PLAAF Munitions

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

China did buy a fairly big stake of galileo, true, worth 230 million euros. Whole project, when finished, is on course to be worth 3 billion euros, two thirds of which is payed by private (mostly european) companies. So one might say that as far as political involvement goes - china bought itself almost a fourth of the whole program. Of course, it is true that in the end, when it comes to worth, EU will be the one to control the on and off switch of each satellite.

Thing is that unlike gps and glonass sat networks, galileo does not have built in features for selective quality signals, coded signals for just EU, etc. You either turn it off completely or not. And since its not a geostationary constellation, you cant just turn off one satellelite to screw over certain area on the earth. To make long story short - yes, signals could be denied to china but that would also mean denying signals to ALL the other users. And with 2/3 of the investors being private - you can imagine how much that'd piss them off. that's billions of euros of lawsuits. So, yes, it can be done, but unless its a life or death situation for europe itself - or unless USA is willing to pay those billions of euros of compensation (to me thats most likely scenario) the galileo network will stay online.

concerning the NATO treaty bit - it says so there itself. If china would attack a european country or US or some of their territoy IN geographical europe or/and north america - then they have the obligation to help. a war over taiwan, or even chinese battles with US forces in japan or afghanistan - that is not covered by the NATO treaty. And one must keep in mind that europe simply does not want to meddle. if it can somehow get past such a conflict so it doesnt get involved - it will do so. Since the NATO treaty itself lets it avoid it without cheating, situation is pretty clear. Again, though, if US gives enough of an incentive - and we're talking dozens or hundreds of billions of dollars in various forms - then who knows what would happen. Money makes the world go around.
 
Last edited:

KYli

Brigadier
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

IDonT said:
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Well, treaty is sign to break, so in time of conflict. How many nations will be coming to aid the US will be debatable. I don't think you should count on the NATO involving conflict with China. I think if I am not mistaken, Australia also states that they do not want to involve the fighting between US and China. Off course nobody will side with China, but many of them might be netural.
 

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

Totoro said:
China did buy a fairly big stake of galileo, true, worth 230 million euros. Whole project, when finished, is on course to be worth 3 billion euros, two thirds of which is payed by private (mostly european) companies. So one might say that as far as political involvement goes - china bought itself almost a fourth of the whole program. Of course, it is true that in the end, when it comes to worth, EU will be the one to control the on and off switch of each satellite.

Thing is that unlike gps and glonass sat networks, galileo does not have built in features for selective quality signals, coded signals for just EU, etc. You either turn it off completely or not. And since its not a geostationary constellation, you cant just turn off one satellelite to screw over certain area on the earth. To make long story short - yes, signals could be denied to china but that would also mean denying signals to ALL the other users. And with 2/3 of the investors being private - you can imagine how much that'd piss them off. that's billions of euros of lawsuits. So, yes, it can be done, but unless its a life or death situation for europe itself - or unless USA is willing to pay those billions of euros of compensation (to me thats most likely scenario) the galileo network will stay online.

concerning the NATO treaty bit - it says so there itself. If china would attack a european country or US or some of their territoy IN geographical europe or/and north america - then they have the obligation to help. a war over taiwan, or even chinese battles with US forces in japan or afghanistan - that is not covered by the NATO treaty. And one must keep in mind that europe simply does not want to meddle. if it can somehow get past such a conflict so it doesnt get involved - it will do so. Since the NATO treaty itself lets it avoid it without cheating, situation is pretty clear. Again, though, if US gives enough of an incentive - and we're talking dozens or hundreds of billions of dollars in various forms - then who knows what would happen. Money makes the world go around.

The term is called Sovereign Immunity. Generally speaking it is the doctrine that the sovereign or government cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution. In other words, you can't sue a government unless it wants to be sued.

There have been many examples of the past where government took over private institutions. Examples are nationalization of the Panama canal, nationalization of private oil fields in Iran, taking over a companies production line so it can build weapons instead of war. Commerce is subservient to the needs of the state. Galileo is vulnerable to the same powers of government.

You guys are not addressing the issue here. Why would you use a guidance system that you don't have 100 percent control over? It is just folly. How easy would it be for the US to get their hands on the signals and jam it or feed it false data.

You are forgetting Sun Tzu
The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected
 
Last edited:

Roger604

Senior Member
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

IDonT said:
Gallileo Partnership
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Partners
European Commission
ESA
GALILEO Joint Undertaking
Private sector participation

China is not in there

Yes it is, China is a member of the Galileo Joint Undertaking.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"Europeans" don't control Galileo. There's a committee that runs it, and China is a part of the committee. If there's a split among the Europeans as who to support, China may be able to muster a majority. And if China's voting share is proportional to the amount of money it put in, it probably only needs France to form a controlling coalition.

That answers your question: China doesn't need to put its trust in people who run Galileo, because it's part of the consortium that runs Galileo -- it's an insider, not an outsider (like the US).

IDonT said:
Article V of the NATO Treaty, which states:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

What the US did for Europe:

Defeated the Nazi
Marshall Plan
NATO = Keep the Russians Out, the Germans down, and the Americans in
The Bretton Woods System
Composed of the bulk of military forces in the Serbian Campaign

NATO plainly doesn't include use of force outside of self-defence.
 
Last edited:

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

China usually tends to be paranoid, distrustful and believes in self reliance. They won't use Galileo or GLOSNASS. Their participation in Galileo lies more in acquiring technology and using them for civil applications. China is far more likely to build and rely on its Beidou satellite system. Given that she does not currently have any GPS guided munitions at all other, its all rather moot about using Galileo or GLOSNASS. By the time China has GPS guided munitions, Beidou is ready. Currently China's PGMs and cruise missiles rely on INS, TERCOM, TV guidance and laser guidance.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

I don't see the point of arguing whether or not the Europeans will turn off Galileo.

There simply isn't enough of a guarantee from the Europeans that Galileo will be kept on in the event of war. No matter how you put it, the Europeans will always favour America more or else the European Embargo would be done with by now. I totally agree with Crobato on the self-reliance part. That's part of the reason why China opposes the usage of weapons in space. It wouldn't want the Americans to shoot Beidou satellites down.

Until then, China's PGMs is stuck with LGBs.
 

Roger604

Senior Member
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

tphuang said:
I don't see the point of arguing whether or not the Europeans will turn off Galileo.

There simply isn't enough of a guarantee from the Europeans that Galileo will be kept on in the event of war. No matter how you put it, the Europeans will always favour America more or else the European Embargo would be done with by now. I totally agree with Crobato on the self-reliance part. That's part of the reason why China opposes the usage of weapons in space. It wouldn't want the Americans to shoot Beidou satellites down.

Until then, China's PGMs is stuck with LGBs.

I think if the EU was just France and Germany and not all those other countries, the embargo would have been lifted a LONG time ago.
 

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

Well, true, it actually is a moot point (but it was fun :D) since galileo wont be operational till 2010. By that time Beidou will be on so china will be sort of covered. Of course the question now turns more to the ability of each side to prevent the other side of using their satellites. But we've been down that road before. :D

As for china not using any gps signals today - well, i don't know, but what's then with all those claims that its long range anti ship and land attack cruise missiles and what not - that they use gps for guidance? I'm not talking about terminal guidance, the public signal is not precise enough for that, but just as a help for the inertial guidance system, such gps signal would mean a lot for staying on course throughout the long flight.
 

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

Roger604 said:
Yes it is, China is a member of the Galileo Joint Undertaking.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"Europeans" don't control Galileo. There's a committee that runs it, and China is a part of the committee. If there's a split among the Europeans as who to support, China may be able to muster a majority. And if China's voting share is proportional to the amount of money it put in, it probably only needs France to form a controlling coalition.

That answers your question: China doesn't need to put its trust in people who run Galileo, because it's part of the consortium that runs Galileo -- it's an insider, not an outsider (like the US).

I don't see China anywhere on that website nor anypart of the committee.
China is not an insider. Gallileo is a purely European venture.

Your response has alot of conditional phrases.
If there's a split among the Europeans
if China's voting share is proportional
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: PLAAF precision guided munitions

Roger604 said:
I think if the EU was just France and Germany and not all those other countries, the embargo would have been lifted a LONG time ago.
As long as UK is in the equation, the Europeans would always side with the Americans. You know it, I know it. Either way, the point is that although Europeans might not turn off Galileo, China has to prepare for the possibility that it does. That's why putting Beidou up and protecting Beidou from the Americans is a must. And realistically speaking, Beidou is enough for any kind of possible conflicts with the Americans in the coming years. China is unlikely to engage America outside of the East Asian envelope.
 
Top