What's new

October Surprise: my prediction for war

CAPRICORN-88

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 19, 2015
2,782
-4
5,512
Country
Singapore
Location
Malaysia
Looks like someone who did not even read my post properly is craving for some attention here.

My post said that an America Class "Assault Carrier" loaded with 20-24 F-35Bs would beat the current Chinese aircraft carriers that carry J-15s. In fact one would defeat both at the same time in an air-battle.

As for weapons load in air-to-air stealth mode, 4 AIM-120D is sufficient to take care of swarms of Chinese J-15s when the "assault carrier" has 20-24 F-35Bs. This is 2 less than other versions of F-35 and F-22.

It's range may be a little less than other versions of the F-35 but this does not matter as much when it's sole job is to defend the "assault ship" and anyway it has a maximum range of 1700km, which is a little less than the F-35C at 2200km. F-35B can patrol 150km ahead of the "Assault Ship" and stay on station for 2 hours on CAP.

Next time I suggest you actually read my post and then do any relevant research before replying.
Really. F35B has a combat range of 1700km. OK I give up.
It is 3400km now.
:sarcastic: :sarcastic: :sarcastic: :cheers:
 

UKBengali

ELITE MEMBER
May 29, 2011
17,599
7
21,480
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United Kingdom
Actually, it is quite possible it has already been launched given that the 09V, according to Fzgfzy and multiple other insiders, is already at advanced stages of construction, if not initial operating capability. The 093A is is roughly around the tech/sound level of a 688i class submarine ... I expect the 093B to be considerably better but still not at the Seawolf/Virginia class due to the 093Bs design. The 09V will be the submarine to watch from now on.

Actually the Type-093B is thought to be at the level of Los Angeles 688i and these went into service in 2016.

The Type-095 SSN will be the one to watch for and it would not be a surprise if it came in at Virginia levels of quietening.

China has made remarkable levels of advancements in reactor and propulsion design over the last decade.

My thinking is that the design has been delayed by 5-10 years to make sure that China has a SSN that is finally competitive with the latest US designs.
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,788
8
10,765
Country
United States
Location
United States
China has made remarkable levels of advancements in reactor and propulsion design over the last decade.

My thinking is that the design has been delayed by 5-10 years to make sure that China has a SSN that is finally competitive with the latest US designs.
We will see the 09V within a year or two ... given the reliable insiders, it is already near completed if not completed as of last year. Usually for something as secret as Chinese SSNs, there will be an inevitable time delay until we see them.
 

UKBengali

ELITE MEMBER
May 29, 2011
17,599
7
21,480
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United Kingdom
We will see the 09V within a year or two ... given the reliable insiders, it is already near completed if not completed as of last year. Usually for something as secret as Chinese SSNs, there will be an inevitable time delay until we see them.

Even if it hits early Virginia levels of quietening we need to remember that this is no better than Seawolf that came into service in 1997. US has been researching even better sub tech over the last couple of decades.

Virginia has already been improved from Block 3 with new sensors and propulsor and we are now on Block 4.
Block 5 boats are on order.
 

ILC

FULL MEMBER
Sep 8, 2017
407
-4
277
Country
Poland
Location
Poland
Actually the Type-093B is thought to be at the level of Los Angeles 688i and these went into service in 2016.

The Type-095 SSN will be the one to watch for and it would not be a surprise if it came in at Virginia levels of quietening.

China has made remarkable levels of advancements in reactor and propulsion design over the last decade.

My thinking is that the design has been delayed by 5-10 years to make sure that China has a SSN that is finally competitive with the latest US designs.
Previously analysts thought that these are 09IIIB but in reality, those are one of the newest iterations of 09IIIA. The 09IIIBs are going to have a VLS hump that 09IIIA don't have, and there are two rumors, first - they launched not so long time ago or second - are still being built.
 

UKBengali

ELITE MEMBER
May 29, 2011
17,599
7
21,480
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United Kingdom
Previously analysts thought that these are 09IIIB but in reality, those are one of the newest iterations of 09IIIA. The 09IIIBs are going to have a VLS hump that 09IIIA don't have, and there are two rumors, first - they launched not so long time ago or second - are still being built.

OK. I was not aware.


@Figaro - How are you sure that the Type-093B would be much better than the Type-093A that only came into service in 2016?

Does it even make sense now that Type-095 is going to be put into imminent service to spend resources on building an inferior sub?

Only way it makes sense is if the Type-095 is not coming into service for many more years and China is desperate to get as many boats out as soon as possible.
 
Last edited:

F-22Raptor

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 19, 2014
7,606
2
10,479
Country
United States
Location
United States
American cruise missiles are slow and easy to shoot down. I challenge the Americans to shoot down the 2000+ ballistic missiles heading toward Japan, Korea and Guam on the first day of the war :lol:
You do realize that terrain hugging cruise missiles, especially the VLO ones, are much harder to shoot down than ballistic missiles with predictable trajectory arcs?

Just another reason I can’t take the Chinese brigade seriously.
 

FairAndUnbiased

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 25, 2011
8,081
-2
12,278
Country
China
Location
United States
1. China's J-20 stealth fighter has 4th gen engines.

2. China's best in production SSN(Type-093B) is worse than the US seawolf class SSN from the 1990s.

3. China's two aircraft carriers combined would lose an air-battle with a single America Class "assault ship".

These are facts and no amount of nationalistic rhetoric will change that.
1. doesn't matter that much in BVR. doesn't even matter WVR when F-35 is still less maneuverable and has less thrust:weight ratio due to having only 1 engine.

2. doesn't matter in shallow seas of the western Pacific and there's 1000 km of that all around China. They are much noisier than diesel-electrics since diesels-electric doesn't have mechanical coupling of engine to shaft. The advantage of SSN - range and speed - is negated on the defensive.

3. there are only 2 America class ships built so far and they sacrificed well decks and amphibious capability to achieve their aviation capabilities. They also can't sustain flight operations due to the need to repair their deck due to higher than expected heat from engines. Most of their aviation wing is still AV-8 Harriers which are little better than propeller planes in air to air.

You do realize that terrain hugging cruise missiles, especially the VLO ones, are much harder to shoot down than ballistic missiles with predictable trajectory arcs?

Just another reason I can’t take the Chinese brigade seriously.
Subsonic cruise missiles have been proven to be easily shot down when flying over contested airspace. Even Syria could do it, hence zero fatalities from a 2018 US cruise missile strike on Syria. Meanwhile zero 1960's Iraqi Scuds were intercepted by Patriot batteries during Desert Storm despite total air supremacy by the coalition.

It's simple, really: you can fire at cruise missiles with everything from anti-air guns and air to air missiles to real SAMs, and they get shot down. Low flying means little against airborne radar. But it's much harder to hit a ballistic missile warhead, particularly after separation due to the small radar cross section and much higher speed.

The biggest advantage of cruise missiles is that they're cheaper than ballistic missiles.
 

F-22Raptor

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 19, 2014
7,606
2
10,479
Country
United States
Location
United States
1. doesn't matter that much in BVR. doesn't even matter WVR when F-35 is still less maneuverable and has less thrust:weight ratio due to having only 1 engine.

2. doesn't matter in shallow seas of the western Pacific and there's 1000 km of that all around China. They are much noisier than diesel-electrics since diesels-electric doesn't have mechanical coupling of engine to shaft. The advantage of SSN - range and speed - is negated on the defensive.

3. there are only 2 America class ships built so far and they sacrificed well decks and amphibious capability to achieve their aviation capabilities. They also can't sustain flight operations due to the need to repair their deck due to higher than expected heat from engines. Most of their aviation wing is still AV-8 Harriers which are little better than propeller planes in air to air.



Subsonic cruise missiles have been proven to be easily shot down when flying over contested airspace. Even Syria could do it, hence zero fatalities from a 2018 US cruise missile strike on Syria. Meanwhile zero 1960's Iraqi Scuds were intercepted by Patriot batteries during Desert Storm despite total air supremacy by the coalition.

It's simple, really: you can fire at cruise missiles with everything from anti-air guns and air to air missiles to real SAMs, and they get shot down. Low flying means little against airborne radar. But it's much harder to hit a ballistic missile warhead, particularly after separation due to the small radar cross section and much higher speed.

The biggest advantage of cruise missiles is that they're cheaper than ballistic missiles.
None of the cruise missiles in the 2018 Syrian attack were shot down. That’s simply a lie. In fact, US cruise missiles have proven to be extremely accurate and effective in past conflicts.

And they are much harder than ballistic missiles to shoot down. Ballistic missiles fly predictable trajectory arcs. US BMD has advanced considerably since the days of Desert Storm. The US routinely intercepts ballistic missiles in tests.

A subsonic cruise missiles speed means nothing when you can’t see and track that missile. Why do you think DARPA chose a VLO subsonic design for LRASM? Because it’s much harder to intercept. Supersonic missiles light up radar.

Ballistic missiles are predictable, cruise missiles are not.
 

UKBengali

ELITE MEMBER
May 29, 2011
17,599
7
21,480
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United Kingdom
None of the cruise missiles in the 2018 Syrian attack were shot down. That’s simply a lie. In fact, US cruise missiles have proven to be extremely accurate and effective in past conflicts.

And they are much harder than ballistic missiles to shoot down. Ballistic missiles fly predictable trajectory arcs. US BMD has advanced considerably since the days of Desert Storm. The US routinely intercepts ballistic missiles in tests.

A subsonic cruise missiles speed means nothing when you can’t see and track that missile. Why do you think DARPA chose a VLO subsonic design for LRASM? Because it’s much harder to intercept. Supersonic missiles light up radar.

Ballistic missiles are predictable, cruise missiles are not.

I am surprised that you spent time replying to that post full of inaccuracies.

There is no point apart from educating other posters who are reading.
 

Feng Leng

BANNED
Aug 3, 2017
4,416
-19
10,819
Country
China
Location
China
You do realize that terrain hugging cruise missiles, especially the VLO ones, are much harder to shoot down than ballistic missiles with predictable trajectory arcs?

Just another reason I can’t take the Chinese brigade seriously.
What predictable trajectory arcs? :lol:



Good luck hugging terrain in open ocean by the way :rofl:
 

UKBengali

ELITE MEMBER
May 29, 2011
17,599
7
21,480
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United Kingdom
What predictable trajectory arcs? :lol:



Good luck hugging terrain in open ocean by the way :rofl:
I cannot believe it but I just gave you a "like" there but it was deserved!

Yes the DF-17 makes ABM defences much much harder.

As for US cruise missile "terrain hugging" over the open ocean, the ocean surface itself would be the "terrain" that it would hug. It would be incredibly difficult for even an AWACS to be able to "see" a stealthy cruise missile flying very close(less than 10m) from the surface of the ocean unless the cruise missile came within a few 10s of kms of the AWACS.
 
Last edited:

Feng Leng

BANNED
Aug 3, 2017
4,416
-19
10,819
Country
China
Location
China
U.N. without Taiwan is cheating the world: U.S. diplomat


The United States ambassador to the United Nations on Tuesday expressed support for Taiwan's inclusion in the United Nations system, saying that it is "cheating the world" not to have Taiwan participating in U.N. activities.

Speaking at a Global Cooperation and Training Framework (GCTF) event jointly organized by Taiwan, the U.S. and Japan on Tuesday, America's U.N. Ambassador Kelly Craft praised Taiwan as "a force for good for the world."

"The world needs Taiwan's full participation in the United Nations system, particularly with respect to matters that affect public health and economic development. A United Nations without Taiwan's full participation is cheating the world," Craft said by video conference.
 

bolo

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 27, 2013
3,274
-9
3,535
Chairman Deng does not minced with his word?
Yes the choice s before 1997 or in1997.
Britain can pick its choice.
As Deng Xiaoping told Britain Ironlady Margaret Thatcher, we don't have to wait until 1997 to do that.

Ironlady was so shocked that she tripped and fall off the step of the Great Hall in China. The reality not only hurts but is SHOCKING.
You mean this?

 

F-22Raptor

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 19, 2014
7,606
2
10,479
Country
United States
Location
United States
What predictable trajectory arcs? :lol:



Good luck hugging terrain in open ocean by the way :rofl:
First, the DF-17 is not a ballistic missile.

Second, those DF-17s are fiberglass mockups.

And finally, the US Navy has already said in testimony to Congress they have a classified capability to defeat HGVs. It’s likely SM-6.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom