Is the PLA vulnerable to pre-emptive strike now and in the near future?

Unfourtunately some participants are rapidly losing contact to a thing sane people desrcibe as ´Real World´.
Someone maintains that US can deploy some of her B-2 (of only 21!!) for months totally clandestinely on Guam whereas the dumb dummies in Beijing fail to detect this since obviously satellites, recon planes, submarines and also spies have yet to be invented in a small backward country called China. :roll:
The next guy paints armageddon scenarios which would probably kill off some hundreds of millions people throughout Asia and is a true believer in his feeble assumption that Russia would stand idly by if US is on the rampage for destroying the planet.

Your thesis about chinese missiletech progress is quite interesting Dusky Lim but there has to surface some evidence about utilization of Chelomei´s principles in China. Mark Wade´s website is an excellent source of information and he is an especially outstanding expert on Russia´s missiletech so I can only recommend that you refer to his analysis. Hopefully China will field in 8-10 years a solidpowered equivalent to Chelomei´s UR-100 in massive numbers preventing Sea Dog´s armageddon from ever happening.

Dear Violet Oboe:

I did a search on Mark Wade's Encyclopaedia Astronautica site with your statement and it came up empty. Can you please identify the particular page that you are refering too? I would appreciate it very much. I can't seem to find that reference anywhere. Please help me out.

P.S. Just give me your opinion - do you think that it is money and production capability that is restraining the Second Artillery from making more CZ-based ICBM's?

Best Regards,

Dusky Lim

Without doubt russian missiles are durable indeed but everything has it´s limits: on 26.07.06 a Dnepr (R-36MUTTH/SS-18) launcher failed after 74 sec into flight and her payload of 18 (R-36 employs a quite capable insertion/MIRV bus! ) microsatellites was destroyed on impact. After all the missile was produced in 1980 and a russian website maintains that the problems were caused during faulty manufacturing 26 years ago. Although Russia´s missile forces tested a Topol/SS-25 on 3.08.06 successfully impacting after 7000 kilometers on Kura range in Kamchatka, this round probably was produced 20 years ago. All in all russian missile performance is quite impressive though they had some failures this year but Russia launches substantially more satellites than US for some years now.

Dear Dusky Lim: Assuming you have read the group of articles about UR-100 family () I think that you are correct to criticize me about my fuzzy statement. I simply wanted to suggest that PLA needs a form of ´Universal Rocket´ which could perform several duties, so I was speculating about a solid fuel powered missile perhaps similar to the rail based RT-23U Molodets (SS-24) albeit in a dimensionally reduced form since PLA does not need a weapon with up to 14 warheads. Russia does not field this mighty missile any longer and may be China could purchase parts of RT-23U techology like solidmotors or MIRV buses.

China possesses a formidable production line for her satellite launchers which unfourtunately produces much more units than can be launched by civil and military space programs since China suffers from sattech chokepoints caused in part by an US techembargo. Hopefully this misery will be changed in the near future as PLA generals talk now openly about the priority of space security for the nation. (Xinhua featured an article today)
As for your last question:
Obviously China´s space and missile projects suffered from a sort of financial cap for a long time . A glaring example seems to be the ´Shenzou´ 921 project: impressive infrastructure was created (Jiaquan, Beijing control center), mighty rockets (CZ-2F) and flawlessly flying hardware (Shenzou). The result of all this are only two meagre manned flights after seven years and we will have to wait until 08 for the next (Shenzou 7) mission to happen. No doubt that such a glacial schedule is to blame on budget caps since the leadership is pleased with the tech/propaganda success but they obviusly do not want to pay the expensive bill for creating a real space program (regular (2-3 times a year) flights and a small space station).
After all Dusky I think that in the coming years there will be distinctive changes because China has established an effective tax collection infrastucture in the last five years. Correspondingly in the first half of 06 the central state netted over 250 billion $ in taxes and the economy is booming along with 11% growth. Money will increasingly available and the generals, engineers and defense business people will put up a fight for the bugs. Consequently we will see things speeding up fast, that´s for sure!

China has shot down stealth planes such as the u-2 with much more inferior technologies than they possess today so stealth bombers are unlikely to be able to make it to china for a surprise attack

USAalltheway said:

Hello all:

I am sorry my previous threads keep getting closed down and I promise to be more circumspect with this thread. Let's hope it lasts...

Anyway, I was curious about your opinions about how vulnerable you think the PLA is to an American/Japanese (most likely American) pre-emptive strike on its nuclear and aero-naval forces. How much damage would be done? Would the PLA be totally decapitated and unable to recover?

You know my opinion... Assume US has gathered the location of most of the PRC's mobile nuclear launchers and warheads through satellite, UAVs, other high tech means, and good old human information. B-2s are on standby to infiltrate air defenses and take them out. Hopefully so few Chinese nukes (less than 10 or so) would be left that the Chinese would be unwilling to fire the rest off in retaliation, in fear of losing their remaining leverage. Most of the Chinese submarine fleet is ready to be simultaneously torpedoed, as it has been shadowed by US Los Angeles class attack subs. CBGs and fighter/strategic bomber squadrons are prepared to gain air superiority and conduct massive air strikes on PLA air bases, communication centers, and command centers. Guided missile destroyers, cruisers, and the carriers' air wings are also prepared to simultaneously bring their massive power to bear against the unprepared and scattered Chinese fleet. All of this will be happening simultaneously. Any surviving stragglers would be promptly eliminated in a second volley. Once Chinese nuclear and aero-naval forces have been decimated (and SAM systems suppressed), USN and USAF is prepared to cause carnage on China's ground forces, soft targets, and infrastructure. I think China's military is vulnerable to pre-emptive strike now and in the near future.

The question is, do you guys think so?

Click to expand...

Your theory of simutanous attacks would only work if the PLA is just standing there doing nothing and waiting to be attacked. Right now PLA has very advanced radars that has a long range and can react quite quickly to defend itself. Also, it would be quite easy to detect a large number of CBGs coming at China. Fly or sailing to China is a long way even from Japan or South Korea and land, naval, and air defences are likely to destroy them down before they reach their destination. The U.S. cannot deploy enough number of forces to counter the amount of defences China has. China is big anyways, unless nuclear weapons are deployed, any forces that actually makes it into China would do little damage since like the U.S., China has defences that protect its long range missile forces and other important military structures. And it is also possible that instead of the U.S. simutaniously destroying the chinese forces, this scenario could be turned into the other way around.

I would also like to point out that USalltheway did not say how the ground forces of china would be defeated. The Chinese ground forces have always won against all odds (the Second Sino-Japanese War, for example). It would be very difficult for an american landing team to destroy the Chinese ground forces. Bombs and missiles are not the answer to winning a war since they are still not as effective as sending in actual people in and they cannot occupy a country and declare victory. Destroying the chinese ground forces would be unlikely. Even if you do, the Chinese people would most likely retaliate in a few years (a democratic government has never worked in China, just look at Taiwan). Anyways, since it is unlikely the that landmass of china would be taken over, the invasion is basically a failure and a waste of money.

There is also the question of supplies. There are only a limited number of supplies that the invading forces can bring. Such a large force would need a large amount of supplies that are not easily met and this would force the U.S. to retreat after a few months or maybe even days. It would also be expected that the U.S. would suffer a large casualty and damage in the operation and be forced to retreat. The operation you simulated would be also too costly for the U.S. economy so the U.S. government will be unwilling to plan an attack on China.

I see no circumstance where the US forces would invade the PRC by land. No way no how. I pray there is never a war between the US and PRC. Because war really sucks.

Red_CCF sez;

China has shot down stealth planes such as the u-2 with much more inferior technologies than they possess today so stealth bombers are unlikely to be able to make it to china for a surprise attack

Click to expand...

Stealth bombers flew all the way from the US to attack Iraq without detection on more than one occasion. How do you know the PLA could shoot one down? I know the Soivets did shoot down a U-2 on May 1, 1960. When did the PLA do the same????

There was a nice article about the Black Cat squadron's activities and the SAM battery commander's counters on CDF. Can't find it right now. I don't have a date, but here's a nice website:

bd popeye said:

I see no circumstance where the US forces would invade the PRC by land. No way no how. I pray there is never a war between the US and PRC. Because war really sucks.

Red_CCF sez;


Stealth bombers flew all the way from the US to attack Iraq without detection on more than one occasion. How do you know the PLA could shoot one down? I know the Soivets did shoot down a U-2 on May 1, 1960. When did the PLA do the same????

Click to expand...

Iraq and china are two different story. Iraq use outdated soviet radars that would in no way see american stealth bombers. China has much more advanced radars and improving with russian help. However, while the U.S. might get away with a few stealth bombings, china would still be able to shoot some stealth bombers down if the U.S. use them on china for an extended period of time.

as for the u-2, you probably have already checked out redmercury's site that verifies my story.

A pre-emptive strike would have little effectivness in my opinion. B-2s may be able to take out specific sites, but there are several areas of uncertainty:

1. Ability of Chinese radars to detect LO aircraft.
2. Distribution of Tor-M1s
3. Sophistication of Chinese sonar in respect to U.S. nuclear subs.
4. Our knowledge on the distribution of Chinese forces.
5. Our ability to covertly launch a massive attack capable of incapacitating China.

A pre-emptive war with China would be unlikely and most likely unwinnable on our part. China has several points of influence that would make any attack on our part rather hurtful.

Any talk of a ground offensive is ridiculous. We have no viable means of attacking them. Any naval assault would be easily detected beforehand and that would be the only way for us to invade.

In consideration to the nuclear side of the argument, I'd have to say I think the matter is far less straightforward. For instance, in the Castle Bravo tests 2 people died from exposure to nuclear fallout. That was 15 megaton nuclear weapon. The reason many people have gotten sickness and died in nuclear fallout cases is because they did not show caution. They would not be careful about what they ate an drank.

In the event of a nuclear war, the exact casualty rate would be severely mitigated by a number of contributing factors:

1. Advancements in treatment of radiological diseases.
2. Better sensors allow detection of missile launches well before they are within range
3. The focus towards large urban cities will result in drastically lower fallout and the presence of the intervening structures will absorb radiation and energy released by the explosion.
4. Nuclear weapons are much cleaner.

All of this severely diminishes the "apocalyptic nature" of nuclear war. None of this destroying the world 10 times over or nuclear winter resulting in extinction of mankind BS.

Not to diminish the negative effects. Any nuclear exchange between China and the U.S. would have deadly consequences for both countries, however, neither is subject to becoming a second-tier power.



In the end, I think any talk of us going to war with China is little more than entertaining speculation. It's not politically, economically, or militarily viable for either country.

Iraq and china are two different story. Iraq use outdated soviet radars that would in no way see american stealth bombers. China has much more advanced radars and improving with russian help. However, while the U.S. might get away with a few stealth bombings, china would still be able to shoot some stealth bombers down if the U.S. use them on china for an extended period of time.

as for the u-2, you probably have already checked out redmercury's site that verifies my story.

Click to expand...

I have not read redmercury's sight. Sorry. And what sort of proof do you have that the PLA has anti-stealth radar?

By 2002 the Iraqi's had replaced their airdefenses with modern equipment from various sources.



By 2002 Iraq's military had modifyied its once standard Soviet-era air-defense systems with newer equipment from a variety of sources. The result was that Iraq's air-defense systems were becoming amalgams of Western, old East European, and Far Eastern technologies that behaved in non-standard ways. That made them less predictable for the US and British planes that were their targets and they became increasingly difficult to counter. Assistance from the Chinese had been forthcoming in terms of laying fiber-optic cables between the various air-defense nodes, particularly in southern Iraq. The purpose behind this is to reduce the electronic emissions given out by the air-defense facilities which, normally, the Americans either would jam or spoof [electronically deceive], or indeed collect intelligence data from.

and;

The Iraqi air defense system was formidable, combining the best features of several systems. The multi-layered, redundant, computer- controlled air defense network around Baghdad was more dense than that surrounding most Eastern European cities during the Cold War, and several orders of magnitude greater than that which had defended Hanoi during the later stages of the Vietnam War. If permitted to function as designed, the air defense array was capable of effective protection of key targets in Iraq.

*****************

Problem was that the Iraqi's were not properly traind on the use of this equipment.

bd popeye said:

I have not read redmercury's sight. Sorry. And what sort of proof do you have that the PLA has anti-stealth radar?

By 2002 the Iraqi's had replaced their airdefenses with modern equipment from various sources.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

By 2002 Iraq's military had modifyied its once standard Soviet-era air-defense systems with newer equipment from a variety of sources. The result was that Iraq's air-defense systems were becoming amalgams of Western, old East European, and Far Eastern technologies that behaved in non-standard ways. That made them less predictable for the US and British planes that were their targets and they became increasingly difficult to counter. Assistance from the Chinese had been forthcoming in terms of laying fiber-optic cables between the various air-defense nodes, particularly in southern Iraq. The purpose behind this is to reduce the electronic emissions given out by the air-defense facilities which, normally, the Americans either would jam or spoof [electronically deceive], or indeed collect intelligence data from.

and;

The Iraqi air defense system was formidable, combining the best features of several systems. The multi-layered, redundant, computer- controlled air defense network around Baghdad was more dense than that surrounding most Eastern European cities during the Cold War, and several orders of magnitude greater than that which had defended Hanoi during the later stages of the Vietnam War. If permitted to function as designed, the air defense array was capable of effective protection of key targets in Iraq.

*****************

Problem was that the Iraqi's were not properly traind on the use of this equipment.

Click to expand...

thanks for the information. I didn't realize that Iraq had already received such sophisticated air defense system. I do however, wonder how Iraq's air defense system would compare to the ones China possess. I also wonder if used properly by trained personnel, would the defense system possessed by Iraq be sufficient enough to stop stealth bombers. I would hope to receive some responses to my questions, thanks.

this link indicates that the chinese have shot down u-2s belonging to american trained ROC pilots during the 1960s-70s.