The US's experimental 'lighting carriers' are 'much more capable' than China's current carriers, top US admiral says

[Beast]

You lack basic understanding of physics.

Iskander is also Mach 10 but easily shot down by the Barak 8 missile system in Azerbaijan, a relatively small missile. Mach-10 and Mach-20+ figures are just high altitude and exo-atmospheric velocities and that too doesn't make them invincible. As soon as their altitude lowers they are much slower, below hypersonic figures, since low altitude air pressure and resistance is much higher and doesn't allow hypersonic flight. In fact at low altitudes it becomes Mach 2 or 3 at best.

Also, a US carrier strike group has more than one ship, and China has yet to prove it's capable of hitting a ship moving at full speed, and yet to prove it's capable of providing accurate, constantly updating coordinates of a US carrier group far away from its shores.

DF-21D is not low tech iskander ballistic missile. It can hit moving targets travel much faster speed.


Plus it DF-21D can't hit, we still have DF-17 HGV. Even US admit they can't hit HGV with unpredictable flight path. And don't troll and claim HGV can be shot down. Never proven so far.

Finally, your aegis is tested against a single ballistic missile. Never against a mass like a dozen or more. One ballistic DF-21D cost 1 million dollar. A dozen is only $12 million. An aircraft carrier is $7 billion. Absolutely worth the price tag.

U.S. fails to intercept test missile target

A U.S. warship failed to intercept a medium-range ballistic missile test target on Saturday, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said.

www.reuters.com

 

[jhungary]

Civil-military fusion is now the policy of China. They won’t be building a logistical network just for the army but everything will be dual purpose even more then it already is.

But you do need to build the network for the Military only, as much dual use as you could, you cannot use civilian supply line to transfer munition, fuel and spare parts to support a war.

This is the class of logistic.

• Class I – Rations – Subsistence (food and drinking water), gratuitous (free) health and comfort items.
• Class II – Clothing And Equipment – individual equipment, tentage, some aerial delivery equipment, organizational tool sets and kits, hand tools, unclassified maps, administrative and housekeeping supplies and equipment.
• Class III – POL – Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants (POL) (package and bulk): Petroleum, fuels, lubricants, hydraulic and insulating oils, preservatives, liquids and gases, bulk chemical products, coolants, deicer and antifreeze compounds, components, and additives of petroleum and chemical products, and coal.
• Class IV – Construction materials, including installed equipment and all fortification and barrier materials.
• Class V – Ammunition of all types, bombs, explosives, mines, fuses, detonators, pyrotechnics, missiles, rockets, propellants, and associated items.
• Class VI – Personal demand items (such as health and hygiene products, soaps and toothpaste, writing material, snack food, beverages, cigarettes, batteries, alcohol, and cameras—nonmilitary sales items).
• Class VII – Major end items such as launchers, tanks, mobile machine shops, some parachute systems and vehicles.
• Class VIII – Medical material (equipment and consumables) including repair parts particular to medical equipment. (Class VIIIa – Medical consumable supplies not including blood & blood products; Class VIIIb – Blood & blood components (whole blood, platelets, plasma, packed red cells, etc.).
• Class IX – Repair parts and components to include kits, assemblies, and subassemblies (repairable or non-repairable) required for maintenance support of all equipment.
• Class X – Material to support nonmilitary programs such as agriculture and economic development (not included in Classes I through IX).
• Miscellaneous – Water, salvage, and captured material.[2]

Not everything can use civilian logistical capability, and if they do, unless that is a very well define system, it will most likely ended up like what the Russian did back in March this year.

Look at how China uses its fishing fleet; as an auxiliary of the navy. In a similar manner all the small the boats that have a half
way decent seagoing capability will probably be used to land and resupply troops on Taiwan.

You have got to be kidding me.......You are saying China should use its fishing fleet to supply their troop??

First of all, any commercial fleet would require port and port facilities to load/offload resupply. You can't roll on/roll off with fishing vessel or cargo ship on that matter, it takes up berthing place if you want to do that. And that is if the Chinese can take a port infact to begin with.

Second, it wouldn't make sense to use fishing trawler as they can only take a small amount of cargo, my family own a few trout trawler in Alaska, they probably can take at most 5 tons of cargo before they started to list. If you are talking about supplying a million troops, you are talking about multiple millions of tons of supply a day, you will need probably hundreds of thousand if not close to a million fishing trawler.

The Brits uses fishing boat to evacuate their troop in Dunkirk, that is actually very messy, and their use are mostly limited to ferry troop from the beach onto big warship that can't go too close to the shore. Otherwise, they aren't really that useful and the bulk of the BEF and French were evacuated by warship waiting offshore.

A lot of ferries and freighters that ply the rivers of China could be modified to cross the straits as well as more purpose build boats could be built at a number of yards all up and down the rivers, used for civilians operations, and once the order is given, sail down the rivers with their holds full of men and material.

It won't work, as mentioned above.

I don’t think most Taiwanese would believe the one country two systems option, but like you said, those of us on the outside don’t know if they will fight or capitulate, and how much sway their business community has over the politicians if the business class are coerced by the CCP.

The very simple answer lies at what the Taiwanese saw themselves as. If they don't see themselves as Chinese, then I would say even if China managed to conquer Taiwan, there will be years, if not decade of insurgency for the Chinese to look forward to. OTOH, if Taiwanese is not willing to fight and just accept their fate, then it would be easier, but still, you will need to content with the fraction that are not okay with the unification. The job would be easier for China, but not at all easy in a sense the Taiwanese would just welcome the Chinese with open arms.

 

[Abid123]

One ballistic DF-21D cost 1 million dollar.

Is it really that cheap?

 

[Beast]

Is it really that cheap?

Ballistic missile alone, not including launcher, tracker and other support. But those support are reusable with only missile as one time dispensable.

 

[Beny Karachun]

DF-21D is not low tech iskander ballistic missile. It can hit moving targets travel much faster speed.


Plus it DF-21D can't hit, we still have DF-17 HGV. Even US admit they can't hit HGV with unpredictable flight path. And don't troll and claim HGV can be shot down. Never proven so far.

Finally, your aegis is tested against a single ballistic missile. Never against a mass like a dozen or more. One ballistic DF-21D cost 1 million dollar. A dozen is only $12 million. An aircraft carrier is $7 billion. Absolutely worth the price tag.

U.S. fails to intercept test missile target

A U.S. warship failed to intercept a medium-range ballistic missile test target on Saturday, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said.

www.reuters.com

It is a low tech Iskander missile at the eyes of an interceptor, same flight characteristics.

US never admitted such a thing. And don't troll with your DF-21D and 26 can hit an aircraft carrier BS, never proven so far.

About that article we don't know the details of that test. SM-6 proved it's capable of intercepting targets that could endanger its ship just fine multiple times. Such an article is meaningless and has no context.

 

[FuturePAF]

But you do need to build the network for the Military only, as much dual use as you could, you cannot use civilian supply line to transfer munition, fuel and spare parts to support a war.

This is the class of logistic.

• Class I – Rations – Subsistence (food and drinking water), gratuitous (free) health and comfort items.
• Class II – Clothing And Equipment – individual equipment, tentage, some aerial delivery equipment, organizational tool sets and kits, hand tools, unclassified maps, administrative and housekeeping supplies and equipment.
• Class III – POL – Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants (POL) (package and bulk): Petroleum, fuels, lubricants, hydraulic and insulating oils, preservatives, liquids and gases, bulk chemical products, coolants, deicer and antifreeze compounds, components, and additives of petroleum and chemical products, and coal.
• Class IV – Construction materials, including installed equipment and all fortification and barrier materials.
• Class V – Ammunition of all types, bombs, explosives, mines, fuses, detonators, pyrotechnics, missiles, rockets, propellants, and associated items.
• Class VI – Personal demand items (such as health and hygiene products, soaps and toothpaste, writing material, snack food, beverages, cigarettes, batteries, alcohol, and cameras—nonmilitary sales items).
• Class VII – Major end items such as launchers, tanks, mobile machine shops, some parachute systems and vehicles.
• Class VIII – Medical material (equipment and consumables) including repair parts particular to medical equipment. (Class VIIIa – Medical consumable supplies not including blood & blood products; Class VIIIb – Blood & blood components (whole blood, platelets, plasma, packed red cells, etc.).
• Class IX – Repair parts and components to include kits, assemblies, and subassemblies (repairable or non-repairable) required for maintenance support of all equipment.
• Class X – Material to support nonmilitary programs such as agriculture and economic development (not included in Classes I through IX).
• Miscellaneous – Water, salvage, and captured material.[2]

Not everything can use civilian logistical capability, and if they do, unless that is a very well define system, it will most likely ended up like what the Russian did back in March this year.


You have got to be kidding me.......You are saying China should use its fishing fleet to supply their troop??

First of all, any commercial fleet would require port and port facilities to load/offload resupply. You can't roll on/roll off with fishing vessel or cargo ship on that matter, it takes up berthing place if you want to do that. And that is if the Chinese can take a port infact to begin with.

Second, it wouldn't make sense to use fishing trawler as they can only take a small amount of cargo, my family own a few trout trawler in Alaska, they probably can take at most 5 tons of cargo before they started to list. If you are talking about supplying a million troops, you are talking about multiple millions of tons of supply a day, you will need probably hundreds of thousand if not close to a million fishing trawler.

The Brits uses fishing boat to evacuate their troop in Dunkirk, that is actually very messy, and their use are mostly limited to ferry troop from the beach onto big warship that can't go too close to the shore. Otherwise, they aren't really that useful and the bulk of the BEF and French were evacuated by warship waiting offshore.



It won't work, as mentioned above.



The very simple answer lies at what the Taiwanese saw themselves as. If they don't see themselves as Chinese, then I would say even if China managed to conquer Taiwan, there will be years, if not decade of insurgency for the Chinese to look forward to. OTOH, if Taiwanese is not willing to fight and just accept their fate, then it would be easier, but still, you will need to content with the fraction that are not okay with the unification. The job would be easier for China, but not at all easy in a sense the Taiwanese would just welcome the Chinese with open arms.

Perhaps not all boats will be as useful but more and more vessels will be built with what they call a “military heart with a civilian shell”

Mind the Gap, Part 2: The Cross-Strait Potential of China's Civilian Shipping Has Grown - War on the Rocks

Editor's Note: This is the second in a series of articles on China's civilian roll-on/roll-off ferries and the role they could play in an invasion of

warontherocks.com

They will probably have to rapidly build new ports, once the beachhead is established and secured, and the minesweepers have cleared the waters around the waters in the approaches to the island and around the new ports. China will have to build multiple “Mulberry Harbors”

I have the example of the fishing boats as an example of a civilian ship used by the PLAN; the maritime militia. Their uses is as an auxiliary in the SCS. I don’t think they will play a big part in the landing or resupply. Rather I was referring to the civilian ferries

Chinese Launch Assault Craft from Civilian Car Ferries in Mass Amphibious Invasion Drill, Satellite Photos Show - USNI News

The Chinese military held a major exercise to prove how the People’s Liberation Army Navy could use large civilian ferries to launch a massive amphibious invasion of Taiwan. The PLAN brought amphibious landing craft to a Chinese beach near the Taiwan Strait, according to Aug. 31 satellite...

news.usni.org

Some of the smaller river freighters are probably what they are going to use to move supplies. While more purpose build ships will have to be built. Used as civilian vessels until called upon for a military mission.

Electric cargo ship tests water along Yangtze River

A homegrown electric cargo ship with a load capacity of 1,000 metric tons successfully tested the water at the Yangtze River section in Changzhou, east China's Jiangsu Province, on Friday.

www.google.com

If the Taiwanese do capitulate the Chinese probably hope it will be like Afghanistan or Vietnam, where the most diehard supporters of the last government leave the country.

 

[HydraChess]

At an event hosted by the US Naval Institute and the Center for Strategic and International Studies in October, Vice Adm. Karl Thomas, commanding officer of the US Navy's 7th Fleet, talked about one of the ways the Navy is working to expand its firepower in the region.

Over the summer, the Navy and the Marine Corps continued experimenting with the "Lighting Carrier" concept, which envisions US Navy amphibious assault ships stocked with US Marine Corps F-35B fighter jets to project power as part of a more distributed force.

USS Tripoli, an amphibious assault ship designed to carry Marines, helicopters, and vertical-takeoff aircraft, spent several months this year sailing with more than dozen F-35Bs, operating like a light aircraft carrier than a standard amphibious ship.

A light aircraft carrier embarks with fewer jets than a fleet aircraft carrier — as many as 20, compared to more than 50 on a fleet carrier — but it costs much less and is more versatile.

Because of that, Tripoli's commanding officer refers to the configuration as an "assault carrier" rather than "lighting carrier," according to Thomas, whose command is responsible for US Navy operations in the western Pacific.

"One day you can have F-35Bs on the flight deck. The next day you can have MV-22s and you can be putting Marines at the shore, and so it just is a very versatile instrument," Thomas said of the lightning carrier.

The Navy is still experimenting with how to integrate the lighting carrier with "a full-size carrier" and its carrier strike group, which is composed of a carrier, escort ships for defense and resupply, and at least one submarine. Thomas said the Navy had two of its nuclear-powered carriers operating with Tripoli during the Valiant Shield exercise in June.

Interestingly, Thomas also said that an amphibious assault ship, designated an LHA, in the lighting-carrier configuration is much more capable than the two aircraft carriers that China has in service.

"I will note that LHA with 14 F-35Bs is much more capable than either of the PRC's current carriers, both from a sortie-creation perspective as well as just a sheer capability," Thomas said.

The F-35B Lighting II is the short-takeoff and vertical-landing variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a fifth-generation fighter with advanced capabilities. In addition to being a STOVL jet, the F-35B's array of sensors allow it to act as a battlefield hub, relaying information to friendly forces across a wide area.

"There is no comparison between a J-15 and an F-35B," Thomas said, referring to China's main carrier aircraft.

A lightning carrier also allows allies and partners "to see the capability you can bring with the F-35Bs on the flattop," Thomas said, pointing to the UK, which sent a carrier embarked with F-35Bs to the Pacific last year, and to Japan, which is converting two helicopter carriers to operate F-35Bs.

Lightning carriers more capable than China's carriers, US admiral says

An amphibious assault ship loaded with more than a dozen F-35Bs "just is a very versatile instrument," the head of the US Navy's 7th Fleet said.

www.businessinsider.com

Perfect for war in pacific and against an invasion of Taiwan.

 

[jhungary]

Perhaps not all boats will be as useful but more and more vessels will be built with what they call a “military heart with a civilian shell”

Have you ever heard of the phase "Too many cooks in the kitchen?"

Also, I am pretty sure you cannot use civilian transport ship (or pretend to be civilian) in war for military purpose, that violate Hague Convention. If China did do that, then any neutral port can impound Chinese Civilian ship.

Mind the Gap, Part 2: The Cross-Strait Potential of China's Civilian Shipping Has Grown - War on the Rocks

Editor's Note: This is the second in a series of articles on China's civilian roll-on/roll-off ferries and the role they could play in an invasion of

warontherocks.com

They will probably have to rapidly build new ports, once the beachhead is established and secured, and the minesweepers have cleared the waters around the waters in the approaches to the island and around the new ports. China will have to build multiple “Mulberry Harbors”

That (Mulberry Harbor) only work because the entire Normandy coast are invaded by around 100,000 troop, not 1 million. And then when the beach head is secure and Allied brought in millions of troops, the allied desperately needed Cherbourg and another port down south of France (don't remember the name on top of my head)

Also, they towed 2 Mulberry Harbour, one sunk on the way and you are talking about breakwater around 300km wide from Bournemouth to the further part of the beach. And you are talking about an open ocean 500km wide, almost twice the distant....

I have the example of the fishing boats as an example of a civilian ship used by the PLAN; the maritime militia. Their uses is as an auxiliary in the SCS. I don’t think they will play a big part in the landing or resupply. Rather I was referring to the civilian ferries

Chinese Launch Assault Craft from Civilian Car Ferries in Mass Amphibious Invasion Drill, Satellite Photos Show - USNI News

The Chinese military held a major exercise to prove how the People’s Liberation Army Navy could use large civilian ferries to launch a massive amphibious invasion of Taiwan. The PLAN brought amphibious landing craft to a Chinese beach near the Taiwan Strait, according to Aug. 31 satellite...

news.usni.org

The only thing I can think of is to sink them and use them as Pontoon like the Russian do after Antonovskiy Bridge was blown. Otherwise I don't think there is a use for the small fishing trawler. The Brits can only use them because they held Dunkirk and they are pulling people out. You can't land on a hot beach with these small fishing boat, that's suicide because you can't take any hit from it.

Even for rear transport, you are talking about wasting space, because of the loading, you can probably jam maybe 15 fully armed troop, but that berth could have been used by a LST and land hundreds of troops instead. There is just limited space in the coast, and you would much rather it was used by the most effective vessel there are. On the other hand, if you mix with small boat, you are then congesting the sea lane, it would be fine if you know your enemy will not hit the landing beaches. But as the Brits will tell you. If not, then a hot beach with congested traffic will spell disaster for you. They lost RFA Sir Galahad because the Brits are trying to unload the troop and helicopter from it and it was blocked by serveral ship.

Some of the smaller river freighters are probably what they are going to use to move supplies. While more purpose build ships will have to be built. Used as civilian vessels until called upon for a military mission.

Electric cargo ship tests water along Yangtze River

A homegrown electric cargo ship with a load capacity of 1,000 metric tons successfully tested the water at the Yangtze River section in Changzhou, east China's Jiangsu Province, on Friday.

www.google.com

You are not talking about landing 20,000 troop for a forward party tho, you are talking about landing 500,000 to a million troop on day 1 to overwhelm the Taiwanese defence. Which mean these small freighter would not be useful because

1.) They still need a fully function port to load/unload, there are no ramp, no helipad on them, you can't use them to establish the beach head.

2.) You will need thousands of them going back and forth to support that 500,000 to 1 million troop you have fighting o the frontline

and finally, I don't even know if these craft are seaworthy on such a job, not to mention these aren't armoured and will be sitting duck for even coastal battery fire.

If the Taiwanese do capitulate the Chinese probably hope it will be like Afghanistan or Vietnam, where the most diehard supporters of the last government leave the country.

Hope can't float man, if you plan an op, you can't plan on "Hoping" it would be the best-case scenario......

 

[HydraChess]

Plus it DF-21D can't hit, we still have DF-17 HGV. Even US admit they can't hit HGV with unpredictable flight path. And don't troll and claim HGV can be shot down. Never proven so far.

There is also no proof that HGV can hit a moving target like a smaller carrier. Besides, terminal guidance is very vulnerable to electronic tricks. If US is moving against China, Chinese sats and drones will not really be helpful in terminal guidance. Most will get blinded by american electronic warfare. That leaves the radar and optical guidance in warhead alone which can never be terribly powerful and can be confused easily.

Civil-military fusion is now the policy of China. They won’t be building a logistical network just for the army but everything will be dual purpose even more then it already is.

You know why they will never do that? Because it will make civilians a perfectly valid targets in war. And I doubt that leaving the wumaos here, chinese will just keep their head down and keep on getting pounded by enemy fire.

 

[etylo]

It is a low tech Iskander missile at the eyes of an interceptor, same flight characteristics.

US never admitted such a thing. And don't troll with your DF-21D and 26 can hit an aircraft carrier BS, never proven so far.

About that article we don't know the details of that test. SM-6 proved it's capable of intercepting targets that could endanger its ship just fine multiple times. Such an article is meaningless and has no context.

You fool, you want go to a war with China with your aircraft carriers as hit targets to prove the missiles ? Are F 22 and F 35 proven in battles ? No.

 

[Beny Karachun]

You fool, you want go to a war with China with your aircraft carriers as hit targets to prove the missiles ? Are F 22 and F 35 proven in battles ? No.

F35s are, we used them many times over Syria, Iraq and probably more countries.

 

[etylo]

F35s are, we used them many times over Syria, Iraq and probably more countries.

Have F 35 shoot down any worthy 4th or higher generation fighters in combat yet or just flying around.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/syrian-dogfight-reveals-f35-stealth-fighter-may-be-toothless-tiger/news-story/31bd4208f783da17588045d20aeb5085

The F-35 Reportedly Has a New Capability: Shooting Itself

This Flying Swiss Army Knife will only cost us...$1.7 trillion.

www.esquire.com

 

[Beny Karachun]

Have F 35 shoot down any worthy 4th or higher generation fighters in combat yet or just flying around.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/syrian-dogfight-reveals-f35-stealth-fighter-may-be-toothless-tiger/news-story/31bd4208f783da17588045d20aeb5085

The F-35 Reportedly Has a New Capability: Shooting Itself

This Flying Swiss Army Knife will only cost us...$1.7 trillion.

www.esquire.com

Chinese Copium articles always make me laugh. Cannon failure. Happen more often than you think.

Israel had no problem blowing up Chinese "anti-stealth" radars

 

[etylo]

Chinese Copium articles always make me laugh. Cannon failure. Happen more often than you think.

Israel had no problem blowing up Chinese "anti-stealth" radars
View attachment 904756

Thats becos the radars were not protected by their any advanced air defence, the radar cant fire missiles at F 35. If your F35 so good, go pick fights with other worthy 4th or 5 th generation fighters, dont just strike defenseless radars.
If you did strike as you claim, it was not really a success, you pretty much missed the target. Dont laugh too soon fool, your nation will be wiped out by the Muslims sometime soon in the future with Chinese support.

https://sputniknews.com/20190418/chinese-radar-in-syria-restored-1074256234.html

 

[Beny Karachun]

Thats becos the radars were not protected by their any advanced air defence, the radar cant fire missiles at F 35. If your F35 so good, go pick fights with other worthy 4th or 5 th generation fighters, dont just strike defenseless radars.
If you did strike as you claim, it was not really a success, you pretty much missed the target. Dont laugh too soon fool, your nation will be wiped out by the Muslims sometime soon in the future with Chinese support.

https://sputniknews.com/20190418/chinese-radar-in-syria-restored-1074256234.html

Nah, it was protected by enough missile systems, your radars just don't work, except as a target for our missiles.

https://sputniknews.com/20190418/chinese-radar-in-syria-restored-1074256234.html

Lol their definition of "restore" is to throw the destroyed system in the trash and place a new radar, only to be destroyed again later.

Sputnik is just a Russian coping mechanism.