most likely AEF-50E series small Engines.
Chinese UCAV/CCA/flying wing drones (ISR, A2A, A2G) thread
- Thread starter VESSEL
- Start date
I mean, if you assume that you've already won, then yeah, you've already won. Rather tautological.
By the time Japan is neutralized, I expect Guam to be little more than empty hangars. Because that means they've already commited and lost all of their assets defending Japan.
One ZF850 Turbojet for export
Two AEF-50 for PLA
A twin AEF-50 (5KN) turbofan powers the PLA variant
ZF-850 is a FADEC turbojet made by private company ZFTX appeared on the export model Wing Loong-10B/X,
ZhongFaTianXin is a private company and have big ambitions.. their main focus is, small/medium gas turbine Engines.
The overall two-phase plan covers an area of more than 130,000m2, with an investment of RMB 3.2 billion. At present, phase I of the project has been completed, with a 20kN and a 50kN engine test bed, and its annual production capacity is 50 small Engines. For phase II, the goal is to improve testing capabilities and expand production capacity. After completion, the annual production capacity will reach 300 units, and at the same time, the company will reach the national military standard, have verification capabilities of related airworthiness tests, and have scientific research and test capabilities of aeroengines.
It's not tautological. It's logic.
As I point out, if there are American airbases still operating in Japan in the 1IC, these are more of a threat to mainland China than any base in the 2IC.
So there's no point developing (more expensive) long-range systems for the 2IC and beyond, unless you assume that Japan can be neutralised.
Remember that this logic is driving China's very expensive weapons development programmes.
---
It also means that even if Japan is additionally fortified, China has the capacity to redirect resources from systems designed for the 2IC to the 1IC, and ensure that Japan is neutralised
If there is a war, I expect the Chinese military to aim for air superiority over both the 1IC and 2IC - right from the beginning of such a hypothetical conflict. So there will be assets located in both the 1IC and 2IC. Guam represents a "safer" base in that it is further away, and is not subject to Japanese political control.
Remember the background.
1. Biden and the previous Japanese Prime Minister both publicly stated that they had the option of going to war with China.
2. Ray Dalio and the late Henry Kissinger also publicly stated that the rest of the world sees the USA as being "overly aggressive" towards China. And in recent months, China has been on the receiving end of an even more aggressive America. (Caveat here, in that the rest of the world has been subject to American bullying)
What is the logical Chinese response?
If you ignore the undervalued exchange rate, the Chinese economy is approaching twice the size of the US, in terms of real output of goods and services. So China should be able to build a larger military and still bankrupt the US in an arms race. Today, if you look at procurement of equivalent naval and air platforms, China is buying ~2x more stuff every year.
---
So tell me what the military balance looks like in 2035 with respect to China-Japan-US.
I've already outlined what I think are the core power projection elements that China would use against Japan.
And I'll add that the USAF presentation states that China has a 4x speed advantage in weapons development and a 20x cost advantage in equivalent hypersonic missiles. Granted, these are the more extreme examples, but you get the idea.
Also, Russia currently produces about 5000 Shaheed Type cruise missiles per month, and these are relatively simple to produce.
Then remember that China's overall manufacturing sector is ~90x larger than Russias. (NB Not that I expect China to actually produce or need anywhere near 450K shaheeds per month)
It's bad logic. More distant bases will quite logically host higher numbers of vulnerable support assets like AWACS/tankers/etc, while closer bases host mainly short-legged fighters. Which are all obviously designed to operate as a mutually reinforcing system. And your approach of focusing on the nearby fighters before degrading the distant enablers is the exact opposite of systems destruction warfare. Taking out the fewer, higher-value, but better-protected enablers first cripples all the fighters.
In other words, the point of developing those expensive long-range systems to hit Guam is in fact to neutralize Japan.
Yeah, that's what I said already. The first and second island chains support each other. Which is why your assumption about the first being gone is tautological. If the first is gone, then you've already won.
Last edited:
IDK, but it was guancha folks who said a while back that WZ-10 was powered by turbojet.
Maybe the domestic variant is powered by AEF-50, but what you posted above doesn't show its engine.