Read the forum code of contact
By: - 18th September 2002 at 12:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 18-09-02 AT 12:09 PM (GMT)]
Pursuing Fulcrums for the PLANAF, while at first seems preposterous, has a strong logical basis:
First of all, if the report is true, it is not the Chinese airforce but the Chinese Navy that is considering buying it. Just like the situation between the USAF and the USN, what PLANAF does is none of the PLAAF's business. It has nothing to do with the SU-30MKKs also.
I think 'considering' is the basis of report. They have not decided anything.
The planes are intended for carrier takeoffs and landings. Obviously the Chinese are interested to make a serious study in that area. MiG-29s have certain advantages over an SU-30 in carrier deployment. To start with, you can pack more MiG-29s in a carrier than you can with SU-30s. I've also previously mentioned my hypothesis that the third batch of SU-30s may be headed for the Navy, not the Air Force, and could be based on SU-33UBs with carrier gear.
It is also convenient for the Chinese to use an upgraded MiG-29, since the MiG-29M series use the Zhemchug radar likely to be used on their J-10 fighters. If the Russians and Chinese managed to make Zhemchug compatible to both Russian and Chinese antiship missiles (like the air launched C801K) so much the better---the MiG-29 can share weapons compatibility with the J-10.
J-10 and FC-1 is ruled out because for carrier use, it's much safer to have two engines instead of one. Do you see two engines on the J-10 or FC-1? Originally the USN intelligence mentioned about a twin engined J-10 with two RD-33 engines. With Zhemchug radar, such a plane is not much different from a MiG-29. Why reinvent the wheel?
SU-30 has better fuel range and radar range than a MiG-29, but again, have you seen an SU-30 and a MiG-29 side by side or overhead? You would realize that for any given space, you're going to pack more MiG-29s than SU-30s. That's why the Indians are going for MiGs in their Groshkov carrier purchase.
Recently Jiang Zhemin toured PLANAF bases, and reiterated a commitment to modernize and beef up the PLANAF.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 13:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 18-09-02 AT 01:10 PM (GMT)] The author does'nt seem to be well informed because india got it's klub missiles before china was even thinking about them and they arm both their new kilos and krivak-4 frigates.Not only that but china seems to be exactly following india's trend of Su-30s,Klubs,Kilo upgrades,R-77s and now the Mig-29K.......Now,the russians and indians have codeveloped the brahmos.I know that china wanted to get the biryuza missile to replace the sunburn on the sovremenny but that does'nt seem to have happened.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 13:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
Also taking into consideration the fact that China might not want to go to the expense of developing a twin engined J10 only to produce relatively small numbers for PLAN carriers. It makes more financial sense if larger orders are expected and one or two medium carriers won't require that many. The MiG29 is already there for modification.
And the Su33 is just huge. Only 24 are carried on the 67000ton Kutzenov.
As for the Chinese Su27/30 fleet, its looking to be pretty massive.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 15:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 18-09-02 AT 04:10 PM (GMT)] That's a bizarre post, Bluetooth. The authors were not well informed because they didn't mention India in an assessment about China???
What has that have to do with anything?
And how do you "know that china wanted to get the biryuza missile to replace the sunburn on the sovremenny"?
By: - 18th September 2002 at 15:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
I never really trusted NewsMax before but since Crobato pointed it out, these two guys have been making some astute calls on the Chinese military.
We'll see if the Mig-29 deal pans out.
Unless it's carrier base, the Mig-29 makes no sense at all. For land-base PLANAF units, the Su-30 would be the far better choice in regards to range, weapons, and sensors. Also, the Su-30 is a type that is being or will be produced in China itself.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 16:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 18-09-02 AT 04:14 PM (GMT)]Based on many sources (articles I've archived in ACIG.org)
My current estimate for the PLAAF SU inventory before 2010
1992 24 SU-27SK, UBK Early batch
1995 26 SU-27SK, UBK with improved N001V radar, optional R-77 capabiltiy, two target multitracking, better terrain mapping support for bombing.
1996 signs 200 SU-27SK agreement. Radar sets either N001V or possibly Phazotron Zhuk-27, capable of confering limited ground attack capability. Shenyang 2001 mockup shows an SU-27 with air to ground weapons including Kh-31 and Kh-29.
1998 two made but had to be rebuilt due to quality problems.
1999 Signs first SU-30MKK deal. Number varies from 38 to 45. Prototypes 501 and 502 most possibly delivered with first batch, with 501 being delivered on August 2000, and first batch of 10 planes in December 2000. First 20 planes equipped with N001VE (multirole version of N001V); all subsequent planes equipped with Zhuk-MS. SU-30MKK purchases part of a larger, longer term deal that will include 240 SU-30MKKs made under license in China.
1999 Signs 28 SU-27UBK deal. Radar sets N001V. Delivery starting in 2001.
August 2000. Indigenous manufacture of SU-27SK restarts again.
December 2000. 14 received from the Shenyang. Production rate assumed to be at least 30 per year.
July 2001. Signs deal for second batch of 38 SU-30MKK. This batch begins delivery in August 2002.
2001 Armstrade reports 20 sets of Sokol radar imported to China. My bet---upgrade of the first 20 SU-30MKKs to this radar.
July-August 2002. Signs deal for third batch---for 38 navalized SU-30MK2 for PLANAF. My guess this is based on SU-33UB airframe.
End of 2002 prediction. 80th and the last SU-27SK will be completed by Shenyang. Production will shift to SU-30MKK.
2003 predictions. Second batch delivery of SU-30MKK will be completed by March. Third batch delivery begins around April. Chinese production of SU-30MKK will also begin at the rate of 20-30 a year. 250 planes are licensed to build, including 120 planes from the previous balance of the first contract, plus an extra 130 planes. Shift from Zhuk MS to Sokol radar with Shenyang production.
I'm looking at a rough total of over 500 aircraft before the end of the decade, with definitely over 240 by 2005.
Licensing conditions:
Maximum Chinese content is 70%. Minimum of 30% must be sourced from the Russians.
Any changes in the specifications of the aircraft must go through Russian approval first.
Export/reexport is not allowed.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 16:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
Man, the news are in a roll lately.
This is from GoodPak, posting at the Ezboards Fighter forum:
"Here is another news from a Chinese News Paper in New York. I have made a rough translation to English.
(Just keep in mind that this newspaper is Pro-Taiwanese)
Sep 6, 2002
Ze Jie Ribao (World Journal)
?Bejing Purchase of Mig Fighter?
[News from Beijing Branch] Beijing might buy Carrier version Mig29M ? E and D. Since these two versions had been modified for folding wing and landing gear, they already ready for being deployed in Air Carrier.
According to a USA Military Magazine September issue, Mig29M ? E, D is a short take off fighter like Su-30.
These two Migs may be deployed to the Air Carrier, the one China is building now, or it can be deployed to the Russia scrapped Carrier.
According to the Russia Yearly Weaponry Report, Mig29M ? E version is the most modernized fighter in Mig29 series. Russia had modified the original Mig29 to be used with Air Carrier in 1995, the designation is Mig-29M ? E carrier version. Its internal fuel load had been enhanced to 2200 KM from 1500 KM. External fuel load had been enhanced to 3500 KM from 2900 KM. Play load also improved from 2000 (Gon Jin?) to 4000 (Gon Jin?)"
By: - 18th September 2002 at 16:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
I have posted this on another forum, I might as well post it here as your reference.
Here is another news from a Chinese News Paper in New York. I have made a rough translation to English.
(Just keep in mind that this newspaper is Pro-Taiwanese)
Sep 6, 2002
Ze Jie Ribao (World Journal)
“Bejing Purchase of Mig Fighter”
[News from Beijing Branch] Beijing might buy Carrier version Mig29M – E and D. Since these two versions had been modified for folding wing and landing gear, they already ready for being deployed in Air Carrier.
According to a USA Military Magazine September issue, Mig29M – E, D is a short take off fighter like Su-30.
These two Migs may be deployed to the Air Carrier, the one China is building now, or it can be deployed to the Russia scrapped Carrier.
According to the Russia Yearly Weaponry Report, Mig29M – E version is the most modernized fighter in Mig29 series. Russia had modified the original Mig29 to be used with Air Carrier in 1995, the designation is Mig-29M – E carrier version. Its internal fuel load had been enhanced to 2200 KM from 1500 KM. External fuel load had been enhanced to 3500 KM from 2900 KM. Play load also improved from 2000 (Gon Jin?) to 4000 (Gon Jin?)
By: - 18th September 2002 at 16:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
Sorry Crobato,
I don't know your posting my, after I hit enter, it was too late.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 16:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
No problem.
I can fix some figures for you though:
"According to the Russia Yearly Weaponry Report, Mig29M ? E version is the most modernized fighter in Mig29 series. Russia had modified the original Mig29 to be used with Air Carrier in 1995, the designation is Mig-29M ? E carrier version. Its internal fuel load had been enhanced to 2200 KM from 1500 KM. External fuel load had been enhanced to 3500 KM from 2900 KM. Play load also improved from 2000 (Gon Jin?) to 4000 (Gon Jin?)"
That should be maximum range based on internal fuel load, from 1500km to 2200km.
Second should be maximum range based with external fuel load, from 2900km to 3500km.
Third should also be on fuel, from 3,000kg (internal fuel load of old MiG-29s), to 4,000kg (internal fuel load of MiG-29M with enhanced airframe). The 2,000kg should be incorrect.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 16:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
Thanks for fixing my translation.
But, the article clearly stated that 2000(GonJin) to 4000(GonJin)is weapon play load. I have no idia how to convert GonJin to western weight measurement.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 18:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
comments
PLAN will not have carriers for the forseeable future, reports about carrier-fighters are wrong.
Assuming there is a carrier and MiG deal in the first place, it will not materialize. If the third batch of Su-30MKK is for navy, MiG-29 does not make sense logistically. Most importantly MiG-29 does not offer any performance advantage over the Su-30 family.
One small mistake in Newsmax article, Taiwan does not have 600 fighters.
World Daily (Shi Jie Ri Bao) is a division of Taiwanese newspaper United Daily (Lian He Bao), but it has been a staunch supporter for unification traditionally. It's not really Pro-Taiwanese.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 20:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: comments
have u even read crobato's posts?
yes, flankers are better then falcrums, but did u know how much bigger the flankers are? if china is to build a carrier, then chances are that it will be a small to medium one, so if it uses su30s, then they'll probabaly only get two dousand on it, which really isnt worth the trouble of building a carrier.
also, cos the flankers are so big, they have incredible range. and with air re-fueling, they can pretty much cover the operational areas of a chinese carrier fleet form land bases. so there is not much need to have more su30s sitting out there in the middle of the sea.
By: - 18th September 2002 at 21:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: comments
I think the Chinese were thinking the samething as India that purchasing Air Carrier along with Mig-29 from Russia, but not Su-30 on the carrier.
By: - 19th September 2002 at 09:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
Interesting article you have there.
The source says that the PLA has about 3600 fighters. I've always thought this number would exceed 5000. Am I right?
Also, I think it's crobato who said that the acquisitions of the PLAN are not the PLAAF's business, much like there's a rivalry between the USN and the USAF. In China, it's the PLA who decides who will get what, and I don't think there's a real distinction between the Air Force and the Navy. The PLANs shore based J-8IIs and future Su-30 MKs have the same tasks as the PLAAF. Remember the spy-plane incident, it was a PLAN fighter who shot down the USN Orion.
As far as the MiG-29M deal. I don't really understand how they would fit in the PLA's structure. Even though they are less expensive and smaller than the Su-33s, is it really worth all the extra costs (training pilots and maintenance personnel)? The PLA already has experience with the Flanker series, wouldn't it be better to just stick with them? I don't think the PLA can do much with a carrier program anyway, unless they want to dominate the Pacific :D. The range of the Su-30 MKs are big enough to make the carriers useless in any attemp to invade Taiwan. China is a continental military superpower, not a naval one, like the United States. I would be better to invest that money into new destroyers, submarines and long range bombers.
Maybe the PLA wants to use these carriers in a more defensive role, based off shore to protect their airspace. But the PLA has enough bases and manpower anyway.
By: - 19th September 2002 at 11:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 19-09-02 AT 11:22 AM (GMT)]The PLA has its factions, it's turf minders. For years, they all the lion's share of modernization. In 1980-1990, it seemed it was the Soviet Union that was the enemy, not Taiwan. Air Force only had the supporting role, the Navy, not much at all.
In the last two years, the priority has changed. Now, its the Air Force and the Navy that serves as the front line against Taiwan, Japan, and the US. Even if the world's biggest army is modernized, without air and naval power, it's useless.
Believe me, even in communist countries, faction minding is quite high. It's an illusion to think communist countries like China move in one mind. Actually, there are factions here, factions there; decisions are made by consensus and agreement, and the next guy in top, has to secure the support of all these factions and turfs.
YOu have to give credit to Jiang Zhemin, because if it wasn't for him, the PLAAF and PLAN will remain like small potatoes to the grand scale of the PLA.
The emphasis on the carrier came from a shift in the PLA strategy in the retaking of Taiwan. Instead of invading Taiwan and fight a bloody street battle in Taipei, the PRC is opting for a blockade. For a blockade to work, you will need carriers. Carriers that can strike at the east coast of Taiwan and cover your submarines.
Why a MiG-29? SU-33s use up too much space---two dozen fills up a 65,000 ton carrier quickly. It might be that the PRC is only looking for a 40-45,000 ton carrier. J-10s are single engine, a configuration not favored in naval use. A twin engine J-10 is like reinventing the wheel, considering the engine, radar and general performance of that type is very much like a MiG-29M. It's not worth the cost of a new development for just 30 or 40 aircraft. The disadvantages of maintaining a new type is offset by the cost advantages it provides.
Note that the MiG-29M uses the same Zhemchug radar set that is most likely used on the J-10, so you have the same weapons compatibility between the two. The Zhemchug is the Zhuk M variant Phazotron specially designed for the Chinese market but which Phazotron also conveniently markets for the MiG-29/33 market. In the course of providing indigenous Chinese AAM and AshM support for the J-10, it means these compatibilities will have to be built into the Zhemchug radar. When the MiG-29ME uses the same Zhemchug radar, the same compatibility is inherited. I think this is a very attraction quality in the eyes of the PLAN leadership.
By: - 19th September 2002 at 12:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 19-09-02 AT 01:04 PM (GMT)]About Chinese carriers. China bought several carriers over the years, believed to be used for studies. That in itself show some interest in carriers. Then you hear rumors about pilots practising off mock carrier landing strips. Now there is the possibility of navalized MiG29s. I would prefer more evidence, but I think its fair to say that interest in carriers is there.
However I don't think Chinese carriers are related to the Taiwan issue. Chinese Su27/30s have enough range to dominate the area around Taiwan including to the east, going around Taiwan if necessary. There's no need for a carrier. And as for using carriers to counter US carriers deep into the Pacific, let's just say such Chinese carriers would be unlikely to last particularly long if used that way.
I think the interest in carriers is more for long term naval development, both in terms of establishing a global naval presence as well as for securing sea lanes against lesser foes. Don't forget that China is growing into one of the largest traders and oil consumers on the planet. And that means plenty of cargo ships plying the seas. You want to be able to exert some long range naval power to help secure passage in times of tension.
Carrier task forces take time to build. You might as well start now. I think its about China thinking long term, as usual.
By: - 19th September 2002 at 13:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
Why did'nt china buy Mig-29s in the past?
By: - 19th September 2002 at 14:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
Because it was rejected for its short range and the perception that the SU-27 was better. Basically their decision was correct. The only reason they're considering MiG-29s now is for carrier use and this is the Navy, not the Air Force, that's making the decision.
By: - 19th September 2002 at 16:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MiG-29s for China
correct if i am wrong but isn't newsmax the same source that claimed that yakhont was to fitted the first two sovremenny, china has bought the Shipwreck SSM and Squall torpedo, china has bought the typhoon submarine and has also acquired Akula. So u still believe newsmax is good place for accurate information? righttt..
Posts: 6,409
By: crobato - 18th September 2002 at 11:57
From Newsmax article
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/17/190138.shtml
The Thunder Is Nearing
Dr. Alexandr Nemets
Wednesday, Sept. 18, 2002
New Messages From the East Asian Media
On Sept. 4, the authoritative Nihon Keizai Shimbun (a Japanese economic newspaper) published the article "Russia Expands Weapons Export to China," which was instantly reprinted, with comments and additions, by the Hong Kong, Taiwanese and U.S. Chinese-language media. Major theses of the article are as follow:
The export of Russian weapons to China has increased rapidly. In just this year (January-August) China and Russia signed a series of agreements to supply weapons for about $5 billion; this included SU-30 MK fighters, submarines, destroyers and air defense missile (ADM) systems. (Smaller agreements are not taken into account.) These weapons will all go to the PLA Navy (PLAN). All this, strangely enough, has taken place simultaneously with "Russian-U.S. rapprochement."
Specifically:
1. In January 2002, a $1.4 billion contract to provide PLAN with two Sovremenny-class 956 EM missile destroyers was concluded.
2. In April, a $200 million contract to supply two S-300 F (RIF) ADM systems with a 200-km range for Chinese-made missile destroyers was signed. Installation of such systems could significantly expand the geographical area of PLAN activity and promote its transformation into a "blue water fleet."
3. In May, a $1.6 billion contract to supply eight Kilo-class 636 diesel-electric submarines was signed. Submarines will be equipped with "super-advanced" Club (anti-ship) cruise missiles. Even India, an old ally and consumer of Soviet/Russian weapons, doesn't get such missiles.
4. In May, the two sides reached agreement about providing 38 SU-3U MK attack fighters for PLAN. This first party of SU-series fighters to be used by PLAN will cost China $1.5 billion. These fighters will be equipped with advanced anti-ship Kh-31 missiles, with a 200-km range capable of engaging U.S. aircraft carriers (missiles are not included in the contract).
These four major contracts for PLAN upgrading total $4.7 billion.
In general, these new weapons (to be supplied by the end of 2005 at the latest) are aimed at establishing PLAN control not only in the Taiwan Strait (this task is almost accomplished already) but also over the East China and South China seas.
The list above doesn't include new contracts to supply Russian kits and spare parts for weapons manufacturing in China, though such contracts are rapidly increasing, along with upgrading of Chinese defense industry technological potential.
By September 2002, China and Russia were close to an agreement regarding the supply of MiG-29 ME and MiG-29 D fighters for PLAN. After improvements are made to the tails and take-off/landing devices of these fighters (to be accomplished by either the Chinese, the Russians, or jointly), they will be eligible to be based on aircraft carriers.
PLA is incomparably stronger than the Taiwanese army in ground forces. By 2000, PLAN had 60 major surface vessels and 65 submarines, with a total deadweight of 905,000 tons, while the Taiwanese navy has 30 surface vessels and four submarines totaling 204,000 tons deadweight.
PLA has 3,600 fighters, including about 3,100 in the PLA Air Force (PLAAF) and 520 in PLAN, while Taiwan has 600 fighters (including about 200 modern ones of the F-16 and Mirage-2000 kind).
Until recently, Taiwanese forces surpassed PLA in weapons quality, and now this advantage is vanishing. Military pressure on Taiwan is becoming stronger. Particularly, by the end of 2004, PLA will have 200 or more advanced Russian-made SU-27 and SU-30 fighters capable of establishing control over the Taiwan Strait airspace. (end of article) Though the data about PLAN overall modernization is of great importance, Let's consider in detail information regarding SU-series fighters.
Additional Facts From Japanese Newspapers
Japanese media are usually reluctant to recognize Chinese military preparations and the growing PLA threat. It was supposed in Japan, until recently, that Taiwan is capable of balancing PLA's elite troops, especially if some U.S. forces are 'in the picture.' Now Japan is beginning to understand that the military situation in East Asia has dramatically changed and the consequences could be tragic for this country:
* The military balance in the Taiwan Strait is irreversibly broken.
* Most of the U.S. forces are tied up in the Middle East and their ability to intervene in the Far East is limited.
However, even now the Japanese underestimate the scale of the threat.
On Aug. 27, the leading Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun reported:
By 2004, when China receives from Russia 38 SU-30 MK fighters, ordered for PLAN several days ago and capable of carrying the most advanced 200-km-range Russian missiles, PLA will have 200 units or more of Russian-made SU-27 and SU-30 fighters. This doesn't include the J-11/SU-27 SK under assembly at Shenyang Aircraft Plant, at the rate of 20 fighters a year.
In addition, by 2004, PLAAF will get the recently ordered 28 SU-30 MKK fighters, capable of carrying advanced Russian air-to-ground missiles. Ten fighters from this order arrived in China in mid-August. Both contracts were made after the visit of Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov to China in the beginning of June 2002. The supply of 38 SU-30 MK and 28 SU-30 MKK fighters will increase the number of Russian-made SU-27 and SU-30 fighters in the PLA inventory to 192. (end of report)
Remarkably, the list of weapons purchases in Nihon Keizai, the Japanese paper cited at the beginning of this article, doesn't include the 28 SU-30 MKK fighters for the PLAAF, which will cost China about $1 billion. Including this sale, the major Chinese weapons purchases in January-August 2002 increases to $5.7 billion.
Even more importantly, the total number of SU-series fighters given in the Japanese papers doesn't correspond to reality.
Up to July 2000, China received, in five parts, approximately 120 SU-27 fighters, including older-model SU-27s, advanced SU-27 SKs and SU-27 UBK trainers. At least 55 of them went to PLAN aviation. The author is responsible for this information, obtained mostly from Taibei's Zhonggong Yanjiu (China Communism Research) journal and based on data from Taiwanese intelligence. In addition, in August 2000-June 2002, China received:
* about 45 SU-30 fighters ? about 40 advanced SU-30 MKK and several units of an older model ? in accordance with an agreement signed in Beijing in December 1999;
* 28 SU-27 UBK trainers.
When the 66 newly ordered SU-30 MK and SU-30 MKK fighters are added, the total will be more than 255 Russian-made SU-series fighters ? NOT 192 or 200, as stated in the above reports from Yomiuri Shimbun and Nihon Keizai.
Even if we subtract about 10 SU-series fighters "consumed" in the training process, the resulting number of Russian-made SU-series fighters in the PLA inventory, by 2004, still exceeds 240.
Finally, How Many of Them?
According to the messages in the Hong Kong and Moscow media on July 30-31, Moscow and Beijing were going to sign ? or had signed already ? two contracts for:
* 40 SU-30 MK advanced fighters to China; these fighters are designated for PLAN aviation;
* 28 SU-30 MKK fighters for the PLAAF.
In total, China will receive 68 two-seat SU-30 fighters of two different varieties, with a combat radius of 1,900 miles and capable of carrying the most advanced air-to-air, anti-ship, anti-radar and general air-to-ground missiles. Delivery should be completed mostly by 2005. Each fighter will cost China approximately $35 million. China is ready to pay this money because PLA intends, in the case of conflict around Taiwan, to
* provide an effective blockade of Taiwan (establish domination in air space);
* challenge the U.S. Navy (and U.S. Air Force) if they come close to Taiwan.
The conclusion of these contracts became possible as a result of successfully accomplishing the previous contract for SU-30 MKK delivery, concluded at the end of 1999 and accomplished by the end of 2001. They were produced by the Komsomolsk-na-Amure (Khabarovsk region) Aircraft Plant. The new SU-30 MKKs will be produced at the same plant. (end of messages)
According to one more series of messages published on Aug. 19 by Hong Kong and U.S. Chinese-language papers, "in December 1999, China ordered from Russia the first group of SU-30 MKK fighters and received them already (by the end of 2001). The second group of 38 SU-30MKK fighters was ordered during the Jiang Zemin-Putin summit in Moscow in July 2001; PLA will start getting them in the second half 2002. The third group of at least 38 SU-30 MKK fighters, for $1.6 billion, to be delivered by 2004, was ordered just recently (in July-August 2004)."
So, how many SU-30 MKK and SU-30 MK fighters are ordered at this moment by the PLA from Russia? The author lost count.
In addition, the Shenyang Aircraft Plant produced, by mid-2002, about 60 J-11/SU-27 SK fighters; about 140 are still to be assembled with Russian assistance. By estimation, the rate of production approached 30 units annually while the share of Chinese components surpassed 60 percent, thus making J-11 comparatively inexpensive.
How many hundreds of SU-series fighters, both Chinese- and Russian-made, will the PLA have by 2005?
And how strong will the PLA Air Force and the PLA Navy be at that time?
Dr. Alexandr V. Nemets is co-author of "Chinese-Russian Military Relations, Fate of Taiwan and New Geopolitics."
====================================
Will give my own analysis later.