Effectiveness of China's Air Defence?

s002wjh said:

if war break out between china/US, US will send much more supplies, weaponary compare to iraq, and other wars.

Click to expand...

vesicles said:

As we all know, wars are won by logistics. As I and other posters have pointed out, logistics is a huge issue when fighting China. China may not have the most advanced weapon systems and may lose a couple battles at the beginning, but defeating China in the fashion of how the West took Libya apart is almost impossible because of the logistics.

You cannot hope to overcome the air defense system of the entire China with the initial phase of missile attacks/bombers. As the conflict begins, those Western bases in the pacific immediately become targets of CHinese counter-attack. I don't think the term "counter attack" has been brought up much at all in past 30-40 years of global conflicts between any Western nation and their foes. However, there would be no doubt that Chinese will counter attack. Some of our fellow posters brought up the point that those damages can be easily fixed. Well, it may be, but don't expect CHina would stop attacking after only one attack. They would keep attacking until either they achieve their goal or they are stopped. that means the West will have to dedicate huge amount of resources in defending their bases instead of investing all their weapons in attacking their targets, like what they have been doing for the past 30-40 years. Defending itself for long period amount of time will also take a toll in the resources that would otherwise be used to attack their targets.

. So Libya cannot be used as a reference.

Click to expand...

i.e. said:

missile wise those who think china doesnt have the capability to render anderson or okinawa in-effective is underestimating.
people need to get the idea that "ballistic missiles are inaccurate" out of their head. USAF's prompt global strike program is partially based on ballistic missiles.

each MRBM carries about 5-1000 kg payload. thats 1-2000 lbs.
think what you can do to an air base with 100x1000 lb jdams?
50 ballistic missiles gives you an equivalent strike pacakge tonnage about a wing of F-15Es. or 2-3 B-2s.
now factor in cluster munitions. factor in EMPs. factor in penetrators, factor in anti-radiation seekers that target PAC-IIIs, factor in UAVs that pop out of the payload and loiter around to give the command center real time feedback for the second wave in flight... the possibility is endless.

Click to expand...

IronsightSniper said:

Just to point out, PAC-3s won't be as easily neutralized as other SAM installations are, since it's missile is ARH, it's fire and forget. OTH radars would of seen the incoming ballistic missiles and at that point, all that's need is target acquisition data from a smaller radar and then off goes the Patriot and boom goes the target (most of the time.)

Also, EMPs are essentially worthless v.s. modern military installations.

Click to expand...

Hendrik_2000 said:

PAC 3 is only good for single warhead and completely useless against multi warhead missile
The new Chinese missile is not only multi warhead but also use higher speed reentry and flat trajectory rendering PAC 3 useless. Pac 3 is only good for "Old missile like Scud" And dont count on SM3 either they are unproven and untested system with kill ratio of 50%

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"Ballistic missiles with a range such as that attributed to the DF-16 could be deployed at the Second Artillery’s Base 52 in Anhui Province and could target Taiwan as well as U.S. bases in the region, such as Okinawa and Guam." Moreover, "the faster re-entry of a longer-range ballistic missile such as the DF-16 would greatly reduce the effectiveness of Taiwan’s PAC-3 missile interceptors

Click to expand...

s002wjh said:

we all know carpet bomb was not that effective vs precision ammo. the MRBM can hit general area but not a particular building or plane on the ground, it might hit some building, but most likely its gonna hit some parking lot or large open space. look at the size of those bases from aerial view, see how much open space it has, and which target is deem critical, and which is not. is the MRBM precise enough to destroy a command & control tower or hangar thats holding the planes. On top of that i don't think japan/sk will appreciate china lobbing missiles at their country(even its US bases)

as for the subs, i doubt US CVG will get close to chinese shore to allow subs ambush it. the sub can sit there and wait but its big ocean, the chance of CVG come close to chinese sub attack range are very very small. you bet US gonna use all there resource to find those subs and destroy its base.

MRBM can do damage over the base but it will not destroy it.

US will not attack chinese inland at the beginning, it will soften chinese costal defence and cities. most developed cities in china are near costal region anyway. on the west side china still have to worry about US military station in afahan and other areas.

tomhawk its different missile compare to MRBM, its a precision guided weapon not a ballistic missile

Click to expand...

Quickie said:

In the escalation, the war will possibly see the destruction of recon satellites and even GPS satellites (near China) making some precision weapons like tomahawk missiles inoperable.

Click to expand...

s002wjh said:

you have to know which satelite belong to US, and the purpose of such satelite. not really worth while if china destroy some othe countries sat or US commerical sat. also US can certainly destroy chinese sat too

china has a long shoreline with only handful of quite subs, it will give US some pause/caution but will not stop US battle group operating in that area. and those subs will hunted by US seawolf/virgina class subs/airborane system etc.

the fact is china can damage US military but in the end its own defense including ships/subs/air defense will be destroyed.

the first thing US/western might do is create a blockade, not allow any ship in/out of china. food, oil and other supplies will be scarce. then probably will soften up costal defence including stationed air defence/navy port etc etc using missles/stealth aircraft etc.

Click to expand...