China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

USAF accelerating its attempt to disperse its forces to large number of airfields rather than concentrating in a handful of prepared airfields least they be targetted by PLARF ballistic missiles in times of war.

I've always felt that's a bit of a misguided move - is preparing a new airfield really cheaper than say, the cost of fielding 10 more DF-26 to make sure that airfield is also destroyed?
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
...
USAF accelerating its attempt to disperse its forces to large number of airfields rather than concentrating in a handful of prepared airfields least they be targetted by PLARF ballistic missiles in times of war.

I've always felt that's a bit of a misguided move - is preparing a new airfield really cheaper than say, the cost of fielding 10 more DF-26 to make sure that airfield is also destroyed?

It makes some sense, but I think its applicability is limited. They will always have main zones where equipment will be concentrated, as well as depots. With the DF-41 only South America and Antarctica are secure from attack. With the DF-26 no place in the Western Pacific is safe.
The main concern of the US should be how to protect its satellite assets and how to prevent the Chinese from using theirs.
China needs to have ground based over-the-horizon radar networks to monitor both the surrounding airspace and space objects.
They also need the capability to quickly launch satellites in case of conflict.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Will this finally put to rest the fatuous "objection" that these AShBMs haven't hit moving targets? Somehow I doubt it.

Well it is moving target Now that ASBM has proven to be able to hit moving target. They now said yeah but can they find it first? I guess nothing convince this people until real thing hit Carrier. Here is always the CAVEAT from our friend Andrew Erickson but how are they derive this caveat from attending Zhuhai air show I am just baffles. To begin with China won't release any info on ASBM or satellite surveillance in Air show It does not make sense!
Read carefully and you get sense of hubris
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

With its recent ASBM tests,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
against moving targets, Beijing seeks to demonstrate a maturing capability and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. It seeks to overawe audiences limited in access to technical details and limited in understanding of basic technical principles—and thereby to generate deference that it has not earned operationally. But however sophisticated and successful, these tests are but one element in a far greater equation. First, ASBMs’ effectiveness in practice hinges on a comprehensive reconnaissance and targeting architecture. As datapoints at the last four Zhuhai Airshows I attended impressed upon me,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. But it remains a work in progress that has not been validated concretely in critical respects. Second, growing American countermeasures make this at least a two-sided contest.
 
Last edited:

silentlurker

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

USAF accelerating its attempt to disperse its forces to large number of airfields rather than concentrating in a handful of prepared airfields least they be targetted by PLARF ballistic missiles in times of war.

I've always felt that's a bit of a misguided move - is preparing a new airfield really cheaper than say, the cost of fielding 10 more DF-26 to make sure that airfield is also destroyed?
Depends, for F35 an airfield might just be a short runway and a few sheds.

Or this concept for popup bases:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


These popup bases would only be set up after a conflict begins though.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Well it is moving target Now that ASBM has proven to be able to hit moving target. They now said yeah but can they find it first? I guess nothing convince this people until real thing hit Carrier. Here is always the CAVEAT from our friend Andrew Erickson but how are they derive this caveat from attending Zhuhai air show I am just baffles. To begin with China won't release any info on ASBM or satellite surveillance in Air show It does not make sense!
Read carefully and you get sense of hubris
...
With its recent ASBM tests,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
against moving targets, Beijing seeks to demonstrate a maturing capability and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. It seeks to overawe audiences limited in access to technical details and limited in understanding of basic technical principles—and thereby to generate deference that it has not earned operationally. But however sophisticated and successful, these tests are but one element in a far greater equation. First, ASBMs’ effectiveness in practice hinges on a comprehensive reconnaissance and targeting architecture. As datapoints at the last four Zhuhai Airshows I attended impressed upon me,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. But it remains a work in progress that has not been validated concretely in critical respects. Second, growing American countermeasures make this at least a two-sided contest.

Those are some really sour grapes there.

I sincerely can't believe they still think China can't spot carriers with satellites if they want to.
Heck there are typically news reports of when a carrier battle group leaves a port and its intended destination.
It isn't easy to hide or make secret something like this. A carrier group has a huge profile.
We know radar satellite imaging is good enough to detect the wake of a ship let alone a huge carrier.
China is one of the leaders in satellite technology, imaging sensors, and AI for computer vision.
So what do they think is an impediment for the capability. These people are sticking their heads into the sand.

Modern satellites don't even have fixed orbits necessarily.
With ion-electric propulsion a lot of imaging satellites have a limited capability to change their orbit slightly.
Particularly military imaging satellites. To detect a carrier you don't need particularly high resolution.
So you could use a bunch of cheap satellites.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
China should exaggerate stories like Americans do and fill in the blanks. Trump sent in a U2 spy plane hoping to violate China's assumed naval exercise showing how the US is boss. But the U2 found nothing but a lonely ship out in the middle of nowhere when suddenly the U2 is slammed by massive turbulence as two hypersonic objects hurtle down from above. Instead of hoping to ruin Chinese wargames, the U2 witnessed and recorded a successful ASBM strike the US said never could be done.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
China should exaggerate stories like Americans do and fill in the blanks. Trump sent in a U2 spy plane hoping to violate China's assumed naval exercise showing how the US is boss. But the U2 found nothing but a lonely ship out in the middle of nowhere when suddenly the U2 is slammed by massive turbulence as two hypersonic objects hurtle down from above. Instead of hoping to ruin Chinese wargames, the U2 witnessed and recorded a successful ASBM strike the US said never could be done.
Where's the exaggeration?
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Where's the exaggeration?

If it happened that way, we would've heard the US complaining like when Chinese fighters fly too close to their aircraft and endangered their pilots. When news of this first broke, I read the target vessel was a tug boat. If a U2 were flying around the area, I don't think the pilot would be paying attention to a tug boat or any single vessel out in the middle of nowhere when it's looking for a big naval exercise to spoil.
 

Mr T

Senior Member
Well it is moving target Now that ASBM has proven to be able to hit moving target. They now said yeah but can they find it first? I guess nothing convince this people until real thing hit Carrier.

I'm very interested by the DF-26B, as they could make aircraft carriers obsolete against all but countries with small militaries. If the DF-26B was a smashing success, you can be sure that lots of countries around the world would start making their own versions. Ironically that could severely limit China's future plans for operating multiple aircraft carriers.

The only question I have is how fast was the target moving. That's an important detail that was not mentioned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top