Power Projection

[Guest]

I am no expert, but I presume Japanese military will have a thing to two to say as well.

EDIT: Also, a question:

Are there any Japanese warships today that bear the name of the older Japanese warships fomr pre-world war.

[bengalraider]

I am no expert, but I presume Japanese military will have a thing to two to say as well.

japan probably has the most modern Asian navy, but it is saddled with the baggage of ww2 not to mention a pacifist constitution. the Japanese navy shall stay away from this conflict for as long as it can and shall only fire in legitimate self-defense
reason-the Japanese have seen china's rise to primacy in the Asian region they remember one important thing Americans shall always be "gaijin". the Americans have little to lose in any direct Chinese missile strike on Tokyo or Osaka( i am talking about conventional missiles), japan on the other hand well...

in his book " the clash of civilizations" prof Samuel Huntington makes the point that in any large scale conflict the Japanese, Filipinos and every other player shall remember one thing . the united states does not share a border with china while they themselves do,in any land conflict the Americans have no hope of countering the Chinese army before the Chinese take over large parts of these nations.any action they take against china shall be retaliated against if not now 25 years down the line ,by 2050 china is poised to become the world's primary economic power and if economic might is here military might cannot be far behind.

[Officer of Engineers]

I do agree to some points you brought up but i do not think it will be just that easy.
Underestimating the chinese might be pretty dum move. (not saying you are dum just pointing underestimating might be)

-Equalizer T-

Over-estimating them is even more stupid.

[Officer of Engineers]

I am no expert, but I presume Japanese military will have a thing to two to say as well.

A couple of years ago, the Americans finally got the Japanese to say that they will act in case of a Taiwan conflict. Taipei's response was thanks but no thanks.

As I stated before, you will note that the US's closest allies in NE Asia (Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea) don't have an alliance with each other.

[Sumku]

I will repeat. In order to hit a carrier, you have to find the carrier.,

Sir, are you seriously suggesting that PLAN and PLAAF would not be able to find a single Carrier in the middle of somewhere.
Afterall, a country that does a Lunar Capsule,ASAT,builds SSBN's has to have that capability after all.

Also PRC is well aware that US would 100% use its Carriers to defend Taiwan and they would have made plans to counter them and the most basic plan would be to first find it.

The EP-3 Hainan Island accident was more than half a decade ago and sure Chinese would have built up/upgraded capabilities by now.

And if such a capability does not exist with PLAN then thats rather dumb on their part.

[Dreadnought]

I am no expert, but I presume Japanese military will have a thing to two to say as well.

EDIT: Also, a question:

Are there any Japanese warships today that bear the name of the older Japanese warships fomr pre-world war.

The Atago would be one of them.;) Pretty sure there may be a few more.

[Officer of Engineers]

Sir, are you seriously suggesting that PLAN and PLAAF would not be able to find a single Carrier in the middle of somewhere.
Afterall, a country that does a Lunar Capsule,ASAT,builds SSBN's has to have that capability after all.

The PLAN might able to find the carrier's screens but I strongly doubt the PLAN can penetrate that screen in open ocean, let alone find the carrier behind that screen.

For the PLAAF to find the carrier, they must 1st train over open water away from the sight of land. I just did a search on the WAB member, WABPilot, he's an ex F-14 pilot and a Vietnam Vet. According to him, there's a big difference between flying over land and flying over water and not just because of the water. Depth perception is severly affected as well.

As for satellites, there is at present a best case scenario of a 30 minute difference. It's not real time ... and if your bird can stay on the same spot for long. This is open ocean we're talking about. You're not keeping a stationary bird over a spot that only have somethint to see 1 hour of the year.

Also PRC is well aware that US would 100% use its Carriers to defend Taiwan and they would have made plans to counter them and the most basic plan would be to first find it.

They're counting on it and their plan seems to be to delay the CVBG with the best case of sinking it but that's not their goal. Their goal is to keep the CVBG as far away for as long as possible. With that, they're using "wolf pack" sub tactics, forcing the CVBG to hunt these packs down before the carrier can embarked air combat operations.

The EP-3 Hainan Island accident was more than half a decade ago and sure Chinese would have built up/upgraded capabilities by now.

Any plane you buy today has to last you 30 years. No Chinese bird is 30 years old.

And if such a capability does not exist with PLAN then thats rather dumb on their part.

They're doing the best that they can and do recall that the navy is not 1st up on the money trough. The army thus far has gotten the lionshare of the funds. Thus, while they may not be able to find and sink a carrier, they're planning on forcing the carrier to spend time to hunt them down.

Hopefully, by the time, the carrier can commit to air combat operations, the gound battle over Taiwan would be decided in the PLA's favour - another long shot but that's another post.

[Dreadnought]

Sir, You are probably aware that anyplace a CVBG sails she is sure to have an unspecified number of SSN's with her at all times.;)

"Depth perception is severly affected as well."

I could not agree more to the point where its scary.

[Officer of Engineers]

I know I don't like that particular strategy of "hunt me down before you go kill my friends."

[gunnut]

The Atago would be one of them.;) Pretty sure there may be a few more.

Kongo and Kirishima were battleships (battlecruisers really) before WW2. Two of their Aegis destroyers are named Kongo and Kirishima.

Actually both those battlecruisers were WW1 vintage with huge upgrades in the 1930s to reclassify them as battleships.

[Guest]

The Japanese Navy had four British built Kongo-class

[gunnut]

The Japanese Navy had four British built Kongo-class

Actually Kongo (1915) was British designed and 3/4 built in Britian. Only the lead ship was built in a British yard. Japanese built the other 3 in Japan.

The Kongo class were also the first dreadnaughts to feature all centerline turrets.

There is no Hiei in Japanese navy right now. Haruna (the other Kongo) is also the name of a class of post-war destroyers.

[Guest]

I stand corrected.
Of all of them I think only the Kirishima had a glorious Japaneses-style noble death at the hands of the gunners of U.S.S. Washington.

[zraver]

Sir, are you seriously suggesting that PLAN and PLAAF would not be able to find a single Carrier in the middle of somewhere.
Afterall, a country that does a Lunar Capsule,ASAT,builds SSBN's has to have that capability after all.

Also PRC is well aware that US would 100% use its Carriers to defend Taiwan and they would have made plans to counter them and the most basic plan would be to first find it.

The EP-3 Hainan Island accident was more than half a decade ago and sure Chinese would have built up/upgraded capabilities by now.

And if such a capability does not exist with PLAN then thats rather dumb on their part.

The US parked several carriers off the Soviet Pacific Coast in the 1980's just outside the 200 mile limit and then launched mirror image alpha strikes (headed out to sea not towards the USSR). The Soviets responded and sent out thier bombers for a mock attack on the carrier group only to have the bombers intercepted by another carrier they did not know was there. And IIRC there was a third carrier in the area. The modern PLANAF and PLAAF doesn't have anything like the ocean recon capability, satellite capability or other assets the USSR did.

[Mercenary]

The modern PLANAF and PLAAF doesn't have anything like the ocean recon capability, satellite capability or other assets the USSR did.

is that a welcome news for the indian Carrier?.. I always wondered it was a sitting duck for chinese subs as the carrier group isn't as formidable as the US CBVGs