The US Air Force just made a huge show in the South China Sea with 3 nuclear-capable bombers

[IceCold]

Boy,if policy had nothing to do with military capability,then military capability had nothing to do with victory,.

You seemed to know your own weakness,I feel very glad for your parents.

Couldnt have said any better.

Political will have nothing to do with military capability. Too bad you ain't gots the brains to see that.

Well at least you accept that your country does not have the stomach to take on a country the size of China.

 

[IceCold]

And what will you say WHEN we sank the PLAN in the SCS ?

Wake me up WHEN US actually MUSTER ups the courage to do that.

 

[gambit]

Wake me up WHEN US actually MUSTER ups the courage to do that.

You will be woken up -- at our convenience and the sounds of water rushing thru PLAN ships.

 

[sword1947]

Whether we want or not, US still station their B52 in Guam.
I dont understand why you call us "betray ourself"?

Mentioned that the title made by another one, not my title, as the thread was combined.
My title " B52, B1, B2 took to the sky during their first integrated bomber operation in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region"

hey, viet. I Bet 100$ that your US friend dare not to attack China with nuke now. if you dont believe, ask them to try

 

[T-Rex]

hey, viet. I Bet 100$ that your US friend dare not to attack China with nuke now. if you dont believe, ask them to try

The US is looking for a way to save face to her allies. The Yankees are scared to death but at the same time they want their good old days to return. Fortunately for us and unfortunately for them those good old days are now by gone era.

 

[T-Rex]

After Saddam Hussein was removed from power back in '03, we interviewed many of the Iraqi Army's top leadership, active duty and retired. We wondered what happened in Desert Storm a decade earlier. Not about the Iraqi Army itself, but about that army's leadership, specifically its psyche.

Essentially, the world contributed to Saddam Hussein's underestimation of US. Much focus were on the combat experience of the Iraqi Army during its war against Iran. Soviet arms were played up. Nationalism emphasized. And many other factors. Saddam Hussein and his generals believed the media of the major countries in the world, including analyses from foreign governments such as the Soviets and China, disseminated thru state owned media, that the Iraqi Army could inflict serious damages to the US military that the US could even plea for a stalemate diplomatic solution. US experience in Viet Nam was used as foundation to critically analyzed the US military for its pending fight against the recently combat hardened Iraqi Army. The bottom line, according to the PLA to the Chinese Politburo, was that the Americans would suffer Vietnam-like casualties.

That is 'exactly' what happened, no ?

But 'they' were so sure. The 'they' being the talking head experts and opinionators that the media trotted out, from retired civilian and military figures. They had charts backed up by yrs of their own experience in best seller memoirs in their own countries that the US was 'entering another Vietnam'. The US had no one in Iraq who knew the country and the people. American soldiers did not know the fanaticism of the Iraqi soldiers. US soldiers were visitors while the Iraqis were the home team favorites. The Iraqis know the terrain and even the air. The 'experts' were so certain that the US was 'entering another Vietnam'.

It is amazing that people in various corners of the Internet would think that the US would fight China like how we did in Iraq. It is amazing that people would think that the US military, once again, would amass troops in nearby allied countries and execute a land invasion of mainland China. They criticized the US military for our 'rigid' mentality without realizing their own truly rigid thinking that the US would fight China the same way we did in Iraq. This is why for the few American military veterans on this forum, we are genuinely baffled.

Personally, I really did thought that Desert Storm was final lesson in underestimating one's potential foe. We did not make that mistake then and I am absolute in my conviction that we will not make that mistake regarding China. I am not talking about the various quotes from generals, retired and active duty, that pointed out the many positive attributes of the Chinese PLA, after all, we went thru it in Desert Storm. I am talking about the nearly inconceivable behind the scenes work currently ongoing by the US military in conceptually taking the PLA apart. You people are making the same mistake about US as when you did back then.

It will not be our peril but yours that are at stake.

Revealed: China's Radars Can Track America's Stealthy F-22 Raptor

Dave Majumdar

February 19, 2016
State-run Chinese media is claiming that the People’s Liberation Army has been able to track the U.S. Air Force’s Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor stealth fighters over the East China Sea. While the Chinese report might be easily dismissed as propaganda—it is not beyond the realm of possibility. In fact—it’s very possible that China can track the Raptor. Stealth is not a cloak of invisibility, after all. Stealth technology simply delays detection and tracking.

First off, if a Raptor is carrying external fuel tanks—as it often does during “ferry missions”—it is not in a stealth configuration. Moreover, the aircraft is often fitted with a Luneburg lens device on its ventral side during peacetime operations that enhances its cross section on radar.

That being said, even combat-configured F-22s are not invisible to enemy radar, contrary to popular belief. Neither is any other tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft with empennage surfaces such as tailfins—the F-35, PAK-FA, J-20 or J-31. That’s just basic physics.

The laws of physics essentially dictate that a tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft must be optimized to defeat higher-frequency bands such the C, X, Ku and the top part of the S bands. There is a “step change” in a Low Observable (LO) aircraft’s signature once the frequency wavelength exceeds a certain threshold and causes a resonant effect. Typically, that resonance occurs when a feature on an aircraft—such as a tail-fin — is less than eight times the size of a particular frequency wavelength. Effectively, small stealth aircraft that do not have the size or weight allowances for two feet or more of radar absorbent material coatings on every surface are forced to make trades as to which frequency bands they are optimized for.
Therefore, a radar operating at a lower-frequency band such as parts of the S or L band—like civilian air traffic control (ATC) radars—are almost certainly able to detect and track tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft. However, a larger stealth aircraft like the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit, which lacks many of the features that cause a resonance effect, is much more effective against low-frequency radars than, for example, an F-35 or F-22. Typically, however, those lower-frequency radars do not provide what Pentagon officials call a “weapons quality” track needed to guide a missile onto a target. “Even if you can see an LO [low observable] strike aircraft with ATC radar, you can’t kill it without a fire control system,” an Air Force official had told me.

That being said, Russia, China and others are developing advanced UHF and VHF band early warning radars that use even longer wavelengths in an effort to cue their other sensors and give their fighters some idea of where an adversary stealth aircraft might be coming from. But the problem with VHF and UHF band radars is that with long wavelengths come large radar resolution cells. That means that contacts are not tracked with the required level of fidelity to guide a weapon onto a target. As one U.S. Navy officer rhetorically asked, “Does the mission require a cloaking device or is it OK if the threat sees it but can’t do anything about it?”

Traditionally, guiding weapons with low frequency radars has been limited by two factors. One factor is the width of the radar beam, while the second is the width of the radar pulse—but both limitations can be overcome with signal processing. Phased array radars—particularly active electronically scanned arrays (AESA)—solve the problem of directional or azimuth resolution because they can steer their radar beams electronically. Moreover, AESA radars can generate multiple beams and can shape those beams for width, sweep rate and other characteristics. Indeed, some industry experts suggested that a combination of high-speed data-links and low-frequency phased-array radars could generate a weapons quality track.

The U.S. Navy and Lockheed may have already solved the problem. The service openly talks about the E-2D’s role as the central node of its NIFC-CA battle network to defeat enemy air and missile threats. Rear Adm. Mike Manazir, the Navy’s director of air warfare, described the concept in detail at the U.S. Naval Institute just before Christmas in 2013.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...inas-radars-track-americas-stealth-f-22-15261

This is the only yankee weapon China should worry about. If China can detect it, there's nothing to fear.

 

[gambit]

Revealed: China's Radars Can Track America's Stealthy F-22 Raptor

Dave Majumdar

February 19, 2016
State-run Chinese media is claiming that the People’s Liberation Army has been able to track the U.S. Air Force’s Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor stealth fighters over the East China Sea. While the Chinese report might be easily dismissed as propaganda—it is not beyond the realm of possibility. In fact—it’s very possible that China can track the Raptor. Stealth is not a cloak of invisibility, after all. Stealth technology simply delays detection and tracking.

And it is so dismissed as propaganda.

First off, if a Raptor is carrying external fuel tanks—as it often does during “ferry missions”—it is not in a stealth configuration.

And how is this a bad thing ? Do those fuel tanks stayed on permanently ?

Moreover, the aircraft is often fitted with a Luneburg lens device on its ventral side during peacetime operations that enhances its cross section on radar.

To help air traffic controllers and in enhancing its RCS, the device masks the jet's true RCS. I guess state media 'forgot' to mention that part.

That being said, even combat-configured F-22s are not invisible to enemy radar, contrary to popular belief. Neither is any other tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft with empennage surfaces such as tailfins—the F-35, PAK-FA, J-20 or J-31. That’s just basic physics.

We never claimed anything to be 'invisible'.

This is the only yankee weapon China should worry about. If China can detect it, there's nothing to fear.

People who have actual military experience would cringe.

Essentially, if you can see it but you cannot shoot it before it can shoot you, you have nothing to fear. That is the 'logic' from the PDF Chinese and their cheerleaders. I hope the PLA leadership is infested with their kind.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Revealed: China's Radars Can Track America's Stealthy F-22 Raptor

Dave Majumdar

February 19, 2016
State-run Chinese media is claiming that the People’s Liberation Army has been able to track the U.S. Air Force’s Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor stealth fighters over the East China Sea. While the Chinese report might be easily dismissed as propaganda—it is not beyond the realm of possibility. In fact—it’s very possible that China can track the Raptor. Stealth is not a cloak of invisibility, after all. Stealth technology simply delays detection and tracking.

First off, if a Raptor is carrying external fuel tanks—as it often does during “ferry missions”—it is not in a stealth configuration. Moreover, the aircraft is often fitted with a Luneburg lens device on its ventral side during peacetime operations that enhances its cross section on radar.

That being said, even combat-configured F-22s are not invisible to enemy radar, contrary to popular belief. Neither is any other tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft with empennage surfaces such as tailfins—the F-35, PAK-FA, J-20 or J-31. That’s just basic physics.

The laws of physics essentially dictate that a tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft must be optimized to defeat higher-frequency bands such the C, X, Ku and the top part of the S bands. There is a “step change” in a Low Observable (LO) aircraft’s signature once the frequency wavelength exceeds a certain threshold and causes a resonant effect. Typically, that resonance occurs when a feature on an aircraft—such as a tail-fin — is less than eight times the size of a particular frequency wavelength. Effectively, small stealth aircraft that do not have the size or weight allowances for two feet or more of radar absorbent material coatings on every surface are forced to make trades as to which frequency bands they are optimized for.
Therefore, a radar operating at a lower-frequency band such as parts of the S or L band—like civilian air traffic control (ATC) radars—are almost certainly able to detect and track tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft. However, a larger stealth aircraft like the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit, which lacks many of the features that cause a resonance effect, is much more effective against low-frequency radars than, for example, an F-35 or F-22. Typically, however, those lower-frequency radars do not provide what Pentagon officials call a “weapons quality” track needed to guide a missile onto a target. “Even if you can see an LO [low observable] strike aircraft with ATC radar, you can’t kill it without a fire control system,” an Air Force official had told me.

That being said, Russia, China and others are developing advanced UHF and VHF band early warning radars that use even longer wavelengths in an effort to cue their other sensors and give their fighters some idea of where an adversary stealth aircraft might be coming from. But the problem with VHF and UHF band radars is that with long wavelengths come large radar resolution cells. That means that contacts are not tracked with the required level of fidelity to guide a weapon onto a target. As one U.S. Navy officer rhetorically asked, “Does the mission require a cloaking device or is it OK if the threat sees it but can’t do anything about it?”

Traditionally, guiding weapons with low frequency radars has been limited by two factors. One factor is the width of the radar beam, while the second is the width of the radar pulse—but both limitations can be overcome with signal processing. Phased array radars—particularly active electronically scanned arrays (AESA)—solve the problem of directional or azimuth resolution because they can steer their radar beams electronically. Moreover, AESA radars can generate multiple beams and can shape those beams for width, sweep rate and other characteristics. Indeed, some industry experts suggested that a combination of high-speed data-links and low-frequency phased-array radars could generate a weapons quality track.

The U.S. Navy and Lockheed may have already solved the problem. The service openly talks about the E-2D’s role as the central node of its NIFC-CA battle network to defeat enemy air and missile threats. Rear Adm. Mike Manazir, the Navy’s director of air warfare, described the concept in detail at the U.S. Naval Institute just before Christmas in 2013.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...inas-radars-track-americas-stealth-f-22-15261

This is the only yankee weapon China should worry about. If China can detect it, there's nothing to fear.

We all knew that, don't we?

It is only the USA or Americans that are in denial.

Provoking China using an excuse of FREEDOM OF NAVIGATION when there was not an iota of evidence that China has ever apprehended or blocked any shipping in the region. USA shipping in these seas are simple insignificant unlike those from China or Japan itself there.

WELL. The good news is within the next couple of years all USA slightest trace of superiority will be completely WIPE OFF and perhaps there may a chance of peace in ASIA.

USA has already created HAVOC in the Middle East and now Europe with their policy with US Presidential candidate accusing Obama, Clintons of creating and supporting the IS.

 

[T-Rex]

And it is so dismissed as propaganda.

Of course it is dismissed as propaganda by the US propaganda ministry.

People who have actual military experience would cringe.

Essentially, if you can see it but you cannot shoot it before it can shoot you, you have nothing to fear. That is the 'logic' from the PDF Chinese and their cheerleaders. I hope the PLA leadership is infested with their kind.

I can see that you don't understand the implication of detecting the so-called stealth fighter. Live happily in your fantasy world.

 

[IceCold]

I can see that you don't understand the implication of detecting the so-called stealth fighter. Live happily in your fantasy world.

He is a moron who lives in Hollywood fantasy. I stop taking him seriously a long time ago. You should to.

 

[gambit]

I can see that you don't understand the implication of detecting the so-called stealth fighter. Live happily in your fantasy world.

Buddy, in war time, it is already difficult to detect 'regular' fighters. You have been watching too many cheap movies where the cinematic radar scope is nothing like the real thing, the kind that I am used to. So between you and I, it is YOU who are living in the fantasy world.

 

[cnleio]

Just like last ADIZ of East Sea "B-52 fly come-and-back", this time the show will on SCS ???
I see, soon to setup ADIZ of SCS.

 

[Three_Kingdoms]

And...what is your point? we betrayed Vietnam is what you tried to said.

You should be shame of yourself, those thousand Vietnameses soul taken by this B-52 and you claim that the weapons aren't the killer? , if this B-52 has never been born, you think US could bomb Vietnam?

Talking "SHAME" to these people or their related is a luxury to them

Operation Linebacker II

Aftermath
During Operation Linebacker II a total of 741 B-52 sorties had been dispatched to bomb North Vietnam and 729 actually completed their missions. A total 15,237 tons of ordnance was dropped on 18 industrial and 14 military targets (including eight SAM sites) while fighter-bombers added another 5,000 tons of bombs to the tally
.......
Damage to North Vietnam's infrastructure was severe. The Air Force estimated 500 rail interdictions had taken place, 372 pieces of rolling stock and three million gallons of petroleum products were destroyed, and 80 percent of North Vietnam's electrical power production capability had been eliminated. Logistical imports into North Vietnam were assessed by U.S. intelligence at 160,000 tons per month when the operation began. By January 1973, those imports had dropped to 30,000 tons per month. The North Vietnamese government criticized the operation stating that the U.S. had "carpet-bombed hospitals, schools, and residential areas, committing barbarous crimes against our people", citing the bombing of Bach Mai Hospital on 22 December and Kham Thien street on 26 December which they claimed had resulted in 278 dead and 290 wounded, and over 2,000 homes destroyed. In total, Hanoi claimed that 1,624 civilians had been killed by the bombing.

Both the Soviet Union and China denounced the bombing, while some Western countries also criticized the US operation. In a famous speech, Olof Palme, the Prime Minister of Sweden, compared the bombings to a number of historical "crimes" including the bombing of Guernica, the massacres of Oradour-sur-Glane,Babi Yar, Katyn, Lidice and Sharpeville, and the extermination of Jews and other groups at Treblinka, and said that "now another name can be added to this list: Hanoi, Christmas 1972". His protests resulted in the U.S. withdrawing their ambassador from Sweden and telling Sweden not to send a new ambassador to Washington."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Linebacker_II

North Vietnam, 1972: The Christmas bombing of Hanoi
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20719382

What It Was Like to Blast Vietnam in a B-52
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/what-it-was-blast-vietnam-b-52-16382

In a B-52 bomber over Hanoi, 1 of 5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL_uQ007lHA8w4-fUMwAMzxhOcRrkrOMUi&v=ozSZ6Kj5-A0
In a B-52 bomber over Hanoi, 2 of 5

... and take it to 5 of 5
(Note the first link does not allow embedding, please try the rest )