China Air Force Steps it Up
StumbleUpon
Digg
Delicious
Reddit
Yahoo Buzz
Mixx
Google Buzz
PlurkUS assumptions about China’s air power look outdated. It’s building a force that will be without rival in the Asia-Pacific.
By Carlo Kopp
This is the first in a series of articles looking at recent developments in China’s military.
The formal retirement ceremony this June for the last People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) Shenyang J-6 / MiG-19 Farmer fighter marks an important milestone for China’s air power, as it transitions from a Cold War era, Soviet-style force to a modern and technologically sophisticated air force with a fleet of high performance aircraft.
Sadly, far too many analysts and senior bureaucrats in the United States remain tethered to the idea that the PLA fighter force still comprises fleets of thousands of cloned 1955 Soviet technology MiG-19 fighters, and is thus incapable of protecting China’s areas of interest from regional or US military forces. Yet although this perception remains appealing in Washington, it ceased to be true almost a decade ago, and today reflects more than anything what Huxley described as ‘vincible ignorance’—not knowing because you don’t want to.
For those that are interested though, a more accurate picture can be gleaned from the fact that about 5 years ago, China planned to field well in excess of 500 Russian designed Sukhoi Flanker fighters, a size comparable to the now declining United States Air Force fleet of around 600 Boeing F-15 Eagle fighters. The Flanker was designed to be a direct equivalent (in some respects superior) to the F-15, which is also the backbone of the Japanese and Singaporean fighter fleets.
Indeed, with an ongoing modernisation plan that will see all legacy aircraft types replaced by modern and much longer ranging replacements, the PLAAF will in numerical terms become the strongest air force in Asia, with the largest fleet of ‘tier one’ fighter aircraft globally, should the United States pursue its current plan to downsize and reduce the capabilities of its tactical air forces. In terms of air power alone, this will result in the single largest swing in the strategic balance in Asia since the 1940s.
The PLAAF has existed since the late 1940s, initially equipped with a mix of foreign—at that time Japanese, American and Soviet—aircraft. Through the 1950s the PLAAF acquired a wide range of then state-of-the-art Soviet planes and the first (and to date only) air war in which the PLAAF participated was in Korea, where Chinese pilots performed well in Soviet supplied MiG-15 Fagot fighters.
But a key juncture in the development of the PLAAF fighter force was the Khrushchev era collapse of relations between the Chinese and Soviet leaderships. Denied the ongoing supply of advanced Soviet aircraft, China resorted to the only choice it had, which was reverse engineering Soviet designs. Numerous Soviet types were built, the most significant being the MiG-19S Farmer, or Shenyang J-6, and the MiG-21F Fishbed, or Chengdu J-7 fighters. These cloned Soviet designs formed the backbone of the PLAAF and PLAN fighter regiments, until the next major evolutionary transition point—the fall of the Soviet Union.
Photo Credit: Uniphoto Press
Jonathan
Christian is so perceptive. What I would like to point out is that no one has mentioned that China does not have the capability to built her own jet engines. The engines for all those fighters are imported from Russia!
durandal
guys..
when it comes to china weakness, think of only two words….”chocked points”.that`s right boys control of the sea lanes…, submarines, carriers battle groups, deep strikes by our stealth fighters and cruise missile assets . and a few allies , that`s all we need… their supply seawagons comes to a screeching halt and their economy will go in to a tailspin.that will force them to come out in to the open sea for a fight.lets see how their fancy fleet of 900 miles range fighters and their amateur, barely blue water navy will fare up agains`t the us navy 100 plus years of espirience at sea warfare,,what?? did say their ballistic missile threats!!!..hum?? that.. depends on a lot of very acurate and sophisticate space base asset for very presice targetting and we are lights years away in space compare to china.sorry boys but china has too much invested in u.s economy(treasury bill/us consumer market) to be looking for a dumb fight it cannot win.
john
This article is nothing more than war propaganda!!! Guess the only solution for the US is to spend more on their military than the rest of the world combined to safeguard itself….on wait they already do!
Patrickbec
To all those saying that the US Airforce is not threatened by all these new Chinese fighters, ask yourselves, is the US Air Force as powerful as you think?. I have looked at USAF fighter numbers in the context of the continuing disestablishment of US Fighjter squadrons and what I have foubnd is alarming: The USAF has very few fighters (I am of course excluding reference to ANG and AFRES). By my reckoning, the USAF has the following combat units with the following numbers:
PACAF
18 TFW, Kadena, Okinawa, 50 F-15C/D
8 FW, Kusan, ROK, 50 F-16C/DG
51 FW, Osan ROK, 26 F-16C/DG, 18 A-10C
3 FW, Elmendork, AK, 40 F-22, 26 F-15C/D
TOTAL: 76 F-16, 76 F-15, 40 F-22, 0 F-15E, 18 A-10
USAFE
31 FW, Aviano, It, 52 F-16C/DG
52 FW, Spangeldahm, Ger, 26 F-16C/DJ, 20 A-10C
48 FW, Lakenheath, UK, 44 F-15E, 22 F-15C/D
USAFE TOTAL: 78 F-16, 22 F-15C, 20 A-10C, 44 F-15E
ACC
20 FW, McDill, Fla, 80 F-16C/DJ
4 FW, Seymour Johnson, NC, 48 F-15E
23 FG, Moody, Ga, 44 A-10C
1 FW, Langley, Va, 40 F-22, 26 F-15C/D
388 FW, Hill, Utah,50 F-16C
366 FW, Mountain Home, Idaho, 36 F-15E
49 FW, Holloman, NM, 40 F-22
355 FW, Davis Monthan, 22 A-10C
ACC TOTAL: 130 F-16, 26 F-15s, 80 F-22, 84 F-15E, 66 A-10C.
The above excludes training units, and units recently deactivated (35 FW, 1 squadron of the 388th, one squadron of the 52nd, and the F-15 squadron of the 366th).
The A-10 and F-15Es are not aircombat fighters, so I’ll exclude it from the numbers. In the Pacific region, the USAF would have a total of 182 F-15/-16-22 to face up to 400 plus Su-27/-33/-J-11s, plus hundreds of J-17s etc. World wide reinforcements, assuming every USAF USA and Europe based fighter could be rushed to the Pacific theatre (totally unrealistic, especially considering at least 15% would be in over-haul/ maintenance, and of course the US has other commitments), would bring an addition of 208 F-16s, 48 F-15s and 80 F-22s!
So to conclude, the USAF in the Pacific could bring 192 fighters (including 40 5th gen F-22s) to the fight, and the entire USAF could bring a 528 fighters to battle (120 5th gen), if it had time to effect the re-deployment, every fighter was out of deep maintanance, a 100 FMC rate existed and no other threats or on-going wars existed elsewhere requiring a fighter presence. The F-35 won’t have any impact on these numbers until at least 2015-16. Yes, two carrier groups would add 44 Super Hornets and 40 legacy Hornets to the fight, and the Marines in Okinawa 2 squadrons of 24 legacy Hornets, but against a force of 400 F-15 equivalent SU-27/33/J-11s, quite frankly, I don’t share those who are optimistic at the USA chances, especially if the Chinese keep addding to their numbers and the USAF keeps cutting back.
doc
While in reality…
1. Su-27/Su-30/J-11 only around 300, with original Su-27 close to retirement. While any further production of J-11(B)s are stopped due to engine problems.
2. Whatever J-10B is, it’s only in testing stage, with 6 examples built God know when it will come out. While regular J-10 only number ~150 and China only have enough engines to build 250 more (at the expense of J-11s). Domestic engine replace are experience massive problems right (which cause production of J-11 to stop).
3. While new the stuff is good, you are still talking about an air force that still built Tu-16s and J-8s (Mig-21 with two engines), new. PLAAF is amazingly cheap like that. (perhaps something USAF will understand, if the budget deficit here gets any worse) Any of the scenario described in the article will simply not happen, unless there is imminent threat of war in East Asia (which is not the case) or gold somehow rains in China. (that is assuming the Chinese Military doesn’t waste its money buying Audi and Mercedes staff cars which is what’s happening right now)
Tom Herring
Dear Daniel
Fair enough, fear mongering is a most undesirable element for any community or nation. I dont think that Kopp is implying that the Chinese are planning on taking over the world militarily any time soon, but their plans and growth like most nations’ involve a strategic long term forecasts which plan for future border skirmishes. Kopp’s article makes a lot of sense, check Air Power Australia website what they say about the system capabilities described there. It seems that if push ever came to shove ,trust me the Chinese could and probably would push back Real Hard. Super Hornets and F-35 are awesome machines but looking at the balance of power in the past and looking at the potential future balance things have changed considerably and will likely change further in the future.
PR
This is a big improvement from The Diplomat’s point of view of China’s ability to field anything modernised and advanced. Too bad it is written by an Australian. Where is the version written by an American?
Max
Those rubbishing China in terms of their military strength and capabilities are genuinely deluded. There are plenty of ways China can defend itself from everyone it needs to.
Henry J Cobb
Hey Kopp, have you discovered MADL or EOTS yet?
Back to today’s China, the Super Hornet outnumbers the modern Chinese fighters and is superior to anything the Chinese have in the air. (Hint: Start with AESA.)
On top of this the numerous American destroyers are still by far the best anti-air platforms that anybody has ever sent to sea.
And even if the Indians sell PAK-FAs to China (the aircraft will be of little use without their electronics), they’ll still be less stealthy than the F-35s and far more electronically noisy.
Max
Hey Henry, Ever heard of saturation anti-ship missile attack? They simply fire about a 100 missiles at the ships and no matter the defense those will be sunk since they simply will be too many.
EOTS? What about it? All it will do is will give you a front seat to your own destruction since all Flankers are supplied with advanced jamming pods that are specifically made to defeat the data-link guidance of BVR shots and also Russian missiles mostly out-range AMRAAM (extended-range Alamo) and AIM-9X (R-74). Add to that the fact that F-35 simply will not have range to get to the battle zone. If the Taiwan airfield is taken out with MRBMs as well as Kadena and Okinawa in Japan then tankers are needed to get F-22s and F-35 to battle and those are easy targets for S-300PMU-1/2 and even old S-200.
T-50 PAK-FA also will feature AESA, the Su-35S will be upgraded to it as well. Also VHF ground radars with AESA technology exist in China. With wave length longer and band width wider then designed for in F-22 and F-35 the SAMs will be easily guided to take out the F-22 and F-35 since Stealth is heavily influenced on illumination aspect.
To Daniel Zimmerman – China PLANNED to field 500 Flankers. They can field whatever number they need. And since they build their own copy of Flanker these days (illegally at that) they may well end up with that number.
Max
As for F-22 they will need tankers too and without those the US will be forced to withdraw due to lack of assets. Super Hornets? Breakfast for the above-mentioned S-300 and Su-30MKK and J-11B once they get their radars upgraded to high-power Phased Array
Jeff
China may be able to field a fleet of 500 Flanker equivalents but so what? Now they finally have an air force to rival the U.S’s forty year old F-15’s – yay!
I keep seeing articles popping up about how China has new 3rd and 4th gen fighters to be able to face the U.S. Air force but the new U.S. air force in the 21st Century will be 5th Gen fighters – does anyone think that the technological difference means nothing? You don’t spend hundreds of billions advancing avionic and flight techs without having something to show for it.
China has an incredibly huge Achille’s Heel – in order to advance their military tech to rival what the U.S. currently has they would have to advance their entire tech base – and that includes education and manufacturing. The side effect of doing this would be to weaken the Communist’s hold even more over an increasingly literate and knowledgeable population. Trying to keep up with the US will prove the fatal blow in the end – all without an actual war :)
John
The article is quite interesting; in one sense I agree that China will be able to increasingly wield air power in the West Pacific. It seems pretty inevitable that with their ongoing economic growth they will invest in modernising all branches of the military. Judging by the way their economy seems to be going, this will mean a pretty powerful airforce, possibly one more powerful than the US’ in the region at some point in the relatively near future.
On the other hand the tone of the article is a bit alarmist and it focuses a little too much on the perceived strengths of the PLAAF and the PLANAF, whilst overlooking the many weaknesses, which deserve their own article! Clearly the US will want to keep a close eye on developments in this area, but the comparison between the USAF and the PLAAF reads as if the latter is about to topple the former as the world’s dominant airforce. Whilst maybe in the future (realistically further than we can honestly hope to forsee) this may be the case, at the moment there is still no comparison. Even regionally the US (and her allies) are not in quite the dire straights the author seems to suggest. The article doesn’t even mention the US 5th gen. fighters! (187 Raptors, 27:1 Kill ratio..? If you believe that, but even so.)
davelnaf
No one in the USAF will lose sleep over worries that the Chinese Air Force has anything close to the capabilities suggested in the article. Helpful advice: Don’t swallow everything the Chicoms feed you about their capabilities. And why would anyone assume they are telling the truth about their capabilities when they lie about nearly everything? Part of the Chinese way of war is to sow lies.
BillT
Well…I have also read a lot of other sources about the modernization of China’s military, and it all seems to jive into the same thing. They are going to control the Asian area, both land and sea, in the near future. If their military can keep our fleets and aircraft carriers at least 1,000 miles off of their coast, they control all of South East Asia, including Japan, Guam and Taiwan. You might just buy and read “America’s Dim Mak Points – Unrestricted Warfare in the 21st Century” by Victor N. Corpus 2009. Victor is a retired Brigadier General of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. Holds a Master’s Degree from Harvard, and was the former Chief of the Intelligence Service. He is of the opinion that China is much more prepared than the US believes.
Christian
Oh another china threat article. Let me guess what the solution is…….let’s spend more on our military budget. Oh yeah baby let’s spend spend spend. Until china has 900 military bases around the world and are exporting war and revolution I’ll take everything coming from the military hawks with a bucket of salt!
David
The article does not mentions the famous JF_17 or Thunder aircraft, which is surely a replacement of F-16s, developed jointly by China and Pakistan and the future 5th generation aircrafts under design and development by both Chinese and Pakistan engineers…these planes will take both these countries far ahead in air delivery systems and a very credible airforce that relies on no one but on their own ingenuity. It is also indicative of the new China-Pakistan alliance that is emerged as the super power of the region, and maybe of the world in a decade!
Tom Herring
Dr Kopp totally knows his stuff, it is a pity that those making the purchases and doing the planning don’t.
Daniel Zimmerman
Dr. Kopp is a well known writer on defense matters, but also known to express extreme fringe opinions, especially when writing about air power. This article is fear mongering and uses suspect numbers. I have not been able to find any confirmation whatsoever for the 500 Sukhoi fighters number that he uses, most sources on the PLAAF put the number much lower.
John Leveritt
How the hell do I print this article?