Replies

>>the SU-27 and the Sovremenny vessels are very capable platforms and

SU-27 is a capable fighter but without excellent pilots it's a moot point. Our own pilots suffered at the hands of MIGs in Vietnam untill we implemented better training. Once we did that our pilots fared far better.

In terms of the SU-27 vs F14, I don't think there is any issue. The F-14 will take it out before the SU-27 can utilize any advantages in manuverablity. (The F14 uses the Phoneix missile which has a range of over 100 miles. The SU-27 has no equavalent.) People underestimate the maneuverability of the F14. The fact that it's wings remain spread in low speed flight gives it alot more manuverability then the traditional delta wing.

>>Sunburn

The SeaRam will destroy a SunBurn. Think of it as sun block lotion for a naval vessel! (SEA Ram will replace Phalanx on Navy ships. It features dual mode Radar/Optical tracking, and it's missiles fly at speeds of over mach 2.)

The Chinese are simply trying to catch up to us. The problem is that while their technology is good, it isn't enough to stay up with us. What we are trying to field in the next few years will offset any advantages they have now or in the future.

While we do have much in development at the moment, if we went to war you'd see the R&D cycle be reduced. Right now there isn't an urgent need for a mach 6 anti-ship missile. But if we went to war with China I think you'd see a production line rolling off such missles in less than a few months.

With limited budgets, a lack of urgency, and more time than anything else, R&D is painfully slow. If things got urgent, you'd see money flow and R&D cycles shorten. (It's often said that tasks take as much time as is alloted to them. )

What they face in the future are:

* Lasers. US Navy is rather close to fielding laser based weapons.

* Super-cavitation CIWS: Originally designed to take out mines, this system can be modified to take out supercavitation torpedoes.

* Stealth aircraft: Though not invisible, reaction time is severely reduced for ship defense. Joint Strike Fighter and F-22, paired with EW measures, are a big problem for naval vessles. Though they can be seen with powerful ship-based radar, delivering a missile to the target is a much more difficult proposition.

* Aegis SM3 anti-missle protection. This is close to implemetation. Very strong anti-missile platform.

* Rods from God: Tungsten rods dropped from space. The impact is so severe that no warhead is required. If we can steer these things, a "stealth" rod from God will sink any Chinese vessel -- or ANY other vessel for that matter.

* Hypersonic missiles: Mack 6+ missiles with ranges of 400 miles. We'll be sinking their ships before they can even come close. (Probably fielded around 2012)

* Hypersonic intercontinental missiles: Mach 12+ missles used to deliver conventional/nuclear warheads. (Fielded 2020)

* Lasers Again. Airborne anti-missile lasers. This system while in R&D, could quickly be put into production.

Decreasing numbers of AIM-54's left in the inventory and from what I have been told, we're not building any new ones. We're going to the AMRAAM, which is a great missile...but lacks the legs of the Phoenix.

In addition, in terminal dive mode from long range, the Phoenix is not very manueverable. Great at taking out Tu-22M's or TU-16's, but not as effective against more modern fighters, especially once they are aware of them.

We need the LRAAM.

I am very familiar with the Rolling Airframe missile (RAM) system and know of its capabilities. It is not at all fool proof or 100% effective against the Sunburn or the Yahkont. Yes, it can take them down...but it will not get all of them. But, as I have said in the past...the missile threat plays to our strength...it is what we designed AEGIOS and all of the weapons systems being intergrated into it for, even though the Chinese and others continue to put efforts there to try and find vulnerability.

Aa to the rest, I agree with most of your other points. I understand that production would pick up, but much of our capability to shift peace time production over to war time production is being moved to the PRC as we speek. We'd have to build a lot of new plants from scratch. I have no doubt we would do this and that we would win in dramatic fashion...but building takes time and in war, time costs lives and ground.

The whole point of this thread is simply to document the efforts the PLAN is making in this regard...and they are not minimal or insubstantial. We need to keep our guard up and, IMHO, adopt economic policies with the PRC that does not tend to be what funds their buildup and efforts in this regard. but that's just my opinion.