Chinese Military - General News

[Beijingwalker]

Many Chinese students who failed Gaokao exam in China still choose to go for college overseas, cause foreign schools don't need Gaokao results.

 

[Michael]

Many Chinese students who failed Gaokao exam in China still choose to go for college overseas, cause foreign schools don't need Gaokao results.

In the past, it was true that many students with money but poor studies studied abroad, and they usually preferred to go to Canada and Australia.

There are still them, but the numbers have been greatly reduced.

 

[Han Patriot]

The whole article is making a virtue out of necessity

I am one good example, I could barely made it into Chinese universities but scored top marks in Australia's top university. Except for language advantage, most Anglo Unis are crappy except maybe Ivy leagues Oxbridge.

 

[nahtanbob]

I am one good example, I could barely made it into Chinese universities but scored top marks in Australia's top university. Except for language advantage, most Anglo Unis are crappy except maybe Ivy leagues Oxbridge.

The whole idea of studying abroad is to settle abroad

 

[Beijingwalker]

The whole idea of studying abroad is to settle abroad

Used to be , not anymore, now they almost all come back.

 

[MH.Yang]

The whole idea of studying abroad is to settle abroad

Chinese students usually choose to return to China.

Nearly 90% of all Chinese students return home after studying abroad: MOE - Global Times

www.globaltimes.cn

 

[nahtanbob]

Chinese students usually choose to return to China.

When they cannot get a job abroad

 

[Fatman17]

 

[Fatman17]

​

​

​

​ [td] ​ [td]Apparently, the prowess of Chinese radar design and networking has successfully defeated the state-of-the-art Electronic Warfare (EW) capabilities of the US Navy’s E/A-18G Growler EW jet. The staggering news was conveyed in the Eurasian Times in mid-July. The report quoted the Chinese academic journal Radar & ECM which articulated the incident in question that took place in late 2023. The debacle was so severe that the commander of VAQ-136, the US Navy electronic attack squadron to which the aircraft was assigned, was dismissed according to the report. People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) officials claimed that the ‘Type-55’ class destroyer Nanchang used Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques to nullify jamming by the E/A-18G. The AI approaches in question comprised cognitive radar techniques. Moreover, a ‘kill web’ networked PLAN assets deployed in the South China Sea at the time of the incident. The kill web allegedly helped the Nanchang, and other PLAN ships, avoid the Growler’s jamming. These capabilities let the destroyer move 100 nautical miles (185 kilometres) north of the PLAN task group and prevent a US Navy Carrier Strike Group (CSG) entering an area where the PLAN was exercising. The Nanchang’s radar locked onto CSG surface combatants dissuading them from entering the exercise area. So successful was the PLAN effort that members of the Nanchang’s crew were decorated. Do the PLAN’s claims add up? Possibly not. Firstly, the Radar & ECM journal article in question is not in the public domain. Although notionally available for purchase with an English language translation, the associated website does not appear to work; your editor tried it numerous times. It is difficult to examine the claims if the journal article in question cannot be read. Secondly, the argument about the dismissal of the VAQ-136’s boss are dubious. The commander in question was relieved due to a loss of confidence in their abilities; a catch-all term covering a variety of shortcomings. Thirdly, why was the E/A-18G allegedly jamming the Chinese vessels? The US and China are not at war. Despite the two country’s geopolitical tensions, using jamming signals in peacetime would be risky. It could send the wrong message that the US Navy CSG was preparing to attack the PLAN ships. Deploying jamming waveforms in peacetime risks handing your potential adversary information about tactics you might use in wartime. Fourthly, illuminating US Navy ships using a radar’s war modes is similarly risky. If such an incident had occurred it is likely to have drawn a full-throated public condemnation from the White House. Instead, it seems that the alleged ‘incident’ is in fact PLAN propaganda intended for international consumption. China gets to flex its electromagnetic muscles, if only in an imaginary sense, showing that its navy can stand up to Uncle Sam. Even if the incident amounts to no more than propaganda, it is no reason to dismiss the PLAN as technologically inferior. China will continue to make her investments into sophisticated defence technology to reach technological parity, or even supremacy, with the US and her allies. This is a situation the United States and her allies must not allow to happen, and this latest alleged confrontation should serve a

​

 

[nang2]

1.) It didn't matter whether it was used by reserve or regular unit. That's still your backbone artillery if shit hit the fan.

2.) Norinco produced 1500 Type 66.

Type 66 (152mm)

History Every major army in the world uses some form of long-range 150mm caliber (or larger) howitzer - towed or self-propelled. The 155mm caliber is still popular in the West, while the East supports the 152mm form. For the modern Chinese military, their 152mm battlefield needs are met by the

tvd.im

View attachment 56454

I don't think even Russia had made over 10,000 D-20.

3.) I hope you had evidence to back that number up.

I sincerely hope American military analysts all think the same as you do.

 

[j_hungary]

I sincerely hope American military analysts all think the same as you do.

Well, I can say the same.

The only difference is, well, I know what an artillery shell look like and used (well, I didn't put it on a tube) one in battle, did you?

 

[MH.Yang]

Well, I can say the same.

The only difference is, well, I know what an artillery shell look like and used (well, I didn't put it on a tube) one in battle, did you?

Chinese law requires every Chinese person to undergo military training at the elementary, middle, high school, and college levels. Each phase of military training lasts at least one month.

Young Chinese are expected to have seen not only artillery shells, but even to have used mortars, to have had a rudimentary understanding of tank driving, Tank-Infantry Synergy, the use of landmines, and other weapons.

Of course, most of these students also don't know whether the caliber of China's large artillery is 152mm or 155mm.

Military education and training in China - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Elementary School.

Middle School.

High School.

University.

 

[j_hungary]

Chinese law requires every Chinese person to undergo military training at the elementary, middle, high school, and college levels. Each phase of military training lasts at least one month.

Young Chinese are expected to have seen not only artillery shells, but even to have used mortars, to have had a rudimentary understanding of tank driving, Tank-Infantry Synergy, the use of landmines, and other weapons.

Of course, most of these students also don't know whether the caliber of China's large artillery is 152mm or 155mm.

Military education and training in China - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Elementary School.

Middle School.

High School.

University.

Dude, he is talking about ME specifically, not people generally, so, I wouldn't say 4 week "show and tell" training beats 13 weeks Army Basic Training + 18 weeks Infantry AIT, + 6 months Army Leadership course + 7 years of Military service including 23 months oversea deployment.

But then if you think you know all the ins and outs of anything military related just by going thru that 2 weeks, well, then that very clearly reflected my point.

Please do think you guys with all these "Military Training" know better than me lol, I have no objection.

 

[Pingle]

How many 155 mm rounds India currently got in her inventory that DDG-80 so eager to BOOM across into China?

How many 155mm rounds India seeking to contract to other countries and how many can those other countries make for India?

Anything like that 100,000 rounds that China can make in just one day now? and at that, not even at war footing.

Still wanna go BOOMING with big guns that you contracted to buy and cannot even make yourself?

India may not be able to make 100000 shells per day but back in 1999 in kargil war India used 500000 plus shells... this is serious wartime capacity if we consider it was in 1999... today it must be high....

 

[j_hungary]

India may not be able to make 100000 shells per day but back in 1999 in kargil war India used 500000 plus shells... this is serious wartime capacity if we consider it was in 1999... today it must be high....

You never need to make 100,000 shell a day, you don't just fire them from the factory, which mean you need someone or something to transport 100,000 shell a day from the factory floor to the frontline. Because they don't magically appear on the frontline if you make them, it's not Field of Dream "if you make it, they will come"

The volume of fuel you need to just bring 100000 shells to the frontline everyday would be huge. Otherwise, it would just be stuck somewhere near the factory floor.

The need for supplies was not dictated by how many you can make, but how many shell you need and how many shells you can supply to the frontline.