Effectiveness of China's Air Defence?

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
From the documented evidence of past wars, we can deduced that by purely taking on a defensive stance is hardly enough for defending a nation from any successful incursion. Taking Iraq and Syria as an example, both boast to have powerful defence network that would render them almost impenetrable by foreign forces... but they are bombed pretty badly.

It just gave a conclusion that no matter how good your defence is... there are bound to have weaknesses and the West or US in particular, seemed pretty good at explioting these weaknesses... be it, their extremely well trained agents that spread across the globe or using of very high tech equipments to break the code, jam the system, etc. But the end result is, these so call impenetrable fortresses fell within minutes to hours.

Although many could argued that China's technology is much higher as compared to Syria and Iraq, she make use of her own hardwares and not the one supplied by Russia... but the same theory still applied. At the height of Cold War, Soviet Union is the enemy. The west spent time and resources looking into her technology and try to break it.

Now Soviet Union is no more the West and US had turned their attention to China. She is a growing power, and I doubt the US and the West didn't take that as a threat and studied into her defences like they did to Soviet Union's.

Thus in time or event of a war, I have this nagging feeling that China might be facing the same consequences as Syria and Iraq... her defences might not have collapsed in mere hours... but might not be able to withstand indefinately.

So by taking purely a defensive stances is never enough. I think China see this weaknesses too... that is why she is initiating lots of modernisation programs for her Air Force, Navy, second artillery and other amphibious forces... for these will be the needed to ensure her own safety when enemy's strike. These forces will not only be task with defending motherland... but will also be use as a striking force against any offensive nations.

Only by maintaining a large and powerful force capable of offensive missions will she truely be safe from being attack by foreign forces... as the saying goes, "The best defence is a good offense." (or something to that effect.)
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Hey plawolf! Nice to see that you are back. Although I agree with you that it is ridiculous comparing China's air defense network to the ones employed by the Syrians and Iraqis how can we be sure that U.S. agents working in China may play a similar pivotal role before an air attack. Thnx.

Cheers, its good to be back.

I have serious doubts over the effectiveness of CIA agents working in China, mainly because human intel has never been a strong point of the CIA, and they had a number of high profile failures wrt China over the decades, which may further disuade them from putting agents on the ground. If anyone is likely to penetrate Chinese military defenses, it would be more likely to be agencies from the likes of Taiwan or Korea (both!) or even Japan, instead of Americans.

Even then, the degree of infiltration is likely to be pretty limited because all major powers don't keep anything truelu secret on networked servers, so you need to physicallu get access tothe hardware to have any chance of gaining access. That is pretty unlikely with the kind of security that is standard in such installations.

In addition, major powers who make their own hardware and software are also far better placed to spot tempering and also be able to quickly work around electronic attacks since they themselves know the systems and software better than anyone else.

Speaking of hardware, all new Chinese government and military computers use processors specificlly design to be resilient to electronic attack and hacking. Its got some right wingers quite sterred up in washington apparently.

To sum up, you will always be better placed to counter electronic attack if you make your own kit instead of buying it off the shelf, since you have the know how to detect incursion fairly early, and can also adapt and upgrade your systems to address any weaknesses that may be discovered very quickly.
 

A.Man

Major
From the documented evidence of past wars, we can deduced that by purely taking on a defensive stance is hardly enough for defending a nation from any successful incursion. Taking Iraq and Syria as an example, both boast to have powerful defence network that would render them almost impenetrable by foreign forces... but they are bombed pretty badly.

It just gave a conclusion that no matter how good your defence is... there are bound to have weaknesses and the West or US in particular, seemed pretty good at explioting these weaknesses... be it, their extremely well trained agents that spread across the globe or using of very high tech equipments to break the code, jam the system, etc. But the end result is, these so call impenetrable fortresses fell within minutes to hours.

Although many could argued that China's technology is much higher as compared to Syria and Iraq, she make use of her own hardwares and not the one supplied by Russia... but the same theory still applied. At the height of Cold War, Soviet Union is the enemy. The west spent time and resources looking into her technology and try to break it.

Now Soviet Union is no more the West and US had turned their attention to China. She is a growing power, and I doubt the US and the West didn't take that as a threat and studied into her defences like they did to Soviet Union's.

Thus in time or event of a war, I have this nagging feeling that China might be facing the same consequences as Syria and Iraq... her defences might not have collapsed in mere hours... but might not be able to withstand indefinately.

So by taking purely a defensive stances is never enough. I think China see this weaknesses too... that is why she is initiating lots of modernisation programs for her Air Force, Navy, second artillery and other amphibious forces... for these will be the needed to ensure her own safety when enemy's strike. These forces will not only be task with defending motherland... but will also be use as a striking force against any offensive nations.

Only by maintaining a large and powerful force capable of offensive missions will she truely be safe from being attack by foreign forces... as the saying goes, "The best defence is a good offense." (or something to that effect.)

My friend, China did not prepare to have major conflicts with the United States, Japan, India, even Taiwan. She was pushed into an arm race with the West. The United States, Japan and India as well as South Korea, keep pushing China to take a stand. Then, China will be a superpower sooner than most people thought.
 

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
My friend, China did not prepare to have major conflicts with the United States, Japan, India, even Taiwan. She was pushed into an arm race with the West. The United States, Japan and India as well as South Korea, keep pushing China to take a stand. Then, China will be a superpower sooner than most people thought.

Not sure what you meant exactly. I understand that China had never the intention of becoming number one in the world or that she had never actually wanted to become a superpower. Chinese in general just wanted to get past life peacefully. However, not wanting to do something doesn't mean others would let you go peacefully, as you have suggested.

The west, US, Japan, India and the such had been very aggressive... especially some of the western nations, US and Japan. However it is all some sort of a global game. I do not believe that China and the west are engaged in a full fledge arm race like the height of Cold War... And seeing what had happen to Soviet Union, I doubt China would follow to that old route.

Unlike Soviet Union who had used almost 100% of their resources solely on military purposes, China did not. Her model is somehow similar to US in the 60s and so far she had been very successful.

In conclusion, it is not always the country that had the best weapons or armament would be the most powerful nation... it is the country that could outlast her rival that could ultimately become the most powerful nation in the world... and that would really depend on many factors,

1) Political stability.
2) Economical Stability.
3) Strong military (Defensive and offensive)
4) Good deterrence (aganist attacks)
5) Powerful manufacturing base
6) wide and comprehensive diplomatic network
7) Large enough population (but not extremely large or explosive)
8) General public having good buying power
9) generally satisfied public (good loyalty, happy public and very minimal poverty)
10) Fast reaction time for emergency (natural disasters)
11) Excellent infrastructure (logistical support, housing, commerical and business structures, etc)

Abovementioned are some of the factors that could actually create a strong superpower and not something that actually only concentrated on military forces.

So even if the west, US, Japan or whoever is pushing China into an arm race, I do not seriously believe that China would be stupid enough to fall for that trap. Whatever happen, she will heed to the above eleven points first... and seriously I doubt alot of countries (unlike in the past) had the ability to force China too much at present days, not because of her military might, but because of many other factors which include the abovementioned points and the fact that China is a magnet for foreign investors who had invested heavily into manufacturing their products in China. If a war broke out... all these investment will go down drain...

Which remind me... having alot of nations (especially those from the west and US) to invest into building of factories in China to build their products is really a good strategies in many aspects.

1) Foreign cash coming into China.
2) Job employment for the mainland Chinese.
3) Learn very modern and useful management system that are otherwise quite difficult to master.
4) Have an insight into other countries supply chain models.
5) These factories are actually a good deterrence against foreign attacks due to the fact that these factories are owned by the foreign investors and they would not want to see their factories bombed to simthering. Sometime lobbying by these powerful and rich individuals in countries like US is the best weapon than all the aircraft carriers added together.
 
Last edited:

duskylim

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Rhino raises a good point. That a purely passive and defensive stance plays into the hands of the US and its offensive strategy.

That also provides a possible counter-strategy - based on the fact that the US has so far conducted SEAD/DEAD under conditions where its assets are free to strike but are safe in their own airbases.

Would the US air strategy be as effective if the enemy struck him where he is most vulnerable, at the fixed and static air bases themselves?

I imagine long-range, multiple missile strikes on all regional airbases with the express intent of destroying not just the parked aircraft but also the base infrastructure, munitions, maintenance facilities and especially the personnel.

If this is done the West is limited to a single set of air strikes - which no matter how successful, would due to the loss of the necessary equipment and personnel required to re-arm, re-fuel and maintain their aircraft, be unable to strike again.

Then even if the aircraft themselves survive, that 1st assault, they are effectively neutralized.

Further it would be a terribly unimaginative PLAAF that would not take advantage of the fact that China is the worlds largest producer of microwave ovens.

Suppose you request those companies to produce a series of magnetron tubes that operate in the frequencies corresponding to your air-defense radars.

Then you integrate into the power supply a computer control system with the ability to mimic the transmission patterns of your radars.

Then you attach a series of these devices to a aluminum foil-lined set of PVC pipes designed as waveguides directing the output to an antenna.

Mount these all on an armored truck and operate several of them near to where the actual radar is - which stops transmitting as soon as he fires the HARM.

Done properly there is a very good chance of a anti-radiation missile homing on one of these rather than the radar itself.

You can sacrifice the antenna and waveguide assembly (tens or hundreds of dollars) instead of the entire microwave unit - and go on trading these for HARMs as long as he has missiles.

You could install cruise missiles into specially-modified shipping containers and carry them around container ships like any ordinary cargo.

Then you could 'accidentally' drop them offshore those bases that you wished to destroy.

They would sink into areas where they would lie in wait for a signal, then, like a submarine you could 'blow' the ballast and the containers would rise off the seabed and fire the missiles at the target bases.

There are so many creative ways to counter the West.

These are only a few of my crazier ideas.
 

cliveersknell

New Member
The bottom line is this: China knows the US much more than the US knows China.
Clancy's books, may be considered fiction, but there are many hints about US technology which the chinese can pick up.
The example of chinese involvement in Vietnam is a clear example of the surprises china can pull of her sleeve. Another fact that happened in Vietnam that angered many including myself , is that some people said , after the Quemoy incident in 1958, that the sidewinder is mature and could replace aircraft machine guns and cannon. Hence many guns were taken off fighters and they were exclusively armed with the sidewinder.
People did not understand that the first generation IR detectors at that time were not robust and that the climate of Vietnam is much warmer and humid that eastern china/Taiwan, therefore the heat and humidity coupled with the poor packaging and reliability of the first IR detectors led to heavy leakage currents which compromised greatly the sidewinder. The Chinese on the other hand supplied North Vietnam with upgraded MiG-15/17 with 4 30mm cannons. They trained the Vietnamese pilots well in gunnery, and dispersed the planes in makeshift fields, coordinated with radio communications. The Vietnamese pilots initially allowed the US planes to bomb their targets and later ambushed them on the way back, the sidewinders failed miserably , while the US pilots had no gun to defend themselves. In the period 65-69, US losses outpaced Vietnamese losses. Furthermore Chinese ground crews maintained the MiGs, Chinese pilots ( like ex chief Wang Hai), flew with the Vietnamese , and chinese airbases in Yunnan and Guangxi were open to Vietnamese aircraft. It was a big loss of material and face to the US. This info was only learned in bits and pieces later during the 80's , the US state department kept this a well kept secret for a long time. Only in the 70's did the US restart gunnery practice.
The next big mistake the US did was to sever all military links with China after Tiananmen. In the early 80's till 89, US had excellent military links with China and knew much about china's military. After 89, the curtain fell. Till today, we are clueless about China real military strenght. The tricks China can pull on the US are indeed many.
Cheers
Clive
 

Lezt

Junior Member
The bottom line is this: China knows the US much more than the US knows China.
Clancy's books, may be considered fiction, but there are many hints about US technology which the chinese can pick up.
The example of chinese involvement in Vietnam is a clear example of the surprises china can pull of her sleeve. Another fact that happened in Vietnam that angered many including myself , is that some people said , after the Quemoy incident in 1958, that the sidewinder is mature and could replace aircraft machine guns and cannon. Hence many guns were taken off fighters and they were exclusively armed with the sidewinder.
People did not understand that the first generation IR detectors at that time were not robust and that the climate of Vietnam is much warmer and humid that eastern china/Taiwan, therefore the heat and humidity coupled with the poor packaging and reliability of the first IR detectors led to heavy leakage currents which compromised greatly the sidewinder. The Chinese on the other hand supplied North Vietnam with upgraded MiG-15/17 with 4 30mm cannons. They trained the Vietnamese pilots well in gunnery, and dispersed the planes in makeshift fields, coordinated with radio communications. The Vietnamese pilots initially allowed the US planes to bomb their targets and later ambushed them on the way back, the sidewinders failed miserably , while the US pilots had no gun to defend themselves. In the period 65-69, US losses outpaced Vietnamese losses. Furthermore Chinese ground crews maintained the MiGs, Chinese pilots ( like ex chief Wang Hai), flew with the Vietnamese , and chinese airbases in Yunnan and Guangxi were open to Vietnamese aircraft. It was a big loss of material and face to the US. This info was only learned in bits and pieces later during the 80's , the US state department kept this a well kept secret for a long time. Only in the 70's did the US restart gunnery practice.
The next big mistake the US did was to sever all military links with China after Tiananmen. In the early 80's till 89, US had excellent military links with China and knew much about china's military. After 89, the curtain fell. Till today, we are clueless about China real military strenght. The tricks China can pull on the US are indeed many.
Cheers
Clive

Clive, let me show you another failure of US society.

remember that most US cities had street cars and a proper public transit? and that the 50s came along and the Big Three "convinced" the govt that the age of personal transit is here and that the street cars, railways should be dug up?

Well he is an American author and a conservative, what do you expect him do? Design battles and campaigns that the Russians/Chinese/Japanese/eco-terrorists wants to fight? :D

Personally I think his writing reached the peak and Red October (which I think is quite good) and went downhill from there, culminating in the ridiculous political fest like the Bear and the Dragon. Interesting how Putin pledged the friendship pact with the Chinese a year after it came out.

Siegecrossbow, just for thought a fiction on a radical group of American militia from the south west with strong Christian believes; and having the US army fight them in Tennessee or sth will make an interesting story.

I know it is part political climate, but how about a radical president is elected whom commands both the house and the senate; and decides that the Europeans did not appreciate the US help in WW2 enough and decides to start a war with the EU? that would be an interesting one - interms of hardware and battles? I think it will make a better story than the bear and the dragon?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sunchips

Just Hatched
Registered Member
In Canada currently where I live, the media is playing up how Canadian air radars constantly pick up Russian bombers on their runs, and then scramble fighters to intercept and shadow them.

In general, it is relatively accurate to understand North American airspace as there being a relatively secure "shield" against any hostile aircraft and/or missiles.

My question is: what about China? In 2001, the EP-3 got within 70 miles of Hainan. Normally, any suspicious foreign aircraft over north america, way before any aircraft would have gotten that close, there would be fighters shadowing and escorting it (although--mind you--not harrassing it, it seems).

How well is Chinese air defence at detecting, intercepting and resolving ALL air threats, over ALL of Chinese airspace, not just over economical areas?
 

noname

Banned Idiot
In Canada currently where I live, the media is playing up how Canadian air radars constantly pick up Russian bombers on their runs, and then scramble fighters to intercept and shadow them.

In general, it is relatively accurate to understand North American airspace as there being a relatively secure "shield" against any hostile aircraft and/or missiles.

My question is: what about China? In 2001, the EP-3 got within 70 miles of Hainan. Normally, any suspicious foreign aircraft over north america, way before any aircraft would have gotten that close, there would be fighters shadowing and escorting it (although--mind you--not harrassing it, it seems).

How well is Chinese air defence at detecting, intercepting and resolving ALL air threats, over ALL of Chinese airspace, not just over economical areas?

US and USSR use to, and Russia today still routinely test each others air defenses and use electronic survailance of each others military. This idea that China is going to prevent survailance from international waters and air space is a pretty novel idea, we are going to have to see how that works out.
 
Top