Picture of the full scale mock up in Wuhan for reference:
Sunday, April 25, 2010
New pictures of Varyag
Just saw some new photos of Varyag. Looks like they are close to finish painting the island. Not only that, I would saw that the structure of the island has now been modified to it's final form. I am just waiting for the sensors to be installed on the island. I have attached a photo of the mock up in Wuhan for comparison. I think that they should eventually look the same
Picture of the full scale mock up in Wuhan for reference:
Picture of the full scale mock up in Wuhan for reference:
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Reflection on watching numerous recent documentaries on China
Last week, I officially quit from my job. I am currently in the middle of an one-week hiatus before starting my new job. As such, I've had some time to watch Ted Koppel's piece on China (People's republic of capitalism) and part of Paul Merton's trip to China. I think Ted Koppel's 4 part mini-series on China was simply brilliant. For anyone who is trying to learn about future US-China relationship, that series would be a good place to start off. As I watch the series, I really begun to think about several major questions. How did China change so quickly? Were the policies of economic liberation really as great as people think they are? Why are Chinese businesses so competitive now and can they be this competitive in the future? Why is the politburo so paranoid about social stability and order? Can democracy and more importantly human rights be delivered in the country without stopping the economic progress? And most importantly, what would happen if the current economic growth in China stop? Ted Koppel brought up the point that it should not be too surprising if there will be another huge revolution/revolt that uproots the system when that happens. Considering the current rein on power that the communist party has on the China, that really seems to be a far-fetched idea. I watched some documentary from Mao's time (China - Mao Bloody Revolution Revealed) and also on Deng in the past 24 hours and have a slightly different prospective.
There have often been a lot of criticisms in the Western media regarding human rights in China. A lot of that is well deserved. As shown in Koppel's documentary (and also could be confirmed by anyone that lived in China for more than a month), the amount of corruption and the driven for greed is astounding; and has caused so much injustice in the country (many in the form of human right violations like forcible eviction). Koppel's interview with billionaire Vincent Lo really revealed some interesting points. Mr. Lo basically made several major points
- while he is not happy about China's human rights record, but they have to start somewhere.
- the autocratic gov't has gone from socialism to become the world's most business friendly government with a constitution of economic development.
- this current autocratic system has delivered 300 million people out of poverty in 30 years and democracy could not have done that
- assurance of stable gov't + policies allow investors like himself get involved in the Chinese economy and deliver more wealth to the country
So, does that mean we should accept or tolerate such human right abuses and lack of democracy in the country.
For this, I watched a documentary on Mao by Phillip Short of BBC and reflected also on past documentaries I watched + what I know from growing up in China. There have been several documentaries made about Mao in the past 15 years as foreigners became allowed to interview people close to Mao at that time. None of which are flattering to Mao. Simply put, there have been 4 major man-caused disasters since the founding of CCP in the 1920s. The first two were the Japanese invasion in 1937-1945 and the civil war in 1946-1949. The next two were both caused by Mao himself in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. I knew that things were really bad during the years of great leap forward, but didn't really know how bad they were until seeing that 20+ million people died of starvation from 1958-1962. It was especially disconcerting to read that cannibalism was quite common during that period (mostly of dead people, but also of living in some cases). Even through all of this mass starvation, the gov't continued the insane policies of exporting grains to other countries to pay off Soviet debts and to look self sufficient in front of outside nations. I guess my family was not as affected by those years because we lived in the cities. However, the urban dwellers had their turn in front of the gun when Cultural Revolution came. All through China, urban youths were sent to the countryside to help the motherland. The intellectuals and the slightly wealthy urban dwellers and supporters of sacked leaders were all publicly humiliated and beaten. There were many stories of deans of universities and principals of schools getting beaten to death or committing suicide after being tortured. Worst of all, some of the most precious art, literature and historical places were destroyed by the brainwashed youth also known as the Red Guards. Personally speaking, my mother's parents were both severely persecuted because of their educational background. The Mao era had none of the war and foreign occupation that plagued the country for the 100 years before that. However, it was replaced by a psychotic leader that managed to brainwash much of the population and destroyed all possible political opponents through radical ideological movements (Cultural Revolution and other major purges). Other than Zhou Enlai and Zhu De, all of the other major revolutionaries like Peng Dehuai, Liu Shaoqi, Deng Xiaoping and many other generals were purged, humiliated and tortured. The administration was infected by leftist radicals like the Gang of Four, Mao himself and Lin Biao to a lesser degree. The succession of Deng Xiaoping over Hua GuoFeng in late 1970s was the first time in the recent Chinese history where a succession happened over a unified China without blood spilling or purges. And thankfully, they have finally put in a system that would allow for peaceful transition of power and that would prevent future emergence of charismatic leader (like Mao himself). If this series of events sound crazy, one has to realize that this was nothing new in the Chinese history. Unfortunately, Chinese history is marred by continuous cycles of internal war, mass starvation, political purges by emperors and village rebellions that led to new deification of rebellion leader as an emperor God.
In Koppel's documentary, he interviewed a bunch of villager who insisted that life is better now than it has ever been. Their explanation was that "the army no longer forces people to join. And we are no longer forced to move off our land." And the oldest women in the village said that right now is the best time to live because they have enough food to eat and enough clothes to wear. Some may think these are extraordinary statements or that the Chinese population has set their standards way too low. However, one only has to look at the past to see how much things have moved. When my parents were in their early 20s, they were working at textile factories and villages in the midst of the Cultural Revolution. All form of higher education were stopped (even most lower level of education were stopped), so their dreams of going to university were sitting in vain. When my grandparents were in their early 20s, China was involved in the two major wars of this century. A lot of their friends were killed by Japanese brutality and then by the civil war. When my great grandparents were in their early 20s, China had just became a republic and was in the midst of constant infighting between local warlords. It should not be hard to see why the Chinese gov't fears change and instability so much. Deng Xiaoping what happened to China in the 60s and 70s when the country went into policies without pragmatism and caution. His philosophy of control, pragmatism and caution has been passed onto all of the current leaders. Outside of the TianAnMen Square crackdown, one can hardly argue against this period of peace, political stability and economical growth in China. A lot of people on the top are fearful that if their current hold on power is taken away, the country will go back into chaos like prior to 1978.
It is very easy to credit Deng Xiaoping and recent administrations for China's success in the past 30 years, but are they really that responsible? Looking back at the period right after Mao's death, the Chinese population was ready to open itself up to the rest of the world and embrace capitalism. I think that opening up the country to Western investment and technology was the smartest thing that the gov't did once the relations were normalized with the Western countries. From his past experiences at the top, Deng Xiaoping saw the need for pragmatic engagement with the West over extreme ideological warfare. According to this well written article by Hoover Institution, the Chinese people were hungry by then for political reform. They were even acting out illegally in many cases to make money for their families. During the late 70s and early 80s, the younger generation were kids when the great leap forward happened and teenagers when the cultural revolution happened. I think they became disillusioned of class struggle and socialism after being starved and later sent to the farms. The older generation still had enough memory of the period of society prior to 1949. I think both generations had suffered enough by then and really wanted to work hard to make lives better for their kids. Even today, the older generation in China are the younger generation of the late 70s, so they still remembered the chaos, starvation, poverty and hard times. They don't really mind to work super hard to ensure better future for their kids. And I think Ted Koppel's documentary was a perfect illustration of what every poor Chinese family are willing to do for their kids. He made a perfect point later in an extra interview that "Chinese people probably deserve to go to the hall of fame for enduring hardship and suffering". When you look at Ted Koppel's interview with the owner of Lifan, you can see the prototypical hardened Chinese entrepreneur that is willing to do whatever it takes to make it in the capitalistic world. You also hear about this with many of the other successful business men in China. They have succeeded because of their hardened experience during the great leap forward and the cultural revolution. They know that the only way forward is to beat out your competition in any possible way. So, I think that China is thriving in the world economy now, because the people that are driving the economic growth are the same people who were hardened through the Mao-caused disasters. It is beating out competitions around the world like Japan did in the 50s/60s because it has a very driven group of people willing to endure hardship. I think that the recent regime's main role through all of this time is to continue a stable environment to allow Chinese people to better their own lives. Deng and the following leaders were smart enough to not stop a good thing when it has already started. The only thing that prevented this from happening for the 100 years prior to that were continued chaos, utter lunacy in power and the numerous wars. And maybe Deng's policy of maintaining stability and not stopping good things is the best anyone can ever hope a government to do. The question as we move forward is whether or not China can continue to strive in the world market when the future generation that came in after the start of the single child policy become the drivers of the economy. Can the Chinese population still work hard and endure suffering when most of the people grew up being spoiled and pampered by their parents.
So in the past 30 years, we have gone from a society of total chaos and starvation to a society of vibrant growth with large degree of personal freedom. It is hard to imagine that China will ever go back to the Mao days. In fact, I read a recent article where Chinese tourists started to complain about lack of freedom after a day of visit in North Korea. Today's North Korea is probably where China was at the time of Cultural Revolution. In fact, the evolution of North Korea from a state that was wealthier and more industrialized than South Korea in the 60s to the pariah state that it is today is a very good parallel to what happened to China in the 60s and 70s. Knowing all of this, the question is what holds in the future for China in terms of democracy and human rights. I think it was very interesting that Ted Koppel mentioned in several places that what he saw or many of the interviews that he was happening could not have happened 15 years ago or even 5 years ago. This shows a gradual change in the personal freedom that we are seeing in the ordinary citizens. For example, I don't think the administration would be able to survive the internal backlash from a crackdown like the one in TianAnMen Square. Actually ever since the death of Deng Xiaoping, no civilian leader will ever have the same power to control the military. That is a good thing, because the politburo members have to retire after 2 terms of power. And we are certainly seeing a lot of checks and balances within the PSC to prevent a God-like leader ever appearing again. As the power at the top have slowly faded from Mao to Deng to Jiang to Hu and to Xi Jinping in the future, the question is whether or not we can have a peaceful transition to some form of electoral based system. I think that a transition to elecoral based system will happen in the next 20 years, but I hope it does not come as a result of a violent national uprising by the disenfranchised over the wealth gap between the haves and the have-nots. Even though today's system is causing a lot of corruption, injustice and wealth gap, it has vastly improved the lives of most Chinese people. I think that a complete repudiation of this system would cause chaos and economic disaster in the short term.
Even so, I do hope for some kind of repudiation in the future. I think that the mistakes that Mao made in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution will never be properly revealed to the Chinese public unless this system is shaken. Deng continued the legacy of Mao and the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party by maintaining that Mao's contribution to history was 70% good and 30% bad. I cannot see CCP go any further in repudiating Mao because 1) that would take away their legitimacy in power; 2) the population just doesn't care anymore. And I think my second point is probably the sadest of all. Even from my parent's generation, they have grown up with the view that Mao was this great leader that unified China but made some mistakes along the way. Leaders like Liu Shaoqi and Peng Dehuai have been rehabilitated, but they have never received the credit they deserved for bringing China out of the Great Leap Forward and trying to run the country. Most of the blames for the Cultural Revolution should rest upon Mao rather than the Gang of Four or Lin Biao. Even though he unified the country and kicked out the foreigners, he also set the nation back to stone ages with his insane economic policies and political movements. In the future, 95% of the new generation of Chinese would grow up never know about how bad things were between the early 1950s and 1978. And I think that is a mistake, because they need to learn about the past to not repeat it again in the future. So, I hope that as people demand for better rule of law and more freedom in the future, the government will incrementally become more open about its past. More transparency from the gov't on these matters is certainly better than having its own citizens watching documentaries of Mao on youtube (some of which are quite biased). There is a major bubble forming in the Chinese economy. Once that bubble bursts, the gov't needs to be prepared for millions of unemployed college students hanging around the country. It would need to also continuously change to prevent another million people from protesting in front of TianAnMen Square. Because the next time it happens, I doubt the army would be listening to the civilian commands.
In conclusion, I think that even though China is going through a really healthy period of peace and growth, there are some looming signs of danger up ahead. Having looked back through its recent history, I understand the politburo's obsession with stability and caution, but also think that they need to continue to change to maintain this stability. Nobody really knows what would happen if the Chinese economy bubble bursts. I hope that the country does not go back to chaos, because that would set the country back many years. I would recommend all of the links that I have mentioned in this blog entry. They are great places to start in understanding Modern China.
There have often been a lot of criticisms in the Western media regarding human rights in China. A lot of that is well deserved. As shown in Koppel's documentary (and also could be confirmed by anyone that lived in China for more than a month), the amount of corruption and the driven for greed is astounding; and has caused so much injustice in the country (many in the form of human right violations like forcible eviction). Koppel's interview with billionaire Vincent Lo really revealed some interesting points. Mr. Lo basically made several major points
- while he is not happy about China's human rights record, but they have to start somewhere.
- the autocratic gov't has gone from socialism to become the world's most business friendly government with a constitution of economic development.
- this current autocratic system has delivered 300 million people out of poverty in 30 years and democracy could not have done that
- assurance of stable gov't + policies allow investors like himself get involved in the Chinese economy and deliver more wealth to the country
So, does that mean we should accept or tolerate such human right abuses and lack of democracy in the country.
For this, I watched a documentary on Mao by Phillip Short of BBC and reflected also on past documentaries I watched + what I know from growing up in China. There have been several documentaries made about Mao in the past 15 years as foreigners became allowed to interview people close to Mao at that time. None of which are flattering to Mao. Simply put, there have been 4 major man-caused disasters since the founding of CCP in the 1920s. The first two were the Japanese invasion in 1937-1945 and the civil war in 1946-1949. The next two were both caused by Mao himself in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. I knew that things were really bad during the years of great leap forward, but didn't really know how bad they were until seeing that 20+ million people died of starvation from 1958-1962. It was especially disconcerting to read that cannibalism was quite common during that period (mostly of dead people, but also of living in some cases). Even through all of this mass starvation, the gov't continued the insane policies of exporting grains to other countries to pay off Soviet debts and to look self sufficient in front of outside nations. I guess my family was not as affected by those years because we lived in the cities. However, the urban dwellers had their turn in front of the gun when Cultural Revolution came. All through China, urban youths were sent to the countryside to help the motherland. The intellectuals and the slightly wealthy urban dwellers and supporters of sacked leaders were all publicly humiliated and beaten. There were many stories of deans of universities and principals of schools getting beaten to death or committing suicide after being tortured. Worst of all, some of the most precious art, literature and historical places were destroyed by the brainwashed youth also known as the Red Guards. Personally speaking, my mother's parents were both severely persecuted because of their educational background. The Mao era had none of the war and foreign occupation that plagued the country for the 100 years before that. However, it was replaced by a psychotic leader that managed to brainwash much of the population and destroyed all possible political opponents through radical ideological movements (Cultural Revolution and other major purges). Other than Zhou Enlai and Zhu De, all of the other major revolutionaries like Peng Dehuai, Liu Shaoqi, Deng Xiaoping and many other generals were purged, humiliated and tortured. The administration was infected by leftist radicals like the Gang of Four, Mao himself and Lin Biao to a lesser degree. The succession of Deng Xiaoping over Hua GuoFeng in late 1970s was the first time in the recent Chinese history where a succession happened over a unified China without blood spilling or purges. And thankfully, they have finally put in a system that would allow for peaceful transition of power and that would prevent future emergence of charismatic leader (like Mao himself). If this series of events sound crazy, one has to realize that this was nothing new in the Chinese history. Unfortunately, Chinese history is marred by continuous cycles of internal war, mass starvation, political purges by emperors and village rebellions that led to new deification of rebellion leader as an emperor God.
In Koppel's documentary, he interviewed a bunch of villager who insisted that life is better now than it has ever been. Their explanation was that "the army no longer forces people to join. And we are no longer forced to move off our land." And the oldest women in the village said that right now is the best time to live because they have enough food to eat and enough clothes to wear. Some may think these are extraordinary statements or that the Chinese population has set their standards way too low. However, one only has to look at the past to see how much things have moved. When my parents were in their early 20s, they were working at textile factories and villages in the midst of the Cultural Revolution. All form of higher education were stopped (even most lower level of education were stopped), so their dreams of going to university were sitting in vain. When my grandparents were in their early 20s, China was involved in the two major wars of this century. A lot of their friends were killed by Japanese brutality and then by the civil war. When my great grandparents were in their early 20s, China had just became a republic and was in the midst of constant infighting between local warlords. It should not be hard to see why the Chinese gov't fears change and instability so much. Deng Xiaoping what happened to China in the 60s and 70s when the country went into policies without pragmatism and caution. His philosophy of control, pragmatism and caution has been passed onto all of the current leaders. Outside of the TianAnMen Square crackdown, one can hardly argue against this period of peace, political stability and economical growth in China. A lot of people on the top are fearful that if their current hold on power is taken away, the country will go back into chaos like prior to 1978.
It is very easy to credit Deng Xiaoping and recent administrations for China's success in the past 30 years, but are they really that responsible? Looking back at the period right after Mao's death, the Chinese population was ready to open itself up to the rest of the world and embrace capitalism. I think that opening up the country to Western investment and technology was the smartest thing that the gov't did once the relations were normalized with the Western countries. From his past experiences at the top, Deng Xiaoping saw the need for pragmatic engagement with the West over extreme ideological warfare. According to this well written article by Hoover Institution, the Chinese people were hungry by then for political reform. They were even acting out illegally in many cases to make money for their families. During the late 70s and early 80s, the younger generation were kids when the great leap forward happened and teenagers when the cultural revolution happened. I think they became disillusioned of class struggle and socialism after being starved and later sent to the farms. The older generation still had enough memory of the period of society prior to 1949. I think both generations had suffered enough by then and really wanted to work hard to make lives better for their kids. Even today, the older generation in China are the younger generation of the late 70s, so they still remembered the chaos, starvation, poverty and hard times. They don't really mind to work super hard to ensure better future for their kids. And I think Ted Koppel's documentary was a perfect illustration of what every poor Chinese family are willing to do for their kids. He made a perfect point later in an extra interview that "Chinese people probably deserve to go to the hall of fame for enduring hardship and suffering". When you look at Ted Koppel's interview with the owner of Lifan, you can see the prototypical hardened Chinese entrepreneur that is willing to do whatever it takes to make it in the capitalistic world. You also hear about this with many of the other successful business men in China. They have succeeded because of their hardened experience during the great leap forward and the cultural revolution. They know that the only way forward is to beat out your competition in any possible way. So, I think that China is thriving in the world economy now, because the people that are driving the economic growth are the same people who were hardened through the Mao-caused disasters. It is beating out competitions around the world like Japan did in the 50s/60s because it has a very driven group of people willing to endure hardship. I think that the recent regime's main role through all of this time is to continue a stable environment to allow Chinese people to better their own lives. Deng and the following leaders were smart enough to not stop a good thing when it has already started. The only thing that prevented this from happening for the 100 years prior to that were continued chaos, utter lunacy in power and the numerous wars. And maybe Deng's policy of maintaining stability and not stopping good things is the best anyone can ever hope a government to do. The question as we move forward is whether or not China can continue to strive in the world market when the future generation that came in after the start of the single child policy become the drivers of the economy. Can the Chinese population still work hard and endure suffering when most of the people grew up being spoiled and pampered by their parents.
So in the past 30 years, we have gone from a society of total chaos and starvation to a society of vibrant growth with large degree of personal freedom. It is hard to imagine that China will ever go back to the Mao days. In fact, I read a recent article where Chinese tourists started to complain about lack of freedom after a day of visit in North Korea. Today's North Korea is probably where China was at the time of Cultural Revolution. In fact, the evolution of North Korea from a state that was wealthier and more industrialized than South Korea in the 60s to the pariah state that it is today is a very good parallel to what happened to China in the 60s and 70s. Knowing all of this, the question is what holds in the future for China in terms of democracy and human rights. I think it was very interesting that Ted Koppel mentioned in several places that what he saw or many of the interviews that he was happening could not have happened 15 years ago or even 5 years ago. This shows a gradual change in the personal freedom that we are seeing in the ordinary citizens. For example, I don't think the administration would be able to survive the internal backlash from a crackdown like the one in TianAnMen Square. Actually ever since the death of Deng Xiaoping, no civilian leader will ever have the same power to control the military. That is a good thing, because the politburo members have to retire after 2 terms of power. And we are certainly seeing a lot of checks and balances within the PSC to prevent a God-like leader ever appearing again. As the power at the top have slowly faded from Mao to Deng to Jiang to Hu and to Xi Jinping in the future, the question is whether or not we can have a peaceful transition to some form of electoral based system. I think that a transition to elecoral based system will happen in the next 20 years, but I hope it does not come as a result of a violent national uprising by the disenfranchised over the wealth gap between the haves and the have-nots. Even though today's system is causing a lot of corruption, injustice and wealth gap, it has vastly improved the lives of most Chinese people. I think that a complete repudiation of this system would cause chaos and economic disaster in the short term.
Even so, I do hope for some kind of repudiation in the future. I think that the mistakes that Mao made in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution will never be properly revealed to the Chinese public unless this system is shaken. Deng continued the legacy of Mao and the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party by maintaining that Mao's contribution to history was 70% good and 30% bad. I cannot see CCP go any further in repudiating Mao because 1) that would take away their legitimacy in power; 2) the population just doesn't care anymore. And I think my second point is probably the sadest of all. Even from my parent's generation, they have grown up with the view that Mao was this great leader that unified China but made some mistakes along the way. Leaders like Liu Shaoqi and Peng Dehuai have been rehabilitated, but they have never received the credit they deserved for bringing China out of the Great Leap Forward and trying to run the country. Most of the blames for the Cultural Revolution should rest upon Mao rather than the Gang of Four or Lin Biao. Even though he unified the country and kicked out the foreigners, he also set the nation back to stone ages with his insane economic policies and political movements. In the future, 95% of the new generation of Chinese would grow up never know about how bad things were between the early 1950s and 1978. And I think that is a mistake, because they need to learn about the past to not repeat it again in the future. So, I hope that as people demand for better rule of law and more freedom in the future, the government will incrementally become more open about its past. More transparency from the gov't on these matters is certainly better than having its own citizens watching documentaries of Mao on youtube (some of which are quite biased). There is a major bubble forming in the Chinese economy. Once that bubble bursts, the gov't needs to be prepared for millions of unemployed college students hanging around the country. It would need to also continuously change to prevent another million people from protesting in front of TianAnMen Square. Because the next time it happens, I doubt the army would be listening to the civilian commands.
In conclusion, I think that even though China is going through a really healthy period of peace and growth, there are some looming signs of danger up ahead. Having looked back through its recent history, I understand the politburo's obsession with stability and caution, but also think that they need to continue to change to maintain this stability. Nobody really knows what would happen if the Chinese economy bubble bursts. I hope that the country does not go back to chaos, because that would set the country back many years. I would recommend all of the links that I have mentioned in this blog entry. They are great places to start in understanding Modern China.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Most recent PLA news
I guess the two big news today are the unveiling of J-10 to 51 countries and Japan getting alarmed about PLAN moving past Okinawa.
Although it made some errors like the F-16 price tag, this Times Online Article pretty much contains all of the contents mentioned in all similar articles. Important points that we know from the past few days:
The pictures below show J-10s from the 70th regiment of the 24th division flying during the day and night. It also shows foreign military attachés getting up-close look at the cockpit of J-10 and a photo of J-10's radar.
As for the incident with Japan, it was significant because the North Sea Fleet actually send a fleet consisting of a 051C, several 053s and tugboat to Malacca Straits after 6000 nm. This really just represents a continuing shift toward more blue water activities for PLAN. Japan better get used to it, because China is not violating any international laws in trying to gain more blue water experience in international waters.
Although it made some errors like the F-16 price tag, this Times Online Article pretty much contains all of the contents mentioned in all similar articles. Important points that we know from the past few days:
- From 24th division, 70th regiment
- More pilots than plane (1.2 pilot per plane)
- Flyaway cost of J-10 is 190 million RMB, around $27 million at current exchange rate
- Maximum load is 9G
- Take-off/landing distance is 350 to 650 m
- Has 11 hard points
The pictures below show J-10s from the 70th regiment of the 24th division flying during the day and night. It also shows foreign military attachés getting up-close look at the cockpit of J-10 and a photo of J-10's radar.
As for the incident with Japan, it was significant because the North Sea Fleet actually send a fleet consisting of a 051C, several 053s and tugboat to Malacca Straits after 6000 nm. This really just represents a continuing shift toward more blue water activities for PLAN. Japan better get used to it, because China is not violating any international laws in trying to gain more blue water experience in international waters.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Recent article about Anti-ship Missile joining PLAN
Recently, an article came out that talked about a YJ series missile that appeared in the 60th anniversary parade last October. From the text, it appears to be talking about the latest version of YJ-83. Here is the article in Chinese:
The relevant parts translate to something like this:
In the 60th anniversary national parade, China's new YJ series AShM shined. It was announced as China's first long range, high accuracy, fully digital missile with high resistance to ECM.
An interview with admiral Li from a naval missile assembly factory.
Started off by mentioning some of the things that happened as they were producing/preparing the missiles for the parade. The typical propoganda in these kind of articles that try to drum up the situation.
Talks about the importance of making sure every little details are right in aerospace industry. When this missile did its first flight testing, everything looked good from the ground. But when they went back and looked at the missile thrust figures and missile trajectory figures, they found that some of the testing figures were less than expected. These are the things you can find by first look. It then talked about another case where the missile misjudged the height in an extremely cold testing environment when it was launched off aircraft. It took a long time before they found out it was due to bad production quality which threw off the instrument measuring the height.
The next part talks about the 6 areas that this missile improved on previous designs:
Admiral says that he believes YJ missile is comparable to the most advanced missiles in the world and even exceed them in certain areas. It is very reliable and has rarely failed in tests and live firing.
He says that most missiles fly at 20 m height toward the target and then dips to 5 to 7 m in the terminal phase. There is really no need to fly any lower, which could cause it to be swallowed by water. Improving terminal maneuvering is an important part of missile development.
He then talks about the cons of supersonic missiles. btw, nothing he mentioned is new if you have ever followed one of those supersonic vs subsonic discussion threads. He says that the missile would have to either sacrifice range or warhead size due to the higher speed of supersonic missiles. He says that they have to fly higher which causes them to be picked earlier by ship radars. They also have 20 to 50 times larger infrared signature, which would allow latest IRST to pick them up easily. The also have much less time to search for target due to the faster speed. They probably have 60% less time to process information. When facing ECM, they might not have a second chance to find the target if something goes wrong the first time it's trying to target. Supersonic missiles also cost more to use than subsonic missiles (1.5 times as much). I'm a little confused here because I think the supersonic missiles cost more than that much more. So, he might have just been talking about maintenance and usage cost.
2009年10月1日，国庆60周年阅兵式上，我国新型“鹰击”系列反舰导弹顺利经过天安门广场，光荣地接受了祖国和人民的检阅。
“此型导弹是我军第一型大射程、命中精度高、抗干扰能力强、全数字化导弹……”解说员清晰的声音随电波传遍世界各地。这一刻，无数中华儿女的心在沸腾。
作为我军现役的新型主力反舰导弹，它们具有什么性能？研制背后发生了哪些故事？记者专门采访了国庆60周年受阅新装备监造者、海军驻某导弹总装工厂军事代表室总代表李耀国大校。
零故障参加国庆首都阅兵
记者：作为国庆装备的直接监造者，你们军代表的内心肯定充满了无比的自豪和荣耀，能不能谈谈当时的情况？
李耀国：这是一项光荣的任务啊！2009年6月，当上级机关把作为阅兵装备的新型反舰导弹监造任务下达给我们军代表室时，我们全室同志无比兴奋。但是，交付周期比正常的生产周期大大缩短，困难可想而知。
在装备生产过程中，军代表室指派专业组长周传忠、业务骨干李锋两名同志倒班工作，吃住在工厂，确保阅兵装备得到全过程质量监督。有一天，大家晚上加班到9点多，在弹翼接头材料分析时，突然发现：有几件产品强度性能指标虽然在合格范围内，但已经接近下限。
厂家的现场指挥人员准备安排第二天上班再排故，周传忠急忙劝阻，建议把设计人员接到现场排故。在等待的过程中，他耐心地对现场工人说：“今晚故障不排除，整个进度就会受到影响，交装的时间就可能延误，部队训练的时间就会相应减少，部队完成阅兵任务的压力就会加大。今晚不管干到几点，故障不清除决不能休息。”
随即，他又找来相关生产记录和资料认真研究，直到凌晨3点多故障才顺利排除。
记者：都说细节决定成败。在航空航天高科技领域，是不是尤为明显？
李耀国：是的。干航天，就要有这样过细的作风。记得该型导弹首次助推弹试验那天，随着一声令下，导弹呼啸着冲了出去，现场的人群欢呼起来。这是此型导弹首次试验，发射出去即意味着成功。
回到住处，现场的人员都互相祝贺，还燃放起了鞭炮。我们军代表却没有被表面的成功迷惑，而是像往常一样，回到房间后打开了现场录取的数据，认真地分析起来。通过对导弹推力数据和弹道数据进行研究分析，与发射的现场录像进行比对，我们发现导弹的初始弹道数据有些下降，数值不大，单从发射场面上是根本看不出来的。
于是，我们立刻找来总师和相关技术员，提出了自己的看法。这个问题在现试验阶段看起来可能不是问题，但是若带入到下一个试验阶段，可能是一个致命的问题。因为弹道下沉，说明推力不足，导致速度不足，从而直接影响后续的舵面控制，后果将是灾难性的。
听完这一席话，刚才还兴高采烈的同志们马上就变得鸦雀无声。于是，大家连夜召开了分析会，对助推器进行改进，增大初始燃烧面积。通过后续试验验证，问题得到圆满解决。
记者：类似这样的情况肯定有很多，能不能谈谈在研制这型导弹的过程中发生的难忘故事？
李耀国：的确是这样，每一型武器研制的背后，都充满了艰辛，也留下了许多难忘的记忆。
记得导弹对海攻击试验时正值冬季，室外的气温是零下20多摄氏度。研制人员和军代表们每天都在寒风凛冽的机场露天办公。当时导弹在挂上战机出发后，突然出现高度测量误差。这对于掠海攻击的导弹来说，是非常致命的。大家分析半天，一直没有找到原因。后来，在检测导弹时，无意中发现高度表内有一小滴冷凝水！原来高度表在生产过程中密封性不强，混入了水蒸气。经过高空环境后结成冰霜，下来后终于现了原形。故障很快被排除
性能六大方面新突破
记者：作为国庆60周年首都阅兵，我国最先进反舰导弹，新型“鹰击”系列导弹都有哪些突破？与国外先进导弹相比有哪些优势？
李耀国：国产新型反舰导弹在前一型导弹的基础上作了重大改进，主要有六大方面突破：
一是由模拟体制改成了数字体制，由中控计算机实施整体控制，缩小了体积，操控性、稳定性更好；二是射程大大增加，是原型弹的一倍，并具有了航路规划能力；三是弹头性能提升，捕捉目标的能力提高，抗干扰能力大增；四是使用性能大大改善，导弹的准备时间压缩，操作程序简化；五是具有广泛适装性，能在多型飞机、多型舰艇上使用；六是使用寿命提高，又大大方便了部队官兵使用。
至于说与国外的先进导弹相比，因为没有直接的比试，不能轻易下结论。但我可以说，和国外的先进导弹相比，它应该处于国际先进水平，有些方面甚至是领先的。
比如，我们这型导弹高可靠性，无论是试验阶段还是部队实际使用，几乎没有失败过。再比如，可维护性、保存性、操作性等方面，我们也有优势。当然还有一点，我们造价也肯定比国外便宜，这是毋庸置疑的。
记者：很多军事爱好者都注意到，现役很多反舰导弹都有掠海飞行能力，那么导弹飞行高度是不是越低越好呢？导弹末端机动能力是不是一个方向？
李耀国：掠海飞行是反舰导弹的一大特点。主要是因为舰艇预警雷达受地球曲率的影响有盲区，掠海飞行可以躲过雷达的探测，达到突然袭击的效果。现在反舰导弹的平飞高度一般在20米左右，到末端后能达到5－7米，这对于躲避雷达来讲，已经足够了。如果高度再下降，很容易就被卷进大海里，国外在试验时就曾发生过类似的悲剧。
末端的机动能力,是导弹增强突防能力一个重要手段，也是一个发展方向。
具备高亚音速飞行能力
记者：大家知道，俄罗斯“现代”级导弹驱逐舰上的“马斯基特”反舰导弹具有超音速飞行的能力，而欧美的一些知名导弹却都采用了高亚音速。这是为什么呢？
李耀国：超音速和亚音速是两个并行的方向，谈不上哪个一定好。虽然超音速导弹速度快，但在技术上存在着一些根本性问题。
首先是射程不足。为了“跑得快”，燃料消耗大，射程就受到影响。导弹要多装燃料，弹头就要减轻，杀伤力也会受到影响。
其次是容易暴露。为保证足够射程，超音速反舰导弹通常要进行中高空飞行，这就把自己置于敌防御雷达的水平视线以上，在理论上给了对方更多预警时间。而且，在飞行过程中，超音速导弹正面的红外特征要比亚音速导弹高20～50倍，装备了新型红外信号转换系统的军舰很容易发现。
再次是应变能力不强。超音速反舰导弹同样依靠雷达搜索追踪目标。处理同样的目标数据，超音速导弹比亚音速导弹的时间少60％。一旦遇到干扰，导弹很可能还没来得及分辨清楚，就一下子飞过去了。而且因为速度太快，超音速导弹如果在第一回合里错过目标，就没有第二次机会了。
最后是费用昂贵。因为超音速反舰导弹对导弹的机动性要求极高，需要用一些特殊材料。计算结果表明，超音速反舰导弹的耗费要比亚音速反舰导弹高1．5倍。
我国下一代反舰导弹，会朝着更高的目标迈进。我相信，经过我国科技人员的努力，中国“鹰击”系列反舰导弹一定能保持自己的优势，在激烈的国际竞争中力求保持先进水平。（记者 钱晓虎 特约记者 姜毅 照片由记者 张雷提供）
The relevant parts translate to something like this:
In the 60th anniversary national parade, China's new YJ series AShM shined. It was announced as China's first long range, high accuracy, fully digital missile with high resistance to ECM.
An interview with admiral Li from a naval missile assembly factory.
Started off by mentioning some of the things that happened as they were producing/preparing the missiles for the parade. The typical propoganda in these kind of articles that try to drum up the situation.
Talks about the importance of making sure every little details are right in aerospace industry. When this missile did its first flight testing, everything looked good from the ground. But when they went back and looked at the missile thrust figures and missile trajectory figures, they found that some of the testing figures were less than expected. These are the things you can find by first look. It then talked about another case where the missile misjudged the height in an extremely cold testing environment when it was launched off aircraft. It took a long time before they found out it was due to bad production quality which threw off the instrument measuring the height.
The next part talks about the 6 areas that this missile improved on previous designs:
- Going from Analog to fully digital with a central computer providing overall control.
- The range increased 100% and also has ability to plan the flight path.
- Seeker technology has increased, can find target better and improved anti-jamming capability.
- Has improved usability, preparation time decreased and procedure is simplified
- Can be used on many platforms (multiple types of aircraft and ships.
- Has longer service life.
Admiral says that he believes YJ missile is comparable to the most advanced missiles in the world and even exceed them in certain areas. It is very reliable and has rarely failed in tests and live firing.
He says that most missiles fly at 20 m height toward the target and then dips to 5 to 7 m in the terminal phase. There is really no need to fly any lower, which could cause it to be swallowed by water. Improving terminal maneuvering is an important part of missile development.
He then talks about the cons of supersonic missiles. btw, nothing he mentioned is new if you have ever followed one of those supersonic vs subsonic discussion threads. He says that the missile would have to either sacrifice range or warhead size due to the higher speed of supersonic missiles. He says that they have to fly higher which causes them to be picked earlier by ship radars. They also have 20 to 50 times larger infrared signature, which would allow latest IRST to pick them up easily. The also have much less time to search for target due to the faster speed. They probably have 60% less time to process information. When facing ECM, they might not have a second chance to find the target if something goes wrong the first time it's trying to target. Supersonic missiles also cost more to use than subsonic missiles (1.5 times as much). I'm a little confused here because I think the supersonic missiles cost more than that much more. So, he might have just been talking about maintenance and usage cost.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Interesting news about China/Israel/Iran
So, according to this article on times online, the Israelis actually made the unprecedented move to come to China to try to persuade Chinese support for sanctions. That in itself is nothing new, but the Israelis are basically saying that they will attack Iran's nuclear facilities and that all hell with break loose if they do. According to the article, they have even let a Chinese general to inspect their strike force to show that they are capable of accomplishing this mission. Basically if you've followed the commentaries of Robert Baer, the Israelis will move to take out the nuclear facilities if UN doesn't deliver on further sanction. Clearly, Israel regards this as existential threat (this entry is not to agree or disagree that point). Even so, it is still a curious strategy to straight out tell China that "you better help us, because we are so desperate that we will do something so dramatic that you will get hurt in the process and we don't care what anyone else thinks about it". It amounts to basically blackmailing the world's leading creditor.
I'm curious to see how China will react to this. I personally think they should support further sanctions in the hope of stopping this from escalating further into a wide conflict that would basically take a large part of Middle East oil out of commission. The world's economy is just recovering and can't handle a dramatic energy crisis like this. However, would supporting a harsher sanction right now stop the Iranians and appease the Israelis? What if the Israelis come back to ask for more sanctions if this round does not solve anything? These are all things that China needs to think about.
I'm curious to see how China will react to this. I personally think they should support further sanctions in the hope of stopping this from escalating further into a wide conflict that would basically take a large part of Middle East oil out of commission. The world's economy is just recovering and can't handle a dramatic energy crisis like this. However, would supporting a harsher sanction right now stop the Iranians and appease the Israelis? What if the Israelis come back to ask for more sanctions if this round does not solve anything? These are all things that China needs to think about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)