It can't be helped. I believe that without this kind of 'quantum leap,' China's future would be bleak. It would be one thing if we could truly maintain good relations with Japan and Southeast Asian countries, but the historical influence and control the U.S. exerts over them is simply too immense to shake
MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions
- Thread starter Picdelamirand-oil
- Start date
J36 is quite good in that regard, it can takeoff from the heart of china and can go long in range with usable load
Presion ammunition became mainstream so runway are in danger,
but long range precision ammunition are not that cheap (except shahid type drones which can be shot down easily if enough gun based, drone based interceptors and then lasers and small rocket based like india's bhargavastra)
And runways are easier to reapir, so constantly using millions of dollar missiles, many of whome will be shot down is very costly,
one has to use atleast 10 everday or two, milti million dollar missiles to make a defeneded runway to a remain disable
Very costly, and then 2 more problems
1) enough width tracks can also be used as runways, though sortie rate will be limited
2) ramped like in indian/soviat carriers , can easily support a heavy thrust aircraft
Of course, there is another possibility: to overhaul the vested interests of the ruling elites and redistribute the wealth of the rich. As the population collapses and the country gradually withdraws from the global OEM/outsourcing system, it could return to a path of internal resource circulation. The reality is that China's grassroots live harder lives than Mexican laborers; the elites have pocketed all the profits from the WTO and the global supply chain. Many people feel life is tougher now than in the 1990s. Consequently, ordinary people fantasize about returning to the 80s or 90s—they don't even dare mention the 70s—where factory workers and directors earned similar wages, and a worker could walk into the director's office to demand change. In those days, exams relied on merit, the state assigned jobs upon graduation and provided pensions, and housing was allocated by the factories. Everyone was equally poor, but the pressure for survival was far less than it is today.
Regardless, given the three-engine setup, it would be more effective as a UAV. The redundant air-to-air radar and missile systems should simply be scrapped
For nations like China and India, the utility of fixed runways and airbases is highly questionable. Due to the extreme population density and the ubiquity of smartphones, there is virtually no security or secrecy to speak of. In wartime, aircraft must be dispersed to primitive farmlands or rotated across highway strips. Consequently, the capability for Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) on unpaved runways is an absolute necessity.
This sounds good and all in paper but in real world, we need such airbases for fuel and weapons storage, maintenance facilities, spare parts, command and control, air defence etc. Except for short skirmishes, you won't be running a sustained air campaigns from random farm fields.
It is certainly good to have but not an absolute necessity, else the F22, F35A, Rafale, Typhoon, J20 etc would be having it. But I agree with you to a certain extend, a good rule we can follow to survive missile attacks is not being where the enemy expects us to be even though it is becoming increasingly difficult with advancement in surveillance technology which we may or may not be able to neutralise in case of war, Sweden is famous for this concept. During the Cold War, Swedish fighters such as the Saab 37 Viggen and later the Saab JAS 39 Gripen were designed to operate from dispersed road bases because Sweden assumed its main airfields would be attacked.
We can employ similar methods along with building hardened shelters, air defence systems, decoys, fast runway repair methods, mobile logistics etc
That's never a good thing. Countries collapse when this happens.
The right method is to bring in reforms that allow the rich to redistribute wealth on their own with profits in mind, and the only way to do that is by increasing consumption.
Population won't collapse, it will reach a bottom and then climb up again. We just don't know what that bottom is.
Su-57 is designed for both.
Using dispersed airfields is called ACE, Agile Combat Employment, where the main base and the airfields follow a hub and spoke model. Transports, helicopters, and trucks can carry the required crew and equipment.
Su-57 can also land and take off in less than 500 m of unpaved runway due to Russia's undeveloped landmass. But J-20 will operate in extremely well-developed environments.
US and India are heavily dependent on ACE while PLAAF is planning to implement it soon.
If you were given a money printing press, tell me, would you use it with restraint? I think that as long as you still have a shred of human nature in you, you absolutely would not.
Therefore, that first path is completely unfeasible. As for the population, when will it hit rock bottom? There is absolutely no historical precedent for a recovery among advanced nations. Consequently, whether it is China or India, there will be no rebound. Survival is a fundamental human instinct, but destruction is a fundamental human instinct as well
Once people become educated and civilized, they feel a profound sense of responsibility toward their offspring. If you maintain the current system of ownership—where wealth is passed from father to son, and from son to grandson—then the naturally logical strategy to ensure the next generation lives a better life is to have fewer children. This should be a universal consensus among all parents.
Having more children is for oneself; having fewer children is for the sake of the children.
Therefore, population collapse has nothing to do with economic levels; it has to do with human nature. This process is irreversible.
Unless, as I just mentioned, this entire system of ownership is completely razed to the ground and the state steps in to raise your children, it is absolutely impossible for the population to rebound
ISLAM
U cange bring another cultural revolution, and infuse the islamic ideology of marriage and child bearing
Everything related to islam is wrong except child birth and i feels that one can seperate that mentality/culture and infuse it into normal cultural without destroying it
In india, muslims of even 3 times higher per capita, with best human development indicator state (kerala) have hugher tfr than the hindus of state UP which is very poor and also more patriarchal
Central asians have experienced 70 years of communism, extremely developed society, Kazakhstan per capita is level of china
Still Kazakhstan tfr is 50% higher than a poverty ridden india
Learning from enemy is not wrong, infact one should
Why not ccp bring a cultural revolution which makes society bit islamic (not religious but cultural) and bit less equality for women but have higher tfr
What you are saying aligns perfectly with my own thinking. In fact, I have consistently argued within my small circle in China that Islam is actually structurally rational. Although the vast majority of people in China harbor extreme animosity toward Islam and colloquially refer to them as 'Hui-Hui' or 'Lv-Lv' (the greens), 回回 / 绿绿 \rightarrow "'Hui-Hui' or 'Lv-Lv' (the greens)" (Transliterated and explained briefly to retain the specific internet/domestic slang slurs used in China to describe Muslims).the evolution of things always follows a strict line of cause and effect.
In Europe, it has now become the mainstream and the primary engine of growth. There is an incredibly high degree of structural similarity between Islam and the Leninist party. At the rural grassroots level of Islamic societies, all matters—from education to adjudication and local customary law—are administered and presided over by religious leaders or Imams (I am not sure what term is used where you are). The officials dispatched by the secular government are mere figureheads. (Currently, this trend is extremely pronounced in China's central and western regions; or perhaps it has always been this way, and people simply failed to notice).
Meanwhile, within Lenin's party doctrine, this exact terminology is referred to as 'building the Party branch at the company level' (支部建在连上)—meaning that the Party’s organizational tentacles must penetrate straight down to the absolute grassroots of the village. This is indeed a highly practical, time-tested, and rational organizational architecture.
Lenin’s party is fundamentally different from the parties in your countries. Of course, from the bottom of my heart, I personally admire and respect Lenin.
Returning to that previous point, I estimate this scenario will soon play out in China. Currently, China’s nominal population stands at 1.4 billion, but this figure is entirely fabricated. This 1.4 billion is merely a weighted, extrapolated dataset calculated from a 1% sample census. The actual population is likely around 1.0 to 1.1 billion. (Local governments at all levels feel compelled to falsify population data simply to maintain their bureaucratic staffing quotas and fiscal allocations. Furthermore, during these unscientific censuses and random samplings, massive deviations caused by floating migrant populations are inevitable. In fact, the discrepancy between the annual birth rates reported by the National Bureau of Statistics and the newly registered household registrations [Hukou] published by the Ministry of Public Security regularly fluctuates by over 10% Per year).
Well, perhaps I am rambling a bit too much on this, but China's demographic outlook is currently exceptionally grim. Within less than five years, we will witness the grand spectacle of the population shrinking by 10 million annually. This will profoundly alter the social fabric and trigger unforeseen shocks. We will undoubtedly witness scenarios where cadre Party members are forced to take the lead in having children—where if you fail to have a second child, your salary is withheld, or a percentage of your wages is docked. It is bound to happen; it is just a matter of how they choose to execute it.
Back in the 1980s, after the elites consolidated power, they implemented the Family Planning (One-Child) policy for nearly 40 years to reduce the state's cost of raising a young population, thereby allowing them to accumulate wealth with maximum efficiency. When I was younger, the so-called demographic experts claimed that the Chinese are a race obsessed with reproducing, so once the family planning restrictions were lifted, annual newborns would comfortably hit 20 million, quickly averting any social crises.
The ruling aristocrats, filled with self-conceit, thought they could use the 1978 capitalist-style reforms to undergo a rapid, painful period of 'primitive accumulation.' They believed that once they swiftly achieved modernization, they could simply unshackle demographic restrictions so that the supply of newly minted slaves would keep pace with consumption. Unfortunately for them, they completely miscalculated, and the whole plan blew up in their faces. The projected 20million newborns never materialized; in reality, last year's figure fell short of even 7 million
Well u seems to be quit anti capitalist. Dont forgot that capitalism saved more life in china than the population of taiwan
->> Nothing is perfect, if u try to eliminate or hate current system without a better system leads to anarchy and degrade quality of life of commonars to very bad
Beside for islam, i only mentioned that cultural aspect and not religious
Islam is bad, worse than anyother ideology, its zombie ideology, u may not understand it but we are living with muslim, we have over 200 million muslim in india, so we have practical experience
They will r@pe your religion women and when u protest against them, they(+leftist) will label u as Islamophobic and label rape as propoganda to gen*cide muslim and label victim as good actress and you as far right facist genocider
So if u are happy being your women r@ped, feel free to adopt islam as religion
Every bad things have some goodness in them, that is with islam, is bad in all thing except child birth
So just adapt this by single outing this mentality and making that mentality as part of culture
It may take time, requires constant state support. But its worth it
我最早年是民族主义者，然后是美国狗，然后是无政府主义者，然后是社会民主主义者，然后现在应该是算作坚定的左派了吧，
这个变化是因为原先那些主义的理论无法解释现在的困境，
年龄增大以后还是认识到，对于中国人来说，是列宁的党给中国带来了现代人的生活，在教科里书里面叫做“10月革命一声炮响，为中国带来了共产主义”，
之前的民族靠不住，祖宗靠不住，美国人靠不住，资本家更靠不住，能靠得住的就只有劳动人民自己罢了，如果自己都不争气，不去斗争那还活着干什么？
不过，共产主义本身也是由基督教精神演化而来的事物，对于东方世界来说，属于生理上的异物。
托洛斯基曾经说过，俄罗斯的社会结构过于原始是无法一国建成社会主义的，
现在也坚信中国的社会无法建成社会主义，恐怕连资本主义都建立不了，
这个过程需要时间，鲜血和牺牲，历史是螺旋向上的。
就算是美国狗的财阀，现在能给他的选民带来那么点好日子，那也不是因为他们良心发现，而是因为有人来过：带着AK47。
……………………………………………………
In my earliest years, I was a nationalist; then, I became a 'running dog' for America; later, an anarchist, and after that, a social democrat. Today, I suppose I can be considered a staunch leftist. This evolution occurred because the theories of those previous ideologies simply could not explain our current predicament.
As I grew older, I finally realized that for the Chinese people, it was Lenin's party that brought about modern human life—what the textbooks describe as 'The salvo of the October Revolution brought Communism to China.' Before that, the nation couldn't be relied upon, the ancestors couldn't be relied upon, the Americans couldn't be relied upon, and the capitalists were the least reliable of all. The only ones who can truly be relied upon are the working people themselves. If you don't even have the spine to stand up for yourself and refuse to engage in the struggle, then what is the point of living?
However, communism itself is an entity that evolved from the Christian spirit; for the Eastern world, it amounts to a physiological foreign body. Trotsky once noted that because Russia's social structure was too primitive, it was impossible to build socialism in one country. Today, I am also firmly convinced that Chinese society cannot build socialism—in fact, it probably can't even establish proper capitalism. This process demands time, blood, and sacrifice; history moves upward in a spiral.
Even if the plutocrats of those 'American running dogs' can provide their voters with a bit of a good life today, it is not because they suddenly found a conscience. It is because someone once came along—and they were carrying AK-47s.
Perhaps English cannot fully articulate what I mean, which is why I am also including my native language in this response