Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Power Projection

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
    Zraver,

    Reading your posts here I am put in mind of the situation Milosevic found himself in after the Kosovo war.

    Initially he got a huge boost from the 'rally round the flag' effect. Oposition leaders joined in protest against the US & he played the Serb martyr to a T. Flash forward a couple of years & things had changed dramatically. During elections that everyone knew were rigged & everyone expected him to win, the eventual winner, Kostunica, was going around saying that Serbia was bombed because of Milosevic. It was his fault.

    I realize that there were plenty of reasons why Milosevic fell. I also realize that there are a lot of factors that do not translate directly from one example to the other. What struck me, however, is that 'rally 'round the flag' and a trumped up national sense of victimhood can be a double-edged sword. I can imagine the CCP trying to play that game, but it seems like a HUGE risk.
    That would also work the same way for any pan green politician stupid enough to unilaterally declare independence.

    Comment


    • RAND Study Suggests U.S. Loses War With China

      new RAND study suggests U.S. air power in the Pacific would be inadequate to thwart a Chinese attack on Taiwan in 2020. The study, entitled "Air Combat Past, Present and Future," by John Stillion and Scott Perdue, says China's anti-access arms and strategy could deny the U.S. the "ability to operate efficiently from nearby bases or seas."

      According to the study, U.S. aircraft carriers and air bases would be threatened by Chinese development of anti-ship ballistic missiles, the fielding of diesel and nuclear submarines equipped with torpedoes and SS-N-22 and SS-N-27 anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), fighters and bombers carrying ASCMs and HARMs, and new ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
      Related Topics

      The report states that 34 missiles with submunition warheads could cover all parking ramps at Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa.

      An "attack like this could damage, destroy or strand 75 percent of aircraft based at Kadena," it says.

      In contrast, many Chinese air bases are harder than Kadena, with some "super-hard underground hangers."

      To make matters worse, Kadena is the only U.S. air base within 500 nautical miles of the Taiwan Strait, whereas China has 27.

      U.S. air bases in South Korea are more than 750 miles distant, and those in Japan are more than 885 miles away. Anderson Air Force Base, Guam, is 1,500 miles away. The result is that sortie rates will be low, with a "huge tanker demand."

      The authors suggest China's CETC Y-27 radar, which is similar to Russia's Nebo SVU VHF Digital AESA, could counter U.S. stealth fighter technology. China is likely to outfit its fighters with improved radars and by "2020 even very stealthy targets likely [would be] detectable by Flanker radars at 25+ nm." China is also likely to procure the new Su-35BM fighter by 2020, which will challenge the F-35 and possibly the F-22.

      The authors also question the reliability of U.S. beyond-visual-range weapons, such as the AIM-120 AMRAAM. U.S. fighters have recorded only 10 AIM-120 kills, none against targets equipped with the kinds of countermeasures carried by Chinese Su-27s and Su-30s. Of the 10, six were beyond-visual-range kills, and it required 13 missiles to get them.

      If a conflict breaks out between China and the U.S. over Taiwan, the authors say it is difficult to "predict who will have had the last move in the measure-countermeasure game."

      Overall, the authors say, "China could enjoy a 3:1 edge in fighters if we can fly from Kadena - about 10:1 if forced to operate from Andersen. Overcoming these odds requires qualitative superiority of 9:1 or 100:1" - a differential that is "extremely difficult to achieve" against a like power.

      If beyond-visual-range missiles work, stealth technology is not countered and air bases are not destroyed, U.S. forces have a chance, but "history suggests there is a limit of about 3:1 where quality can no longer compensate for superior enemy numbers."

      A 24-aircraft Su-27/30 regiment can carry around 300 air-to-air missiles (AAMs), whereas 24 F-22s can carry only 192 AAMs and 24 F-35s only 96 AAMs.

      Though current numbers assume the F-22 could shoot down 48 Chinese Flankers when "outnumbered 12:1 without loss," these numbers do not take into account a less-than-perfect U.S. beyond-visual-range performance, partial or complete destruction of U.S. air bases and aircraft carriers, possible deployment of a new Chinese stealth fighter around 2020 or 2025, and the possible use of Chinese "robo-fighters" to deplete U.S. "fighters' missile loadout prior to mass attack."

      The authors write that Chinese counter stealth, anti-access, countermissile technologies are proliferating and the U.S. military needs "a plan that accounts for this."
      What about CVBGs?

      Comment


      • War game argues that USAF fleet could be outmatched by Chinese

        Rand's 90-slide briefing presented in August argues that the US Air Force's fifth-generation fighter fleet could be outmatched by hordes of lesser-skilled Chinese Sukhoi Su-27 pilots in a 2020 battle over the Taiwan Straits. In the Rand war game, China launches an air attack on skies above Taiwan. Using advantages of proximity and sheer numbers, the assault force consists of 72 Su-27 Flankers, 24 in each of three regiments. Operating from Andersen AFB, Guam, the USAF can muster only six Lockheed F-22s in the Taiwan Straits at any time.

        As the engagement starts, Chinese Flankers outnumber F-22s by 72 to six. The F-22s are also heavily outgunned in the battle. Three Su-27 regiments carry a total of 912 air-to-air missiles, compared with 48 by six F-22s.

        In the end, the simulation optimistically assumes no F-22s are shot down in dogfights, but enough Su-27s break through to wipe out the USAF's tankers. Since the F-22s lack the range to return to a friendly base, they are lost anyway.
        Comments!!!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sumku View Post
          Comments!!!
          Red Scare, its pitting a might exist Chinese force of 2020 vs a we have it today USAF tasking with no RoCAF, USN or JSDF help.

          Comment


          • Also notice the article questioned the reliability of AIM-120 but said not one world about Chinese AAMs, which have never been used in combat.
            "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by gunnut View Post
              Also notice the article questioned the reliability of AIM-120 but said not one world about Chinese AAMs, which have never been used in combat.
              Yup, it also assumed that by 2020 Kadena/Okinawa won't be protected by ABM (US and JSDF), that the US won't assume an inbound ballistic attack isn't nuclear etc.

              I seriously doubt the JSDF is going to take a ballistic attack on Okinawa laying down. The article also does not consider AAM trucks like the proposed conversion of the B-1. US Ohio class SSGN strikes on Chinese airfeilds, RoCAF Pac-3 and other SAM systems, USN Aegis assets, USAF/USN/USMC/JSDF J-35's. Covert tanker and electronics support from India and the Phillipnes, emergency field usage from Vietnam who won't want a dominant China. The list goes on.

              Comment


              • Remember what the Colonel said about predicting twelve years into the future.

                Comment


                • anyone else get the feeling that the rand report may be red herring thrown to get more funds for the F-22,DDG-100 and other such programs from congress.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by bengalraider View Post
                    anyone else get the feeling that the rand report may be red herring thrown to get more funds for the F-22,DDG-100 and other such programs from congress.
                    exactly

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sumku View Post
                      Comments!!!
                      Yeah, Why not operate from the above places and add Okinawa and Diego Garcia and certain others in the med. And as far as range goes adapt them for one time carrier landings and then the game has just taken a drastic turn for China. What then?;)
                      Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
                        What then?;)
                        China's toast then :))

                        Comment


                        • This looks just like that ridiculous exercise where those motorboats managed to teleport into the middle of the CVNGs. Streetfighter or something.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X