China’s new military ‘transparency’

China’s new military ‘transparency’

When DoD’s top man on China, Michael Schiffer, rolled out this year’s China report not too long ago, he renewed a familiar American criticism: Beijing isn’t open and transparent about what weapons it’s building, and that ultimately is bad for everyone, because it forces the U.S. and commanders around the Western Pacific to assume the worst. Sometimes this criticism gets taken a little too far, as when the State Department was widely mocked in August when it asked “why” China wanted its new aircraft carrier, the Shi Lang. But fundamentally, transparency is a good thing for everyone, and it’s worth pointing out that anyone in the world can bring up almost any detail you can imagine about American ships, aircraft or weapons with a few mouse clicks. Doing anything about that information in a tactical situation is a whole other matter.

If you take a step back, though, China actually is improving its military openness — although, let’s be very clear: This is still China we’re talking about. But, between radio silence and something, something is a change. There were two good examples just this week:

If you haven’t watched it yet, check out John’s video of the J-20 posted over at Defense Tech. It’s a great look at the jet taxiing to a stop, the pilot popping his canopy, and then opening the jet’s F-22-like weapons bay, complete with Skunk Works-approved sawtooth edges on the doors. (There’s also a weird square hatch open on the right edge of the jet, just forward of the aft landing wheel. It doesn’t look like a weapons bay — a big maintenance access for the engine, maybe? Any ideas?) While you’re watching the video, notice that even though it shows dozens of Chinese engineers, airmen and soldiers milling about on the tarmac, nobody does anything about the person pointing a video camera at this once-secret fighter jet.


John’s video is just the latest to show the crawl-walk-run process by which J-20 pilots are learning to fly the new airplane. One or two grainy, distant videos may have been smuggled out illegally, but after this many, and with this kind of clarity, it’s obvious that Chinese officials want people to see them. Again — not the same as holding a press conference at the aerodrome and taking questions from Steve Trimble, but it’s better than nothing.

This week’s second example came in a very brief report in China’s official Global Times newspaper, apparently not available online but which was picked up by wire services: A Chinese spokesman announced that the Shi Lang is evidently back from its initial sea trials and it accomplished all the objectives that commanders set down. What were they? What’s next? No dice — but here’s another interesting detail from this same item: “China says the ship is intended for research and training, pointing to longer-term plans to build up to three additional clones of the carrier in China’s own shipyards.”

This could be significant, or it could just be a confusing choice of phrase by our reporter, but what it seems to say is that China wants to copy the Shi Lang, which began its life as the Soviets’ Varyag, as opposed to designing a new, indigenous class of ships from the keel up. If true, it says a lot: The Chinese apparently like the size, ski-jump configuration and other aspects of their current ship, which tells us they’re not going to try for a Royal Navy CVF-size flattop or anything like a U.S. Navy carrier. (Unless it doesn’t.)

But at least we open-source normies have these crumbs to chew over, even if all they end up doing is making us want more.

Join the Conversation

That door in front of the aft right landing gear is a landing gear door.

Luckily unlike Russia’s new weapon China makes nothing but crap. We all know the Chicoms want world domination. BUT they own us financially so no war is needed. This-is all for looks of a new China.

Hmm: Commie Yuans and Amurs in the 100s & Shi Lang can transit the Panama Canal (prc has a base at both ends, ports in Long Beach and the Bahamas and virtually controls ocean-bourne shipping). A space race, the cyber war on for years now and dire quest for hegemon.

Let’s see, Clinton gave prc (Long Beach,) high tech missle equip and computer tech — they hacked what they couldn’t bribe; and, the transparency here is that calling their “bluff” one day is going to be a wake-up call from hell, what with our 1000– .. er, I mean 600– … uh, make that our less-than-300-ship Navy. Let’s see if we’re not eufrrprc’d in the end? Certainly a wake up call DC! Austerity that.

hummm.…. a hand of crazy generals exhist everywhere.
That they want Taiwan I have no doubts.… the all population is indoctrinated to think about the reunion of Taiwan with main land. I talk with chinese students and sometimes after a few more drinks it’s surprising the tone changing towards Taiwan … passing from “I don’t want to talk about politics” to “Taiwan will be ours again”. Now I can imagine what’s going on in military personne headsl!!

But going from there to an attack on the US, knowing that the US already made Jpan pay a heavy price for the same deed?!!
Insane …they want Taiwan without a Nuclear war! They don’t want to lose 1000 times the land surface of Taiwan. Chinese are gamblers for nature … but they will not bluff a nuclear winter for Taiwan.

Just make sure that someone is not feeding the “big ghost” of the US, that is an invasion!!
During cold war and after you guys were paranoic about the red invasion, etc! … don’t start it over!

Mattel toys are crap designed by Mattel including their paint requirements, but the iPhone and iPad are superbly made.

the taiwan will fall politically/ economically in time, there is no doubt about it.

I doubt it.

the chinese will invest heavily into their economy and there will once be a pro-china govt. that’s it.

Except that in the 2008 referendum 95% of the population wanted independence. If less than 14% of the voting population would have cast ballots it would have been for independence.

“That door in front of the aft right landing gear is a landing gear door.”

It’s not. In photos you can see those two areas aren’t connected, there is fuselage between them.

@WarPony… China is maturing developement of their anti-ship ballistic missile capability on their medium range land based DF-21D, designed to damage/destroy aircraft on the deck of a carrier, to seriously foul the deck causing extended delay in its use, and to destroy radars on the carrier and on other ships similarly attacked. China is also separately maturing development of the larger DF-31 land based ballistic missile, and its sibling submarine launched JL-2. After these three items are well matured, it will be a small effort to migrate the anti-ship capability from DF-21D to DF-31 and JL-2. And then the anti-ship capability will no longer be regional A2/AD threat, rather will be a threat anywhere within range of the land based DF-31 and the submarine launched JL-2, if China also develops the ability to find and track their targets. DF-21D changed the rules of the game, but that anti-ship capability on quiet long range submarines is another game entirely.

.

China makes crap, but that’s how everyone starts. Soon they will get better. Japan, post-WW2 was like China in making crap (clone) goods, until an American named Deming helped improve the efficiency of their industries, and improved the quality of their products. Never assume the Chinese quality will remain crap forever. It’s just like how the British played down and underestimated the Empire of Japan prior to WW2 in the Pacific by saying the A6M Zero fighter aircraft was crap and that the Imperial Japanese pilots were crap too because their slanted eyes afforded them less vision than a caucasian pilot.

@lance, China don’t own US money you fool!!!! its way around US own China money and US is already bankcrupt.

You have twisted the facts. Everybody knows the US wants to dominate the world, not China. No room and no point to bull-shitting around.

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement