, if China is a paper tiger, what does that make India?

India and Pakistan both have much more battle xp than Chinese army. Indian Army is fighting terrorists in kashmir day per day basis. you can not deny the fact that xp is much more effective. Indian army is weaker than Chinese but the difference is minimal and xp of Indian army give India and edge over China in any battle