Military FAQ thread
- Thread starter rommel
- Start date
SteelBird
Colonel
Re: Can ID this plane?
When an unidentified photo about Chinese military equipment leaks out, the first thing we should think about is if the photo is real? Since only J-20 is the only aircraft which has canted tail fins in the whole Chinese aircraft inventory and the "CV" is a mock-up one, we can safely assume that it is not anything real. The aircraft above is totally covered. As an aircraft size is ten+ meters in length and 8~9 meters in width, it would take a very large piece of cloth to cover over all, and it's pointless to do so. We have seen many Chinese aircraft being covered only the canopy, why this one needs to cover all?
When an unidentified photo about Chinese military equipment leaks out, the first thing we should think about is if the photo is real? Since only J-20 is the only aircraft which has canted tail fins in the whole Chinese aircraft inventory and the "CV" is a mock-up one, we can safely assume that it is not anything real. The aircraft above is totally covered. As an aircraft size is ten+ meters in length and 8~9 meters in width, it would take a very large piece of cloth to cover over all, and it's pointless to do so. We have seen many Chinese aircraft being covered only the canopy, why this one needs to cover all?
Re: Can ID this plane?
There have been other photos of the Wuhan facility showing the J-15 mock up fully covered, it's not exactly unique.
Chill guys, chances are it's just the same J-15 mock up we seen before and the cloth's lines giving the canted tail appearnce.
There have been other photos of the Wuhan facility showing the J-15 mock up fully covered, it's not exactly unique.
Chill guys, chances are it's just the same J-15 mock up we seen before and the cloth's lines giving the canted tail appearnce.
zoom
Junior Member
Re: Can ID this plane?
This was evident in the video i posted last month (where this picture is taken from) in #3917 of 'Latest Plan Aircraft info and photos' thread so we have all seen it before.
[video=youtube;6OkYT8J5oT0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OkYT8J5oT0[/video][/QUOTE]
This was evident in the video i posted last month (where this picture is taken from) in #3917 of 'Latest Plan Aircraft info and photos' thread so we have all seen it before.
[video=youtube;6OkYT8J5oT0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OkYT8J5oT0[/video][/QUOTE]
challenge..your back from your vacation
. I can tell. Up to your old ways..
The below is for challenge especially! all others reed and heed.
1) Stop opening threads for a simple question. Use this FAQ thread.
2) Stop opening threads for every new piece of PLA equipment you see. I started a thread for that purpose..USE IT? You've previously been told this.
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/strategic-defense/new-chinese-military-developments-5082.html
bd popeye super moderator
. I can tell. Up to your old ways..The below is for challenge especially! all others reed and heed.
1) Stop opening threads for a simple question. Use this FAQ thread.
2) Stop opening threads for every new piece of PLA equipment you see. I started a thread for that purpose..USE IT? You've previously been told this.
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/strategic-defense/new-chinese-military-developments-5082.html
bd popeye super moderator
Red___Sword
Junior Member
Well generally speaking, PLA is more a "stationary" force while US forces are more "deploytable".
Considering those most inhuman rules applied to the "conscripts" in a civil aspect: You are only taking 2 years of service while most chances you stationed not at your hometown - It is better to control your hormone-impulsion, rather than leave behind some unfinished-affairs when you decommisioned / retired from your service and gose back to your hometown. (It is compulsory to SEND YOU BACK to your home-town, after your service) - In general, military service itself do not, and shall not, contribute to any form of migration. China have had loads of civil unrest troubles because of other-wise, throughout her history, CPC learnt this.
Regarding the professional military personnels (including NCOs), maybe I didn't make it clear - The current PLA reforms, is exactly learn from USA's sample. The "military dependents" should have more or less the same as US's counterpart, plus some "Chinese characteristic" benifits (I don't suppose US military negotiate with local civil governments to arrange jobs for the military dependents aih? - Although China dose practice this less and less.)
Everyone talks about penetration rate vs certain thickness or composition of armor when they talk about MBTs, but would the modern AP round damage the structural integrity of the armor at and around the point of impact even if the shell does not penetrate? Would a couple shells hitting in proximity be enough to break the armor?
Does someone knows how many Type 022 (Houbei Class) ships has right now the chinese navy or how many are they planning to build? I was wondering also if is it true that they can carry land-attack Hongniao and anti-ship C-801 as wikipedia suggests. I dont trust very much wikipedia's information about chinese/russian ships/weapons capabilities.
You can look on the main SDF site, although they're building Type 22s at a pretty fast rate, so I'm not sure if whatever info is on there will be up to date.