I believe they deflect the thrust, in this case it looks like the thrust is directed downwards.Sorry the answer might be obvious to some of you, but what are those tiny flaps at the end of the engine nozzle? For some reason, only the top half of the flaps are flipped inwards. Thanks.
Not sure if it is appropriate to ask this here.
But do we have some thread dedicated to China-Taiwan invasion? (stuff like various military exercises done by China and Taiwan to invade and defend an invasion, about strategy/equipment that can be used etc.) Or where is it usually discussed?
It looks like this could be a more real thing in the future that some want to think:The perfect weapon?
OK I promise this is the last post I make about a new fantastic technology. But I think I have just thought of the perfect weapon. Basically, what it consists of, is a miniature robot too small for the human eye, but which has a unique code and ID and can send and receive transmissions via telecommunications. The robot also has the ability to read a person's genetic code. Basically what you do is, manufacture this robot and during peacetime, have it serreptitiously burrow into the bodies of every human being in the opposing nation, read the DNA of each person, and send it back via encrypted telecommunications to your nation.
Finally the robot has one final capability... to migrate itself into the heart of the host human and explode the heart. When you have infected the entire population of the opposing nation, during peacetime, nothing has to happen. The host can live his or her entire life without ever noticing they are infected by the robot. But in the case of a war, all you have to do is broadcast to all the robots in the battle zone to explode the hearts of your opponents. Your opponent's soldiers will start randomly falling dead en masse and they will not know why. How terrifying!
For all we know we already have this weapon burrowed inside all of us....
The question is, does SDF think this is feasible?
China needs a large amount of nuclear attack and strategic submarines. They also need to continue building more helicopters.What technology, equipment, vehicles, weapons etc do you think china should be prioritizing and getting more of(or finishing R&D ASAP and getting some if they don't have any at all)? For the above question, assume that it will be used for Taiwan or SCS scenarios.
I think the Osprey is a useful transport aircraft to use in the Pacific. Helicopters are not fast enough for troop transfers across such wide distances. I have a poor view with regards to the viability of the F-35B however. VTOL kills usable payload and you end up with an aircraft which will only be usable for air-to-air operations.What do you guys think about VTOL, and in particular ones that can change like Ospreys/F35B, especially in relation for use with LHD like on type 75s, and also how it would relate to chinas overall doctrines and existing style?
I think China will get three supercarriers. China will get at least six LHDs. Since that is the number of LHDs Japan and South Korea have.China currently has 3 type 75, anyone know how many they are gonna get, and how many do you guys think they should be getting? What do you guys think about that and how many do you think china should get, along with carriers also?
China has no plans to use its naval forces to invade other countries. Military force could be used for the annexation of Taiwan.gunboat diplomacy
That would be the rumored Type 076. But there is no evidence of it being in production.I remember hearing that they were gonna be used with drones also(and catapult system to launch heavier drones/payloads?).
Drones also have their issues. As technology improves they will become more capable but it might take a decade for this to happen.Im thinking drones and ai and remote control are the future of warfare and china should be mass producing and prioritizing stuff like this over manned systems/weapons(like manned attack helicopters that can be easily taken down by manpads, and then allowing these "guerillas" to disappear back again into the mountains.. loitering drones would stop that kinda shit imo).
Yes after Syria and Nagorno-Karabakh conflict loitering drones and suicide drones seem to have come more into wide use.They'd just be quickly wiped out via missiles from the sky, seas and even mainland and just blown away if they bunched up and tried to attack those air dropped troops in numbers. Loitering drones would give china all the edge they need.
China's technological base currently is not good enough to start a project like replicating the V-22 Osprey. They will need turboshaft engines with twice the power of current engines. China will also have to consider if they want to replicate its complex hydraulics or use electrical systems to do the same purpose.Should china be developing and improving on this tech asap or are there other more urgent things that china needs and should be investing/buying/researching on? If yes, what?
That is about it yes. They are also way more expensive and somewhat more failure prone than helicopters. They are also less suitable for operations in unprepared airfields. Because the rotor is smaller and has more RPM than the one in a helicopter it kicks up more dust and does more turbulence while landing or taking off. Given current US procurement programs there are proposals in the US to use similar technology to replace the entire US helicopter fleet. The V-280 Valor is one example. It remains to be seen what aircraft will win the competitions though.Does anyone know what usa primarily uses them for and what's their doctrine that makes them prefer ospreys compared to normal attack helicopters like what china uses? I know they are faster and have more range, but is that it?
There is no reason why a VTOL should have less firepower than a helicopter. The VTOL will however be a lot heavier than a similar attack helicopter and you will have to cut down on armor protection to compensate for the increase in weight. The question is if the speed advantage compensates for this or not. I doubt it does. It seems more suitable for transport between prepared pads than anything else.The also have less firepower compared with attack helicopters right?
China has an early Harrier in a museum in Beijing. So they certainly looked into that technology at one point. The Soviets had the Yak-141 but it never entered service and the prototype was never completed. Yak-141 also used an engine project which is basically dead. After WS-15 engine is available it will the possible to consider a project like this. But I am not certain it will be much use. If you can put EMALS on a 40,000ton light carrier without issue why bother with low performance VTOL aircraft?To me it seems like china doesn't really care much about VTOL planes/jets and is fine with just helicopters. Anyone know why? I guess that is the norm, and usa is the exception with f35b, along with the British and the OG VTOL Plane, the harrier. No one else has that technology currently right? Has Russia got this tech and do they use it on anything?
They are different aircraft. Some countries use transport aircraft to drop bombs out of the ramp in the back in some situations but a transport aircraft airframe is not optimal for a bomber.Also can someone tell me the difference between H6(and it's variants) vs Y20? Couldn't Y20(and variants) do everything H6 does if they really wanted to and they redesigned the Y20 for bomber duties, kinda like how usa still uses the B-52?? Doesn't Y20 carry more weight and have more space for bombs/missiles etc?