Pinkov's latest articles


Skywatcher

Captain
Doesn't Pinkov know that any model of the J11B, which would be the only thing capable of competing for exports with current Flanker builds, will be directed towards the PLAAF instead of whatever dictatorship of the month China is trying to get resources from?

At least for the next ten years or so.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
at par with SU-27skm,rather than SU-30mkk.
means that China stll have a lot technical glinch to overcome.

No. Su-27SKM is equal to slightly better than the Su-30MKK. They have after all, practically the same systems. One can say that the Su-30MKK/MK2 is the twin seater equivalent to the Su-27SKM, or the Su-27SKM is the single seater equivalent to the Su-30MKK/MK2. To put it simply, the only significant different between the two are the number of seats.

Also Pinkov is typically blowing hot hair. If the Russians believed that the J-11B is only equal to the Su-27SKM, they are delusional.

Lets start with the radar design. The Su-27SKM and Su-30MKK still uses the Twist Cassegrain antenna. Do you know what that is? A Cassegrain is something you see with a telescope. There is one reflector on the back and a small reflector on the front. The whole construction is like a tube. To scan around, the whole assembly "twists" as the reflectors contain polarizing elements that will direct the beam to one direction.

On the other hand, a slotted planar array consists of a flat dish that is supported and moved by a mechanical, robotic arm. The dish contains slots that acts as radar wave guides. Other than the radome and IFF antennas sticking out, the whole thing is remarkably simple.

Now why is a slotted planar array superior to a twist cassegrain design? The explanation is simply right there staring in your face. The Twist Cassegrain needs a structure to hold the second reflector in front of the main reflector. In photos of the N001 radar itself, its looks like tube.

All that stuff blocks away optimal radar reception. If you want the best radar reception, you need as little stuff in front of your main dish as much as possible. You don't want anything to block it.

Now imagine the kind of mechanisms that need to turn the cassegrain around to scan around its field of view. You have an idea that it will be much more complex than the arm on the planar array. So it may not scan as fast.

You may also think that the arm on the planar array gives superior flexibility, and with it superior field of view. And this is true, in fact, nothing in this world, not PESA or AESA, has yet to match the field of view of a planar array.

Since the planar array does not use polarizing elements to shift its beam to the side, it has very little sidelobs. All it does is physically direct the main beam to the side. As a matter of fact, the good old planar array probably have lower sidelobs than a PESA. When you have lower sidelobs, more energy and emission is put on the main beam, which means more range, and more signal gain. At the same time, with less wasted energy going to the sides, the radar is less likely to be detected by other receivers.

Given that the arm in the slotted array sounds less complex than what it takes to scan with a twist cassegrain, it may overall be more reliable in the long run.

The fact that the J-11B (and the J-10, the J-8F, and the JH-7A) uses a planar array is already a step ahead of the Su-30MKK or Su-27SKM.

No surprise why China would not want the Su-27SKM.

China in fact, was working with Russia to the development of the Su-30MK3, which was supposed to have a slotted planar array called Zhuk MSE. China previously wanted Zhuks even at the time they were acquiring the J-11 under license; the Zhuk equipped Su-27SK is called the SMK.

All that didn't happen, but its a good bet that the J-11B is roughly the equivalent to the Su-30MK3 instead. The Su-30MK3 project was stopped, and you may guess the J-11B may have something to do with it.

In addition there are other neat things the J-11B seems to have over the Su-27SKM. The wide screen wide angle HUD for example. The optical/UV based MAWS is another. Only the Su-30MKM has this level of missile warning protection. The lighter weight, with correspondingly more powerful engines, and a better RCS reduction.
 

challenge

Banned Idiot
picture of ultra long range ram jet power air to air missile indicate that PLAAF may be working on either AESA (which more likely) or PESA.
there may be indication that working model AESA may already undergoing test.
 

AssassinsMace

Brigadier
Here's his latest article on Chinese nuke subs.

Analysis: China's nuke expansion at sea

Published: Feb. 29, 2008 at 11:53 AM

By ANDREI CHANG
HONG KONG, Feb. 29 (UPI) -- Some high-resolution images of China's Type 094 SSBN have shed new light on this mysterious strategic missile nuclear-powered submarine of the People's Liberation Army Navy. Satellite photos released by Google Earth reveal two of these new submarines at the Huludao Shipyard in northeast China.

The 094 SSBN's hull structure has been upgraded from the 092 SSBN, which means the later version is not a new submarine design. This indicates that despite almost 30 years of development, China's technological standard in the design of nuclear-powered submarines is still not very advanced.

Between the tall bulging SLBM (submarine launched ballistic missile) compartments and the submarine hull, there are quite large drainage holes. Nearly 100 drainage holes dot the SLBM compartment. This type of coarse structure is a sharp contrast to the clean and streamlined design of nuclear submarines in the United States, Britain and France.

The September 2007 issue of Kanwa Defense Review Monthly featured a comparative analysis of the subtle differences between the Type 092 and 094 SSBNs. The sail of the 094 is obviously higher than that of the 092. The section connecting the rear of the sail and the SLBM compartment is at an angle of 90 degrees on the 094, while this angle is approximately 85 degrees on the 092.

This is the most obvious difference between the two submarines; because of this, the SLBM compartment on the 094 is higher. This indicates that the 094 SSBN is fitted for the new 8,000-kilomter-range JL2 SLBM.

Nonetheless, the two 094 SSBNs at the Huludao Shipyard have not been fitted with JL2 SLBMs, because the draught is quite high. From the satellite photos it appears that the two 094 SSBNs are supposed to have the same draught and the same length.

In that regard, it is apparent that the 094 SSBN has not directly fired JL2 SLBMs up to the present time. This also confirms the analysis of U.S. intelligence agencies that JL2 SLBMs are not yet operational in the Chinese navy.

Sea tests of the 094 SSBN began in the summer of 2005. A general impression is that these submarines were constructed in a rush, which would explain the obvious traces of the earlier 092 model on the newer SSBN.

This also shows that the gap between China's technological standard in nuclear submarine design and the world's leading military powers is widening, and the mentality of the Chinese designers is somewhat ossified.

The hull design structure alone tells that the 094 SSBN's noise control technology is not comparable to that of European or U.S. submarines. This could be made up for by the 8,000-kilometer range of the JL2 SLBM, however.

The structural designs of the 094 SSBN and 093 SSN -- China's new nuclear attack submarine -- provide evidence that Russia was never involved in the design of these two Chinese strategic nuclear submarines. An authoritative designer at the Russian RUBIN Central Design Bureau has confirmed this on several occasions.

This author reported earlier that China had imported one Russian automatic welding machine for building nuclear submarines at the end of the 1990s, indicating that Russian technical assistance and guidance would have been expected in the construction of the 094 project. However, Russian experts in this field say they never knew what the automatic welding machines China imported were used for.

It is typical Chinese practice to import Russian equipment, but to seek technical guidance and maintenance work from Ukraine or Belarus. This not only helps China keep secret what it is working on, but also ensures that China does not have to rely solely on Russia.

China's internal military journals have disclosed that in the course of building the 094 China did invite experts from the Ukrainian Badon Research Institute, who provided technological guidance in the welding technologies for the submarine's reactors.

It seems that China built its latest SSBN using the fundamental design concept of the earlier 092 version as a shortcut to enable rapid deployment of strategic nuclear submarines as part of its effort to deter the United States from intervention in the event of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait.

The 094 SSBN still has only 12 SLBM compartments. Modern strategic nuclear submarines in Europe and the United States are normally fitted with 16-24 SLBM compartments. Too few strategic ballistic missiles might not pose an effective nuclear deterrence against opponents.

The number of nuclear missiles fitted on board alone indicates that the overall operational capability of the 094 SSBN is only equivalent to the standard of U.S. or Soviet SSBNs in the late 1960s. Nonetheless, China has unveiled images of a strategic nuclear submarine fitted with 24 SLBMs, the design structure of which is still quite close to that of the 092/094 SSBN. This indicates that the next upgrade, the 096 SSBN, will carry more nuclear warheads.

The upgrading of the 092 SSBN in the mid-1990s gave the PLA navy the 092M, which was later used as the platform for the 094 SSBM development project. Since the first 094 SSBN has not yet officially entered service, the fact that the navy is building more 094 nuclear submarines implies it is satisfied with the results of a series of tests on the upgraded version 092M.

The 092M and 094's command and control systems appear to be basically the same, judging from the same structure of the sonar rectifier hoods fitted on the two types of submarines. The 092M SSBN is fitted with a 262B sonar system.

China's official documents say that an H/SQ G-207 flank sonar array is fitted on the 093 SSN, but it is not known whether this same sonar system has also been fitted on the 094 SSBN.

--

(Andrei Chang is editor in chief of Kanwa Defense Review Monthly, registered in Toronto.)


© 2008 United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any form.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
This Pinkov guy can be embarrassing.

The number of nuclear missiles fitted on board alone indicates that the overall operational capability of the 094 SSBN is only equivalent to the standard of U.S. or Soviet SSBNs in the late 1960s. Nonetheless, China has unveiled images of a strategic nuclear submarine fitted with 24 SLBMs, the design structure of which is still quite close to that of the 092/094 SSBN. This indicates that the next upgrade, the 096 SSBN, will carry more nuclear warheads.

So CCTV had a TV documentary, and this TV documentary happened to be talking about modern submarines, which so happens to show the simplified diagram of an Ohio in it.

The 094 SSBN's hull structure has been upgraded from the 092 SSBN, which means the later version is not a new submarine design. This indicates that despite almost 30 years of development, China's technological standard in the design of nuclear-powered submarines is still not very advanced.

Yes it is not a new submarine design but it is not based on the 092 but on the 093. You don't look at the back of the sub, you look at the front and the bottom and rear of it, as the missile compartment is nothing but an add on. The 094 is much like a stretched 093 with the missile back. The US used to do a similar approach with its SSBNs (George Washington, Ethan Allen, Lafayette, from the Skipjack and Thresher class).

The sail, the bow, the tail, the limber holes, are almost identical to the 093 class, rather than the 092 class, which itself was based on the 091.

The 093 and 094 are sharing commonality to reduce costs and simplify training and logistics.

Between the tall bulging SLBM (submarine launched ballistic missile) compartments and the submarine hull, there are quite large drainage holes. Nearly 100 drainage holes dot the SLBM compartment. This type of coarse structure is a sharp contrast to the clean and streamlined design of nuclear submarines in the United States, Britain and France.

True the design of the missile back is not very advanced, but Mr. Pinkov here could not identify the source of the design properly.

It is in fact, based on the Delta I/II back which had similar rows of holes along the sides.

The Delta III/IV uses a more cleaner but blocker turtleback design, which implies that the turtleback itself is a separate design from the rest of the submarine. Yet the basics of the sub are roughly the same in other areas. The Delta class family itself is an example why you cannot use the sub's back to indicate lineage.

All the holes really does not matter if they are capable of being closed underwater.


It seems that China built its latest SSBN using the fundamental design concept of the earlier 092 version as a shortcut to enable rapid deployment of strategic nuclear submarines as part of its effort to deter the United States from intervention in the event of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait.

And yet China has denied it will use a first strike strategy, which means that for such a scenario, the SSBN is useless.

The structural designs of the 094 SSBN and 093 SSN -- China's new nuclear attack submarine -- provide evidence that Russia was never involved in the design of these two Chinese strategic nuclear submarines. An authoritative designer at the Russian RUBIN Central Design Bureau has confirmed this on several occasions

So finally after harping the opposite way, he saw the light.

The upgrading of the 092 SSBN in the mid-1990s gave the PLA navy the 092M, which was later used as the platform for the 094 SSBM development project. Since the first 094 SSBN has not yet officially entered service, the fact that the navy is building more 094 nuclear submarines implies it is satisfied with the results of a series of tests on the upgraded version 092M.

What is an 092M? This guy has no idea that the Chinese do not use the monicker "M" to mean modified or upgraded like the Russians would. In fact, for the Chinese the use of the letter "M" means something very different, "export" in fact.

If something is upgraded the designation would have been "G" for "Gai" as in improved.

There was no significant upgrade of the 092 in eighties and in the nineties. The 092 was last seen---in all places in Google Earth---in 2005 inside a dry dock, and from the looks of it, appears to be getting a major refit and upgrade. However, given the chronology---2005---it would have had zero value as a test bed for the 094.

Rather its more likely technologies developed in the 093/094 are being backwardly fitted to the 092.

China's official documents say that an H/SQ G-207 flank sonar array is fitted on the 093 SSN, but it is not known whether this same sonar system has also been fitted on the 094 SSBN.

The PLAN instituted a new procedure to put white markings on subs to warn upon the locations of their passive flank sonars so tugboats would not bump into them. Just to give a little history, this Russians themselves implemented similar policies.

The fact that the 094s have such white markings are an indication they have passive flank sonars. It is a good chance that with the commonality between the 093 and 094, the sonars would be the same.
 

F40Racer

New Member
The more I read his ariticles, the more I think he is an embarrassment in the military community. He doesn't appear show any consistency or logic in his reports. He either grossly exaggerates PLA's capabilities, or belittle it to the point of being rediculous. For example, his assessment of China's power projection capability goes from rivaling USA in about two decades to weaker than Singapore. He basically appeals to the anti-China crowd around the world by trying to make negative comments about China on every opprotunity available.
 
Last edited:

F40Racer

New Member
To answer Troika's question, Pinkov is not half-Russian, he is Chinese. The reason he adopted the name "Pinkov" is because he is a big fan of Georgy Zhukov. The pronounciation "Pin" in Mandarin means "equal", basically he wants to be just like Zhukov. LOL.
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Oh well I made a very stupid mistake and commented on one of his posts on FB (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
) at a Chinese Military forum, if his faked and biased YouTube-videos could not better be ignored.

Since then he's constantly insulting and threatening me via some Russian supporters, a "well-known" lady from North Korea under a Japanese pseudonym (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
) :D and even in person!
 

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
Oh well I made a very stupid mistake and commented on one of his posts on FB (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
) at a Chinese Military forum, if his faked and biased YouTube-videos could not better be ignored.

Since then he's constantly insulting and threatening me via some Russian supporters, a "well-known" lady from North Korea under a Japanese pseudonym (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
) :D and even in person!

You didn’t make fun of his hair did you? If so that is a big no no and he might stalk you to your house in Germany.
 

Top