Page 5 of 27 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 402

Thread: Power Projection

  1. #61
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    The PLANAF, ie the guys who have flown over open water, numbers at around 800 aircrafts of various types. ~20 HARRIERs ain't going to scare them off.

  2. #62
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 08
    Posts
    777
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    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.

    But can't PLAN or PLAAF destroy the 'screen' (i.e. ships or planes)?

    China is surely able to launch saturated attack.

  3. #63
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    If they're just taking on the screen, maybe but they're not. The screen is only meant to detect the enemy. The full weight of the battle group is then brought to bear.

    Imagine you finding a baby brown bear. Not much and you can handle it blind folded. But once that baby bear screams for its mother, you're in a world of hurt.

  4. #64
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 08
    Posts
    777
    By screen, do you mean E-2 or something else?

    Isn't it possible to destroy the 'screen' and outer defence layer by layer? If the fighers on the carriers join the fight, there would be an Air-to-Air fight.

    If China managed to take down those E-2, is it true that the information asymmetry would be greatly alleviated?

  5. #65
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    I'm talking the outer edges of the battle group, ie destroyers, submarines, and aircrafts. The 1st eyes and ears of the battle group. E-2s are only part of this picture. The battle group can and will function without them.

  6. #66
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 08
    Posts
    777
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    I'm talking the outer edges of the battle group, ie destroyers, submarines, and aircrafts. The 1st eyes and ears of the battle group. E-2s are only part of this picture. The battle group can and will function without them.
    So do you think the PLA is able to sink those ships and take down those planes? If yes, then the PLA will be finally able to sink the carrier.

  7. #67
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    The battle group does not work that way. They won't allow you time to sink the screen and then come back a 2nd time for the carrier. The screen will fight tooth and nail while the rest of the battle group would be coming in screaming hot. Even if you do manage to sink a ship or two, your planes would be chased back to where they come from and bombed while they're still on the ground and then, the base would be bombed too.

  8. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    10 Aug 08
    Posts
    100
    Bit confused here. Does the scenario being discussed entail leaving out Okinawa AFB and ROCAF when talking about China trying to interdict the US CVBG or is that already a taken?

    Few questions I'm unsure about, Will the US declare their intentions for their CVBG during their surge to the region or will they show up first and then talk later or better worded does the US have to state a sense of war enroute?

    What are the rules for the US when operating out of Okinawa AFB? Is it allowed involvement in Taiwan conflict? What about bombing PLA bases? Can Japan deny any operations usage or is there an Act. or something relating to this?

  9. #69
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Quote Originally Posted by yeung3939 View Post
    So do you think the PLA is able to sink those ships and take down those planes? If yes, then the PLA will be finally able to sink the carrier.
    Let's say you manage to find a ship and you "think" it's the screen for the battlegroup. What are your choices?

    1. hold your main force in reserve and hope to lure the battle group out to fight
    2. commit everything you can and destroy the screen as fast as possible

    Problem with:
    1. it will be a prolonged fight and you may lose more than you want to
    2. you just spent your force and killed a screening ship which may not be a screen for the battle group

    After you decide what you want to do, then you deal with the scenario the Colonel outlined.

    Still, you have to find the battle group first. A carrier is 300 meter long. How big is...say...South China Sea?
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  10. #70
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 08
    Posts
    777
    But.....

    How exactly will the carrier group bomb the inland bases of China? As far as I know, the main force(air force) is deployed in bases in Anhui and other non-coastal provinces. Is it that easy for those F/A-18E/F or curise missiles to get through the HQ-9 and S-300 and fighters and bomb those bases?

    Also, is it that difficult to sink a destroyer which serves as the outer defence of the carrier group? China has anti-ship missiles with 150+km range (sea skimming), and capable platforms such as JH-7 and missile boats. How exactly will the carrier group defend its 'screen'?

    In addition, China has capable submarines that can launch anti-ship missile far away from the target. Is it that easy to track and destroy those submarines? It seems not too difficult for those submarines to sink the 'screen' of the carrier group.

    Finally, is it that easy for the US to track Chinese ships?

    Thank you!!!!

  11. #71
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,878
    also would like to mention here,

    the PLAAF isn't big enough for its own mission goals here. they need to, at a minimum, take out enough of taiwan's air defenses to operate and then ensure air neutrality against the ROCAF. which is sort of difficult, because the way the taiwan strait is set up, the PLAAF will not be able to outnumber their opponents. the PLAAF will need to wear the ROCAF down through attrition, something that takes a lot of time.

    at the same time, they need to deter the americans from coming in, and if/when the americans come in they need to delay the americans long enough for their marines and ground troops to force taipei to surrender.

    once the americans come in, it's over for the PLAAF. in fact, RAND in 2005 stated that america could easily ensure air superiority with 2 CVBGs. guess what, the US has practiced surging 5-6 CVBGs, something which was done during the gulf war.

    american military policy vis-a-vis taiwan is thus focused around one point only- not even to outright defeat the PLA but merely to delay the PLA for 30 days without US intervention. if the PLA can't beat taiwan in 30 days, they're done, US intervention or not.
    Last edited by astralis; 16 Sep 08, at 15:01.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  12. #72
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Quote Originally Posted by yeung3939 View Post
    But.....

    How exactly will the carrier group bomb the inland bases of China? As far as I know, the main force(air force) is deployed in bases in Anhui and other non-coastal provinces. Is it that easy for those F/A-18E/F or curise missiles to get through the HQ-9 and S-300 and fighters and bomb those bases?
    The farther inland they are, the less range they have over water. Those jets will exhaust their fuel just getting to the coast with full load.

    Quote Originally Posted by yeung3939 View Post
    Also, is it that difficult to sink a destroyer which serves as the outer defence of the carrier group? China has anti-ship missiles with 150+km range (sea skimming), and capable platforms such as JH-7 and missile boats. How exactly will the carrier group defend its 'screen'?
    Combat Air Patrol (CAP) flown by carrier fighters. They are actually outside the screening ships. They screen the screens. They are supported by E-2Cs, under the protection of the screening ships and other fighters.

    Quote Originally Posted by yeung3939 View Post
    In addition, China has capable submarines that can launch anti-ship missile far away from the target. Is it that easy to track and destroy those submarines? It seems not too difficult for those submarines to sink the 'screen' of the carrier group.
    These subs will still need to find the carriers before they can launch their missiles. No firing solution, no launch. These subs are probably tracked the minute they leave port. At least that's what we did to Soviets back in the days.

    Quote Originally Posted by yeung3939 View Post
    Finally, is it that easy for the US to track Chinese ships?

    Thank you!!!!
    They are probably tracked the minute they leave port.

    The problem with China is the same with Soviet Union, not enough coast line. We can concentrate all our assets on just a few strategic ports and choke points and get a pretty good idea on where the ships/subs are. Where as for the US, we stroll out our front yard and it's the open ocean. Lots of places to go and hide.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  13. #73
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 08
    Posts
    777
    Are Chinese nuclear subs and D subs fitted with AIP that easy to be tracked? If it is that easy to track advanced subs such as 093, Kilo and Yuan Class, why is it that difficult to track carriers?

    In my humble opinion,Su-30MKK and JH-7A do have enough internal/additional fuel to sink the screens and bomb targets on Taiwan. They are actually designed to do exactly this. Also, if the carrier stays too far away from the coast, the strike efficiency will decrease sharply.

  14. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    09 Sep 08
    Location
    Uk/Finland
    Posts
    13
    U.s do not want to have war with China and China do not want have war with U.s
    Too constly for both sides.

    -Equalizer T-

  15. #75
    Registered User
    Join Date
    10 Aug 08
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by yeung3939 View Post
    Are Chinese nuclear subs and D subs fitted with AIP that easy to be tracked? If it is that easy to track advanced subs such as 093, Kilo and Yuan Class, why is it that difficult to track carriers?
    Lets makes this clear. The CVBG doesn't have to look for those subs because those subs will come to them or at least be in the CVBG's path enroute. OOE has made this clear from his post.
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
    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.


    Quote Originally Posted by yeung3939 View Post
    In my humble opinion,Su-30MKK and JH-7A do have enough internal/additional fuel to sink the screens and bomb targets on Taiwan. They are actually designed to do exactly this. Also, if the carrier stays too far away from the coast, the strike efficiency will decrease sharply.
    PLAAF does not claim Air superiority! At best it is air denial over its invasion force. Where do you get that the PLAAF can take out outer ship screen + carrier air patrol + ROCAF + ROCA AA batteries?? Hell you might as well add take out the carrier while you at it.
    The CVBG's primary task is to sink the ships and deny the PLAAF, by sinking the transport ships the carrier might as well go home. Mission accomplished. How deep do you have to go to strike to hit the ships? I mean its got to be on water right ? You know something we don't...thinking the PLAN are planning a Ottoman Constantinople? )

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Soft Power a more effective tool?
    By Helium in forum International Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 31 May 08,, 06:54
  2. In Wartime, Who Has the Power?
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06 Mar 07,, 02:02
  3. Bringing Power To The People
    By Shek in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02 Mar 06,, 23:27

Tags for this Thread

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •