Indonesia picks the F-15EX to push back on China

[Cheepek]

Excellent choice.


Pakistan should also buy 2 squadrons of F-15EX

Indonesian F-15EX and Pakistani F-15EX can crush the Indians from both the sides.

F-15EX from both sides will result in F-30EX

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Good for you like Indians to live in delusions, lol.

This is american so I don't know where the indian even come from?

 

[antonius123]

China lose. 9/10 the US won against china. 25 times the US won in a war sim. With China losing more than the US & even taiwan. Like there's the link just read it for yourself. I know it's hard for you to read but please do try.

China is expected to collapse so I don't see how the US lose heavily for some reason.

good read if you want to see how the Marines plan to beat china.

Force Design

The war simulations conducted by the US Air Force and CSIS had different assumptions, methods and objectives. The US Air Force simulation focused on a biological weapon attack by China followed by a surprise invasion of Taiwan1. The CSIS simulation focused on a conventional amphibious invasion of Taiwan by China without a biological weapon attack2. The US Air Force simulation showed that the US would lose fast in such a scenario, while the CSIS simulation showed that the US/Taiwan/Japan would defeat China in most scenarios, but at a high cost.

So the 25x times you mention is with the same assumption. Different assumption will end up different result.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

The war simulations conducted by the US Air Force and CSIS had different assumptions, methods and objectives. The US Air Force simulation focused on a biological weapon attack by China followed by a surprise invasion of Taiwan1. The CSIS simulation focused on a conventional amphibious invasion of Taiwan by China without a biological weapon attack2. The US Air Force simulation showed that the US would lose fast in such a scenario, while the CSIS simulation showed that the US/Taiwan/Japan would defeat China in most scenarios, but at a high cost.

So the 25x times you mention is with the same assumption. Different assumption will end up different result.

"High cost" to the US is different to chinese high cost.

A thousand US troops dead is a high cost. Ten thousand dead chinese is just statistic. The chinese are expected to lose around >40.000 & hundreds of ships. The US cared about their soldier's welfare. A thousand dead is unacceptable. That's why Force structure 2030 exist. To achieved victory with less casualties.

While the Chinese double down on A2/AD. The Marines & Navy actually have a new plan to counter chinese advantages.

Also I like the argument that china can only won by violating the Geneva convention on biological & chemical weapons.

Fun Fact: If you used the Biological or Chemical on the US in reality the US will escalate in response. In what ways I hope you never found out.

 

[MajesticPug]

Excellent choice.


Pakistan should also buy 2 squadrons of F-15EX

Indonesian F-15EX and Pakistani F-15EX can crush the Indians from both the sides.

You always made the stupidest comment among any living Paks. Must be the American education or influence you received living in the US. LOL..

 

[jhungary]

"High cost" to the US is different to chinese high cost.

A thousand US troops dead is a high cost. Ten thousand dead chinese is just statistic. The chinese are expected to lose around >40.000 & hundreds of ships. The US cared about their soldier's welfare. A thousand dead is unacceptable. That's why Force structure 2030 exist. To achieved victory with less casualties.

While the Chinese double down on A2/AD. The Marines & Navy actually have a new plan to counter chinese advantages.

Also I like the argument that china can only won by violating the Geneva convention on biological & chemical weapons.

Fun Fact: If you used the Biological or Chemical on the US in reality the US will escalate in response. In what ways I hope you never found out.

A few things people need to realise about these "War Game", having been involved in Military Intelligence myself, I was part of some of these "War Game" which I know first hand

1.) War Game ALWAYS start with the worse scenario, in this case, US Bases in Asia and Hawaii was attacked by Biological Weapon and taken almost all of their combat power out in the opening salvo. Call it "Pearl Harbor" effect or whatever you want to call it. nobody runs war games with you start with an advantage. We all know how to fight when we are winning, what these war game drill in is to try to turn the bad situation around.

2.) In these war game, US would lose up to 80% of the Pacific Airforce. While that's a lot but that is roughly 40% of the entire US Air Force strength, while not counting the reactivation of Davis-Monthan AFB which will patch up to 20% strength with the older reserve F-16 and F-15 aircraft back into service.

On the other hand, China would loses upward to 70% of their national strength. That mean after this war, US would still be around 60% strength after the reactivation of the reserve, while PLAAF will down to 30% or lower strength. Which it ceased to be an effective force.

3.)Almost none of these War Game I known of (And I know a lot) have resulted in Chinese occupation of Taiwan. In fact, after Battle of Snake Island in the Ukrainian war, I would say it's nearly impossible for any modern force to completely occupy an island.

4.) This war is going to be fought in between China and Taiwan, it would be naive to think US/Taiwan and allies will not attack Chinese infrastructure in this war, I mean, people can think like the Russian and think "I invade you and your land is all game and my land is off limit", nobody else think like that, certainly not the Ukrainian, and we can assume Taiwan would attack Chinese mainland, and seeing Taiwan as a more competent force than Ukraine, you are looking at wholesale destruction of Chinese East Coast.

While material loss with the US can be replace as US most likely would not be affected as Chinese Missile and Air Attack most likely will not reach US Mainland barring nuclear option, China will have a difficult road to recover from this.

5.) I can almost certainly guarantee you if and when US get involved in this war, US will NOT be going in alone, unless US started this war (even if they did, there are still some countries will follow US down this path) Which will most likely alter the outcome of a heads-up war game.

 

[antonius123]

"High cost" to the US is different to chinese high cost.

A thousand US troops dead is a high cost. Ten thousand dead chinese is just statistic. The chinese are expected to lose around >40.000 & hundreds of ships. The US cared about their soldier's welfare. A thousand dead is unacceptable. That's why Force structure 2030 exist. To achieved victory with less casualties.

While the Chinese double down on A2/AD. The Marines & Navy actually have a new plan to counter chinese advantages.

Also I like the argument that china can only won by violating the Geneva convention on biological & chemical weapons.

Fun Fact: If you used the Biological or Chemical on the US in reality the US will escalate in response. In what ways I hope you never found out.

Where do you get the data that China will loose hundred of ships in the CSIS simulation?

The source you gave above doesn't agree with that. The wargame tallied up the total deaths after three weeks of battle:

• China: 10,000, with nearly 30,000 taken prisoner
• Taiwan: around 5,000 servicemembers killed, with more civilian casualties.
• America: around 5,000 servicemembers killed and many more wounded.

A few things people need to realise about these "War Game", having been involved in Military Intelligence myself, I was part of some of these "War Game" which I know first hand

1.) War Game ALWAYS start with the worse scenario, in this case, US Bases in Asia and Hawaii was attacked by Biological Weapon and taken almost all of their combat power out in the opening salvo. Call it "Pearl Harbor" effect or whatever you want to call it. nobody runs war games with you start with an advantage. We all know how to fight when we are winning, what these war game drill in is to try to turn the bad situation around.

2.) In these war game, US would lose up to 80% of the Pacific Airforce. While that's a lot but that is roughly 40% of the entire US Air Force strength, while not counting the reactivation of Davis-Monthan AFB which will patch up to 20% strength with the older reserve F-16 and F-15 aircraft back into service.

On the other hand, China would loses upward to 70% of their national strength. That mean after this war, US would still be around 60% strength after the reactivation of the reserve, while PLAAF will down to 30% or lower strength. Which it ceased to be an effective force.

3.)Almost none of these War Game I known of (And I know a lot) have resulted in Chinese occupation of Taiwan. In fact, after Battle of Snake Island in the Ukrainian war, I would say it's nearly impossible for any modern force to completely occupy an island.

4.) This war is going to be fought in between China and Taiwan, it would be naive to think US/Taiwan and allies will not attack Chinese infrastructure in this war, I mean, people can think like the Russian and think "I invade you and your land is all game and my land is off limit", nobody else think like that, certainly not the Ukrainian, and we can assume Taiwan would attack Chinese mainland, and seeing Taiwan as a more competent force than Ukraine, you are looking at wholesale destruction of Chinese East Coast.

While material loss with the US can be replace as US most likely would not be affected as Chinese Missile and Air Attack most likely will not reach US Mainland barring nuclear option, China will have a difficult road to recover from this.

5.) I can almost certainly guarantee you if and when US get involved in this war, US will NOT be going in alone, unless US started this war (even if they did, there are still some countries will follow US down this path) Which will most likely alter the outcome of a heads-up war game.

If the war happen between US and China in west pacific, most of US naval power will be mobilized and concentrated on west pacific, means around 70% US Naval will be in the pacific.

The CSIS simulation said : the high losses damage the U.S. global position for many years, that means the loss should be much highher than just 30%.

But still... China industrial power can recover the loss of the 70% much faster than US can do for the 30% loss.

Alarming Navy Intel Slide Warns Of China's 200 Times Greater Shipbuilding Capacity

The Office of Naval Intelligence is sounding the alarm about the huge gap in U.S. and Chinese shipbuilding capacity and its implications.

www.thedrive.com

 

[jhungary]

It seems you are still talking about the war simulation done by CSIS on conventional amphibious attack on Taiwan where China loose.

But still... China industrial power can recover the loss of the 70% much faster than US can do for the 30% loss.

Alarming Navy Intel Slide Warns Of China's 200 Times Greater Shipbuilding Capacity

The Office of Naval Intelligence is sounding the alarm about the huge gap in U.S. and Chinese shipbuilding capacity and its implications.

www.thedrive.com

But still... China industrial power can recover the loss of the 70% much faster than US can do for the 30% loss.

Alarming Navy Intel Slide Warns Of China's 200 Times Greater Shipbuilding Capacity

The Office of Naval Intelligence is sounding the alarm about the huge gap in U.S. and Chinese shipbuilding capacity and its implications.

www.thedrive.com

Yeah, if you say so........China can also recruit Super Saiyan and battle out Japan with Gundam........lol

 

[antonius123]

Yeah, if you say so........China can also recruit Super Saiyan and battle out Japan with Gundam........lol

That is said by The Office of Naval Intelligence.

Denial is sign of powerless mind, also your knowledge is far oudated.

 

[jhungary]

That is said by The Office of Naval Intelligence.

Denial is sign of powerless mind, also your knowledge is far oudated.

View attachment 950717

First of all, ONI did not say that, what they said is ship building capabilities in general, not just warship. If China build nothing but Warship, then yes, that's 200 times more, but can you do it? It's different to build a cargo container than building a AESA radar equipped and weapon ready warship. There is a reason why even China has 200 times the ship building capability as they pointed out, Chinese still lack behind the USN number in terms of Destroyer (75 vs 50), Cruiser (20 vs 8), Aircraft Carrier (10 vs 0), Nuclear Sub (50 vs 23), and Assault Landing Craft (11 vs 3 (I'll gave your Fujian)). And this will not change in the next 5 or 10 years

Second of all, that ONI scenario is for peace time, I am running on a scenario where China will be embargo by most countries in the west PLUS Taiwan is targeting Chinese force regeneration capability. Taiwan have weapon that can destroy China East Coast, the entire 1200km coastline is under Taiwanese weapon capability, and then you are talking about US Navy ground strike capability. US can run the entire course in the pacific, the Chinese can't do the same to US West Coast, let alone US East Coast.

And finally, again, I would believe Super Saiyan and Gundam Scenario before what you said.

 

[antonius123]

First of all, ONI did not say that, what they said is ship building capabilities in general, not just warship. If China build nothing but Warship, then yes, that's 200 times more, but can you do it? It's different to build a cargo container than building a AESA radar equipped and weapon ready warship. There is a reason why even China has 200 times the ship building capability as they pointed out, Chinese still lack behind the USN number in terms of Destroyer (75 vs 50), Cruiser (20 vs 8), Aircraft Carrier (10 vs 0), Nuclear Sub (50 vs 23), and Assault Landing Craft (11 vs 3 (I'll gave your Fujian)). And this will not change in the next 5 or 10 years

Second of all, that ONI scenario is for peace time, I am running on a scenario where China will be embargo by most countries in the west PLUS Taiwan is targeting Chinese force regeneration capability. Taiwan have weapon that can destroy China East Coast, the entire 1200km coastline is under Taiwanese weapon capability, and then you are talking about US Navy ground strike capability. US can run the entire course in the pacific, the Chinese can't do the same to US West Coast, let alone US East Coast.

And finally, again, I would believe Super Saiyan and Gundam Scenario before what you said.

You can't read or what?

Here I quote for you:

The data compiled by the Office of Naval Intelligence says that a growing gap in fleet sizes is being helped by China's shipbuilders being more than 200 times more capable of producing surface warships and submarines.​

So yes... 200 times is for building warships and submarines!

China doesn't need many aircraft carriers to fight US in west pacific theatre. Combination of submarines, destroyers, fregat and DF-21, DF26, and DF17 + H6 carrying LARSM + PLAAF will be more than enough to face US Navy and the allies. She has hundreds of DF-21 and DF17 that have potential to neutralize carriers and airbased in Guam, Japan, and Korea.

Who's going to embargo China other than US and allies: Japan, SKorea, Taiwan, Australia and Western Europe?
The biggest producer and exporter of steel, oil, copper, bauxite, nickel etc are not US/Europe/Japan.

 

[HerbertPervert]

Problem here is how many platforms does Indonesia have and can they handle the logistics? You don't want to end up like Egypt, essentially doing window shopping for jets like women grabbing purses.

 

[jhungary]

You can't read or what?

Here I quote for you:

The data compiled by the Office of Naval Intelligence says that a growing gap in fleet sizes is being helped by China's shipbuilders being more than 200 times more capable of producing surface warships and submarines.​

So yes... 200 times is for building warships and submarines!

China doesn't need many aircraft carriers to fight US in west pacific theatre. Combination of submarines, destroyers, fregat and DF-21, DF26, and DF17 + H6 carrying LARSM + PLAAF will be more than enough to face US Navy and the allies. She has hundreds of DF-21 and DF17 that have potential to neutralize carriers and airbased in Guam, Japan, and Korea.

Who's going to embargo China other than US and allies: Japan, SKorea, Taiwan, Australia and Western Europe?
The biggest producer and exporter of steel, oil, copper, bauxite, nickel etc are not US/Europe/Japan.

Do you think Taiwan ballistic

And you can't read or what?

This is the ONI picture that your article use, can you kindly read back to me what is the word I have circled it out for you?

On the other hand, if you don't know the difference between commercial and military ship then there aren't really nothing we can talk about. Moreover, how do you get enough navy sailor to staff the extra ship? You can't just pull sailor off the street and expect them to know how to use and operate all the weapon system and subsystem. A typical shipborne sailor have between 18-40 months on the job training, how you are going to crew those ship that you build?

And what's going to happen when US, Australia and Japan embargo China? I don't know Australia is the primary supplier to China on High Grade Iron ore, coal, bauxite, and Japan is the primary supplier of IC and silicone product to China, and US in high grade Petroleum product tell me what can China build if Aluminium, Iron, Steel, Silicon is cut off? Well, I guess you can always build your ship with wood.

 

[Indos]

Problem here is how many platforms does Indonesia have and can they handle the logistics? You don't want to end up like Egypt, essentially doing window shopping for jets like women grabbing purses.

We are operating many kind of planes and so far there are no issues.

Logistic ? Our strategy is to put all SU 27/30 in one base in South Sulawesi where the logistic for the plane is concentrated at that base. F16 is concentrated in base in East Java and another based in Riau province in Sumatra.

As I said in the future we only will have three kind of fighters which are F15, Rafale, and KF21.

At the mean time we are not really efficient with lot of plane variation but it is still needed to spread the planes into our vast territory.

 

[kingQamaR]

We are operating many kind of planes and so far there are no issues.

Logistic ? Our strategy is to put all SU 27/30 in one base in South Sulawesi where the logistic for the plane is concentrated at that base. F16 is concentrated in base in East Java and another based in Riau province in Sumatra.

As I said in the future we only will have three kind of fighters which are F15, Rafale, and KF21.

At the mean time we are not really efficient with lot of plane variation but it is still needed to spread the planes into our vast territory.

War is about logistic ... Just pick one type of the two . Either you go full F15 or Full Rafale all the way ..
You don't live in the perfect world anyway ..