Chinese Z-19 & Z-10 Attack Helicopter Operational With PLA Army

 Images of the Chinese Z-19 Light tandem seat gunship helicopter and Z-10 attack helicopter operational with the People's Liberation Army (PLA).

China Gets Combat Experience In Africa

China's Z-9WE helicopter gunship has finally gotten some combat experience. Kenya has been using its four Z-9WEs in southern Somalia for over six months. Kenya received the first two of these helicopters in 2010, and the second pair last year. The Z-9WEs have proved very useful in Somalia against the al Shabaab Islamic terrorists. That's probably why no one has mentioned that the Z-9WEs are a violation of the Western arms embargo against China (because of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre).
The embargo against China is unpopular. European firms are particularly eager to drop the embargo and some, like France, are ignoring it. This is done by disregarding the installation of dual-use Western equipment in weapons systems. One example is the use of French Arriel 2C engines (built under license in China) for the Z-9WE combat helicopter.

China's Type81 LHD Helicopter Carrier

More Details on Pratt and Whitney Canada’s Involvement in Helping China With Its Z-10 Attack Helicopter

Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. (PWC), a Canadian subsidiary of the Connecticut-based defense contractor United Technologies Corporation (UTC), today pleaded guilty to violating the Arms Export Control Act and making false statements in connection with its illegal export to China of U.S.-origin military software used in the development of China’s first modern military attack helicopter, the Z-10.
 
In addition, UTC, its U.S.-based subsidiary Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation (HSC) and PWC have all agreed to pay more than $75 million as part of a global settlement with the Justice Department and State Department in connection with the China arms export violations and for making false and belated disclosures to the U.S. government about these illegal exports.
 
Roughly $20.7 million of this sum is to be paid to the Justice Department. The remaining $55 million is payable to the State Department as part of a separate consent agreement to resolve outstanding export issues, including those related to the Z-10. Up to $20 million of this penalty can be suspended if applied by UTC to remedial compliance measures. As part of the settlement, the companies admitted conduct set forth in a stipulated and publicly filed statement of facts.
 
Today’s actions were announced by David B. Fein, U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut; Lisa Monaco, Assistant Attorney General for National Security; John Morton, Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Ed Bradley, Special Agent in Charge of the Northeast Field Office of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS); Kimberly K. Mertz, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI New Haven Division; David Mills, Department of Commerce Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement; and Andrew J. Shapiro, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs.
 
The Charges
 
Today in the District of Connecticut, the Justice Department filed a three-count criminal information charging UTC, PWC and HSC. Count One charges PWC with violating the Arms Export Control Act in connection with the illegal export of defense articles to China for the Z-10 helicopter. Count Two charges PWC, UTC and HSC with making false statements to the U.S. government in their belated disclosures relating to the illegal exports. Count Three charges PWC and HSC with failure to timely inform the U.S. government of exports of defense articles to China.
 
While PWC has pleaded guilty to Counts One and Two, the Justice Department has recommended that prosecution of UTC and HSC on Count Two, and PWC and HSC on Count Three be deferred for two years, provided the companies abide by the terms of a deferred prosecution agreement with the Justice Department. As part of the agreement, the companies must pay $75 million and retain an Independent Monitor to monitor and assess their compliance with export laws for the next two years.
 
The Export Scheme
 
Since 1989, the United States has imposed a prohibition upon the export to China of all U.S. defense articles and associated technical data as a result of the conduct in June 1989 at Tiananmen Square by the military of the People’s Republic of China. In February 1990, the U.S. Congress imposed a prohibition upon licenses or approvals for the export of defense articles to the People’s Republic of China. In codifying the embargo, Congress specifically named helicopters for inclusion in the ban.
 
Dating back to the 1980s, China sought to develop a military attack helicopter. Beginning in the 1990s, after Congress had imposed the prohibition on exports to China, China sought to develop its attack helicopter under the guise of a civilian medium helicopter program in order to secure Western assistance. The Z-10, developed with assistance from Western suppliers, is China’s first modern military attack helicopter.
 
During the development phases of China’s Z-10 program, each Z-10 helicopter was powered by engines supplied by PWC. PWC delivered 10 of these development engines to China in 2001 and 2002. Despite the military nature of the Z-10 helicopter, PWC determined on its own that these development engines for the Z-10 did not constitute “defense articles,” requiring a U.S. export license, because they were identical to those engines PWC was already supplying China for a commercial helicopter.
 
Because the Electronic Engine Control software, made by HSC in the United States to test and operate the PWC engines, was modified for a military helicopter application, it was a defense article and required a U.S. export license. Still, PWC knowingly and willfully caused this software to be exported to China for the Z-10 without any U.S. export license. In 2002 and 2003, PWC caused six versions of the military software to be illegally exported from HSC in the United States to PWC in Canada, and then to China, where it was used in the PWC engines for the Z-10.
 
According to court documents, PWC knew from the start of the Z-10 project in 2000 that the Chinese were developing an attack helicopter and that supplying it with U.S.-origin components would be illegal. When the Chinese claimed that a civil version of the helicopter would be developed in parallel, PWC marketing personnel expressed skepticism internally about the “sudden appearance” of the civil program, the timing of which they questioned as “real or imagined.” PWC nevertheless saw an opening for PWC “to insist on exclusivity in [the] civil version of this helicopter,” and stated that the Chinese would “no longer make reference to the military program.” PWC failed to notify UTC or HSC about the attack helicopter until years later and purposely turned a blind eye to the helicopter’s military application.
 
HSC in the United States had believed it was providing its software to PWC for a civilian helicopter in China, based on claims from PWC. By early 2004, HSC learned there might an export problem and stopped working on the Z-10 project. UTC also began to ask PWC about the exports to China for the Z-10. Regardless, PWC on its own modified the software and continued to export it to China through June 2005.
 
According to court documents, PWC’s illegal conduct was driven by profit. PWC anticipated that its work on the Z-10 military attack helicopter in China would open the door to a far more lucrative civilian helicopter market in China, which according to PWC estimates, was potentially worth as much as $2 billion to PWC.
 
Belated and False Disclosures to U.S. Government
 
These companies failed to disclose to the U.S. government the illegal exports to China for several years and only did so after an investor group queried UTC in early 2006 about whether PWC’s role in China’s Z-10 attack helicopter might violate U.S. laws. The companies then made an initial disclosure to the State Department in July 2006, with follow-up submissions in August and September 2006.
 
The 2006 disclosures contained numerous false statements. Among other things, the companies falsely asserted that they were unaware until 2003 or 2004 that the Z-10 program involved a military helicopter. In fact, by the time of the disclosures, all three companies were aware that PWC officials knew at the project’s inception in 2000 that the Z-10 program involved an attack helicopter.
 
Today, the Z-10 helicopter is in production and initial batches were delivered to the People’s Liberation Army of China in 2009 and 2010. The primary mission of the Z-10 is anti-armor and battlefield interdiction. Weapons of the Z-10 have included 30 mm cannons, anti-tank guided missiles, air-to-air missiles and unguided rockets.
 
“PWC exported controlled U.S. technology to China, knowing it would be used in the development of a military attack helicopter in violation of the U.S. arms embargo with China,” said U.S. Attorney Fein. “PWC took what it described internally as a ‘calculated risk,’ because it wanted to become the exclusive supplier for a civil helicopter market in China with projected revenues of up to two billion dollars. Several years after the violations were known, UTC, HSC and PWC disclosed the violations to the government and made false statements in doing so. The guilty pleas by PWC and the agreement reached with all three companies should send a clear message that any corporation that willfully sends export controlled material to an embargoed nation will be prosecuted and punished, as will those who know about it and fail to make a timely and truthful disclosure.”
 
“Due in part to the efforts of these companies, China was able to develop its first modern military attack helicopter with restricted U.S. defense technology. As today’s case demonstrates, the Justice Department will spare no effort to hold accountable those who compromise U.S. national security for the sake of profits and then lie about it to the government,” said Assistant Attorney General Monaco. “I thank the agents, analysts and prosecutors who helped bring about this important case.”
 
“This case is a clear example of how the illegal export of sensitive technology reduces the advantages our military currently possesses,” said ICE Director Morton. “I am hopeful that the conviction of Pratt & Whitney Canada and the substantial penalty levied against United Technologies and its subsidiaries will deter other companies from considering similarly ill-conceived business practices in the future. American military prowess depends on lawful, controlled exports of sensitive technology by U.S. industries and their subsidiaries, which is why ICE will continue its present campaign to aggressively investigate and prosecute criminal violations of U.S. export laws relating to national security.”
 
“Today’s charges and settlement demonstrate the continued commitment of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) and fellow agencies to protect sensitive U.S. defense technology from being illegally exported,” said DCIS Special Agent in Charge Bradley. “Safeguarding our military technology is vital to our nation’s defense and the protection of our war fighters both home and abroad. We know that foreign governments are actively seeking U.S. defense technology for their own development. Thwarting these efforts is a top priority for DCIS. I applaud the agents and prosecutors who worked tirelessly to bring about this result.”
 
“Preventing the loss of critical U.S. information and technologies is one of the most important investigative priorities of the FBI,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Mertz. “Our adversaries routinely target sensitive research and development data and intellectual property from universities, government agencies, manufacturers, and defense contractors. While the thefts associated with economic espionage and illegal technology transfers may not capture the same level of attention as a terrorist incident, the costs to the U.S. economy and our national security are substantial.
 
“Violations of the Arms Export Control Act put our nation at risk and the FBI, along with all of our federal agency partners, are committed to ensuring that embargoed technologies do not fall into the wrong hands. Those who violate these laws should expect to be held accountable. An important part of the FBI’s strategy in this area involves the development of strategic partnerships. In that regard, the FBI looks forward to future coordination with UTC and its subsidiaries to strengthen information sharing and counterintelligence awareness.”
 
“Protecting national security is our top priority,” said Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement Mills. “Today’s action sends a clear signal that federal law enforcement agencies will work together diligently to prevent U.S. technology from falling into the wrong hands.”
 
Assistant Secretary Shapiro, of the State Department’s Bureau of Political and Military Affairs, said, “Today’s $75 million settlement with United Technologies Corporation sends a clear message: willful violators of U.S. arms export control regulations will be pursued and punished. The successful resolution of this case is the byproduct of the tireless work of our compliance officers and highlights the relentless commitment of the State Department to protect sensitive American technologies from being illegally transferred.”
 
U.S. Attorney Fein commended the many agencies involved in this investigation, including ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) in New Haven; the DCIS in New Haven; the New Haven Division of the FBI; the Department of Commerce’s Boston Office of Export Enforcement. He also praised the Office of the HSI Attaché in Toronto, which was essential to the initiation and investigation of this matter, and the State Department’s Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, for its critical role in the global resolution of this matter.
 
The prosecution is being handled by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Stephen B. Reynolds and Michael J. Gustafson from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut, with assistance from Steven Pelak and Ryan Fayhee of the Counterespionage Section of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. (ends)
 
Here is the United Technologies response:
 
HARTFORD, Conn. — United Technologies Corp. (UTX) today announced that it has resolved previously disclosed enforcement actions brought by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Department of State in connection with past violations of U.S. export control regulations.
 
The resolution includes Pratt & Whitney Canada (P&WC), a United Technologies company, pleading guilty to violating the State Department’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), as well as the False Statements Act. The plea arises out of the improper export to China of modifications to Hamilton Sundstrand engine control software incorporated into P&WC helicopter engines from 2002-2005. The Justice Department has agreed to defer any action against United Technologies and Hamilton Sundstrand arising out of these improper exports pending implementation of certain remedial obligations.
 
Commenting on the resolution, United Technologies Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Louis Chenevert stated, “Export controls are an integral part of safeguarding U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. As a supplier of controlled products and technologies to the Department of Defense and other domestic and international customers, we are committed to conducting business in full compliance with all export laws and regulations. We accept responsibility for these past violations and we deeply regret they occurred.”
 
The agreement with the Department of State resolves self-disclosures made by the Company between 2006 and 2012, and includes $55 million in penalties, of which $35 million will be paid in cash over four years. The remaining $20 million will be suspended subject to certification and approval of qualifying compliance expenditures. Under the resolution with the Department of Justice, the UTC companies will collectively pay penalties totaling $20.7 million. The Company has fully reserved to account for all payments under the settlement agreements.
 
The State Department’s Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance will impose a partial statutory debarment from ITAR license privileges on P&WC. The debarment will not affect existing export authorizations, nor will it affect P&WC’s ability to continue to perform existing programs for the U.S. Government, NATO members and certain other U.S. allies, or programs that support Operation Enduring Freedom. P&WC will also be able to seek other ITAR authorizations on a case-by-case basis. P&WC will be eligible to apply for full reinstatement after one year.
 
“These violations revealed important opportunities to strengthen our export compliance program. We have taken considerable steps to improve our export controls and to enhance our compliance infrastructure. The Department of Justice and Department of State recognized both our cooperation in their investigations and the significant remedial actions we have taken. Under the agreements, UTC will continue and accelerate its efforts to achieve world-class performance in export compliance,” Chenevert said.
 
“Our commitment to best-in-class compliance across the entire company involves investments in the best people, processes and systems. Since 2006, UTC has invested more than $30 million to strengthen its export compliance infrastructure, including IT system enhancements and process improvements as well as increased employee training and communications efforts. The company also has dedicated more than 175 executives, managers and professionals full-time to export compliance, and hundreds more on a part-time basis. All of these measures reflect UTC’s commitment to fully comply with export control laws,” he added.

United Technologies Fined $75 Million for Military Exports to China

Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp., a Canadian subsidiary of Connecticut-based defense contractor United Technologies, has pleaded guilty to violating the Arms Export Control Act and has settled with the U.S. government for $75 million.
 
The company admitted June 28 to making false statements in connection with its illegal export to China of U.S. software used in the development of China’s military attack helicopter, the Z-10.
 
“We accept responsibility for these past violations and we deeply regret they occurred,” United Technologies CEO Louis Chenevert said in a statement. “As a supplier of controlled products and technologies to the Department of Defense and other domestic and international customers, we are committed to conducting business in full compliance with all export laws and regulations.”
 
Of the settlement money, roughly $20 million will be paid to the Justice Department, with the remaining $55 million going to the State Department. According to the Justice Department, up to $20 million of the payment could be suspended if United Technologies uses it for remedial compliance measures.
 
“This global settlement will ensure immediate, comprehensive and effective remedial action across the company’s many operating units and subsidiaries,” said Andrew Shapiro, assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs. “It also sends a clear message: Those who willfully violate U.S. arms export control laws will be pursued and punished.”
 
The United States has prohibited export of all U.S. defense articles to China as a result of the Chinese military’s action to suppress public protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989.
 
In the meantime, China began building an attack helicopter under the guise of a civilian helicopter program so that it could gain assistance from Western suppliers, according the Justice Department.
 
Pratt & Whitney decided on its own that it could sell engines for the Chinese Z-10 program without an export license because they were identical to engines the company was already supplying China for a commercial helicopter.
 
However, engine software, built by another United Technologies subsidiary named Hamilton Sundstrand Corp., had been modified for a military application and therefore was considered a defense article, requiring an export license.
 
However, Pratt & Whitney decided to export the software to China without a license anyway.
 
According to court documents, the company knew in 2000 that the Z-10 program’s aim was to develop an attack helicopter and that supplying it with U.S. parts would be illegal. Pratt & Whitney failed to notify its parent company — United Technologies — about the attack helicopter program, according to the Justice Department.
 
The company’s hope was that work on the attack helicopter would “open the door to a far more lucrative civilian helicopter market in China,” the Justice Department said.
 
When an investigation was opened in 2006, the company admitted to knowing about the military helicopter program in 2003 or 2004, not in 2000 when it had first become aware.
 
The Z-10 is now in production and being fielded by the People’s Liberation Army of China.

Lastest WZ-10 pictures released , with high-tech equipment

Chinese Navy’s Ka-28 chopper landing in terrible weather

China is developing a large landing helicopter dock ship

A 22,000-tonne landing helicopter dock (LHD) under development in China has sparked alarm in defense circles in Taiwan, with some analysts saying the ship could cause a “strategic shift” in the Taiwan Strait.
 
The design, first unveiled by state-owned China Shipbuilding Industry Co (CSIC, 中國船舶重工集團公司) — the country’s largest shipbuilding conglomerate — at the Defense and Security 2012 exhibition in Bangkok in early March, is believed to be the Type 081 LHD that defense enthusiasts have been expecting for years.
 
According to Jane’s Defence Weekly, CSIC confirmed the existence of a Type 081 program in 2007, but at the time it refused to disclose further details. The design phase of the vessel was reportedly completed in 2006, with engineering design beginning soon afterwards.
 
The 211m long LHD will be capable of carrying an impressive eight helicopters on deck, with hangar space for four more, or for hovercraft. It will also have capacity to accommodate 1,068 marines and will be equipped with phased-array radar, four short-range air-defense launchers and anti-submarine warfare capability.
 
Its operational range is expected to be 7,000 nautical miles (13,000km), with an endurance of up to 30 days at sea.
 
The Type 081 was reportedly inspired by the Mistral-class amphibious assault ship operated by the French Navy. Some analysts have also pointed to similarities with the 18,000-tonne Hyuga-class helicopter carrier used by the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force since 2009.
 
Defense analysts say CSIC is fully capable of building the LHD, especially following the experience gained by Chinese shipbuilders with three 20,000-tonne Type 071 Yuzhao-class amphibious transport docks, the last of which was launched in September, with a fourth rumored to be on the way. Despite having a similar displacement to the Type 081, the Type 071 can only accommodate two Z-8 heavy transport helicopters.
 
Assuming that the timeframe for construction of the Type 081 is similar to that for the Type 071, the first Type 081 could be launched as early as 2014. China’s first Type 071 was launched in December 2006, two years after the model was first unveiled.
 
Some reports indicate that the People’s Liberation Army Navy might be seeking to acquire as many as three Type 081s for its operations.
 
The Chinese government has yet to confirm whether CSIC has begun construction of the Type 081.
 
Given its ability to carry various types of helicopters — Z-8 and Z-9 transport and Z-10 attack helicopters, among others — a large number of marines and landing craft, analysts are saying that the Type 081 would greatly enhance the Chinese navy’s ability to launch humanitarian operations as well as project force beyond its shores, a reflection of the strategic choices made by the Chinese navy in recent years.
 
It would also play a key, possibly game-changing role in any amphibious assault on Taiwan or against other adversaries in the South China Sea.

China Using Helicopter UAVs At Sea

A Japanese warship recently passed by a Chinese frigate that appeared to be flying a helicopter UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) off its helicopter pad. The Japanese took photos and passed them around. At first it was noted that the helicopter looked like the Schiebel S-100 Camcopter. Schiebel is an Austrian firm which markets the S-100 in many countries via the U.S. firm Boeing Aircraft. But Schiebel continues to sell the S-100 itself, and a little digging revealed that the Chinese had bought 18 S-100s two years ago. While the three S-100s seen on the aft deck of the Chinese frigate do look like the S-100, there also appear to be some differences. So either China modified some of the S-100s it had bought, or has created an S-100 clone. European nations are not supposed to sell China weapons (because of an arms embargo), but the S-100s were apparently sold to Chinese police organizations (which is legal, and the S-100 does have civilian users). One Chinese firm has already offered a helicopter UAV similar to the S-100.

The S-100 weighs 200 kg (440 pounds), can stay aloft six hours per sortie, and operates at a max altitude of 5,500 meters (18,000 feet). Max speed is 220 kilometers an hour. So far, some 200 S-100s have been sold so far, to military and civilian customers.

Chinese firms have developed several helicopter UAV designs. For example, the Chinese V750 weighs 757 kg (1,665 pounds) and has a payload of 80 kg (176 pounds). Max speed is 161 kilometers an hour and endurance is four hours. The V750 can fly a pre-programmed route, or be controlled by a ground operator (up to 150 kilometers away.) The manufacturer is offering the V750 for civilian (scientific survey, search and rescue, police surveillance) and military uses. There are over a dozen other Chinese helicopter UAVs on the market.

Meanwhile, the U.S. has taken the lead in this area, with several models developed in the last decade. The one most similar to V750 is the MQ-8B Fire Scout which is operating in Afghanistan and aboard warships. The U.S. Navy developed, and put into use, the MQ-8B. A similar model, the RQ-8B, died because the U.S. Army already had plenty of UAVs that got the job done. The navy kept Fire Scout because helicopters are more practical on most navy ships (for landings and takeoffs.) Navy Fire Scouts have been successfully used on frigates (in both the Atlantic and Pacific). There is a huge demand for UAVs in Afghanistan, so the navy sent some there.

The 1.5 ton Fire Scout is based upon the Schweitzer 333 unmanned helicopter, which in turn is derived from the Schweitzer 330 commercial lightweight manned helicopter. Fire Scout has a payload of 272 kg (600 pounds), a cruising speed of 200 kilometers an hour, max altitude of 6,100 meters (20,000 feet) and endurance of eight hours. The U.S. Navy plans to acquire over 160 Fire Scouts.

Several other navies have been testing helicopter UAVs on their warships, and this type of UAV seems destined to replace a lot of manned helicopters on warships, and enable smaller warships (that cannot handle the larger manned helicopters) to operate unmanned helicopters.

chinese z-10 and z-19 attack helicopter

Chinese steal the US Apache

China’s SVU200 UAV conducts maiden flight

China's Sunward Tech Star-lite SVU200 vertical take-off and landing unmanned aerial vehicle has conducted its maiden flight.
The aircraft conducted several short test flights before conducting a 20-minute flight, said Dennis Fetters, the SVU200's designer, in a statement.
"The demonstration included multiple take-offs, landings, turns, sideways manoeuvres, quick-stops, backward flying and forward-cruise flights," said Fetters. "A lifting demonstration of 200kg (441 lbs) was also performed."
The SVU200 has a conventional helicopter layout, with a large main rotor and smaller tail rotor. Following the flights, the president of Sunward Tech, He Qing Hua, approved "full autonomous flight testing"

At the Aviation Expo/China 2011 last September in Beijing, Fetters told Flightglobal the aircraft has a 78hp (58kW) engine, and an endurance of up to 2.6h at its cruising speed of 177kmh. Fetters is a freelance American UAV designer who resides in China.

Fetters said the aircraft was designed to monitor powerlines, but SVU200 promotional material depicts it equipped with 18 rocket tubes and a chin-mounted electro optical/infrared sensor. Sunward said the SVU200 has a "maximum useful load" of 244kg.
Sunward plans to sell two units and a ground control station for yuan (CNY) 10 million ($1.6 million). The aircraft can carry a range of weapons and sensors and has two small internal storage compartments.
At the Beijing show a number of of indigenous VTOL UAVs were displayed, most of them developed by Chinese technical institutions, ostensibly for commercial purposes. One of the UAVs at the show, the YOTAISC X200, was also on static display at the exhibition hall of the Singapore Airshow 2012.
The X200 has a maximum payload of 100kg and two contra-rotating main rotors.
.