US Army Picks Tomahawk & SM-6 For Mid-Range Missiles

[F-22Raptor]

WASHINGTON: Instead of picking a single missile to be its thousand-mileMid-Range Capability, the Army has chosen to mix two very different Navy weapons together in its prototype MRC unit: the new, supersonic, high-altitude SM-6 and the venerable, subsonic, low-flying Tomahawk.

“Following a broad review of joint service technologies potentially applicable to MRC, the Army has selected variants of the Navy SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles to be part of the initial prototype,” says a Rapid Capabilities & Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO) statement released this afternoon. “The Army will leverage Navy contract vehicles for missile procurement in support of the Army integration OT [Other Transaction Authority] agreement.”

Lockheed Martin won the OTA contract, worth up to $339.4 million with all options, to integrate the two missiles – both built by Raytheon – into the Army fire control systems, vehicles, and support equipment required for a fully functioning artillery battery. Lockheed builds the current wheeled HIMARS and tracked MLRS launchers, which can handle a wide variety of current and future Army weapons, but neither the service nor the company would say whether they could fire either SM-6 or Tomahawk, citing security concerns.


They are set to enter service in 2023.

I asked the Army if it would modify either weapon to better its needs: The answer is no. “The Army will not modify the Navy missiles,” an official said in an email to Breaking Defense. That means the Army’s going to buy exactly what the Navy is getting.


However, the announcement’s mention of “variants” gives the Army leeway to buy the latest and most upgraded models. That’s important for both weapons.


A Mix of Missile Options

The subsonic Tomahawk cruise missile is the long-serving mainstay of long-range strike. It was first fielded in the Reagan era and has been much upgraded since, with more than 2,000fired in combat since 1991. There used to be a whole family of different versions, but nuclear-tipped, land-based, air-launched, and anti-ship variants were retired after the Cold War. That left the Navy’s conventional-warhead Tomahawk Land Attack Missile(TLAM), which can only be fired from ships and submarines, and only at stationary targets ashore.


But in recent years, anxiety over the growing Chinese fleet led the Pentagon to build a new anti-ship model, the Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MSM). The Army and Marine Corps are both intensely interested in turning Pacific islands into forward outposts bristling with ship-killer missiles, so they’re likely to buy the Maritime Strike model.

The supersonic SM-6 is the latest and sexiest version of the Navy’s Standard Missile family, whose primary role is defensive, built to shoot incoming enemy aircraft and missiles out of the sky. But the new SM-6 is also capable of striking surface targets on land and sea.

The SM-6 selection surprised me at first, because its reported ranges are well short of the 1,000 miles the Army wants for the Mid-Range Capability. While the real range is classified, estimates range up to 290 miles (250 nautical miles).

However, the Navy is now developing an extended-range model of the SM-6, the Block 1B. (It’ll use the rocket booster from another Standard Missile variant, the ICBM-killing SM-3, which is known to have a range greater than 1,000 miles). What’s more, while the current SM-6 maxes out at Mach 3.5, the SM-6 Block 1B will reportedly reach hypersonic speeds, i.e. above Mach 5. While the Navy plans for Block 1B to complete development only in 2024, it wouldn’t be a stretch to have a handful of missiles available early for the Army’s MRC roll-out in late 2023.


Why mix both SM-6 and Tomahawk in the same unit? Part of the answer is probably cost. Tomahawk is relatively affordable at about $1.4 million each, or perhaps $2.5 million for the anti-ship variant. The current model of SM-6 is nearly $5 million, and the hypersonic, extended-range SM-6 1B will no doubt cost more. That allows the Army to buy more Tomahawks than SM-6s and reserve the faster, more expensive missiles for harder or higher-priority targets.

The other benefit is tactical. The Tomahawks come in relatively low and slow, trying to get under radar, while the SM-6s fly high and fast. A missile defense that stops one may not stop the other, complicating the enemy’s countermeasures.

Both missiles are available in the near term, a crucial consideration given the Army’s urgency to field the Mid-Range Capability by the end of 2023. In the longer run, however, the Army may well develop a new weapon for the MRC role, perhaps derived from DARPA’s hypersonic OpFires experiment.

Why should the Army be launching long-range missiles at all?

That’s not something it’s done since the Pershing was retired, and some critics consider it redundant to the existing Navy and Air Force arsenals. But the Army is eager to prove its relevance to future wars against high-tech adversaries, especially in the vast Pacific, and it argues that truck-launched missiles are cheaper to deploy and easier to hide than weapons mounted on ships and planes.

The Army’s official press release and its full responses to my questions follow.


“The Army and joint service partners have conducted extensive mission thread analysis to solidify the kill chain and communications systems required to support MRC operations. Details are not publicly releasable due to OPSEC considerations,” Army officials wrote me in an email.

“The Tomahawk and SM-6 were chosen in order to accelerate a mature capability to address near-peer threats. They provide the required mix of capability to engage desired targets at mid-range distances. Working closely with the Navy, the Army will be able to integrate these missiles for the MRC prototype battery to meet the FY23 fielding date.

“The Army will not modify the Navy missiles. While working on materiel solutions, the Army is also consistently doing analysis to determine the best mix of weapons systems, how the enemy is going to fight against new capabilities, and how to address capability gaps.

“The MRC prototype battery is planned to include a mix of both SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles to provide the desired capability in FY23.”

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/11...30.471718555.1603733422-2058618215.1563220009

 

[shanlung]

WASHINGTON: Instead of picking a single missile to be its thousand-mileMid-Range Capability, the Army has chosen to mix two very different Navy weapons together in its prototype MRC unit: the new, supersonic, high-altitude SM-6 and the venerable, subsonic, low-flying Tomahawk.

“Following a broad review of joint service technologies potentially applicable to MRC, the Army has selected variants of the Navy SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles to be part of the initial prototype,” says a Rapid Capabilities & Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO) statement released this afternoon. “The Army will leverage Navy contract vehicles for missile procurement in support of the Army integration OT [Other Transaction Authority] agreement.”

Lockheed Martin won the OTA contract, worth up to $339.4 million with all options, to integrate the two missiles – both built by Raytheon – into the Army fire control systems, vehicles, and support equipment required for a fully functioning artillery battery. Lockheed builds the current wheeled HIMARS and tracked MLRS launchers, which can handle a wide variety of current and future Army weapons, but neither the service nor the company would say whether they could fire either SM-6 or Tomahawk, citing security concerns.


They are set to enter service in 2023.

I asked the Army if it would modify either weapon to better its needs: The answer is no. “The Army will not modify the Navy missiles,” an official said in an email to Breaking Defense. That means the Army’s going to buy exactly what the Navy is getting.


However, the announcement’s mention of “variants” gives the Army leeway to buy the latest and most upgraded models. That’s important for both weapons.


A Mix of Missile Options

The subsonic Tomahawk cruise missile is the long-serving mainstay of long-range strike. It was first fielded in the Reagan era and has been much upgraded since, with more than 2,000fired in combat since 1991. There used to be a whole family of different versions, but nuclear-tipped, land-based, air-launched, and anti-ship variants were retired after the Cold War. That left the Navy’s conventional-warhead Tomahawk Land Attack Missile(TLAM), which can only be fired from ships and submarines, and only at stationary targets ashore.


But in recent years, anxiety over the growing Chinese fleet led the Pentagon to build a new anti-ship model, the Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MSM). The Army and Marine Corps are both intensely interested in turning Pacific islands into forward outposts bristling with ship-killer missiles, so they’re likely to buy the Maritime Strike model.

The supersonic SM-6 is the latest and sexiest version of the Navy’s Standard Missile family, whose primary role is defensive, built to shoot incoming enemy aircraft and missiles out of the sky. But the new SM-6 is also capable of striking surface targets on land and sea.

The SM-6 selection surprised me at first, because its reported ranges are well short of the 1,000 miles the Army wants for the Mid-Range Capability. While the real range is classified, estimates range up to 290 miles (250 nautical miles).

However, the Navy is now developing an extended-range model of the SM-6, the Block 1B. (It’ll use the rocket booster from another Standard Missile variant, the ICBM-killing SM-3, which is known to have a range greater than 1,000 miles). What’s more, while the current SM-6 maxes out at Mach 3.5, the SM-6 Block 1B will reportedly reach hypersonic speeds, i.e. above Mach 5. While the Navy plans for Block 1B to complete development only in 2024, it wouldn’t be a stretch to have a handful of missiles available early for the Army’s MRC roll-out in late 2023.


Why mix both SM-6 and Tomahawk in the same unit? Part of the answer is probably cost. Tomahawk is relatively affordable at about $1.4 million each, or perhaps $2.5 million for the anti-ship variant. The current model of SM-6 is nearly $5 million, and the hypersonic, extended-range SM-6 1B will no doubt cost more. That allows the Army to buy more Tomahawks than SM-6s and reserve the faster, more expensive missiles for harder or higher-priority targets.

The other benefit is tactical. The Tomahawks come in relatively low and slow, trying to get under radar, while the SM-6s fly high and fast. A missile defense that stops one may not stop the other, complicating the enemy’s countermeasures.

Both missiles are available in the near term, a crucial consideration given the Army’s urgency to field the Mid-Range Capability by the end of 2023. In the longer run, however, the Army may well develop a new weapon for the MRC role, perhaps derived from DARPA’s hypersonic OpFires experiment.

Why should the Army be launching long-range missiles at all?

That’s not something it’s done since the Pershing was retired, and some critics consider it redundant to the existing Navy and Air Force arsenals. But the Army is eager to prove its relevance to future wars against high-tech adversaries, especially in the vast Pacific, and it argues that truck-launched missiles are cheaper to deploy and easier to hide than weapons mounted on ships and planes.

The Army’s official press release and its full responses to my questions follow.


“The Army and joint service partners have conducted extensive mission thread analysis to solidify the kill chain and communications systems required to support MRC operations. Details are not publicly releasable due to OPSEC considerations,” Army officials wrote me in an email.

“The Tomahawk and SM-6 were chosen in order to accelerate a mature capability to address near-peer threats. They provide the required mix of capability to engage desired targets at mid-range distances. Working closely with the Navy, the Army will be able to integrate these missiles for the MRC prototype battery to meet the FY23 fielding date.

“The Army will not modify the Navy missiles. While working on materiel solutions, the Army is also consistently doing analysis to determine the best mix of weapons systems, how the enemy is going to fight against new capabilities, and how to address capability gaps.

“The MRC prototype battery is planned to include a mix of both SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles to provide the desired capability in FY23.”

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/11...30.471718555.1603733422-2058618215.1563220009

China got 3000+++ Mach 3+ YJ12s YJ18s good enough to burn USA 100,000 ton carriers from end to end , not to talk about taking out USA Burkes and Ticos.

And a whole hosts of other smaller YJs numbered in thousands.

And CM401s

 

[khanmubashir]

Sm6 is primarily a Sam so dual purpose
Perhaps they wanna use it for defence also of there battle ground batteries

And increased procurement will reduce the unit cost
Economy of scales

 

[Oldman1]

China got 3000+++ Mach 3+ YJ12s YJ18s good enough to burn USA 100,000 ton carriers from end to end , not to talk about taking out USA Burkes and Ticos.

And a whole hosts of other smaller YJs numbered in thousands.

And CM401s

If you think we only have Harpoons, you are in a world of hurt.

 

[shanlung]

If you think we only have Harpoons, you are in a world of hurt.

Then go have a war with China.

And see who will remain forever young!







EVEN WHEN CHINESE GOT JUST SINGLE SHOT BOLT ACTION RIFLES LIKE IN THE KOREAN WAR, THEY CHASED THE FUCKING AMERICANS AND THE 5 EYES AND THE REST OF THE WORLD WITH AMERICA FROM YALU RIVER TO SOUTH OF THE PARALLEL IN UNDER 3 WEEKS WITH THE ANGMOHS SHITTING DOWN THEIR PANTS.


America forgot about WW2 where China with barely any arms from USA and with single shot bolt rifles and swords and bare hands fought and killed 3,000,000 Japanese invaders?

And USA needed no less than aircraft carriers and battleships and planes and artilleries and automatic rifles to kill 300,000 Japs in the Pacific?

And remember that China in WW2 with single shot bolt rifles and 5 bullets to a rifle were the best armed half of the force. And with swords and bare bodies with explosive strapped to them took on and killed 3,000,000 japanese soldiers.

And USA needed no less than aircraft carriers and battleships and planes and artilleries and automatic rifles to kill 300,000 Japs in the Pacific?

"dare to die corps" http://forlornhopesui.blogspot.com/2015/08/dare-to-die-corps.html

Chinese suicide bomber putting on an explosive vest made out of Model 24 hand grenades to use in an attack on Japanese tanks.


The battle involved a Japanese plan to conquer Xuzhou, a major city in the East. However, the Japanese failed to consider the plans of generals Li Zongren and Bai Chongxi, who planned to encircle the Japanese in the town of Tai'erzhuang. The Japanese operation started on 24 March. Overconfidence led the Japanese commanders to overlook the thousands of inconspicuous "farmers" in the area, who were affiliated with Li Zongren and cut communication lines and supplies, diverted streams, and ruined rail lines. By late March, supplies and fuels were being dropped from airplanes to Japanese troops, but the quantities were insufficient.
On 29 March 1938, a small band of Japanese soldiers tunneled under Tai'erzhuang's walls in an attempt to take the city from within. They were caught by the Nationalist defenders and killed. Over the next week, both sides claimed to hold parts of the city and surrounding area, and many were killed in small arms battles.
Finally, the Japanese attacked frontally, failing to consider the greater Chinese numbers. A major encirclement on 6 April, with Chinese reinforcements, preceded a major Japanese defeat and retreat, which the Chinese failed to capitalize upon fully through pursuit due to a lack of mobility.
The Chinese captured 719 Japanese soldiers and large quantities of military supplies, including 31 pieces of artillery, 11 armored cars, 8 armored fighting vehicles, 1,000 machine guns and 10,000 rifles.
A "dare to die corps" was effectively used against Japanese units.
Chinese suicide bomber putting on an explosive vest made out of Model 24 hand grenades to use in an attack on Japanese tanks
Due to lack of anti-armor weaponry, Suicide bombing was also used against the Japanese. Chinese troops strapped explosives like grenade packs or dynamite to their bodies and threw themselves under Japanese tanks to blow them up. Dynamite and grenades were strapped on by Chinese troops who rushed at Japanese tanks and blew themselves up. During one incident at Taierzhuang, Chinese suicide bombers obliterated four Japanese tanks with grenade bundles.
Amid the celebrations of the victory in Hankow and other Chinese cities, Japan tried to deny and ridiculed the reports of the battle for days. It was reported in the world's newspapers, however, and by mid-April had provoked a Cabinet crisis in Tokyo.
The Chinese scored a major victory, the first of the Nationalist alliance in the war. The battle broke the myth of Japanese military invincibility and resulted in an incalculable benefit to Chinese morale.


Japanese learned kamikaze attacks from what the Chinese did to them in China.

And now China weapons are more powerful and reach further and more accurate than that of USA AND ALL HER ALLIES RUNNING DOGS.
And China got much more of those weapons than USA hope to have

Or Korean War where China with single shot bolt action rifles drove USA and all her allies when USA firepower 100 times greater than China and fighting with automatic weapons and artillery and battleships with 16 inch guns .

The military might and strength of USA with heavy artillery and planes and tanks and battleships with 16 inch guns cannot be resisted by China with economy slightly out of stone age and with single shot bolt action rifles. Bolt operated rifles were just one stage above using muzzle loading muskets and black powder.

That Chinese be slaughtered and turned into red pulp should they dare to fight good old Dugout in Korea.

Chinese whacked USA and the UN combined that they had to flee south of the Parallel as demanded by China.Chinese fought with bolt operated rifles against Ma Dueces , automatic weapons and artillery and tanks and planes and chopters and battleships with 16″ guns.

Go read the book by David Halberstam
The Coldest Winter

Look on the front line at 24 Nov 1950 and the front line of 16 Dec 1950.

It took China only twenty days and less to do that push down to 38 parallel fighting USA and the UN combined who had 100 times and more of the firepower of China.

And what about Vietnam?
USA firepower at least 100 times that of Vietnam and China combined?

AND NOW CHINA GOT FAR MORE POWERFUL WEAPONS WITH BIGGER BANG AND LONGER REACH THAN THE ANGMOHS
AND CHINA GOT FUCKING MORE OF THAT AS WELL

 

[shanlung]

Japanese learned kamikaze attacks from what the Chinese did to them in China.

Much of what is thought to be Japanese actually derived from China that Japanese learned from China.

The game Go is actually Wei Chi.
Japanese tea ceremony came from ancient China
Bonsai is a chinese concept. Penzai 盆栽 , also known as Penjing 盆景 , is the ancient Chinese art of depicting artistically formed trees, other plants, and landscapes in miniature.

Zen Buddhism , that most thought to be Japanese, is Taoism in Buddhist wrapping. In China that is Chan Buddhism 禪

Chan Buddhism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Japanese Kanji 漢字 is HanJi, or Han characters, or Chinese characters.

Japanese learned kamikaze attacks from what the Chinese did to them in China.

That was well known from many other sources.
Below one of those source published recently in 2020

 

[Oldman1]

Then go have a war with China.

And see who will remain forever young!

If you have all those weapons and we only have the harpoon, why don't you invade Taiwan? Did the Korean War give China nightmares because you guys created the longest retreat as you said on the U.S. led military, but what happened after that? You guys took Seoul, but why is it out of your hands? Why didn't the U.S. military surrendered? Why longest retreat but not a defeat?

 

[shanlung]

If you have all those weapons and we only have the harpoon, why don't you invade Taiwan?

Why?

Chinese do not yearn to kill Chinese.

Taiwanese I knew in Taiwan over a 30 years period all felt that they are Chinese. Chinese in language and culture and history.

Despite the instigations of Dotard and Liar Pompeo and NED and 5 Eyes , Taiwanese know they are Chinese.

China know in time, the reunion will be made. So why any need to fight?

Only Muricans , and Dotard and Pompeo praying and hoping and yearning for Chinese to kill Chinese.
Chinese will see Dotard eventually dragged out of Whitehouse kicking and screaming and 1000 cameras rolling and watching.

Pompeo will be back in some toilet bowl and someone will flush that and turn off the light.

Did the Korean War give China nightmares because you guys created the longest retreat as you said on the U.S. led military, but what happened after that? You guys took Seoul, but why is it out of your hands? Why didn't the U.S. military surrendered? Why longest retreat but not a defeat?

What nightmares?

Muricans ran south of parallel with shit and pee pouring down their pants.

You cannot win even with goat herders in Afghan and Iraq and Somalia


USA WON AGAINST NICARAGUA, GRENADA AND PANAMA.
THATS ABOUT THE WARS USA WON SINCE WW2




In Korea where USA firepower was at least 100 times more than China and China industrial might was much less than sub Sahara Africa , the Chinese whacked USA and the UN combined that they had to flee south of the Parallel as demanded by China.

And what about Vietnam?
What ws the military edge USA had over Vietnam and China who supported Vietnam with boots on the ground.
About 100 or more to 1?
Didn’t USA had far far greather military technology supremacy over China and Vietnam?
Firepower of USA which included B52s, battleships, Spooky gunships? Helicopter gunships and who threw everything into fighting Viets including toilet bowls?

Your memory so short?
Maybe this can refresh your memory.
How about this!

Mylai rings a bell? A moment to be proud of ? Among many other moments like Mylai.
Help to boost up the numbers for body counts! Small or big, young or old, still bodies to be counted!

USA fought with gunships, battleships, fighter planes from carriers, B52s, massive firepower and total air superiority, against pajamas clad fighters with flip flops from used truck tyres firing AKs and RPGs.
And with courage as they fought for freedom and their land whereas USA fought to enshrine corrupt dictators.
You proud of that?
I wish you joy in such kind of pride.
This was the end result.
You remember this ? Or too painful?

What was the military edge USA have over a bunch of separate goat herders in Afghan? Do not even need the entire fucking country of Afghan.
10,000 to 1 ?
Or is it the Afghan goat herders have military technology greater than USA??
I finished reading “the Outpost” by Jake Tapper. How a bunch of goat herders in Afghan with AKs and rpgs and IEDs (because they do not have billion dollar industry to make bombs like USA, can only make bombs in backyard on a DIY basis) taking out USA brave men despite they having 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships and billions of dollars backing them and not so good in protecting them.
If USA fought bravely with massive firepower behind them, then what about the goat herders with only AKs and RPGs fighting against USA knowing they fighting against 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships ?
Even more fucking brave is the least I can say of the Afghans goat herders. Who were untrained knowing only how to herd goats unlike the USA special forces who went through countless hours and weeks and months learning how to kill and kill.
Yet who won? And who left Afghan?
Maybe USA army should consider making their fighting folks do a course in goat herding . As who knows, maybe herding goats might be better to build up fighting skills.

USA got fucked when USA tried that in Afghan . Against a bunch of tribesmen when USA had 1000 the firepower over them. And after a trillion of dollars what have USA got to show in Afghan?
Why did the United States of America fail to win the war in Afghanistan even after 17 years? Why does the lone superpower fail to defeat a group of goat herders?
And in Somalia. A bunch of ex fishermen and part time goat herders with nothing more than AKs and RPGs chased USA out running with tail between legs

What military edge USA got in Iraq over Sadr? 1,000 to 1?
Or is it Sadr got better and more advanced military technology over USA?
In Iraq losing out to Sadr who had 1000 times less firepower than USA.
Having no more than AKs and rpgs.

USA want to invade China when China military technology is better and China with more fire power over USA?
Please do not have war with China.
Do not even think of a nuclear war with China because you think China got only 300 nukes and USA got thousands of nukes.
But if even one nuke land on China or Chinese forces, USA and all of USA bases around the world from Guam to Okinawa and Japan and Diego Garcia and Singapore and UK and Europe will become lakes and seas of molten glowing green and multicolored glass.
Wuming Chan's answer to Could China's 200 nukes realistically kill more than 50% of the US population in a nuclear war?
Wuming Chan's answer to Which missile can be considered as the world's most dangerous Intercontinental Ballistic missile (ICBM) ?
Will the quarrels and disagreements that lead to this war be relevant or even remembered once the war started?
Can this kind of war ever come to an end once started?



China’s new PCL191 multiple launch rocket system is capable of firing ballistic missiles up to 500km. Photo: Handout

The multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) that made its public debut at China’s
National Day parade
on October 1 has been identified as a state-of-the-art piece of weaponry capable of firing both rockets and ballistic missiles, according to a leading military magazine.
A report in the latest issue of Modern Ships also gave the new hardware a name – the Type PCL191 – saying it was a modular launcher based on the AR3 system developed by China for the export market.
Unlike other weapon systems on display in Beijing, which had their names emblazoned along their sides, the Type PCL191 rumbled through the streets of Beijing on the back of heavy-duty trucks with almost complete anonymity.


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/mil...91-multiple-launch-rocket-system-casts-shadow




Note the DF100s antiship missiles . Revealed only in Oct 2019. Mach 5 and range of 1000 km.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/chinas-df-100-missile-good-enough-kill-americas-navy-96476


China got 3000++ of Mach 3s YJ-12 and YJ18 to throw against the 11 carriers USA want to bring to their self declared FONOP.
Or at least 300++ Mach 3s on each carrier group.
Assuming only 20 % of those will hit. So be assured that at least 10 missiles will hit the carrier and not just 1 missile.
And not just the warhead, there will be 2–3 tons of missiles coming behind the warhead at Mach 3 tearing into the bulkheads and ordnance and aviation fuel and the poor men and women in the carrier. Those 2–3 tons of missile body will be tearing in the bulkheads faster and more deadly then APFSDS. Andf carrying its own unburned fuel to add to the fun.
Even steel will burn when hit with hell fire and tons of steel and debris coming in at Mach 3. The aviation fuel, and paint on walls, the bombs and ordnance will all cook off and add to the huge huge fire inside the carrier. Regardless if carrier under Condition Zebra or Donkey or Jackass.
The brave sailors in those carriers will not care or worry and be happy that their carrier not sinking. And only burning and burning from one end to the other end.

Remember in just ten minutes, China missiles will destroy all the fucking airbases and naval bases in Japan and Guam. And in the next 30 minutes, Chinee cruise missiles by the thousands will take out whatever the **** the missiles left in Japan.

Whether the mosquito is female or male will also be known.
Your stealth F35s or B1s B2s got smaller radar profile than a mosquito?
China Using Radar To Combat Mosquitoes
China is using military technology to wage war ... on mosquitoes
USA or Israeli got any systems able to do that?
Thank you USA for enforcing ban on China in purchasing that from Israel or other countries.
Forcing China to do it all on its own and leaving you either far behind or far far behind.
**And Chinese air weaponary. To splash the air tankers and AWACs and JSTAR USA rely on to direct the fight in the air. And the Stealth planes of USA.**
How China's Clever New Missile Could Cripple American Air Power
China's Mach 6 Monster Air-to-Air Missile Could Make the U.S. Air Force Come in for a ‘Crash Landing’
This is what USA Airforce Secretary got to say in 2018
Air Force secretary: China, Russia could shoot down new JSTARS on day one of a war
There will be no usable bases for USA airforce in Japan or Guam within the first 10 minutes of the war.
First Strike: China's Missile Threat to U.S. Bases in Asia
A Missile 'Pearl Harbor': How China Could Win a War Against America?
Missile Strikes on U.S. Bases in Asia: Is This China's Real Threat to America?
Those bases will all be hit and cratered by DFs with conventional warheads so planes cannot take off.
Go into above to see photos of strikes made by Chinese on model setups in the Western desert of China that represent hardened bunkers for planes and runways and dock settings with models of Burkes and Ticos and the bases HQs to see the pin point targetting of the DFs.

Naval assets and head quarters will all be hit and sunk and taken out of play.
Then Chinese cruise missiles will fly by the thousands to take out planes still stuck in those bases.
As for shooting war at the sea. And forgetting for time being the DF-21Ds and DF-26Bs and CM-401s that China have and figment of imagination in heads of USA Admirals.
Just on AShMs.
Xi Jinping's Rocket Force is nullifying U.S. military primacy in Asia

 

[Oldman1]

Why?

Chinese do not yearn to kill Chinese.

Taiwanese I knew in Taiwan over a 30 years period all felt that they are Chinese. Chinese in language and culture and history.

Right you don't yearn to kill Chinese yet you are pointing weapons towards them. And you guys had a civil war, so sounds like its nothing new.

Despite the instigations of Dotard and Liar Pompeo and NED and 5 Eyes , Taiwanese know they are Chinese.

So far Taiwan are buying weapons to counter China, so they don't feel like being part of China.

China know in time, the reunion will be made. So why any need to fight?

In other words, you really don't want to because of the consequences.

Only Muricans , and Dotard and Pompeo praying and hoping and yearning for Chinese to kill Chinese.
Chinese will see Dotard eventually dragged out of Whitehouse kicking and screaming and 1000 cameras rolling and watching.

Pompeo will be back in some toilet bowl and someone will flush that and turn off the light.

Thats in your court on whether you want to kill Chinese or not. We are not pointing missiles towards Taiwan. You are.

What nightmares?

Muricans ran south of parallel with shit and pee pouring down their pants.

You cannot win even with goat herders in Afghan and Iraq and Somalia

Ran south but you still haven't explained why you lost Seoul after the counterattack. What happened?

USA WON AGAINST NICARAGUA, GRENADA AND PANAMA.
THATS ABOUT THE WARS USA WON SINCE WW2

What about Gulf War 1 and 2?

In Korea where USA firepower was at least 100 times more than China and China industrial might was much less than sub Sahara Africa , the Chinese whacked USA and the UN combined that they had to flee south of the Parallel as demanded by China.

South Korea still exist so something must have gone wrong for you.

View attachment 687439

And what about Vietnam?
What ws the military edge USA had over Vietnam and China who supported Vietnam with boots on the ground.
About 100 or more to 1?
Didn’t USA had far far greather military technology supremacy over China and Vietnam?
Firepower of USA which included B52s, battleships, Spooky gunships? Helicopter gunships and who threw everything into fighting Viets including toilet bowls?

You have the backing of the Soviet Union providing the best weapons. Its like the U.S. backing Afghanistan and defeating the Soviet Union in the 1980s. So what does that mean? What about China losing to Vietnam after just being allies few years ago?

Your memory so short?
Maybe this can refresh your memory.
How about this!

Remember what China did in Vietnam.

Mylai rings a bell? A moment to be proud of ? Among many other moments like Mylai.
Help to boost up the numbers for body counts! Small or big, young or old, still bodies to be counted!

USA fought with gunships, battleships, fighter planes from carriers, B52s, massive firepower and total air superiority, against pajamas clad fighters with flip flops from used truck tyres firing AKs and RPGs.
And with courage as they fought for freedom and their land whereas USA fought to enshrine corrupt dictators.
You proud of that?
I wish you joy in such kind of pride.
This was the end result.
You remember this ? Or too painful?

Are you saying Vietnam didn't have fighter jets or surface to air missiles provided by China and Soviet Union?

View attachment 687436

What was the military edge USA have over a bunch of separate goat herders in Afghan? Do not even need the entire fucking country of Afghan.
10,000 to 1 ?
Or is it the Afghan goat herders have military technology greater than USA??
I finished reading “the Outpost” by Jake Tapper. How a bunch of goat herders in Afghan with AKs and rpgs and IEDs (because they do not have billion dollar industry to make bombs like USA, can only make bombs in backyard on a DIY basis) taking out USA brave men despite they having 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships and billions of dollars backing them and not so good in protecting them.
If USA fought bravely with massive firepower behind them, then what about the goat herders with only AKs and RPGs fighting against USA knowing they fighting against 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships ?
Even more fucking brave is the least I can say of the Afghans goat herders. Who were untrained knowing only how to herd goats unlike the USA special forces who went through countless hours and weeks and months learning how to kill and kill.
Yet who won? And who left Afghan?
Maybe USA army should consider making their fighting folks do a course in goat herding . As who knows, maybe herding goats might be better to build up fighting skills.

Remember what happened in Iraq. People thought it would be the mother of all Vietnams, what happened there? You think the Vietnam war would be enough to deter the U.S. from ever going into another conflict again.

USA got fucked when USA tried that in Afghan . Against a bunch of tribesmen when USA had 1000 the firepower over them. And after a trillion of dollars what have USA got to show in Afghan?
Why did the United States of America fail to win the war in Afghanistan even after 17 years? Why does the lone superpower fail to defeat a group of goat herders?
And in Somalia. A bunch of ex fishermen and part time goat herders with nothing more than AKs and RPGs chased USA out running with tail between legs

China couldn't handle Vietnam, Soviet Union couldn't handle Afghanistan, so what does it mean?

View attachment 687437

What military edge USA got in Iraq over Sadr? 1,000 to 1?
Or is it Sadr got better and more advanced military technology over USA?
In Iraq losing out to Sadr who had 1000 times less firepower than USA.
Having no more than AKs and rpgs.

Sadr lost in that fight, you know that.

USA want to invade China when China military technology is better and China with more fire power over USA?
Please do not have war with China.
Do not even think of a nuclear war with China because you think China got only 300 nukes and USA got thousands of nukes.
But if even one nuke land on China or Chinese forces, USA and all of USA bases around the world from Guam to Okinawa and Japan and Diego Garcia and Singapore and UK and Europe will become lakes and seas of molten glowing green and multicolored glass.
Wuming Chan's answer to Could China's 200 nukes realistically kill more than 50% of the US population in a nuclear war?
Wuming Chan's answer to Which missile can be considered as the world's most dangerous Intercontinental Ballistic missile (ICBM) ?
Will the quarrels and disagreements that lead to this war be relevant or even remembered once the war started?
Can this kind of war ever come to an end once started?'

China wants to conquer the Pacific Ocean because they want those resources. Also don't think about a nuclear war since we have enough nukes to kill the whole Chinese population. Since there are so dense in the cities, it makes it worse for China. Please don't kill your history and culture in an instant. Remember there are enough nukes to destroy the world population couple of times over.

China’s new PCL191 multiple launch rocket system is capable of firing ballistic missiles up to 500km. Photo: Handout

Up to 500? The U.S. military are already developing 700-800km range already.

The multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) that made its public debut at China’s
National Day parade
on October 1 has been identified as a state-of-the-art piece of weaponry capable of firing both rockets and ballistic missiles, according to a leading military magazine.
A report in the latest issue of Modern Ships also gave the new hardware a name – the Type PCL191 – saying it was a modular launcher based on the AR3 system developed by China for the export market.
Unlike other weapon systems on display in Beijing, which had their names emblazoned along their sides, the Type PCL191 rumbled through the streets of Beijing on the back of heavy-duty trucks with almost complete anonymity.


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/mil...91-multiple-launch-rocket-system-casts-shadow

Note the DF100s antiship missiles . Revealed only in Oct 2019. Mach 5 and range of 1000 km.

View attachment 687445



https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/chinas-df-100-missile-good-enough-kill-americas-navy-96476


China got 3000++ of Mach 3s YJ-12 and YJ18 to throw against the 11 carriers USA want to bring to their self declared FONOP.
Or at least 300++ Mach 3s on each carrier group.
Assuming only 20 % of those will hit. So be assured that at least 10 missiles will hit the carrier and not just 1 missile.
And not just the warhead, there will be 2–3 tons of missiles coming behind the warhead at Mach 3 tearing into the bulkheads and ordnance and aviation fuel and the poor men and women in the carrier. Those 2–3 tons of missile body will be tearing in the bulkheads faster and more deadly then APFSDS. Andf carrying its own unburned fuel to add to the fun.
Even steel will burn when hit with hell fire and tons of steel and debris coming in at Mach 3. The aviation fuel, and paint on walls, the bombs and ordnance will all cook off and add to the huge huge fire inside the carrier. Regardless if carrier under Condition Zebra or Donkey or Jackass.
The brave sailors in those carriers will not care or worry and be happy that their carrier not sinking. And only burning and burning from one end to the other end.

The U.S. has stealth cruise missiles that will be hard to detect and track and will sink the Chinese Navy. And we haven't even talked about the new IRBMs. China will remember their sacrifice just like in the movie Sacrifice. By the way how many died in the war?

Remember in just ten minutes, China missiles will destroy all the fucking airbases and naval bases in Japan and Guam. And in the next 30 minutes, Chinee cruise missiles by the thousands will take out whatever the **** the missiles left in Japan.

Remember that thousands of cruise missiles will destroy China's military bases on the the mainland as well as their artificial bases.

Whether the mosquito is female or male will also be known.
Your stealth F35s or B1s B2s got smaller radar profile than a mosquito?
China Using Radar To Combat Mosquitoes
China is using military technology to wage war ... on mosquitoes
USA or Israeli got any systems able to do that?
Thank you USA for enforcing ban on China in purchasing that from Israel or other countries.
Forcing China to do it all on its own and leaving you either far behind or far far behind.
**And Chinese air weaponary. To splash the air tankers and AWACs and JSTAR USA rely on to direct the fight in the air. And the Stealth planes of USA.**
How China's Clever New Missile Could Cripple American Air Power
China's Mach 6 Monster Air-to-Air Missile Could Make the U.S. Air Force Come in for a ‘Crash Landing’
This is what USA Airforce Secretary got to say in 2018
Air Force secretary: China, Russia could shoot down new JSTARS on day one of a war
There will be no usable bases for USA airforce in Japan or Guam within the first 10 minutes of the war.
First Strike: China's Missile Threat to U.S. Bases in Asia
A Missile 'Pearl Harbor': How China Could Win a War Against America?
Missile Strikes on U.S. Bases in Asia: Is This China's Real Threat to America?
Those bases will all be hit and cratered by DFs with conventional warheads so planes cannot take off.
Go into above to see photos of strikes made by Chinese on model setups in the Western desert of China that represent hardened bunkers for planes and runways and dock settings with models of Burkes and Ticos and the bases HQs to see the pin point targetting of the DFs.

Stealth works, otherwise China wouldn't be trying to develop stealth aircraft, so they must know something. China knows that in a couple of years, the U.S. can easily destroy far into China's bases no matter how far deep into the mainland with the new IRBMs, you have 10 year window.

Naval assets and head quarters will all be hit and sunk and taken out of play.
Then Chinese cruise missiles will fly by the thousands to take out planes still stuck in those bases.
As for shooting war at the sea. And forgetting for time being the DF-21Ds and DF-26Bs and CM-401s that China have and figment of imagination in heads of USA Admirals.
Just on AShMs.
Xi Jinping's Rocket Force is nullifying U.S. military primacy in Asia

The U.S. with its new IRBMs and hypersonic missiles will nullify China's military primacy in Asia. Your ships will be sunk just being in the docks. Same for your planes.

 

[KAL-EL]

@Oldman1

I give you a hell of a lot of credit for lowering yourself to other levels.

 

[shanlung]

Flushing all his verbal diarrhea down the toilet into the sewer

So any time India want to rock & roll.
Or Muricans . Or Japanese

And please do not talk of nukes. China might well be the only country
with fully functional H Bombs
Chinese H Bombs are done to the YuMing configuration requiring very little maintenance.
Muricans do their H bombs to the Ulam Teller configuration needing lots of maintenances.

Each warhead needs to have about 200 milligrams of fresh tritium added every year. Here’s a pic showing W80s having their gas changed.

How many Murican H Bombs can go kaboom immediately? Not many.
And all of China H Bombs can go kaboom and turn New Delhi and other enemies that wanted war to pools and lakes and seas of molten multi coloured glass.

So please be nice and respectful and no phony FONOPs or claiming of China territories that not yours to begin with.

Or have the war that you yearning for.

And now I will put the toilet lid over oldman1
And block him so he can stew in where I flushed him to.