Posted on 08/04/2009 9:09:18 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
RAND study: Now China wins Taiwan Straits air war
Nearly 10 years after a RAND study predicted the US side easily beats China in an air war over the Taiwan Straits, the think-tank has published a new monograph online today that reverses its former opinion.
Now, a People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) bristling with a newly acquired arsenal -- including Su-27 and J-10 fighters, AA-12 and PL-12 missiles, and short-range ballistic missiles -- defeats the US side. Moreover, the PLAAF defeats the US side with or without F-22s, with or without access to Kadena Air Base in Okinawa and with or without the participation of two US carrier battle groups, according to the monograph.
RAND's analysis "suggests that a credible case can be made that the air war for Taiwan could essentially be over before much of the Blue air force has even fired a shot. Threats to Blue air bases and a more evenly matched qualitiative balance combine to paint a very troubling picture."
Personally, I would be careful to trust any military analysis that states -- on two occasions -- the US Marine Corps flies F/A-18E/Fs (... er, no, not in this lifetme). But the overall facts in RAND's air war scenario appear very persuasive, at least to this observer.
In a war over Taiwan, China may think twice about striking sovereign Japanese territory on Okinawa, or sovereign US territory on Guam. But RAND's analysts are prudent to assume that the PLAAF's strategy would seek to maximize its chances of success in a battle over the future of Taiwan.
The scenario assumes a 27:1 kill ratio for the F-22, 4.5:1 kill ratio for the F-15 and a 2.6:1 kill ratio for carrier-based F/A-18E/Fs, which seems to reflect conventional wisdom. But that's not hardly enough. By striking Kadena and Taiwan air bases with missile attacks, the PLAAF can generate 3.7 times more sorties than the blue forces. On the first day, the PLAAF loses 241 jets compared to 147 jets for the Blue forces, including one F-22. But the PLAAF still dramatically outnumbers Blue forces and wins the war of attrition.
Interestingly, the new RAND monograph is not critical at all of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Last year, John Stillon, a senior RAND analyst was fired after he put the think-tank in an awkward position. Stillon's presntation on the results of the Pacific Vision wargame, which were leaked to the press and posted on this blog, noted the F-35 "can't turn, can't climb and can't run". In the new study, RAND says "the F-22 and the still-to-come F-35 can expect to offer meaningful aircraft-on-aircraft technological advantages over what the PLAAF will bring to the fight".
The world advances but we do not.
I beat the RAND group by 2 years.
One child policy gives birth to more boys and criminals
Posted by Kevin OMalley to nickcarraway
On News/Activism 01/12/2005 12:07:37 PM PST · 17 of 25
Here is my swag on what is going to happen in Taiwan, posted on an earlier thread, “China Rapidly Modernizes for War With U.S.”.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1285398/posts
1) The one-child policy has created a testosterone-rich generation the likes of which no one on earth has ever seen. China will have an entire army of what they call “little dictators” who have few prospects of finding women, and they will be very aggressively pushing their old-guard superiors for action on the Taiwan issue. The final straw will be that they’ll be promised wives when they invade Taiwan.
2) Their army is as much as 200 Million strong, which was the size predicted in Revelation in the Bible, called “The Kings of the East.” They can afford casualties in the range of 10 million, which is 5 times bigger than our army ever was. China has some unfinished business with Vietnam, having fought to a standoff in 1979. They might do a run through Vietnam first so that their troups are more battle-hardened and arrogant, knowing that the US didn’t exactly win there. The added bonus is they get one of the largest warm water ports in the world.
3) Taiwan has never declared independence. It’s not like the brave Estonians standing up to Russia when communism fell. They’re like an impudent child claiming to have sovereignty over China. Their fatal miscalculation is that they know they’ll need Americans to fight for them if they are in a war, but Americans will be reluctant to shed blood for an ally that didn’t have the courage to declare independence until they were invaded on an “internal dispute”. The chinese will hammer away at this in the press.
4) Chinese weapons policy has been to cycle through older generations of weaponry and stay about one generation behind the latest stuff. They sold their old silkworm missiles to the Iranians and used that money to upgrade their newer missiles, which are inferior to US missiles but they only need to be functional. The plan is to overwhelm defenses with superior numbers. No ship can stand up to 50 supersonic silkworm missiles aimed at it. They have similar tactics for other systems, such as anti aircraft missiles.
5) The chinese went up against Americans in Korea. They sent in 300 thousand infantry up against a much smaller American force. The key was that they only had rifles for about 1 in 5 personnel. So they would tell one to go as far as he could till he got shot, then the 2nd one would pick up the rifle & keep charging, and so on. Today, every one of those infantrymen has an automatic rifle. They are not as well equipped as their US counterparts but they can afford a lot of casualties. Vietnam, Iraq, Somalia and other engagements proved that you can’t replace feet on the ground with air superiority. No matter how advanced the air force is nor how many smart bombs get dropped, the US won’t be able to dislodge a standing army without sending in massive troup numbers and experiencing casualties. If our press made a big deal about losing 1000 US soldiers in Iraq, they’ll have a heydey with 500 thousand casualties. Seeing the press reaction emboldens the Chinese.
6) China is building a blue-water navy including submarines. They might be able to achieve a standoff in the surrounding ocean, limiting the ability to resupply american troups while the chinese troups will pillage Taiwan. Once America loses 2 nuclear powered aircraft carriers (with the resulting radioactive plumes), the calculation is that the U.S. will lose stomach for more fighting.
7) The trick to defeating these strategies with minimal casualties will be special forces operating in Taiwan. They will need to have the ability to direct standoff weapons fire onto individual tanks and squad units in order to be effective.
8) The most likely outcome will be that Taiwan will be a giant pile of rubble. Casualties could run as high as WWII.
If China wins, it could be a Pyrrhic victory. If the US wins, it will take a whole generation to repair and rebuild.
I think the Chinese view towards weakness or perceived weakness is a little bit like how Germany viewed the U.S. after we sent 10,000 men wandering in the hills to find Pancho Villa, to no avail. The Germans perceived it as weakness and went ahead with their war plans.
9 posted on Sunday, September 23, 2007 9:47:37 PM by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
Don’t if Chicoms care but a missile attack on Kadena would be an act ofwr against Japan. I would think such an act would drive Japan toward a course of action the ChiComs don’t really want, a remilitarized and nuclear Japan.
Under the 0bama Regime, this will be par for the course.
When foreign interests no longer need American money, etc., we could be wiped out like bugs at a pic nic.
Russian air force assets can beat European assets now too. And, a Combined Russian/Chinese Air force could be able to defeat the USAF.
It will be interesting too see comments to come from our military types here at FReepers.
I think that under this scenario things would move too fast for Japan to remilitarize. In the words of the poet, “A change in the weather is always extreme.”
We have an actual defense treaty with Japan, where we don’t with Taiwan. Our defense treaty involves a nuclear umbrella and has since 1953. Moving against Taiwan is one thing. There is some historical and geographic precedent to “justfy” runification by force. Moving against Japan is an act of war and China is and will be for the future, unable to inflict serious damage on the USA while we are in a position of sending Japan back to the Manchu Dynasty.
Attack Guam? A friggin US territory? Get serious.
And the Taiwan [which has a considerable military] has its collective fingers up their butts while this is coming down?
... and oh BTW. What happens when the invasion fleet replete with landing craft, meets a Los Angeles class submarine and “oh by the way” shore defenses?
As a battle of wills [the Obama factor is troubling at best], this game playing makes some sense. As a battle of attrition where China is prepared to keep absorbing losses? Maybe. Given the a robust response -— first strike victory? The Rand idiots need to get serious.
Is that a Freudian slip?
I’ve been thinking about this scenario as soon as China started producing the J10s.
The situation really was put into development with China’s economic improvement and improved economic reality, and the inevitable R&D into aerospace weaponry that would result.
The other half of the scenario required the “American Idolized” American voter to vote for moron weak on defense politicians like Clinton and Obama.
Well, we’re are almost there, with Chinese economic affluence and technological-numerical parity meeting an American military ready to slash and burn large advanced projects.
We have no credible deterrent to a Chinese attack on Taiwan, aside from the pseudo MADT (Mutual Assured Destruction) of Taiwan scenario.
The next show to drop will be Taiwan basically getting absorbed into China, but the Taiwan elite who see the writing on the wall and the worthless defense pacts with the US.
Try three million - and they've actually been shrinking the troop strength of their armed forces pretty rapidly, as they aim to become a smaller, more high-tech force. A potential cause of instability in China is all the unemployed officers and soldiers that have resulted.
No ship can stand up to 50 supersonic silkworm missiles aimed at it. They have similar tactics for other systems, such as anti aircraft missiles.
The Silkworm is subsonic.
5) The chinese went up against Americans in Korea. They sent in 300 thousand infantry up against a much smaller American force. The key was that they only had rifles for about 1 in 5 personnel.
And your source for this is what, exactly?
It's always sort of dangerous to do military analysis when you don't have any idea of what you're talking about.
It's rather amazing that people haven't noticed that Japan has been remilitarized for about thirty years. They now have one of the largest defense budgets in the world and arguably, leaving aside SSBNs, the second best navy in the world right now.
China will take Taiwan without firing a shot. The tide is moving towards at least economic - if not outright political - unification. China and Taiwan both make a ton of money with the current state of affairs, and are growing very comfortable working together.
China and Taiwan will merge, Taiwan will be a semi-autonomous region (like Hong Kong - own currency, laws, passport) and the two become one. Without a shot fired. It may take 10 more years, it may take 40 more years, but it will happen; there is a resignation on both sides of the strait and as long as money is made on both sides, both sides will be fine with it.
China’s building a military to confront Russia and India; the “interesting times” will take place in Siberia, the Kamchakta Peninsula, and the Indian frontier. No need to confront the US, South Korea, Taiwan, or Japan - too much money to be made, and too stable of relationships. Russia and India are the flashpoints, with my bet being on Russia.
Yes, Russia and China are doing joint maneuvers, but there is a LOT of tension over the Siberian frontier - Russia is having a hard time managing and controlling it, and China wants the resources. I can guarantee the Chinese are playing dumb and letting the Russians tip their hands about tactics, operational parameters, capabilities.
Meanwhile Red China has been building hundreds of Su-27 variant fighters, Lavi knockoffs, and an indiginous design.
People like John McCain and Secretary Gates are guilty of fighting the last war not getting ready for future conflicts.
If I was Taiwan I would start building tactical ballistic missiles. Lots of them. They need to be able to target all the facilities that launch and supply the PLAAF and Navy. It's their only hope.
Regaining the initiative in the air may require that the United States and/or Taiwan field a new, expensive, and politically prob- lematic suite of strike capabilities (e.g., hundreds of medium-range ballistic missiles) aimed at China’s own air base infrastructure. Making clear to Beijing the consequences of attacking U.S. bases and forces in East Asia in terms of counterstrikes on the Chinese mainland has the potential to enhance deterrence.
A reasonably robust “four rings” defense against a large-scale Chi- nese invasion should be possible even with a degree of PLA con- trol of the air, but it will require new capabilities and concepts to be put in place.
This is from the summary PDF. I am inclined to agree.
Instinctively, I believe that Rand thing is agenda driven, they left too much out [ 688i’s; DDG’s; Japan; Australia et el ]
Have things changed that much in one year?
I smell a rat.
If Japan is not Nuclear already.Seems to me the way to win is target the tankers in the opening shot.Cant refuel from something that aint there anymore.They would need a boatload of more tankers than we will.
The barriers are (1) Taiwanese air, (2) US submarine and other naval force in the strait itself (3) surge of air warfare ability from the US, by carriers, to US regional bases, and to the island itself, and (4) the ground defense against whatever manages to get across, of a half million man army with armor.
They can beat the first if the US stays out, probably but not with certainty. If they achieve that then they might deal with (4), again probably but not with certainty. But if they face (2) and (3), they simply lose. Period.
7 Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
8 They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright.
They're not stupid. The components are there. The Japanese would be able to assemble nukes within days.
They win, because the U.S. will do nothing!
Well, probably apologize.
Agreed.The distrust between the two countries is a thousand years old.And it aint gettin no better.
We should just buy the dang Russian planes and install our own radar and fire control systems
Sad but true.
Japan was pretty quiet about it, but I have heard their navy is pretty darn big
I wonder if the russian engines have gotten any better.They used to have the TBO of that of a handgrenade.
I don’t know. That’s interesting.
Anyone like redteamjournal.com?
F-15 gets a 4.5 to 1 Kill ratio against the Peaoples Liberation Air Force who gave us Wong-Wei?
Meanwhile,,, in the *real world*, the F-15 enjoys something like a 150 to ZERO ratio.
And i like how the Chinese bases withing sortie distance of Taiwan remain untouched, while they do anything they want to us.
The Japanese Defense Force (JDF) is very good. Well, they are pretty good. About a notch below our reserve forces.
The problem Japan has, is that pesky little thing that MacArthur wrote for them in 1945 or 46 called their Constitution which does not allow them to conduct military operations outside of Japanese territorial boundaries.
This is my knowledge based on my working there in 2000. I believe this is still the case, although I may be wrong, but as I recall, it is the reason they only sent non-combatants to Iraq a few years ago.
Not true. The Eurofighter "Typhoon" is a half-generation better than the best Chinese a/c, having been designed in the 90s, and the F-22 is a half-generation newer than that.
As for the AA-12 "AMRAAMsky's" and so forth, all those missiles, including our AIM-120 AMRAAM, are basically 80's technology updated with right-now software. The AA-10's, AA-8's, and AA-11's which are the backbone of the Chinese air-to-air armory are all early-80's or late-70's missilery. The Chinese Su-30 MKK is a 90's update of a mid-70's design.
The world isn't progressing all that fast ..... it's just too expensive. Everybody is using 10- to 20-year-old inventory.
Not in its terminal dive. Oh, and the warhead is armored.
At least "Sea Dart," launched from a county-class British DDG (iirc), was able to deal with one in the Gulf, in 1991, pretty handily.
The Silkworm is subsonic.
***By the time we engage them, the Silkworm is likely to be supersonic. And they can use relatively simple DSP technology for targeting aircraft carriers with their current generation of SUPersonic ICBMs and put conventional warheads in them if they wanted to.
And your source for this is what, exactly?
***You’re asking for source material of something that was posted 4 years ago? Maybe I’ll take my time to find it again, like 4 years from now.
It’s always sort of dangerous to do military analysis when you don’t have any idea of what you’re talking about.
***Right backatcha
My bet would be on India. Why? Because Russia has too much territory and not enough people. Russian population is also shrinking. Russia will be more likely to set up some sort of union with China, EU-like, so that Chinese and Russians can live and work anywhere within two countries. Russia has so few people that it can't even exploit resources that are in the ground and ready for taking. Whole Siberia, with its oil and gas and lumber, is populated with about 2 persons per square mile; most of them are in cities, the rest of the land is untouched. There is room for billions of people there, limited only by food that you can grow locally or bring in. China is interested because its problems are exactly opposite - too many hands, too few things to do. Also you need to consider that Russian society is old (person-wise and culture-wise) and tired; it was already tired when Dostoevsky wrote his books; right now it is worse. Injection of young blood could be a good idea.
But Indian population is numerous already and growing fast, so it must seek new lands. Its population is young, and with youth comes desire to live and fight. And India's territory is already all used up, there is not much land where you can just walk in and build a house or a factory or a city. India may find itself in a demographic corner very soon, whereas Russia has all the resources it needs to quietly do nothing until there is nobody left.
There are some other facts in favor of my theory. The mayor of Moscow recently closed a major market (for all kinds of health violations, IIRC) where chinese, among others, were selling stuff. China complained, and already a new territory is allocated and the same Chinese merchants are already selling there, right out of shipping containers, even before the buildings of the new market are ready. China enjoys very special relations with Russia, and I would not be surprised if at some point (say, 50 years from now) Russia and China will be apart in names only, even if that. They complement each other nicely, and they have common foreign goals. In other words, they are natural allies. If that happens, the new state with combined territory of Russia and China, with the combined population, with manufacturing of China, with Russia's cheap railway access to Europe (and USA, at some point, through the tunnel to Alaska) and with Russian space technology and science - that state will become an unquestionable major power on the planet. I somehow doubt that such a thought never occurred to anyone in Bejing or Moscow.
Quite true, but if about two dozen of their smoke-quiet, long-endurance diesel submarines deployed in the Formosa Strait to protect Japanese interests by opposing invasion ..... who would know it?
After all, the Taiwanese and Australians operate diesel submarines, too.
Your observations are all true, but I think the conclusion is wrong. China will go into Russia for the very points you make: fewer and fewer people, aging population, collapsing Government, and very resource rich while lightly populated and even more lightly defended.
China will move into Siberia and Eastern Russia to take the resources, and will be prepared to defend if needed. It will claim that the Siberians are closer to the Han than the “Western” Muscovites and thus it’s natural - even destiny - that Siberia be part of China.
China’s not stupid; it will avoid a conflict with India if possible, since India carries a much bigger “bite” than Russia. India can fight back effectively, and has shown a willingness to do so (witness Pakistan’s conflict). China will take the easy way out, absorb Eastern Russia, and continue to just build.
And regardless which of us is correct, Taiwan will merge into China without a shot fired! On that I think we can agree...;)
Don't bet on that. Around CINCPAC headquarters and the Seventh Fleet, the JDF is sometimes referred to as "the Eighth Fleet". Their people assets are completely versed in U.S. operational doctrine and they and their ships operate with U.S. groups and units flawlessly whenever they're on joint operations with U.S. units.
I very seriously doubt that Russian pride will roll over for the Chinese and become a junior partner, as in the days of the Mongols.
I think you've made a very serious mistake there.
No, they'll claim they're reversing the unequal treaties that made the RFE part of the Russian Empire in the first place. It'll be war.
It hasn’t really been a year. The Chinese have been working on their air force in a big way since the late nineties. Lots of 4th generation plus aircraft and some potent new missiles.
We already suspect CIA played games with their revised Iranian estimates a few years ago.
I never say it, let me get back to you.
Aren’t we cutting our military? China is not.
This also goes for nuclear energy and oil independence. We do not advance, but we help other countries advance.
Oh, Tom Clancy will never let that stand! lol
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.