Y-20.
%2B(6).jpg){kind=spacer}
%2B(7).jpg){kind=spacer}
%2B(12).jpg){kind=spacer}
JL-600.
%2B%2BAmphibious%2BAircraft%2BD-600%2BAmphibious%2BFlying%2BBoat.%2BLarger%2BDragon%2BD-600%2Bproject%2Bwas%2Bannounced%2Bby%2BChina%2BAviation%2BIndustry%2BCorporation%2BI%2B(AVIC)%2B%2B(4).jpg)
Y-30.
%2BChinese%2BY-30%2BMedium%2BTurboprop%2BMilitary%2BTransport%2BAircraft%2B(1).jpg){kind=spacer}
Note: Of all these aircraft the one that stirs my imagination and concerns me the most is the JL-600. A quick blast from the past. The USMC experimented and by all indications actually used the R3Y Tradewind as part of its "Rapid Deployment Force" during the 1950's and up until the Vietnam War. Consider it an early form of the USMC's Air Contingency MAGTF (its a shame that the SPMAGTF-CR's went Hollywood instead of simply reinforcing an existing concept). If China has plans to do the same, and can integrate its air and sea assault forces, then the US/Japan have already lost the race to reinforce islands in the Pacific. Let's hope they're pure rescue and anti-sub planes.
chinese 4 engined seaplane ? hmm thats interesting... for the projected island campaigns in the future ?
ReplyDeleteAn idea worth considering. The paint job imply that the idea is not in their mind yet. For now the US-Japan alliance have the upper hand with the V-22 that not relly so much on good weather for landing. A PLA seaplane transport is likely to be able to load more and the speed is likely to be similar. I think that they know that Japan can conter by build and a seaplane transport based on our ShinMaywa US-2 for backup the V22. So it may level the field but dont give them the upper hand. At most it can give to the PLA a window of oportunity if done in secret. If we take the economic and political angle the CCP can do it openly only to force Japan to expend more money in force projection capabilites and then accuse the Abe administration of building offensive capabilties instead of only defensive ones. Of course, then Japan can point out how the PLA seaplanes transports threaten military outposts of countries in the South China sea and how Japan can send help to them fast potentially validating the current administration collective self-defense policy in the eyes of other countries that feel threatened by the PRC. A domino effect can be that ROK build their own just because they feel threatend by Japan. In that case of course everyone is likely going to play the "it can help in disaster relief" card. But I think the PRC is only going to be happy with a near equivalent tilt-rotor and see a seaplane transport as a stopgap measure.
ReplyDeleteDoctor Lykes
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yulius_Fuchik_1992-09-09.jpg
Lebed
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zLgC9Iv2r9g/UcqwShj_60I/AAAAAAAAz3c/7ES-oWI_7NQ/s640/Lebed-class_LCAC.jpg
The use of leased vessels for 'cooperation' missions as part of low-key theater presence is not uncommon. The US Army continues to lease ships for the use of Special Forces to this day in South America as floating ressuply and staging bases for anti-drug stuff.
Though certainly not a new idea ('Pirates Of The Carribean' [as Privateers] did indeed ambush registered freighters expected in objective harbors, hoist their colors and and sail right past the breakwater, under the guns of their victims in what must have been the first SPOD captures; the Germans in Weserubung; the Argentine commando attacks off a freighter during the Falklands Wars etc.) the notion that you can get away with using a merchant vessel as a harbor raider in today's conditions of universal satellite coverage and wide spread telecoms is very doubtful.
Particularly with places like the Senkakus, which are really little more than rocks sticking out of the water, not even habitable by any conventional standard; there would be no point in developing a raider capability like this as any sub or shore battery with a Polyphem or Spike could doom the mission from a standoff position where suppression fire would be very unlikely to work.
Conversely, something like a SEAL water jump could easily Halo in, do whatever (Oil Survey, remote beacon or Fisheries processing plant) damage was deemed necessary and get out without any real proof that they had been there at all. Under these conditions you would likely use one of those GPS guided, engine powered, ramair parachute supply drops to put a small zodiac into the water to get your ingress and then simply motor out past any surveillance radial to a 'perfectly legal' pickup by a fishing craft, sub or your flying boat.
The only time I could really see this being attempted for real would be if Taiwan went hot and the PLAN decided to make sure the Marines stayed on Okinawa.
Again, my personal choice would be a lot smaller operational force off a neutral registered ship, aircraft or sub with limpet charges on UUV remote penetrators to stay away from whatever harbor surveillance is present at Naha.
Small actions lead to small disappointments if they fail and little go-get'em invigoration of enemy morale while strategic speedbumping delay doesn't have to be huge to be effective in cascading consequences, if you sink the right ships at the correct time.
Look at the Italian pig riders.