PRC Improvment topic


Junior Member
VIP Professional
Now I wish to delve into the area of close airsuport. Based on my own personal exp I firmly believe after you gain control of the air battle space you NEED very good close airsupport. I think the dev of the new Attackhelo is a great start. I would also urge the PRC to field a new dedicated close support aircraft. THIS IS NEEDED VERY MUCH. The Fantan does not cut it in my opinion. I think the SU-25 base design is fine. I love the A-10. The ability to send in a aircraft low and heavily armed and ARMOURED is outstanding. I also think the fielding of a PRC version of the AC-130 gunship would also be good and well within the means of the PRC.


New Member
VIP Professional
I think that is a sore spot for a lot of armed forces these days. A dedicated close support aircraft means the force can obtain air superioity and enough resource to keep an dedicated close support arm. Must country are using multirole fighter/Helo gunship to fill in for this role.

Chinese is developing a attack helo, which is good news. I doubt PLAAF still have enough resource to design/import a fixed winged solution. At the moment, The possible conflict is with taiwan or Japan. there are no platform to lunch helo in to middle of the strait, and Q5 is good enough to carry out groud attack with out fighter escort. It is not too bad in a dog fight.( I think it even managed to beat Pakistan's F16 once). Conflict with Japan.. that's navy's job. So a dedicated close support is not urgently needed but good to have one day. A lot of the M-17 Helo have weapon plyon's to handle machine gun pods and rockets, they can do some of the close support tasks too.

Notice that I didn't put U.S. in the picture. I thoughs are: U.S. should hold the upper hand in air after certain amount of loss. One they have the upper hand. PLAAF's close support will be a one way trip... long range artillery probably will be the better pick.

By the end of it, it is all about limited resource. Chinese force wil use the fund to improve their fighter arm and improve their multirole capability, but I won't see they developing a dedicate fixed wing close support aircraft. The WZ-10 project will be more towards tank hunt. There are 2 mil PLA standing army,all they need is rifle and grenades. U.S. will run out of money before they can kill every one of them. Who needs close air support.(only joking):cool:


Junior Member
VIP Professional
here are my thoughts on fighting war I think they are reasonable and sound

1.situational awarness is a must. knowing 70%+ of the OPFOR location and movement routs.

2. COMPLETE control of the air battle space and supressing OPFOR AD systems.

3. Through the Use of the above begin killing the OPFOR with the use of airpower.

4. KILL the command structure.....make it personal and cause fear in the leadership through the use of airpower.

5. an AGGRESIVE highly trained ground force that has "blood lust" and wants to kill the OPFOR combined with Hi-tech weapon platforms that make it easy and almost video game like to kill OPFOR

6.logistics....keep the above happening

I think the whole idea in war is to kill people. you have to have a military that understands this. the internet Video of the apache killing the insurgents with the SA-7 on the tractors is a good example..."roger that smoke him" this to the outside viewer looking into the world of the military seems harsh but is key in winning war.....cheers ute.