Posted on 08/19/2019 1:19:41 AM PDT by kaehurowing
If an armed conflict broke out between Beijing and Washington, China’s hi-tech ballistic missiles would likely cripple the United States’ military bases and naval fleet across the Western Pacific region within hours, a new report by Australia-based researchers has said.
With China making rapid technological advancements and sharpening its hard power, the report urged the US and regional allies such as Australia and Japan to overhaul military investment and deployment plans, or face the prospect of American “military primacy” being undermined by the Asian power.
(Excerpt) Read more at scmp.com ...
Actually, we have 11 carriers deploying just under 1000 aircraft.
True.
Never underestimate China.
More importantly, never underestimate China’s arrogant and ambitious leaders capability to do make military mistakes
I’m counting the amphibious assault ships since they can host aircraft if need be.
Trump is on it
Um, about that. Your info is a bit out of date.
China has two carriers in the water, with the second on sea trials.
Our tanks have been destroyed quite handily in Iraq (the ones we left there) and in Yemen (the ones we sold the Saudis) - at the same type of missile the Russians and Chinese sell in large quantities on the world market. The US Army has an emergency order in for Trophy anti-missile systems in to Rafael of Israel to protect some of our tanks.
Our ABM ships are nice but our Navy took CIWS off many of them. The Navy is currently desperately raiding museums and warehouses to put CIWS systems back on.
China’s strategy in the air is to kill the AWACS from long range then when our birds fire up their radar to compensate, swarm them with radar homing missiles fired in the hundreds by giant swarms of cheap missile hauler fighters. We did not and do not have enough advanced airframes to counter this.
Our military helicopters may be powerful, but the Chinese field Russian designs and as has been demonstrated in recent fights, we didn’t armor ours enough whereas the Russian-design-family birds shrug off SAMs and even ATGMs (visible third party proof of this is freely available on YouTube).
“China hasn’t fought a war since 1953” isn’t exactly true either. Among other things, you’re forgetting the long running Sino-Soviet border wars, their active if covert participation in Vietnam, the ongoing action in Xinjiang (1960-present) which has more than a little resemblance to our recent ‘fun’ in the Sandbox... They’ve not been sitting at home playing mahjong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China
Look at the so called South China sea. China has Vietnam and Philippine’s aligning with US
Quantity has a quality all its own. Go look at the workmanship of a Soviet T-34 tank and compare it to an early Tiger tank. The former is sloppy, the latter is precise.
Then remember the T-34s buried the Tigers in hulls and drove all the way to Berlin.
“Good enough” often wins.
Tanks are death traps.
Our shermans sucked but we won.
Same point. Shermans were mass produced, not as sloppily made as T-34s, but they were produced at a rate that also buried the German machines in hulls. They were good enough and made in huge numbers and the superbly crafted, precisely engineered German tanks couldn’t do anything but fall back in the face of the swarm.
Swarm attacks are ugly, but if your machinery and gear is “good enough”, historically they work.
Been on the bad end of a Hind, The Russians make good helicopters.
Not since tanks got active protection systems. The Israelis got theirs working in the obvious ongoing fights in their part of the world, the Russians perfected theirs by the second Chechen War. The Chechens reported that T-72s and T-90s mounting the Arena APS had to be attacked by six or more heavy ATGMs simultaneously in a saturation attack to defeat the APS and get a hit on the tank. Which often had ERA mounted anyway, so whether you actually damaged the tank with your single hit was a crapshoot.
The Chechens also found that the APS’ capability to drive the turret motors, slew the gun onto the source of the attack and cue the gunsight for the gunner to pull the trigger was a rather fearsome capability. Considering it was fully capable of locking on to helicopter gunships and slow moving ground attack aircraft, tracking it and prosecuting the entire engagement by itself with gunner consent.
Was just talking to a math teacher about swarm technology.
“Safety in numbers”
“the tyranny of numbers”
Real world footage of a Hind hit by MANPAD, completely ignores it, keeps flying.
Original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3f2QFYfQHM
Stabilized version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwUIaRmIRFY
All I have driven is a heavily modified Bradley.
Give me a submarine any day.
China has two NOW, I believe they have two more under construction, maybe more.
China is gaining on us RAPIDLY.
Note how quiet it is, ***** snuck right up on us.
Saturation attacks have been pretty much known to be the only way to defeat Western style point defenses for quite a long time now - so you need quantity for that.
You don’t even have to have a drone swarm to do that. In fact, the PLAN aka Chinese Navy have a rather ugly little scheme going.
Let me introduce you to the PLAN’s Type 22 missile boat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_22_missile_boat
This is a small stealthy surface combatant whose main purpose in life is to survive undetected long enough for the 8 shipkiller missiles or the rumored option of 4 large capshipkillers it carries (look at the HUGE box launcher on the back) to be launched from just over the radar or visual horizon. They have so far made over 80 of them. And they are all datalinked.
So, USN sends over a CBG, and all of a sudden out of nowhere, the CBG suddenly has to deal with as many as 640 seaskimmers appearing out of nowhere at practically point blank range. CIWS and Aegis is not going to be able to stop even a significant fraction of those before they start impacting.
They have two now and a third of the same class under construction. They’re all ski-jump carriers, they’re laying down the first of a new class of CATOBAR (aka ‘conventional’) carriers now with more to follow.
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.