PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

tphuang · May 11, 2022

SEAD said:
Exactly. That’s what I mean by “try to simulate in CMO and the map speaks”

indeed the continuous line should be from Alaska to Vietnam.

View attachment 88662

Yes the range and payload of h20 brings game changing capabilities. If they can refuel over Russian air space, it would have even longer range.

Keep in mind that an Russia china alliance would also open up the possibility of china using h6 to launch hypersonic missiles against Alaskan air bases from Russian air space. Which would further reduce the air bases that USAF would be able to operate from.

SEAD · May 11, 2022

tphuang said:
Yes the range and payload of h20 brings game changing capabilities. If they can refuel over Russian air space, it would have even longer range.

Keep in mind that an Russia china alliance would also open up the possibility of china using h6 to launch hypersonic missiles against Alaskan air bases from Russian air space. Which would further reduce the air bases that USAF would be able to operate from.

Just a guess: they may try to explore “buddy tanking” for H-20 and it may extend its range for 4000-8000km.

14000km range means it can cover the whole US and I believe PLAAF would desire to do that for a position in nuke triad. H-6 can only threat a part of west coast even with ALBM and refueling.

Mohsin77 · May 11, 2022

tphuang said:
As for attacking carriers, tht belongs to the anti ship missiles thread.

Sinking Carriers is a dynamic systems problem, because its position is always changing. Just locating the carrier and tracking it is half the puzzle.

If you can do that, then multiple solutions become available. e.g. Subs are also a threat vector for carriers, especially as they get closer to the coastline to launch shorter ranged fighters (#F-35) then diesel electric subs become a massive threat.

AndrewS · May 12, 2022

tphuang said:
For glide bombs, you have seen those ls6 kits back in the days. I am sure that something launched from really high at mach 0.6 to 0.75 can fly 150 km to the target. China really just needs to step up it's game and build that large arsenal of glide pgms. Don't be cheap.

Glide bombs are the cheap option. The SDB-1 is about $40K and the SDB-2 about $200K.

Otherwise the expensive option is more cruise missiles and hypersonic missiles

Mohsin77 · May 12, 2022

AndrewS said:
Otherwise the expensive option is more cruise missiles and hypersonic missiles

Is it actually an "expensive" option though?

China can probably produce a Tomahawk class CM for about $1mil/unit.

So that gives you 1000 units for a billion USD.

Multiply that by 10 and you have an unstoppable force for just $10 billion.

Think about the damage you can do with 10,000 Tomahawks.

AndrewS · May 12, 2022

Mohsin77 said:
Is it actually an "expensive" option though?

China can probably produce a Tomahawk class CM for about $1mil/unit.

So that gives you 1000 units for a billion USD.

Multiply that by 10 and you have an unstoppable force for just $10 billion.

Think about the damage you can do with 10,000 Tomahawks.

Say $1 Million for a Tomahawk.

But for the same money, you could buy 5 SDB-2 or 25 SDB-1

Mohsin77 · May 12, 2022

AndrewS said:
Say $1 Million for a Tomahawk.

But for the same money, you could buy 5 SDB-2 or 25 SDB-1

You can't launch SDBs sitting at home.

Those SDBs require launch platforms to fly inside or near enemy airspace.

Each launch platform costs money, and needs support assets, which also cost money.

With that said, SDBs are useful, but they're not a first-wave weapon.

caohailiang · May 12, 2022

Mohsin77 said:
Is it actually an "expensive" option though?

China can probably produce a Tomahawk class CM for about $1mil/unit.

So that gives you 1000 units for a billion USD.

Multiply that by 10 and you have an unstoppable force for just $10 billion.

Think about the damage you can do with 10,000 Tomahawks.

i dont think 10000 tomahawk is "unstoppable"

PLA on her first day of war, have the capability to launch some 5000 cruise missiles - that tempo could last for a few weeks, so they may have 100k cruise missiles in stock.
They have to degrade enemy defense to the point where they could use glider/JDAM before cruise missile inventory is depleted otherwise the war is lost

Mohsin77 · May 12, 2022

caohailiang said:
i dont think 10000 tomahawk is "unstoppable"

PLA on her first day of war, have the capability to launch some 5000 cruise missiles - that tempo could last for a few weeks, so they may have 100k cruise missiles in stock.
They have to degrade enemy defense to the point where they could use glider/JDAM before cruise missile inventory is depleted otherwise the war is lost

I think you're talking about the entire war inventory.

I'm talking about a specific target set, like an island chain or even battle groups at sea.

You could probably even deal with all the defenses of a country like Taiwan with 10,000 CMs.

Also, I wouldn't "sustain" 5K CMs/day strike rate. I'd make sure the 1st wave is decisive.

Then you can send in as many SDBs/JDAMs you want in the follow up strikes.

tphuang · May 12, 2022

AndrewS said:
Glide bombs are the cheap option. The SDB-1 is about $40K and the SDB-2 about $200K.

Otherwise the expensive option is more cruise missiles and hypersonic missiles

I don't think translated well. They should buy more cruise missiles and PGMs. I was not comparing glide bombs to cruise missiles. The puzzling part is that we have not seen PLAAF really seen many photos of fighter jets carrying or testing with smaller PGMs. And we have not seen glide bombs in service. Maybe they have procured them. We don't know. From what we can see, they have been very committed in their cruise and ballistic missiles purchases, but not as much with the cheaper PGMs.

PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

tphuang

Lieutenant General

SEAD

Junior Member

Mohsin77

Senior Member

AndrewS

Brigadier

Mohsin77

Senior Member

AndrewS

Brigadier

Mohsin77

Senior Member

caohailiang

Junior Member

Mohsin77

Senior Member

tphuang

Lieutenant General