What's new

October Surprise: my prediction for war

.
A few hundred J20 and a few dozen H20 stealth bomber by year 2025.:-)


J-20 will be unlikely to get WS-15 engine till 2025. Till then it remains compromised due to it's previous generation engine.
We have no idea whether WS-10 equipped J-20s can be retrofitted with WS-15.

Don't expect H-20 to go into IOC till 2025 at least and then no more than 12 will be available.
 
Last edited:
.
i wonder if OP is Dr Shahid Masood by any chance :p
 
.
J-20 will be unlikely to get WS-15 engine till 2025. Till then it remains compromised due to it's previous generation engine.
No one expecting it to be WS-15 ready by 2025, but compromised? J20A version still has undoubtly advantage over enemy aircrafts,both number,quailty wise.
 
.
No one expecting it to be WS-15 ready by 2025, but compromised? J20A version still has undoubtly advantage over enemy aircrafts,both number,quailty wise.


J-20 cannot be called a true 5th gen fighter till it has a 5th gen engine in the WS-15. Yes it can beat F-16 easily but will be at a severe disadvantage against F-22.

It will need to rely on afterburner a lot to obtain enough thrust in order to compensate for it's low dry thrust and so will hampered in terms of range and maybe even stealth(thermal signature of after-burning engine).

Also we have no idea whether WS-10 J-20 can be retrofitted with WS-15 and so China may keep producing low numbers of J-20s till WS-15 is ready to be fitted.
 
Last edited:
.
American cruise missiles are slow and easy to shoot down.
Being slow does not equate to being easy to shoot down - how many American cruise missiles could be shot down over the course of years in any theater of operations?

American cruise missiles have a small RCS by virtue of stealthy applications, made to fly really close to the surface with sophisticated onboard ECM capabilities, and programmed to exploit coverage gaps on the surface to the extent possible. Flight speed levels are also good enough to reach designated targets in a short span of time - its not like they take forever to reach a target. Terminal attack speed levels typically fall in the supersonic and/or hypersonic regimes. All of these characteristics in combination allow cruise missiles to slip through defensive arrangements on land and score kills. These types never disappointed.

Poor judgement on your part.

I challenge the Americans to shoot down the 2000+ ballistic missiles heading toward Japan, Korea and Guam on the first day of the war
How many Launchers are there in Chinese inventory?

Well-researched figures below:

china-military-capability-table-866.jpg


For Japan and South Korea, SRBMs will do.

250 Launchers in total

For Guam, IRBMs will be needed.

80 Launchers in total

If YOU wish to strike at these regions, high-value targets must he considered (YOU will be wasting costly munitions otherwise); these are usually heavily defended spaces/assets and there is good probability of incoming ballistic missiles being shot down in the process (missile defenses in place). The ones which might get through might not be sufficient to cripple a number of high-value targets across the board.

Now China will end up fighting on multiple fronts and will have to split its resources accordingly. The WAR has just begun...

At this rate, YOU risk depleting your ballistic missile inventory in a span of few days, and a WAR can last months and even years.

Now consider military might and options at the disposal of South Korea, Japan, and USA respectively - very lengthy discussion in itself.

Sorry my friend but WAR is not merely numbers game and neither ballistic missiles will grant you VICTORY in one. People should do the math before presenting arguments.

Objectives should be REALISTIC and ATTAINABLE - always.
 
.
Sometime between October 10 and October 22, the US will announce an adjustment in the One China Policy and upgrade its diplomatic relations with Taiwan to ambassador level. Within 24 hours, PLAAF will penetrate Taiwan airspace and commence an air war over Taiwan. ...


So only 4 days left until WW III?
 
.
Whether it is in a few days or not is perhaps said in jest, but the thread is nevertheless very interesting and a fun read. I personally think that if the US pushes on Taiwan, China will not show restraint. And if Japanese territory is used in the fight, it gives the perfect chance to China to even the score by decimating Japanese cities.
 
.
Whether it is in a few days or not is perhaps said in jest, but the thread is nevertheless very interesting and a fun read. I personally think that if the US pushes on Taiwan, China will not show restraint. And if Japanese territory is used in the fight, it gives the perfect chance to China to even the score by decimating Japanese cities.
Japan is largely irrelevant in Sino-Taiwan conflict.

Decimating Japanese cities? You make it sound like as if Japan will just let that happen and China can get away with anything. Japan will invoke QUAD....
 
.
Japan is largely irrelevant in Sino-Taiwan conflict.

Decimating Japanese cities? You make it sound like as if Japan will just let that happen and China can get away with anything.

I guess you think otherwise, but being able to disagree in a civilized manner, politely is something that would benefit the forum. You seem to have a few lessons missing in that quarter.
 
.
I guess you think otherwise, but being able to disagree in a civilized manner, politely is something that would benefit the forum. You seem to have a few lessons missing in that quarter.
I sense OVERREACTION in you....

Japan can invoke QUAD to counter China should it come under attack. I merely reminded you of this fact - in good faith.

This thread is driven by wild imaginations/predictions in large part. Let us see WHAT HAPPENS in the M/o October. And if these predictions do not materialize... PDF have standards to uphold.
 
.
So only 4 days left until WW III?
It's starting now...

KMT's latest proposals are of 'Taiwan independence' nature: analysts


Taiwan's "Legislative Yuan" on Tuesday passed two proposals from the KMT, which are to "request the US to help confront the CPC," and "for the Taiwan Island and the US to resume diplomatic ties," Taiwan local media reported. The KMT also called on the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to "work actively" on these two issues.

The KMT, in its proposals, urged the ruling DPP in Taiwan to persuade Washington to consider the Chinese mainland as a "threat". It even suggested DPP set a goal to resume so-called "diplomatic ties with the US". The proposals were passed at the "Legislative Yuan" and sent to related departments to study, local media reported.

Zhang Wensheng, a deputy dean of the Taiwan Research Institute at Xiamen University, said that the KMT proposals were made to distance itself from the Chinese mainland, and also, to play up its image of "loving Taiwan and protecting Taiwan" so as to compete with the DPP.

Whether it is the "resumption of 'diplomatic relations'", or the US' military defense of Taiwan, it is nothing to do with Taiwan, but ultimately a decision by Washington, Zhang noted. Also, it is wishful thinking in the island of Taiwan.

In fact, the ruling DPP had previously hyped the "resumption of diplomatic relations" as well. On February 13 this year, Taiwan's "Legislative Yuan" leader Yu Shyi-kun met with William Christensen, Director of the Taipei Office of the American Institute in Taiwan, and suggested the "resumption of diplomatic relations." Christensen did not respond.
 
.
Being slow does not equate to being easy to shoot down - how many American cruise missiles could be shot down over the course of years in any theater of operations?

American cruise missiles have a small RCS by virtue of stealthy applications, made to fly really close to the surface with sophisticated onboard ECM capabilities, and programmed to exploit coverage gaps on the surface to the extent possible. Flight speed levels are also good enough to reach designated targets in a short span of time - its not like they take forever to reach a target. Terminal attack speed levels typically fall in the supersonic and/or hypersonic regimes. All of these characteristics in combination allow cruise missiles to slip through defensive arrangements on land and score kills. These types never disappointed.

Poor judgement on your part.


How many Launchers are there in Chinese inventory?

Well-researched figures below:

china-military-capability-table-866.jpg


For Japan and South Korea, SRBMs will do.

250 Launchers in total

For Guam, IRBMs will be needed.

80 Launchers in total

If YOU wish to strike at these regions, high-value targets must he considered (YOU will be wasting costly munitions otherwise); these are usually heavily defended spaces/assets and there is good probability of incoming ballistic missiles being shot down in the process (missile defenses in place). The ones which might get through might not be sufficient to cripple a number of high-value targets across the board.

Now China will end up fighting on multiple fronts and will have to split its resources accordingly. The WAR has just begun...

At this rate, YOU risk depleting your ballistic missile inventory in a span of few days, and a WAR can last months and even years.

Now consider military might and options at the disposal of South Korea, Japan, and USA respectively - very lengthy discussion in itself.

Sorry my friend but WAR is not merely numbers game and neither ballistic missiles will grant you VICTORY in one. People should do the math before presenting arguments.

Objectives should be REALISTIC and ATTAINABLE - always.

150 H-6K, H-6N, and H-6J can carry 900 Tomahawk-sized ALCMs.

150 * 6 = 900

These 900 Tomahawk-sized ALCMs can be used to hit Guam or carrier strike group (CSG).

The Chinese H-6 bomber fleet can rearm/refuel and do this AGAIN and AGAIN.
0MauOuR.jpg


How do I know China has a Tomahawk-sized ALCM?

Because they paraded it last year. The KD-63 on the right of this picture has a known length of 7.0 meters. That makes the brand new ALCM on the left LARGER than the Tomahawk (5.56 m length).
9aUwrbs.png


We also know the Flanker centerline pylon can carry a large Tomahawk-sized ALCM. We know because India already does it.
ZPl8WyO.jpg


China has HUNDREDS of Flankers that can do this too.
3pEyM3j.jpg

Qu0iHeG.jpg
 
.
J-20 will be unlikely to get WS-15 engine till 2025. Till then it remains compromised due to it's previous generation engine.
We have no idea whether WS-10 equipped J-20s can be retrofitted with WS-15.

Don't expect H-20 to go into IOC till 2025 at least and then no more than 12 will be available.
WS-15 will be incorporated into the J-20 very soon, most likely in the next year or 2022. It will have to be tested on the J-20 before receiving design certification, which the head of the Chinese Gas Turbine Institute said would occur between 2021 to 2023. As for the J-20 being retrofitted with the WS-15, most likely this is not possible considering the intake changes that must occur as the WS-15 is a low bypass ratio engine (~0.3) while the WS-10 BPR is relatively high at 0.6.

For the H-20, I too believe 2025 would be the IOC but why do you assume no more than 12 will be available? Surely the Chinese are aiming to match the B-21 production rather than the B-2?
 
.
150 H-6K, H-6N, and H-6J can carry 900 Tomahawk-sized ALCMs.

150 * 6 = 900

These 900 Tomahawk-sized ALCMs can be used to hit Guam or carrier strike group (CSG).

The Chinese H-6 bomber fleet can rearm/refuel and do this AGAIN and AGAIN.
0MauOuR.jpg


How do I know China has a Tomahawk-sized ALCM?

Because they paraded it last year. The KD-63 on the right of this picture has a known length of 7.0 meters. That makes the brand new ALCM on the left LARGER than the Tomahawk (5.56 m length).
9aUwrbs.png


We also know the Flanker centerline pylon can carry a large Tomahawk-sized ALCM. We know because India already does it.
ZPl8WyO.jpg


China has HUNDREDS of Flankers that can do this too.
3pEyM3j.jpg

Qu0iHeG.jpg
How many of those bombers can be made airborne for a particular operation in one go? It cannot be all of them.

As for the jet fighters, how many Chinese aerial refueling platforms are in service in the present? only 13 (not good)

KD-63 is LACM class and not suitable for attacking USN in the Pacific. Even if anti-ship capabilities are assumed, stated range will force Chinese bombers and Jet fighters to get too close to USN formations to be safe.

gormley-table2.jpg


If China is to fight USA then this battle must be on your terms with realistic objectives such as defending a part of your territory or in a friendly neighboring country invaded by USA - not out in the open with all options on the table. China is not on this level yet (ignoring nuclear option).

USN is equipped with remarkable set-of-defenses lately - they have invested a great deal in this area in the last two decades.

USN is potent on many counts including in the EW spectrum - this is the domain where much of the WAR will be fought. Bediou denial is a given.

PLAN is your best bet against USN given its sheer size in the present. However, numbers do not imply parity in technologies fielded.

China can take on India in the present but USA is entirely different beast in comparison. It is important to have realistic expectations in this theme.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom