PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

enroger · 2025-09-15T04:29:24-0400

tamsen_ikard said:
I don't think subsonic stealth plane is that big of a threat to current day China. First of all, stealth is only going to get more and more useless as sensor technology and AI gets better and better.

Radars are progressively getting more and more powerful these days. So they detect smaller object from longer distance. Moreover, AI is getting more smarter, which means even small radar signatures can be identified as a stealth bomber with pattern recognition.

Then there is detection using IR and visible light itself. No amount of stealth technology is going to work against that, unless you have technology to make planes transparent. Due to AI and extreme high powered camera type detection systems, you will have ability to detect objects 100s of KMS away.

Moreover, China will have enough radar, planes and ships to essentially forward deploy and act as forward observers during wartime. So, any B-21 that comes close will be detect way before they come anywhere close to the mainland.

I am not even counting satellite detection since they could be destroyed in a full scale superpower war. But they are an option too.

I think all of these factors will make B-21 detection so much easier that there will be marginal difference between a B-21 detection range and a B-52.

If China can keep B-21 at a distance then it can only launch very large hypersonic missiles to cover the long distance. That will limit how many missiles it can carry in its internal bay. A B-21 that can only carry 1-2 standoff hypersonic missiles is not a big of a threat to China. If they try to carry smaller subsonic missiles, well those missiles are easily intercepted.

The problem is not just stealth, but stealth + stand off strike combo that makes it difficult to deal with. China can detect B-21 but at what range? If the detection range is less than cruise missile range than it is meaningless because the plane would be on return flight before you detect it.

The current best bet to neutralize B-21 threat is just to decimate Guam or any other basing within China's strike range. Just B-2 alone will not be able to generate enough sortie to have meaningful impact.

It would be much better if China can intercept B-21, which is why the talk of ultra-long range SAM is generating some interest, it comes down to whether it is possible to build the kind of detection capability that can support this.

Edit: Another way to deal with B-21 is to have an ISR picket way out beyond 1IC, say a string of KJ's and unmanned awacs patrolling 500km away from the coast. Not an easy thing to set up to say the least.

bsdnf · 2025-09-15T05:03:47-0400

The stealth capabilities of JASSM/LRASM are largely limited to low-altitude and head-on engagement.

However, 1. When JASSM/LRASM uses a long-range trajectory, it is relatively easy to detect at high altitude. If it chooses a low range and LO trajectory, the carrier itself would have to risk approaching the PLA's strike range.

2. As the early warning radar network becomes increasingly sophisticated, the possibility of the stealth barrier being burned through from the side is increasing. And when they lose their stealth capabilities, they are easily intercepted.

This is why the United States is developing and procuring extended-range models. As the PLA's detection and strike capabilities are rapidly improving, the range of "Standoff" is rapidly expanding.

tphuang · 2025-09-15T10:37:54-0400

Jason_ said:
I agree that US SSNs are the number two threat after the B-21. Why number two? Because its threat toward Chinese mainland/ground targets are low whereas the B-21 can threaten everything. F-47 when fielded would have immense difficulty taking off from an intact airfield and B-52 are worse in every way to the B-21.

It's kind of pointless to have an argument on whether SSN or B-21 is a bigger threat. The point is that in a Westpac conflict, you are dealing with a lot of threats. It's pointless to just focus on 1.

The evolution of 3rd and 4th generation semiconductor is such that stealth detection is improving at a much faster rate than stealth improvement.

tphuang · 2025-09-15T10:47:40-0400

lych470 said:
Just read the article.

In a way I'm pretty glad that all those USAF Colonel quacks (and have you noticed, all the quacks who write opinion pieces are all Colonels) are all retired. Because what the article, and by extension, its writer, is advocating for is unlimited conventional strikes on Chinese mainland.

To quote: "It is not enough for the U.S. to simply prevent the PLA from seizing ground on the shores of Taiwan. That by itself will not guarantee victory. A war-winning strategy must also deny sanctuaries to the PLA—including sanctuaries on China’s mainland—and enable U.S. forces to degrade China’s ability to launch long-range air and missile salvos that could cripple U.S. joint force operations in the Pacific. ...

History has repeatedly demonstrated the imperative to deny operational sanctuaries that enable adversaries to husband resources, produce war materiel, train replacement warfighters, secure military leadership, and protect their lines of communication. Because freedom from attack is crucial to enable the freedom to attack, denying sanctuaries is an essential element of any successful warfighting strategy."

Anyone with half a brain-cell would know that such proposed actions will result in nuclear war.

I don't know why you would think that way. In a Westpac conflict, China would also be expected to attack US bases well beyond second Island Chain. There is of course going to be escalation ladders, but I think there are going to be many legitimate military targets inside China that US military will go after.

There is just too many people who thinks B-21 or even F-35 is invisible despite vast amount of evidence to the contrary.

enroger said:
The problem is not just stealth, but stealth + stand off strike combo that makes it difficult to deal with. China can detect B-21 but at what range? If the detection range is less than cruise missile range than it is meaningless because the plane would be on return flight before you detect it.

The current best bet to neutralize B-21 threat is just to decimate Guam or any other basing within China's strike range. Just B-2 alone will not be able to generate enough sortie to have meaningful impact.

It would be much better if China can intercept B-21, which is why the talk of ultra-long range SAM is generating some interest, it comes down to whether it is possible to build the kind of detection capability that can support this.

Edit: Another way to deal with B-21 is to have an ISR picket way out beyond 1IC, say a string of KJ's and unmanned awacs patrolling 500km away from the coast. Not an easy thing to set up to say the least.

I think it's just unrealistic to expect going through a war without taking hits. It's even more unrealistic to think that you can deny US military from launching missiles against you whether it's from B-21 or Virginia class or B-52 or naval ships or Rhinos.

What we are seeing from PLA is increasingly able to attack US bases in Northern Australia, Diego Garcia, Alaska and Hawaii. So, I don't really see B-21 as uniquely able to somehow evade Chinese attacks on air bases that it may operate from.

The biggest difference change recently is probably the ability of Type 093B getting out beyond 2IC and able to launch hypersonic missiles from its VLS. That directly threatens US military bases way beyond 2IC.

PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

enroger

Senior Member

bsdnf

Junior Member

tphuang

General

tphuang

General