Zhuhai Air Show 2018

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by Deino, Aug 7, 2018.

  1. Biscuits
    Offline

    Biscuits Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    666
    Likes Received:
    925
    Yes. They’d rather not have any ex foreign equipment but a lot of legacy equipment from the 70s and 80s come from US (Black Hawk, Humvee) or Russia (J11) and that equipment needs to be upgraded all the same.

    It’s sort of a grey area.
     
  2. goat89
    Offline

    goat89 New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    53
    You are especially right on the grey area though. I now wish to plan for a possible visit to Zhuhai in 2020 LOL.
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  3. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    12,373
    Likes Received:
    10,712
    Can't licence what is not related. And can't licence well under arms embargo.
    Z20 is based on Blackhawk but not a Blackhawk. It's not a upgrade or licence as the Blackhawk only gave them the concept. They themselves had to design a helicopter that matched the performance but could be built to modern spec.
    The PRC can't licence Blackhawk as they were placed under embargo by the U.S. government. That's why despite having the money they never bought more S70 choppers well Taiwan have.
    Blocked from such they like the Iranians with the F14 have without licence found ways to keep there S70 in service as they worked to master designing there own helicopters.
    The Z20 has massive structural differences from the S70 series and likely more in common with the Airbus Helicopter EC175 joint Harbin Z15 than any Sikorsky product.
     
  4. goat89
    Offline

    goat89 New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    53
    Ah so internally the Z20 is quite different? If thats so, you are right, licensing isn't an issue...

    Weird question: Was the Z20, initially, built for Army or Naval forces in mind? In my readings on PLA helicopters, it seems they are trying to find a 'perfect' helicopter for high altitude operations, along with the capability to be interoperable with their PLAN ships - something the Z-18 cant do as of now? So, is it correct to presume that the Z20 was initially for Army/Air Force, but with a focus on SCS, it is going towards a direction of PLAN capable ASW (or even ASuW) helos?
     
    DGBJCLAU, Air Force Brat and N00813 like this.
  5. Air Force Brat
    Offline

    Air Force Brat Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    8,818
    Likes Received:
    10,294
    You mean the J-20 and the J-10? good grief, so much negativity, China doesn't play those kind of "dirty tricks" on their allies, neither does the US!
     
  6. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,698
    Likes Received:
    26,763
    This year Zhuhai airshow is marked by plethora of duplicated system I was wondering about it Guess what I am not the only one Here is Wendell Mennick take on the subject I don't necessarily agree with his conclusion

    Why Is China Building So Many Different Types of Weapons?

    China is in a “race with the United States and the rest of the world.”

    by Wendell Minnick
    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-china-building-so-many-different-types-weapons-36327

    China’s effort to build more types of weapons, in all categories imaginable, than the entire world combined, begs more than just a cost-benefit analysis. It might be better to think in terms of an environmental impact study with only one question: just how many people does Beijing plan to kill?

    There are various theories about the rampant growth of redundant programs and seemingly wasteful spending by China’s military-industrial complex.

    The recent China Airshow in Zhuhai was the perfect example. China displayed a full court press of new weapon systems and capabilities. Even the China Shipbuilding and Offshore Co. is getting involved in the land warfare business, as was clear by displays of road-mobile air defense systems.


    The exhibition revealed that China’s militarization efforts are in “full swing” and the airshow itself was “designed explicitly to impress and intimidate,” said Paul Giarra, the president of Global Strategies & Transformation.

    Nothing has put the fear of God in the U.S. Navy like the growth of China’s anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) efforts, particularly the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile program .


    “With things like anti-ship cruise missiles and surface-to-air missiles, China is simply throwing a lot of money at a lot of different projects, simply because it has the money,” said Richard Bitzinger, a visiting senior fellow at Military Transformations Program at Singapore’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.


    The near-exponential increase in defense spending over the past twenty years has given the military billions more in funding for research and development (R&D). “Plus, a lot of these programs, particularly ASCMs, are actually of different types: different ranges and different uses,” he said.

    Still, China now produces such an assortment of new anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCM) that sorting out old from new developments and designations is bewildering.

    The Airshow showed off a model of the new road-mobile supersonic CM-401 ASCM. Also shown was a fully operational road-mobile BP-12B ASCM, the latest iteration of a land-warfare surface-to-surface missile system that began as the 150-kilometer-range P-12, then later as the 280km BP-12A. There was also an unveiling of the air-launched HD-1 supersonic ASCM, which might be an export variant of the YJ-12, now being considered by Pakistan.

    China’s redundant ASCM and UAV programs are under development not just by state-owned entities, such as AVIC, CASC, CASIC, and CETC, but also by a variety of start-ups and university-based companies, said Roger Cliff, senior research scientist at CNA. The development of comparable types of weapon systems without a known buyer or overseas market is “bizarre . . . something you rarely see in the West.”

    Vasily Kashin, a Russian specialist on China’s arms industry, said the abundance of ASCMs are “just leftovers from China's intense anti-access/area denial R&D programs, which do not tend to sell very much, but still quite good to flaunt it.”

    Kashin, a senior research fellow at the Russian Academy of Sciences, is a Zhuhai Airshow veteran. The plethora of ASCMs and UAVs on display are part of China’s “let a hundred flowers bloom” philosophy within its military-industrial complex.

    “My feeling is that much of what we see is a product of China’s closer civil-military integration process,” Kashin said. “By getting private firms to participate more with defense R&D, China will see many more prototypes reaching the sales stage even though there might not be a huge market. In the process, though, the PLA [People’s Liberation Army] can cherry pick the very finest products for themselves.”

    Cliff suggested there might be one possible success story in China’s fighter aircraft program, in which two aircraft competed for the air force’s stealth fighter requirements. Unconfirmed media reports hint that the Chinese air force plans to procure the J-31 , in which the Shenyang Aircraft is thought to have developed using its own funds after the air force initially supported the J-20 , built by Chengdu Aerospace.

    Even though the Chinese defense industry is “pretty monolithic” there is a “lot of competition inside each sector,” Bitzinger said. As an example, within AVIC, there are two major combat builders, Shenyang and Chengdu, and “they frequently compete with aircraft projects, such as the J-8 vs. J-10 and J-20 vs. J-31.”

    This is China’s traditional approach to reducing the technological risks caused by the weakness of the domestic industrial base, Kashin said, which has a history of simultaneously developing two systems.

    Kashin said that the first one would be a high-risk project, usually expensive, innovative and involving imported components. The second, a less ambitious low risk project suits the minimal requirements of the PLA, which can be accomplished without external help. As a result, the PLA would get the new systems even if the external supply chain is disrupted or the project fail

    Cont on the link
    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-china-building-so-many-different-types-weapons-36327
     
  7. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,543
    Likes Received:
    16,407
    lol i'm a bit confused that bitzinger would say that, but not surprised.


    Kashin's understanding of the dual track development is obsolete and hasn't really been the case for over a decade now.



    The variety of systems with duplicated functions is because there are so many new private and state arms manufacturers who want to get into the game. Some have better odds than others. In coming years some will fail and some will succeed and consolidate.

    Back in the early 2010s we saw how many Chinese smartphone makers there were all vying for marketshare, and in time only a half dozen or so remain big players while many of the rest became irrelevant. The situation is somewhat similar for the consumer drone industry.
    I think we are currently seeing the same process play out in many sectors of the defence industry, but also in the electric vehicle industry too.
     
    DGBJCLAU, by78, AleDucat and 2 others like this.
  8. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,230
    Likes Received:
    1,343
    Yes there were a lot more private weapons manufacturers in there than usual. Especially anti-tank missiles, small arms, and the like. It used to be we only saw that variety in the drone market. It shows their private companies are getting more serious. I think that is good because it allows them to advance their weapon systems more quickly.

    It is not surprising they have a lot of redundant missile systems since those are, in some areas, significantly behind the West, so they have a lot of demand for those systems. Compare this with NATO where there are only a couple of standard bomb types with add on laser or GPS kits like the Paveway and the JDAM.
     
  9. goat89
    Offline

    goat89 New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    53
    Haha, I am 'meeting' Mr Bitzinger tomorrow evening ;)

    Also, i had the privilege to visit Tsinghua Univeristy in Beijing earlier this year... the article is absolutley right on the Civil-Mil Cooperation. China is tapping onto really smart people and potential startups in general to offer solutions and products the givernment cant come up alone. I even met a young Taiwanese guy (27?) who moved to China to setup a company with a local. I also met a GM that worked for a company that sold fake mil vehicles that looked almost the same as the real ones, even through thermals? Just deception models to fool enemy air power and what not.
     
  10. by78
    Offline

    by78 Brigadier

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,358
    Likes Received:
    31,539
    Well, we end the show with this awesome overhead shot of the venue... Apologies for the large image size.

    [​IMG]
     
Loading...

Share This Page