The US's experimental 'lighting carriers' are 'much more capable' than China's current carriers, top US admiral says

[renhai]

The reason I have that many ready to go answer is because I am fighting the American (Controlled by a friend of mine, a retired LTC) on a wargame between China and Taiwan for a think tank judged by a bench of academic and ex-military. And I am ironically controlling the Chinese force and now at day 34, my force isn't making any headway into Taiwan.

There are a lot of different factors affecting how this war is going to be fought, mostly people think of the distant and the size between China and Taiwan and they would think there are more than enough resource for China to take on, afterall, China is 100x size of Taiwan. However, it's because Taiwan is small, China cannot put as much force as they think they can (or rather, most people think they can) on it, think of it like a funnel, you have a big opening and a small end, if you pour a lot of water into the funnel, you will just spill it instead of getting the water flow quicker, the same apply to the logistic in war. You can have your million strong army, but the coastline of Taiwan will not change simply because you want to land a million man on it. That's funnelling.

It's like a old fighter pilot saying. It didn't matter if you are 1 against many, there can only be 1 aircraft at your six all the time. @gambit would probably can explain this better than me.

MacArthur: or are you going to command the UN army?

 

[FuturePAF]

The reason I have that many ready to go answer is because I am fighting the American (Controlled by a friend of mine, a retired LTC) on a wargame between China and Taiwan for a think tank judged by a bench of academic and ex-military. And I am ironically controlling the Chinese force and now at day 34, my force isn't making any headway into Taiwan.

There are a lot of different factors affecting how this war is going to be fought, mostly people think of the distant and the size between China and Taiwan and they would think there are more than enough resource for China to take on, afterall, China is 100x size of Taiwan. However, it's because Taiwan is small, China cannot put as much force as they think they can (or rather, most people think they can) on it, think of it like a funnel, you have a big opening and a small end, if you pour a lot of water into the funnel, you will just spill it instead of getting the water flow quicker, the same apply to the logistic in war. You can have your million strong army, but the coastline of Taiwan will not change simply because you want to land a million man on it. That's funnelling.

It's like a old fighter pilot saying. It didn't matter if you are 1 against many, there can only be 1 aircraft at your six all the time. @gambit would probably can explain this better than me.

That sound really cool; the experience from the war game you are sharing with us, it really helps debunk the assumptions us laypeople have about the potential conflict.

How do you factor in the potential use of tens of thousands drones? Especially airborne drones, coming in waves, with many being lost, more will just keep coming until the opposition is overwhelmed.

Sure the island is a funnel, but I’m not just talking about the ports, but with helicopters, the airborne forces could take the high ground behind the frontlines, and use the high ground against the defenders. A lot of defenses are necessary out in the open and not just pop-up threats to the PLA, so a day 1 strike could knock out a lot of the defenses.

Btw, what were the other limitations/hindrances by day 34, other then logistics?

Also, what was the size of the Chinese force in your warfare?

 

[renhai]

Yeah, they also think their military is some hive mind failure proof 100% motivated fearless army and that the hundreds of thousands of casualties they will endure in a war against Taiwan will have 0 effect on the motivation and capability of their military.

They make it sound like their military will have minimal casualties because they think they have the right answer to any of their enemy's moves, just like Russia thought they will defeat Ukraine in 3 days because "S400 and Su-35 will destroy Ukrainian air force, Iskander and Khinzal will destroy Ukrainian air defenses, KA-52 and T-90 will destroy Ukrainian tanks and artillery will destroy Ukrainian infantry" but turns out all of their "superior weapons" that supposedly counter every step Ukraine could take failed, because war is chaos, not an organized turn based game of chess.

The same 1 dimensional way of thinking China military fans here talk about makes me laugh, for example "DF-21D will kill all American aircraft carriers" what makes them think the US has no technological/strategic/tactical ways of countering such weapons? "J-20 will kill F-22 and F-35", "Type 055 will destroy Zumwalt", "HQ-9 and PL-15 will destroy American AWACS" etc etc.

They think their command and supply chains will never suffer. They think a war is simply about numbers on paper clashing with other numbers on paper and the side with more numbers win.

Laughable.

How much courage did MacArthur give you?

baby. You know. China gained P5 status with war and blood. China has an industrial chain that you can't imagine. And production capacity you can't imagine. And the ability to mobilize war that you can't imagine.

China wants a peaceful solution (doesn't want another civil war). This does not mean that you can underestimate China's war capabilities.

 

[Beny Karachun]

How much courage did MacArthur give you?

baby. You know. China gained P5 status with war and blood. China has an industrial chain that you can't imagine. And production capacity you can't imagine. And the ability to mobilize war that you can't imagine.

China wants a peaceful solution (doesn't want another civil war). This does not mean that you can underestimate China's war capabilities.

I don't know man, 3-5 times more dead Chinese/North Korean soldiers than the UN casualties, Korean and Chinese invasion repelled, despite relatively small US and much smaller US allies involvement.

Seems to me like if a war would happen now NATO would kick your ***.

No one is underestimating Chinese capabilities, it's only you that overestimate them.

 

[jhungary]

Yeah, they also think their military is some hive mind failure proof 100% motivated fearless army and that the hundreds of thousands of casualties they will endure in a war against Taiwan will have 0 effect on the motivation and capability of their military.

They make it sound like their military will have minimal casualties because they think they have the right answer to any of their enemy's moves, just like Russia thought they will defeat Ukraine in 3 days because "S400 and Su-35 will destroy Ukrainian air force, Iskander and Khinzal will destroy Ukrainian air defenses, KA-52 and T-90 will destroy Ukrainian tanks and artillery will destroy Ukrainian infantry" but turns out all of their "superior weapons" that supposedly counter every step Ukraine could take failed, because war is chaos, not an organized turn based game of chess.

The same 1 dimensional way of thinking China military fans here talk about makes me laugh, for example "DF-21D will kill all American aircraft carriers" what makes them think the US has no technological/strategic/tactical ways of countering such weapons? "J-20 will kill F-22 and F-35", "Type 055 will destroy Zumwalt", "HQ-9 and PL-15 will destroy American AWACS" etc etc.

They think their command and supply chains will never suffer. They think a war is simply about numbers on paper clashing with other numbers on paper and the side with more numbers win.

Laughable.

Well, most of them are laughable, but this guy, he is something else.

If you look at his previous post using 3rd Battle of Seoul to "demonstrate" that Chinese kick UN behind. Anyone with 1 IQ would have figure out Seoul is neither controlled by the Chinese nor the North Korean, which mean there are going to be a Forth Battle of Seoul (Operation Ripper) and in that battle UN kicked his ancestor a$$....Which make this a bad example...

This is not just one directional thinking; this is just plain stupid.....

 

[Beny Karachun]

If you destroyed the radar, then Syria would put up another exactly the same ineffective radar for air defence ? Thats your logic, only a fool like you would do that, and where can Syria get another exact same radar in no time ?
The Syrias S 300 are/were controlled by the Russians, and they were not allowing Syria to fire the missiles.

Why Syria isn’t firing its S-300 missiles at Israeli jets

***

www.haaretz.com

I guess they had nothing better to do with the spare radar they had.

Syria says Russian missile defence system ‘ineffective’

The Syrian military has criticised the Russian S-300 missile defence system, saying that it is largely ineffective against Israeli air strikes, Avia.pro reported yesterday. A Syrian military source told the...

www.middleeastmonitor.com

This is more accurate about the S-300.

 

[renhai]

I don't know man, 3-5 times more dead Chinese/North Korean soldiers than the UN casualties, Korean and Chinese invasion repelled, despite relatively small US and much smaller US allies involvement.
View attachment 904800
View attachment 904801

Seems to me like if a war would happen now NATO would kick your ***.

No one is underestimating Chinese capabilities, it's only you that overestimate them.

baby. 17 Countries cannot win the Korean War. This is not an honor.

anyway. even if the United Nations military uses aircraft carriers and air superiority. Celebrating the 71st anniversary of the Chinese army's occupation of Seoul. lol.

oh Are you sure NATO has the courage to go to war with China? Not sending mercenaries to swim in the Taiwan Strait?

 

[Beny Karachun]

How do you factor in the potential use of tens of thousands drones? Especially airborne drones, coming in waves, with many being lost, more will just keep coming until the opposition is overwhelmed.

You could cost effectively destroy drones with other drones, you could hide your air defenses, you could use jammers (for RC drones), you could use non-nuclear EMPs with flux compression generator bombs, laser defense systems etc.

I'm sure at least part of those ways are available for Taiwan or are in development.

 

[jhungary]

That sound really cool; the experience from the war game you are sharing with us, it really helps debunk the assumptions us laypeople have about the potential conflict.

How do you factor in the potential use of tens of thousands drones? Especially airborne drones, coming in waves, with many being lost, more will just keep coming until the opposition is overwhelmed.

Sure the island is a funnel, but I’m not just talking about the ports, but with helicopters, the airborne forces could take the high ground behind the frontlines, and use the high ground against the defenders. A lot of defenses are necessary out in the open and not just pop-up threats to the PLA, so a day 1 strike could knock out a lot of the defenses.

Btw, what were the other limitations/hindrances by day 34, other then logistics?

Also, what was the size of the Chinese force in your warfare?

If I share the wargame outcome here, this is going to be troll to death....

I used drone on the war game alright, then got ambushed by Taiwanese AD and a JTF of USN/JMSDF. Started to think I throw missile at Kadena and Okinawa on day 2 was a mistake. The problem is, I can't launch that many drone to cover the entire Taiwanese island, once it pass the West Coast of Taiwan, I no longer have ISTAR control because anything I send would be intercepted by a CTF that set sail before the war, they basically just lay outside my Intermediate Ballistic Missile range and somewhere 360 miles off East Coast of Taiwan waiting to launch missile and aircraft on my attacking force.

I made a mistake and pushed my missile battery too close to my own shore to maximize the range and paid for it by a triple F-35 strike from a combine Carrier Task Group and land base aircraft, lost 8 missile battery.

On day 34, my problem is force regeneration. I send in a 200,000 force to invade Taiwan, half of them is now gone taking beach head, it's not like I can't supplement my force but I keep putting my reserve into depleted unit, I need to find a way to get another 50,000 troop to turn the ties, but right now it is not gonna happen and I while I have secured 2 beach head on the North end of the Island (Taipei) and Tainan, tried to advance toward Keelung and got bomb to shit by Fighter of Unknown Origin from Okinawa, I suspected that is where my enemy hiding his 2 LHA there, thinking of sending a KJ-500 in the area to sus out their navy, but I think that's too risky.

Both US and China do not have Air Superiority in Taiwan on day 34, I have the western part from West Coast to China East Coast, the American have put out 2 Aircraft Carrier Group Somewhere East of Taiwan.

 

[renhai]

You could cost effectively destroy drones with other drones, you could hide your air defenses, you could use jammers (for RC drones), you could use non-nuclear EMPs with flux compression generator bombs, laser defense systems etc.

Baby. Do you know that China has these world-class technologies?

 

[jhungary]

-snipped-.

@waz @LeGenD

 

[FuturePAF]

You could cost effectively destroy drones with other drones, you could hide your air defenses, you could use jammers (for RC drones), you could use non-nuclear EMPs with flux compression generator bombs, laser defense systems etc.

I'm sure at least part of those ways are available for Taiwan or are in development.

Sure, that’s why it will be hard, no matter what China tries, and it will be a war of attrition and technologically cat and mouse.

 

[Beast]

There is also no proof that HGV can hit a moving target like a smaller carrier. Besides, terminal guidance is very vulnerable to electronic tricks. If US is moving against China, Chinese sats and drones will not really be helpful in terminal guidance. Most will get blinded by american electronic warfare. That leaves the radar and optical guidance in warhead alone which can never be terribly powerful and can be confused easily.

Kiddy... You need to brush up more of your knowledge.

 

[renhai]

If I share the wargame outcome here, this is going to be troll to death....

I used drone on the war game alright, then got ambushed by Taiwanese AD and a JTF of USN/JMSDF. Started to think I throw missile at Kadena and Okinawa on day 2 was a mistake. The problem is, I can't launch that many drone to cover the entire Taiwanese island, once it pass the West Coast of Taiwan, I no longer have ISTAR control because anything I send would be intercepted by a CTF that set sail before the war, they basically just lay outside my Intermediate Ballistic Missile range and somewhere 360 miles off East Coast of Taiwan waiting to launch missile and aircraft on my attacking force.

I made a mistake and pushed my missile battery too close to my own shore to maximize the range and paid for it by a triple F-35 strike from a combine Carrier Task Group and land base aircraft, lost 8 missile battery.

On day 34, my problem is force regeneration. I send in a 200,000 force to invade Taiwan, half of them is now gone taking beach head, it's not like I can't supplement my force but I keep putting my reserve into depleted unit, I need to find a way to get another 50,000 troop to turn the ties, but right now it is not gonna happen and I while I have secured 2 beach head on the North end of the Island (Taipei) and Tainan, tried to advance toward Keelung and got bomb to shit by Fighter of Unknown Origin from Okinawa, I suspected that is where my enemy hiding his 2 LHA there, thinking of sending a KJ-500 in the area to sus out their navy, but I think that's too risky.

Both US and China do not have Air Superiority in Taiwan on day 34, I have the western part from West Coast to China East Coast, the American have put out 2 Aircraft Carrier Group Somewhere East of Taiwan.

baby,.17 Countries cannot win the Korean War. Now you think you're smarter than MacArthur?

Here is an idiot who thinks he is smarter than MacArthur and gives negative comments to others wantonly.

 

[etylo]

I guess they had nothing better to do with the spare radar they had.

Syria says Russian missile defence system ‘ineffective’

The Syrian military has criticised the Russian S-300 missile defence system, saying that it is largely ineffective against Israeli air strikes, Avia.pro reported yesterday. A Syrian military source told the...

www.middleeastmonitor.com

This is more accurate about the S-300.

Thats your delusion. Fool's logic.