China can and will achieve total air superiority over Taiwan

For what its worth, indigenous LGBs like LT-2s and LTD pods are already in service and sighted with various JH-7A and Q-5 regiments.

The KD-88 standoff missile is now confirmed in service with JH-7A regiments. This has been hypothesized for some time now.

The KD-63 standoff missile is confirmed in service with H-6H regiments, and there are at least 3 of them, each with well over 20+ aircraft based on GE sighting. That's higher than the PLAAF norm for bomber regiment.

What's important is to find out the status of FT-1, FT-2 and LS-6. The JDAM/JSOW type weapons can mean a fudamental change in the equation by introducing cheap kits that can be used to upgrade dumb bombs.

The ability and the inventory of PGMs with the Su-30s are already a given.

Finding out the exact nature and capability of upgrades on the J-8II is also important. If it is anything close to the Zhuk proposed variant, that represents a considerable change in the equation.

The ECM capability of the PLAAF is there with dedicated H-5 and a new Y-8 variant. Like I said, everyone of those Flankers can carry wingtip ECM pods, and those ECM pods are the most common equipment you can see with pictures of PLAAF Flankers, and this one goes all the way back when the PLAAF first got Su-27s. It appears they always train and use this, so there is __no doubt__ about their sheer proficiency in using them and in learning how to operate in a dense ECM environment.

Scratch said:

I'd be interested in whats the readiness state of the PLAAF. It's said they have 300 Flankers. Do they have the crews to man all those AC ? Do they have enough weapons to arm all, is there enough fuel for several missions and enough technicians for maintenance ??
Of course all this applys to the ROCAF as well ...

Click to expand...

Crews, fuel and technicians are yes in both sides. Weapons depends. China isn't admitting anything but the amount of weapons being imported is rather high. Seems to me that the PLAAF is better motivated in dealing with these issues than the ROCAF.

And about AIM-7. As I can recall, in several cases I read about an incident with US fighters involved, it's stated that 2-3 Sparrow were fired against a single target. If thats the normal procedure, wouldn't the ROCAF run out of ammo pretty fast ... ?

Click to expand...

This is true with all missiles including AMRAAM, so expect them to run out pretty fast.

Suppose one regiment has 50~100 missiles each, three regiments would be 150~300 missiles total. This kind of estimations could give a baseline for discussion (and we could adjust the assumption up or down), but I must say the error margin could be very large even with careful adjustments.

Unlike famous platforms such as Flankers, the performance of the PGM is unknown. Basically, you could judge PGM by the following quality:
1. Range
2. Accuracy
3. ECM
4. Cost
5. Ease of O&M
Even if we ignored the last two, and take the advertisement range at face value, there are still two important factors that are unknown.

Not trying to play down PLA's achievement, I'm sure these are very big leap compare to the capability of past. But a general defense industry potential/capability assessment does not have the same criteria as war game scenario analysis. The later requires much more detail information.

Same with PLAAF's Electronic Warfare capability in general. Of course PLAAF has HD-5, HD-6, and several other platforms and many types of EW equipment (at least 8~10 known airborne types, if I remember correctly). Other than Flankers with Russian ECM pods, there are others such as KG8605 ECM pods for older aircrafts. But what are the exact capability of these systems? If we ask simple questions about coverage frequencies, speed, range, or power, you don't get a lot of answers using public sources. You could get some stuff here and there, for example KG8605 is known to work in 8~18GHz, includes noise/deception techniques and integration to chaff/flare systems. However even that is sketchy, and the accuracy of the information is a bit questionable.

EW is difficult to assess in general. The western systems supposedly are more transparent but still not easy to compare, and PLA's systems are much less transparent.

Actually, I don't expect ROCAF or PLAAF to have the same ROE as USAF. USAF/USN have such an overwhelming advantages in most cases, therefore you could see they rather be safe than sorry in some situations.

I don't see BVR AAM quantity being a problem for ROCAF (well, maybe for F-CK-1). There is a limit to number of BVR engagements above Taiwan Strait because of the distance. Even assuming a low kill rate and two BVR missiles per enemy aircraft, the total is still very significant.

ROCAF's problem has always been sortie generation in war time. Compare to that, BVR missile quantity isn't a big issue at all.

hi every one..im new on this site.and this is my first letter here...i would ask one queston that why dont we buying typhoons or rafales.they r much advance than our J-10s.with such planes like rafalse or EF we can defet taiwan easily.

Well, chichu, perhaps there is an arms embargo by the european uinion against the PRC...
China wanted that to be ended to have acces - as they said - to some low end weapons. But even that was rejected by the EU.
So I don't think they will sell high-end weapon systems like Rafale or EF to China ...

So after all the pros and cons, may the outcome be that PRC could win total air supriority over the ROC, but ones achieved won't have airplanes left to make use of this ... ?
But serious: There are also ROC ground based air defence capabilities. And having PGM doesn't necessarily mean good SEAD qualities.
The ROCAF, in the defensive role, has support of frinedly SAMs, the PLAAF faces hostile SAMs additionally to the ROCAF.

In the 1991 Gulf War, only 9%-10% of the bombs dropped were "smart bombs". But they got lopsided press coverage because of military PR. The same is prolly true with the PLAAF today -- a small % of PGM's is getting a lot of PR.

In a PLAAF vs. ROCAF conflict, the PLAAF has absolute geographic advantage in number of AFB's and strategtic depth. For the ROCAF to "win", they cannot stay on receiving end of bombs and pray the US would intervene quickly. The ROC military needs the offensive capability to attack PLAAF AFB's to destroy its hangers, barracks, fuel depots, etc.

Spending billions on new F-16's is not a fix-all solution, what they need is lots of long-range LACM's that could perform saturated attack against PRC targets. The HF-2E is a step in the right direction, but the number produced and its range/payload falls short.

cabbageman said:

Suppose one regiment has 50~100 missiles each, three regiments would be 150~300 missiles total. This kind of estimations could give a baseline for discussion (and we could adjust the assumption up or down), but I must say the error margin could be very large even with careful adjustments.

Unlike famous platforms such as Flankers, the performance of the PGM is unknown. Basically, you could judge PGM by the following quality:
1. Range
2. Accuracy
3. ECM
4. Cost
5. Ease of O&M
Even if we ignored the last two, and take the advertisement range at face value, there are still two important factors that are unknown.

Not trying to play down PLA's achievement, I'm sure these are very big leap compare to the capability of past. But a general defense industry potential/capability assessment does not have the same criteria as war game scenario analysis. The later requires much more detail information.

Same with PLAAF's Electronic Warfare capability in general. Of course PLAAF has HD-5, HD-6, and several other platforms and many types of EW equipment (at least 8~10 known airborne types, if I remember correctly). Other than Flankers with Russian ECM pods, there are others such as KG8605 ECM pods for older aircrafts. But what are the exact capability of these systems? If we ask simple questions about coverage frequencies, speed, range, or power, you don't get a lot of answers using public sources. You could get some stuff here and there, for example KG8605 is known to work in 8~18GHz, includes noise/deception techniques and integration to chaff/flare systems. However even that is sketchy, and the accuracy of the information is a bit questionable.

EW is difficult to assess in general. The western systems supposedly are more transparent but still not easy to compare, and PLA's systems are much less transparent.

Click to expand...

It is impossible to judge anything without getting into OPSEC data. But that is true with any military in the world.

ECM and EW is a topic that is impossible to scratch. We have no basis if they are effective or ineffective.

But we only know that PLAAF does have EW and does have ECM. And they do their espionage and ELINT homework, which is what is important, because intelligence is the primary information weapon for EW, not the systems per se. The side that had better ELINT/SIGINT services will have the advantage.

adeptitus said:

In the 1991 Gulf War, only 9%-10% of the bombs dropped were "smart bombs". But they got lopsided press coverage because of military PR. The same is prolly true with the PLAAF today -- a small % of PGM's is getting a lot of PR.

In a PLAAF vs. ROCAF conflict, the PLAAF has absolute geographic advantage in number of AFB's and strategtic depth. For the ROCAF to "win", they cannot stay on receiving end of bombs and pray the US would intervene quickly. The ROC military needs the offensive capability to attack PLAAF AFB's to destroy its hangers, barracks, fuel depots, etc.

Spending billions on new F-16's is not a fix-all solution, what they need is lots of long-range LACM's that could perform saturated attack against PRC targets. The HF-2E is a step in the right direction, but the number produced and its range/payload falls short.

Click to expand...

PGM itself is too expensive. TV guided ones is the most accurate but also the most expensive, followed by laser guidance in corresponding order. The real truimph of PGMs is the development of GPS/INS kits that can cheaply transform old dumb bombs into PGMs. While these weapons are not meter to meter as accurate as EO/Laser guidance, they are however, far more cost effective.

In GW1, the PGMs are used in high value targets. We expect the same for the PLAAF. The rest of the targets don't merit the cost of PGMs and can be engaged with bombs and rockets. Among unguided weapons, the rocket pods are the most accurate, and flying MLRS tactics is the basic asset of the PLAAF which all aircraft and pilots are made and trained to do.

The US beat the cost equation by introducing JDAM/JSOW kits. If the PLAAF can master this hurdle---and they're already on their way if those kits like FT-1, FT-2 and LS-6 are the sign---then it will open up cheap PGM delivery for the PLAAF. That greatly affects the equation, and I do mean a major shakeup, like a wrench thrown better major gears, against all previously known scenarios of the conflict.

The HF-2E is a horrible solution to the ROCAF problems. SSMs and cruise missiles are bad because of their ratio of warhead weight vs. cost of delivery. There is only so much you can spend, and with that expenditure, how much warhead in weight have you delivered? You always have to consider alternative costs and options---if I have this amount of money, how would I best spend it. Would I better spend it buying AIM-9X upgrades for my F-16s for example instead of 100 cruise missiles?

JDAM/JSOW solutions on the other hand, lean heavily to the cost equation. When it comes to warhead weight/cost of delivery, it wins hands down compared to any other air to surface guided delivery system.

Scratch said:

So after all the pros and cons, may the outcome be that PRC could win total air supriority over the ROC, but ones achieved won't have airplanes left to make use of this ... ?
But serious: There are also ROC ground based air defence capabilities. And having PGM doesn't necessarily mean good SEAD qualities.
The ROCAF, in the defensive role, has support of frinedly SAMs, the PLAAF faces hostile SAMs additionally to the ROCAF.

Click to expand...

Blowing up the airfields would be the easy part. Hunting down the mobile SAMs would be the hardest.

Can't do that unless you have good ground ISR, and that's way more difficult than hunting down ships in the ocean.

One reason I'm in the look out for internet pics of surveillance pods on the JH-7As. I heard there is a phase array SAR pod for this plane. The Su-30MKK was said to have the MR400 pod which was seen in MAKS 2003, though we have not heard much of it ever since. But we have not heard of SAPSAN for a while too, and thought it was abandoned, until we just saw a recent picture of it on a PLAAF MKK. This lays waste on the you don't see it, it's not there argument. So all bets are off.

I think a lot of people have not realized this, but those cheek bumps Y-8s you have been seeing, can represent a very vital part of this ground ISR equation. As much as sighting those JDAM/JSOW like kits, those Y-8s can act like battlefield force multipliers, they will search, scan for targets, and then vector bombing forces at them. Another important Y-8 is the one that has the radar dome under the nose and the possible ELINT capability. It looks like an MPA but has more aerials and has a SATCOM dome on top. A function of a plane like this is to pick up radar signals from SAM, determine their location and then vector attackers towards it.

A lot can succeed and also fail because of the ISR issue. You cannot understress the importance of this and looking out for PLAAF developments on such.

One JA-7A pic I found:


Truely, ISR is an important fact, espcially when it comes to SAM hunting. But unless pilots are used to WildWeasel like tactics, I think even GPS guided units won't do much against mobile SAMs. The more sophisticated the weapon, the more experiance you often need to succesfully deploy that weapon.

Even leaving the USAF out of the equation, I still think PLAAF is currently unable to establish air superiority over ROCAF. There is a good chance ROCAF will stil be able to hold on to their airspace.

I realize that today the PLAAF is draining a lot of money into buying the flashiest new Russian fighters and developing ones that are (at least on paper) comparable to Western aircraft, because of their current economic growth. But that doesn't necessarily mean an improvement of your air force. Buying a 20 million dollar fighter isn't worth a damn unless the pilot knows what he is doing. Do the pilots in PLAAF had an equivalent of Red Flag/ Green Flag program? Just how competent and commited are they really? Look at Iraq back in Gulf War I (which I never served in however). The Iraqis had almost as many Mig-29s and other modern aircraft as us and also had defender's advantage. On paper, like the PLAAF, they had a comparable air force to us. But look what happened to them. The Arabs in the Yom Kippur war had an airforce equal, if not superior to the Israelis, and they had the right-next-door advantage China has to Taiwan also. Nonetheless their aircraft losss rates were still much higer than the Israelis. To quote Tom Clancy, "air power is fraglie, unpredictable, and not a substitute for clear military objevtives." Truer words never spoken. Granted, having the best equipment is important, but its more about the quality and professionalism of the pilot. In this area no one can match the USAF, and the ROCAF is still undobtedly better than the PLAAF.

I think the PLAAF, in any war over Taiwan, would be able to mantain a high sortie rate in the first few days, but would eventually suffer heavily and be forced to provide only "limited" air support. This may change in the future, like 10 years, but in 10 years anything can happen. Most likely, the Chinese economy would not be as booming as it is now, the bubble would have burst, and resultantly the PRC would be forced to cut back on defense spending unless it wanted to harm itself.

All of this excludes the USAF. If we really got involved there is no doubt as to whcih way it would go. Damn proud I served.

USworldpolice sez;

f any of you are interested, I served two tours over the southern "no-fly" zone in Iraq, once in 1993 and again in 1995. If any of you can recognize, I flew the 'Strike' variant of the F-15 Eagle family.

Click to expand...

What squadron and wing where you assigned with? Where were you stationed in the Gulf region & stateside?

Forum members>>> We have discovered that USworldpolice is a "poser" a "fake"' a "Phoney". In fact a three time banned loser.... Warning to others..do not claim to be something you are not. And if you are banned KEEP OUT!!!

bd popeye moderator