Jura The idiot
General
while I slept, Internet Battle Of Taiwan has begun
Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter Gollevainen
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Jura The idiot
General
the air operations are of high intensity now
Preemptive strikes are an option that would come under the overall banner of offensive counter air.
The number of aircraft that the ROCAF can sortie before the PLA strikes their air bases will depend on how quickly and how prepared each side may be when hostilities are joined, and the exact political circumstances of how the political circumstances evolve to a declaration of war can be really quite varied and not too relevant to the nature of OCA itself.
Additionally, any ROCAF fighters that do manage to sortie initially will likely have their air bases either newly attacked or subsequently re-attacked to maintain them in a mission-kill status.
So for the factor of "sortie rate," some of the important questions are how many aircraft can get in the air initially, and how many aircraft can repeatedly land and get back into the air in an effective and mission capable manner.
The tactics that one may use for the weapon will obviously depend on the calibre of opfor you are facing.
For example in a Taiwan contingency the use of something like PL-X against ROCAF airborne assets would be different to say if they were fighting US aerial forces.
The kill chain itself as described and portrayed by the original paper emphasized the use of AEW&C to provide an initial firing solution and mid course guidance for the missile by datalink. Considering the point of an AEW&C is to actively emit, using an AEW&C to provide the initial guidance for a long range AAM is not much more different to having an AEW&C actively emitting in a battlespace in generall.
By the terminal phase the missile will have its own terminal seeker (RF and ImIR combination supposedly).
Of course the paper was written quite a few years ago -- I wouldn't be surprised if in the future the integration of being able to hand off datalink to more "forward placed" tactical fighters or stealth fighters would be on the cards -- i.e.: not too different to how the US has looked at using F-22s and F-35s to guide in AMRAAMs launched by non-stealthy fighters or to guide in SAMs launched from ships like SM-6.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
The PRC is always going to be the one to strike first if the ROC declares independence; I don't think anyone every questioned that. How else would it work? ROC attacks PRC first?? LOL
If it comes to blows, forget about world image; national integrity above all. And the whole world knows it's not a large nation striking a smaller weaker nation; it's a country doing what it always promised, which is to use force against all attempts to break its nation apart. And all but a very small handful of insignificant countries in the world recognize that Taiwan island is a part of China, or they would not have the privilege of relations with the PRC.
If there is a fight, it starts with Beijing cratering all of Taipei's runways and airbases. Then we discuss where the F-16Vs are at.
OK, your assumption is that one top-of-the-line-ish export 4.5 gen fighter has better everything than another top-of-the-line 4.5 gen fighter even though we don't know any (or most) specifications of either. And my assumption is that a missile that is in use and flying under the pylons of in-service fighters, works, and works better than any of its predecessors, which all "work." This is given that the US intelligence community, after gleaming who knows what information, has recommended that the AIM-120 design be side-stepped for a completely new missile in hopes that that will compete with the PL-15. So I'm fairly certain that it's not due to subjectivity that I say my assumption is far safer than yours.
Last edited:
Jura The idiot
General
oh there would be events even before Continental China preempted Taiwan: Continental China would've sent agents and small groups of SF to join with Taiwanese fifth columnist, and hit grids; communications; gates (or deeper) of military bases; and so on
...fuel load&consumption at specific modes, operational(cruise)&dash speed and altitude, acceleration, supersonic maneuverability, ECR.
F-16v is anything but a superior BVR platform. Or, for the matter, the best choice for Taiwan conditions. As if they have this choice.
On the other hand, it's nonetheless decent, and it's heritage is very advantageous to some of the most critical roles in any contest against PRC.
Why it shouldn't be comparable to a decade old tech?
Last edited:
Skywatcher
Captain
Morocco is buying about 160 M1A2 Abrams for $1.2 billion in December 2018.
Frankly Taipei should have turned its M60s into HIFVs or upgraded them with unmanned turrets and hull ERA, instead of going for propaganda props.
My point is that RCS values for 4th/4.5 generation fighters don’t offer as big of an advantage as marketed.
Brumby
Major
I agree. The difference between 5th and 4th can be between 20 to 30 dB whereas within the 4/4.5 it may be between 3 to 10 dB. However the difference is not insignificant even on those differences with what it can bring to detection range advantage and jamming effectiveness.