What's new

China's Blitzkrieg on U.S. Carrier

Status
Not open for further replies.
The United States won't come in range and then fight, it will first fight when its enemies are in range. The thing is the US does not usually do Gung Ho, Jonh Woo style a gun in each hand shooting everyone on the scene type of attacks.

The US is rumored to have Inter Continental Cruise Missiles and many other tricks for long range attacks, remember those B2's can fly to China and back from the continental US. The US's tactic would definitely be to soften its target and gradually increase the intensity of its attacks.

Can't give you a play by play, but thats what the US trend in recent years suggests.

This gives some advantage to China - if China takes over Taiwan, the US isn't probably going to come guns blazing down on China. For the past 5-10 years, this has been the focus of military assumption by the Chinese defence that a big naval armada would come down knocking on their door.

They should think about other things as well.
Of course we will come within range and fight. OUR range, that is...:lol:

This is not pre-WWII where Germany managed to clandestinely built up all three services. Even then, there were signs picked up by various European intelligence agencies that Germany was massively rearming. China will not be able to prepare for an attack on Taiwan without US knowing about it. Even in the 'old days' as in swords, spears, bows and arrows, merchants were always excellent sources in intelligence and many served as spymasters for their lieges. Same for today, Taiwanese businessmen will pick up clues about said preparations.

So if there is a potential for an armed conflict over Taiwan and if the US is determined not to let Taiwan fall, we will let both sides know we are watching. If we decide to preempt China, long range bombers of both types will attack those strategic preparation points. China's submarine forces will have been tracked by US and will be sunk. We do not need to destroy everything, just do serious enough damages that will force China to do another cost/benefit analysis over taking Taiwan by force.
 
Of course we will come within range and fight. OUR range, that is...:lol:

This is not pre-WWII where Germany managed to clandestinely built up all three services. Even then, there were signs picked up by various European intelligence agencies that Germany was massively rearming. China will not be able to prepare for an attack on Taiwan without US knowing about it. Even in the 'old days' as in swords, spears, bows and arrows, merchants were always excellent sources in intelligence and many served as spymasters for their lieges. Same for today, Taiwanese businessmen will pick up clues about said preparations.

So if there is a potential for an armed conflict over Taiwan and if the US is determined not to let Taiwan fall, we will let both sides know we are watching. If we decide to preempt China, long range bombers of both types will attack those strategic preparation points. China's submarine forces will have been tracked by US and will be sunk. We do not need to destroy everything, just do serious enough damages that will force China to do another cost/benefit analysis over taking Taiwan by force.

and those bombers will be downed by fighters and SAMs. then the US will have to think about whether it will escalate, or step down.
 
and those bombers will be downed by fighters and SAMs. then the US will have to think about whether it will escalate, or step down.
Terrain Following B-1s and invisible to Chinese radars B-2s...??? Baghdad Bob...Is that you...???
 
Terrain Following B-1s and invisible to Chinese radars B-2s...??? Baghdad Bob...Is that you...???

terrain following B-1 lol... at low level it's maximum speed is mach 0.92, less with full weapons. this needs to be done over uneven terrain, over the ocean at long distances this can be easily detected. for actually downing it, HQ-9 is more than enough. not to mention everything J-8 and up have lookdown-shootdown capable radars.

B-2 are invisible to what radar? nothing is invisible unless it is transparent to radio waves, it's simply RCS that's decreased which decreases detection distance.

"mission accomplished!"
 
terrain following B-1 lol... at low level it's maximum speed is mach 0.92, less with full weapons. this needs to be done over uneven terrain, over the ocean at long distances this can be easily detected.
Do not talk as if you know what you are talking about. If an aircraft is below the radar horizon, its speed is largely irrelevant.

for actually downing it, HQ-9 is more than enough. not to mention everything J-8 and up have lookdown-shootdown capable radars.
:lol: Those J-8s will have no idea which direction the B-1s will approach. A bit of education for you, fighter aircraft radars are quite directional.

B-2 are invisible to what radar? nothing is invisible unless it is transparent to radio waves, it's simply RCS that's decreased which decreases detection distance.
And you learned that from me. By the time any Chinese radar detect a B-2, if at all, it would have been weapons release time for the B-2.

"mission accomplished!"
That will be our 'tally ho', right before we 'pickle'.
 
of course the speed is important. lower speed increases time for reaction. the radar horizon applies to uneven terrain, over flat open ocean there's no radar horizon.

and our SAM radars are similar to MPQ-53. if the B-2 can't be detected by our radars, it would be just as invisible to US radars.
 
of course the speed is important. lower speed increases time for reaction. the radar horizon applies to uneven terrain, over flat open ocean there's no radar horizon.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

This is utterly embarrassing for you and your fellow Chinese members here. This is exactly what I mean about desperate people willing to bend the laws of physics. This is a MUST SAVE.

and our SAM radars are similar to MPQ-53. if the B-2 can't be detected by our radars, it would be just as invisible to US radars.
We do not care if our radars cannot pick up our B-2s. We have other means to know where they are anyway. So what the hell does this worth in this argument? Zilch.
 
sorry got confuse by terrain following. english is not my first language.

on the radar horizon:

how low is low?

R=(2*4/3*R_earth*h)^0.5

unless the B-1 can fly below 200 m, it will easily be detected and shot down within 50 km. even if weapons are released, scrambled fighters will still know its approximate location and will down it from there.
 
sorry got confuse by terrain following. english is not my first language.

on the radar horizon:

how low is low?

R=(2*4/3*R_earth*h)^0.5
Here is another thing you can learn from me...

Horizon calculator - radar and visual

unless the B-1 can fly below 200 m, it will easily be detected and shot down within 50 km. even if weapons are released, scrambled fighters will still know its approximate location and will down it from there.
Sure...

Aerospaceweb.org | Aircraft Museum - B-1B Lancer
low-level mission: 600 mph (965 km/h) at 200 ft (61 m)
I was in the WSO seat in an F-111E in a four-ship over the English Channel. Our lead was asked if we could help out the French to test their new air defense radars. We descend down to 50 ft and I tuned the TF radars to pick up surface waves. Do not think that just because you can post some math you really know what you are talking about. The higher the radar's altitude, the greater its radar horizon, but it also advertises its position, location and transmit strength to a greater distance to anyone out there. This will force Chinese radars to divide their attention to uncertain hostile inbounds, high and low, and both difficult to detect. US air power, and that mean all three services, is the most combat experienced in the world. Each can devise and execute its own operations. Each can also coordinate with ground forces as the world have seen in the ME. But unlike the ME, we will not have to worry about our ground forces.
 
Time out! Incoming breaking news. This whole China-U.S. scenario is basically dead. My former "armchair general" article has been killed by a changing world. KIA!

Ma: Taiwan won't ask U.S. to fight China - CNN.com

"Ma: Taiwan won't ask U.S. to fight China
By Tom Evans, CNN
May 1, 2010 -- Updated 0604 GMT (1404 HKT)

(CNN) -- Taiwan will never ask the United States to fight against China on its behalf, Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou said in a CNN interview.

"We will continue to reduce the risks so that we will purchase arms from the United States, but we will never ask the Americans to fight for Taiwan," Ma told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in an exclusive interview that aired Friday. "This is something that is very, very clear."

He added that the risk to the United States of a conflict between China and Taiwan is the lowest in 60 years as a result of his government's efforts to build a rapprochement with Beijing.

"In the last two years, as a result of our efforts to improve relations with the Chinese mainland, we have already defused the tension to a great extent," he said.

Ma said his government has concluded 12 agreements with China on flights, food safety, opening Taiwan to mainland tourists and mutual judicial assistance in the past two years.

"All these agreements contribute to prosperity and stability in Taiwan and nothing in these agreements compromised Taiwan's sovereignty or autonomy," he added."
 
Time out! Incoming breaking news. This whole China-U.S. scenario is basically dead. My former "armchair general" article has been killed by a changing world. KIA!

Ma: Taiwan won't ask U.S. to fight China - CNN.com

"Ma: Taiwan won't ask U.S. to fight China
By Tom Evans, CNN
May 1, 2010 -- Updated 0604 GMT (1404 HKT)

(CNN) -- Taiwan will never ask the United States to fight against China on its behalf, Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou said in a CNN interview.

"We will continue to reduce the risks so that we will purchase arms from the United States, but we will never ask the Americans to fight for Taiwan," Ma told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in an exclusive interview that aired Friday. "This is something that is very, very clear."

He added that the risk to the United States of a conflict between China and Taiwan is the lowest in 60 years as a result of his government's efforts to build a rapprochement with Beijing.

"In the last two years, as a result of our efforts to improve relations with the Chinese mainland, we have already defused the tension to a great extent," he said.

Ma said his government has concluded 12 agreements with China on flights, food safety, opening Taiwan to mainland tourists and mutual judicial assistance in the past two years.

"All these agreements contribute to prosperity and stability in Taiwan and nothing in these agreements compromised Taiwan's sovereignty or autonomy," he added."
Right...And this will be etched in stone that Taiwan will never ask in the future. I knew this news item was going to come up.
 
Right...And this will be etched in stone that Taiwan will never ask in the future. I knew this news item was going to come up.

Au contraire, the news from Taiwan is excellent. The U.S. military is exhausted. America's fighting men and women deserve a long well-earned rest.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/aug/12/usa.iraq
"Aug 12, 2007 ... But it is in the soldiers themselves - and in the ordinary stories they tell - that the exhaustion of the US military is most obvious, ..."

Analysis: America decides to fight and win in Afghanistan - Telegraph
"Nov 1, 2008 ... The US military is exhausted after years of combat in Iraq, from where the general plans to gradually withdraw his men. ..."

Julie Menin: We Can't Turn Our Back on Iran
"Jun 18, 2009 ... Besides, thanks to Bushie's antics, the US military is exhausted and overtaxed, and is in no shape to enter Iran. ..."
 
Last edited:
Au contraire, the news from Taiwan is excellent. The U.S. military is exhausted. America's fighting men and women deserve a long well-earned rest.

Analysis: America decides to fight and win in Afghanistan - Telegraph
"Nov 1, 2008 ... The US military is exhausted after years of combat in Iraq, from where the general plans to gradually withdraw his men. ..."

Julie Menin: We Can't Turn Our Back on Iran
"Jun 18, 2009 ... Besides, thanks to Bushie's antics, the US military is exhausted and overtaxed, and is in no shape to enter Iran. ..."
You go right ahead and believe that we are 'exhausted'. Ultimately, what matter is what the PLA's leadership believe and I have no doubt they are not as gullible as you are.
 
the same for US leaders. they know many things that the average soldier does not.
 
U.S. attempts to pierce China's veil of strategic nuclear ambiguity.

In post #82, I listed the broad range of known delivery vehicles for "China's Nuclear Strike Force." One of the most well-kept secrets on the planet is the size of China's thermonuclear arsenal. The Pentagon has no idea how to deal with China unless it knows with certainty the size of China's nuclear deterrent.

Let's review some key facts.

1) China was the fourth nation in the world to explode a thermonuclear weapon in 1967, ahead of the French.

2) China launched her first satellite into space in 1970.

3) Putting (1) and (2) together, China has possessed the capability to build thermonuclear-tipped ICBMs for 40 years. Over the years, China has improved her miniaturization technology to the point of building a W-88 class warhead by the 1980s.

We also know that China has demonstrated the ability to send multiple satellites into space on one rocket. This dual-use technology is the basis for MIRVed ICBMs.

The point is that China has been able to build advanced MIRVed thermonuclear ICBMs for at least twenty to thirty years.

4) Everyone agrees that China's nuclear arsenal is smaller than the U.S.'s roughly 10,000 (e.g. deployed and strategic reserve) warheads.

5) The key question that everyone wants answered is: how much "smaller" is the Chinese nuclear arsenal? Are China's nuclear warheads closer to 200 or 2,000 in number? The U.S. wants to know.

Hence, the latest clever political move to pressure China to disclose the number and locations of her nuclear arsenal. The U.S. has disclosed the total number of its nuclear warheads (which we all knew numbered in the many thousands) and now it wants to know China's big secret.

For the last 40 years, has China been sitting on her hands and doing "not much"? Or, as many suspect, how big of a nuclear arsenal has China built in secret over the last 40 years?

U.S. says China nuclear programs lack transparency | Reuters

"U.S. says China nuclear programs lack transparency

WASHINGTON
Tue Apr 6, 2010 1:57pm EDT

r


(Reuters) - Lack of transparency surrounding China's nuclear programs raises questions about its strategic intentions, the United States said on Tuesday.

Barack Obama | China

"China's nuclear arsenal remains much smaller than the arsenals of Russia and the United States," the administration said in a nuclear policy document published on Tuesday.

"But the lack of transparency surrounding its nuclear programs -- their pace and scope, as well as the strategy and doctrine that guides them -- raises questions about China's future strategic intentions."

"The United States and China's Asian neighbors remain concerned about the pace and scope of China's current military modernization efforts, including its quantitative and qualitative modernization of its nuclear capabilities," it said.

China last month unveiled its 2010 military budget with a spending hike of 7.5 percent, a relatively low figure that surprised outside analysts after more than two decades of double-digit rises.

The U.S. report reiterated the Pentagon's oft-stated wish to hold a strategic dialogue with the Chinese military that would "provide a venue and mechanism for each side to communicate its views about the other's strategies, policies, and programs on nuclear weapons and other strategic capabilities."

"The goal of such a dialogue is to enhance confidence, improve transparency, and reduce mistrust," the report added.

China ended weeks of uncertainty last week when it announced that President Hu Jintao would attend a summit next week on nuclear security in Washington.

China had previously delayed saying whether Hu would participate in the multinational meeting hosted by President Barack Obama. U.S.-China ties have recently been clouded by economic and political disputes.

Washington angered Beijing by announcing a $6.4 billion arms package for Taiwan early this year, and China responded by postponing several high-level exchanges between U.S. and Chinese military leaders.

But China did not freeze all military-to-military contacts as it did in response to previous U.S. arms deals with Taiwan.

(Reporting by Phil Stewart and Paul Eckert, Editing by Alan Elsner)"

http://china.globaltimes.cn/diplomacy/2010-05/528550.html

"US calls on China for more nuke transparency

* Source: Global Times
* [02:27 May 05 2010]
* Comments

By Liu Dong

China pledged Tuesday "extreme restraint" in its nuclear development, as the US revealed Monday the size of its nuclear stockpile, whilst warning about isolation for any state that defies the current disarmament trend.

The Pentagon disclosed that the US holds 5,113 nuclear warheads as of September 30, including operationally operated warheads, both in active and inactive reserves, an 84 percent curtail from the 31,225 in 1967 and a 75 percent cut from the 22,217 in 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell.

The figures, the first official disclosure of the half-century-long top secret, were released as the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference unfolds, at which US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted that this revelation serves to enhance transparency concerning the US arsenal and which is conducive to urging other nuclear-armed states to follow suit.

China was specifically singled out, as a senior US defense official renewed calls for greater transparency by China, saying there was "little visibility" when it came to Beijing's nuclear program, Reuters reported.

Zhang Zhaozhong, director of the Science and Technology Research Division of the National Defense University, rebuffed the US claim of China's lack of a transparent policy concerning the nuclear arsenal as unsubstantiated.

"On the contrary, the publicized figure is merely shrouded tactics, as the US holds at least 9,000 nuclear warheads," Zhang added.

China will "exercise extreme restraint over developing nuclear weapons," foreign ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said Tuesday in a regular press briefing.

"China will continue to maintain nuclear power at the lowest level, only for national security needs. We are willing to make joint efforts with the relevant countries toward nuclear disarmament and a nuclear-weapons-free world," the spokeswoman added."
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom