Geoffrey Forden (MIT) - "How China Loses the Coming Space War"

coolieno99

coolieno99

Junior Member
juli.mafia said:
Hey guys i've just registered,but i don't know how to send my comments yet.I took a general view to the sinodefence.com site,and i must confess i am terribly amazed with the amount of change that has happened to the PLA.Nevertheless i feel obliged to warn chinese experts that they urgently need more third and fourth generation military hardware,especially in the seas and skies (the land forces are useless in modern warfare if you don't dominate or at least protect the skies and seas)If you are satisfied with current levels(200-300 type 99 MBT-s,14 destroyers,one aircraft carrier,one nuclear powered submarine,the ugly J-series of aircrafts,no air dominance fourth generation aircraft at all etc.,etcc.)you are in deep trouble.Let assume for example that a coalition between Japan,S.Korea,Taiwan,Australia,Canada,U.S.A. and Singapore(maybe the U.K.) is build against China.Your Airforce,Navy,and mechanized divisions(including type 99)would collapse inless than a month or two if a full scale attack occurs from this coalition.The outcome will be a prolonged guerrilla war like that of the WW2 against Japan.Aren't you ashamed of this reality.60 years of indipendence.Think out
Click to expand...
After the U.S. military was defeated by N. Vietnam in 1975(58,000 U.S. servicemen killed), it is generally accepted the U.S. will never fight another conventional land war in Asia.
 
U

Ulick

New Member
Registered Member
coolieno99 said:
After the U.S. military was defeated by N. Vietnam in 1975(58,000 U.S. servicemen killed), it is generally accepted the U.S. will never fight another conventional land war in Asia.
Click to expand...
Is it technically correct though that the US "lost"?, they withdrew...under not great circumstance in 72-73 after coming to an agreement, the Paris peace accords, NV then launched the conventional war against SV, and won it in 75, the US pretty much only fought a gurrilla war, large scale and with some "conventional" battles but it waas still a gurrilla war, and the Viet minh (Viet cong was kind of a made up title from the US)...anyhow history now, and judging by recent US-Vietnamese contact something both sides are working to leave there:)
 
U

Ulick

New Member
Registered Member
Back on topic somewhat, what do people think of the upcoming US anti-sat event, ?
 
crobato

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
This thread is about satellites and space war stuff so I suggest leave the Vietnam stuff elsewhere. And please do not reply to past flame bait posts by people that have already been addressed by moderators. Thank you.
 
crobato

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
1. Sending a target higher does not make it any easier to hit. It not only increases distance, but a higher orbit means a higher orbital speed (I cannot imagine how someone from MIT can make that mistake).
Click to expand...

My own major fub here. A higher orbit actually means a lower orbital velocity; geosync orbits have orbital velocity only as fast as the earth's rotation. What you do need is a higher ESCAPE velocity on the part of the interceptor the higher it goes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top