US attacks China!! a scenario

[sigatoka]

What's their best plane? SU-30MKK - 70s tech.
Their best tank - Type-9whatever - a T-90 wannabe
Their best missile - DF-31 - a landbased POSIDEN


Get off the PPP shtick, it doesn't work comparing China to the West.

The platforms are 1970's but the technology that resides within them is upgraded and continues to be upgraded. The engines, electronics, missiles and so on. The toyota corrolla has been around for 30years, yet its fuel economy and ride and so on have improved dramatically over the 30 years.

The Chinese Su-30MKK is more capable than the F-16's and F-15's and as capable as the F-18's. The U.S. Raptor isnt even in service yet and thus shouldnt even be used as a comparion.

The T-90 is a very capable tank; as capable as Western tanks per dollar spent.

I have never said that their ICBM's were plentiful or capable, in fact along with the Chinese navy it is a weak link. However their nuclear doctrine is one of minimum deterance.

The Purchasing power parity model was developed for the VERY REASON that the standard mechanism for comparing developing nations GDP to that of developed nations understated the size of the developing nations GDP.

Trust me, use PPP for a better indication of relative size of economies.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

The platforms are 1970's but the technology that resides within them is upgraded and continues to be upgraded. The engines, electronics, missiles and so on.

With Russian or Chinese electronics? Yep, real up to par there.

The toyota corrolla has been around for 30years, yet its fuel economy and ride and so on have improved dramatically over the 30 years.

Ain't the same chasis.

The Chinese Su-30MKK is more capable than the F-16's and F-15's and as capable as the F-18's. The U.S. Raptor isnt even in service yet and thus shouldnt even be used as a comparion.

I should hope a brand new SU-30MKK is better than any plane that's being flying for 20+ years. However, don't try to snow me that it's better than the brand new stuff coming off the factory floor.

The T-90 is a very capable tank; as capable as Western tanks per dollar spent.

You mean price per point? Here's something for you. You get what you pay for and the Chinese ain't paying for a LEO II, CHALLENGER, nor an ABRAM.

I have never said that their ICBM's were plentiful or capable, in fact along with the Chinese navy it is a weak link. However their nuclear doctrine is one of minimum deterance.

That's not a doctrine. That's a prayer. Their nuclear doctrine is of a survivable retallitory strike.

The Purchasing power parity model was developed for the VERY REASON that the standard mechanism for comparing developing nations GDP to that of developed nations understated the size of the developing nations GDP.

Trust me, use PPP for a better indication of relative size of economies.

No, I don't trust you. PPP only works for nations of similar culture and size. You can't use PPP to compare a snow bound meat diet heavy country to a rice belt country. It just doesn't work.

China is way too different from the US and from the West to have any meaningful PPP comparison.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

None of which you have addressed the point how the hell could the Chinese could afford even a Normandy size invasion force. At the end of the day, a Chinese AK-47 is only worth $75 while an M16C7 is worth $2200. An LST is going to cost $30mil+ in real dollars, not PPP, no matter who builds it. Even cheap bullets from the Chinese are going to cost $25 per 1000 rounds. Real dollars, not PPP.

So, tell me how is it $7trl PPP dollars is going to buy an invasion force that is going to cost at least $100bil+. Once you add in the salaries and training, watch it baloon up to $200bil+. That's real dollars. Not PPP.

To state that the Chinese economy is larger than the US during the Normandy Invasion is a downright lie in suggesting that they could afford such a force. In fact, pure hogwash.

 

[Jay_]

China is accumulating U.S. dollars in order to keep its export competitive. Purchasing foreign reserves devalues domestic currency and hence lower price for exports, increasing demand for chinese goods and hence lowering unemployment.

So your notion that US needs China more is not true, coz China needs US to provide employment for their screaming people who will/may revolt against CPC.

Its nothing to do with a "hedge". Hedging is done to reduce/manage risks.

Hedge as a word has several meanings,

Main Entry: 1hedge
Pronunciation: 'hej
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English hegge, from Old English hecg; akin to Old English haga hedge, hawthorn
1 a : a fence or boundary formed by a dense row of shrubs or low trees b : BARRIER, LIMIT
2 : a means of protection or defense (as against financial loss)
3 : a calculatedly noncommittal or evasive statement

 

[Jay_]

The Chinese Su-30MKK is more capable than the F-16's and F-15's and as capable as the F-18's.

You are again comparing apples and oranges. F-15, F-16 and F/A 18 are totally different platforms alltogether.

The U.S. Raptor isnt even in service yet and thus shouldnt even be used as a comparion.

Who said so??

"$2.99 billion firm-fixed-price contract modification to definitize the Lot 5 acquisition of 24 aircraft (FA8611-04-C-2851). Solicitations began July 2004, negotiations were complete November 2005, and work will be complete November 2007. This new Lot 5 production contract will increase the total number of contracted F/A-22 aircraft to 107. To date, 53 aircraft have been delivered to the U.S. Air Force and 66 have completed final assembly."
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2005/11/315b-in-f/a22-raptorrelated-contracts-updated/index.php

The T-90 is a very capable tank; as capable as Western tanks per dollar spent.

Say T-90 costs $50 and M1A2 costs $100, so which is more capable based on your price point theory?

I have never said that their ICBM's were plentiful or capable, in fact along with the Chinese navy it is a weak link. However their nuclear doctrine is one of minimum deterance.

Minimum deterrance?? Against the US? Not even close.

Trust me, use PPP for a better indication of relative size of economies.

Yeah, but there is also something called population to feed.

 

[TexasJohn]

None of which you have addressed the point how the hell could the Chinese could afford even a Normandy size invasion force. At the end of the day, a Chinese AK-47 is only worth $75 while an M16C7 is worth $2200. An LST is going to cost $30mil+ in real dollars, not PPP, no matter who builds it. Even cheap bullets from the Chinese are going to cost $25 per 1000 rounds. Real dollars, not PPP.

So, tell me how is it $7trl PPP dollars is going to buy an invasion force that is going to cost at least $100bil+. Once you add in the salaries and training, watch it baloon up to $200bil+. That's real dollars. Not PPP.

To state that the Chinese economy is larger than the US during the Normandy Invasion is a downright lie in suggesting that they could afford such a force. In fact, pure hogwash.

Will do. Ever hear of Deficit financing? Here in the US we do that quite well. How else do you think we are financing the Iraq war?? estimated cost is well over a $1 trillion - money we don't have btw

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Big difference. The US got a credit rating China doesn't have. PPP ain't going to change that one bit.

 

[TexasJohn]

Ok, let's examine your statements.

What's their best plane? SU-30MKK - 70s era aiframe.
Their best tank - Type-9whatever - a T-90 wannabe
Their best missile - DF-31 - a landbased POSIDEN

Yep, real impressive. And get off the shtick about the Iraqi Insurgency. They're two different things. It's like comparing a horse to a camel just because both can run and have 4 legs.



For an economics major, this is one pure baloney. There is absolutely no way 2 years training would ever equal 4 years of training. And within those 4 years, most Western soldiers would have seen at least one deployment to an actual combat situation. Thus far, since 1986, only 2000 Chinese troops have been exposed to a combat situation.

Not in the same class.



Get off the PPP shtick, it doesn't work comparing China to the West.



The Chinese can sustain 10,000 casualties. Provided that they win. The CCP can't afford 10,000 screaming mothers demanding answers for their incompetence.

Yes. The SU-30/27 is a 70s era airframe. The F-16 is also that. It emerged from the YF-16 project and the first flight of the F-16A was Jan 1975. The F-16B was introduced in July that year. This is NOT unusual in fighter projects. The F-14 Tomcat (only recently retired) first flew in 1956.

The F-16 of the 70s - just like the SU-27 has changed quite a lot since then. Have you heard of the Cope India excercises that US and India had recently? unfortunately, the USAF took an asswhuppin from SU-30MKIs (Indian version) because of stuff like vector thrusting nozzles ( eliminating the radius of turn of an aircraft) helmet mounted targeting etc. The USAF used their latest block 50 F-16s. The entire purpose of this excercise was because the US realized they would someday fly against Chinese SU-27s and SU-30 MKKs. Taiwans Air Force does not have block 50s. They don't even have BVR capabilites.

The Chinese Army (PLA) does not have 70s equipment anymore. Back then their main rifle was the SKS. Now it is the AK-xx flavor. I'm afraid your knowledge of Chines Armed forces is stuck in the 70s!! No offense bud, but here is the Pentagons own assesment of the China vs Taiwan issue. It is a lot of reading but you can skip down to Chapter 6 and also read the appendix:

http://www.pentagon.mil/pubs/pdfs/China Report 2006.pdf

This should spread enlightenment all the way around!

 

[TexasJohn]

Big difference. The US got a credit rating China doesn't have. PPP ain't going to change that one bit.

It doesn't??? wow! where did you get that? Is that why we are getting them to revalue the Yuan? Is that why when China announced them switching to a mixed bourse of reserves Wall Street had the jitters till The Chinese Reserve Bank had to "mellow down" the announcement the very next day that they were not "dumping" the dollar but merely adding bullion to the mix?

If you can back up your statement -cool. I never said I knew everything! I'm willing to learn tho!

 

[Officer of Engineers]

http://www.pentagon.mil/pubs/pdfs/China Report 2006.pdf

This should spread enlightenment all the way around!

Why don't you go back 5 years when all these reports started and see the trend? It's budget time. I've read these reports every year. I'm stuck in the 70s? How about checking out my article?

http://www.china-defense.com/pla/ti_pla/ti_pla_01.html

How about the works of Colonels Ken Allen and Denis Blasko?

How about reading the works of David O'Rear, fomerly of the ECONOMIST Asia?

Why don't you join up to my forum http://www.china-defense.com/forum/index.php?act=idx, the largest English based PLA watcher forum in the world with over 20 gigabytes of information including the mistakes we've made in the past.

As for my statement that PPP ain't going to buy the PLA an invasion fleet - I will quote David O'Rear.

"I will have one real dollar than a 1000 PPP dollars."

 

[TexasJohn]

Why don't you go back 5 years when all these reports started and see the trend? It's budget time. I've read these reports every year. I'm stuck in the 70s? How about checking out my article?

http://www.china-defense.com/pla/ti_pla/ti_pla_01.html

How about the works of Colonels Ken Allen and Denis Blasko?

How about reading the works of David O'Rear, fomerly of the ECONOMIST Asia?

Why don't you join up to my forum http://www.china-defense.com/forum/index.php?act=idx, the largest English based PLA watcher forum in the world with over 20 gigabytes of information including the mistakes we've made in the past.

As for my statement that PPP ain't going to buy the PLA an invasion fleet - I will quote David O'Rear.

"I will have one real dollar than a 1000 PPP dollars."

I sure will. People tell me I read too much anyway!!!LOL! I'll register myself using the same name as here.

I noticed you chose not to respond to the "aircraft age and capability" issue!

I'll have to think about the $1 vs 1000ppp

 

[Officer of Engineers]

I noticed you chose not to respond to the "aircraft age and capability" issue!

I did answer it but apparently, you don't know who Colonel Ken Allen is.

I suggest you revisit COPE INDIA and skip the hype. There's ALOT to be learned but not what you think.

Since we're talking the Chinese here, you want to tell me the 1st time the Chinese sent up a total strike package? Even in an exercise?

 

[Jay_]

The F-16 of the 70s - just like the SU-27 has changed quite a lot since then.

US has JSF and Raptors, while there is nothing China can do about it.

Have you heard of the Cope India excercises that US and India had recently? unfortunately, the USAF took an asswhuppin from SU-30MKIs (Indian version) because of stuff like vector thrusting nozzles ( eliminating the radius of turn of an aircraft) helmet mounted targeting etc.

TVC and HMS did not win it for India. Its the strike package that India and USA fielded, with out AWACS support, with out USAF's longrange BVR missiles and without AESA radar.

The USAF used their latest block 50 F-16s. The entire purpose of this excercise was because the US realized they would someday fly against Chinese SU-27s and SU-30 MKKs.

Even though the USAF flies it, Block 50 is not the latest, Block 60 is. Block 60 is miles ahaed of anything that China can field, let alone an equivalent of JSF and F/A 22.

Taiwans Air Force does not have block 50s. They don't even have BVR capabilites.

FC-1 is fielded with BVR missiles, ever heard of TC-2 Sky Sword II?? Their Mirage 2005's are also armed with MICA.

 

[TexasJohn]

I did answer it but apparently, you don't know who Colonel Ken Allen is.

I suggest you revisit COPE INDIA and skip the hype. There's ALOT to be learned but not what you think.

Since we're talking the Chinese here, you want to tell me the 1st time the Chinese sent up a total strike package? Even in an exercise?

NO, I don't know who Ken Allen is. A Google search gives me nothing significant. If there is an article he wrote that answers this question, please provide a link! My dad is a retired Colonel all the way back from WWII - he is real old now, how many people know him?

btw remember China has already fought 2 wars (proxy)with the US. I'd say Korea and Vietnam. The first was a stalemate and the second can only be termed a defeat for the US ( you can call it a strategic withdrawal if you like). Not bad for a country LBJ called 4th world army huh? technology only goes so far,my man. We are finding that out in Iraq and Afghanistan now.

What exactly are you calling a total strike package? your definition may not be the same as mine. Do you mean a combo Air/ground/Naval assault?

btw, I am unable to register on your site..dunno why.

 

[TexasJohn]

US has JSF and Raptors, while there is nothing China can do about it.

JSF is not out yet, and Raptor production has slowed down, due to cost overruns an some structural issues. The latest was when the pilot was "locked down" into his cockpit and had to be chain-sawed out!!


TVC and HMS did not win it for India. Its the strike package that India and USA fielded, with out AWACS support, with out USAF's longrange BVR missiles and without AESA radar.

You are thinking Cope India 2005 (F-15c).The SU-30MKI did not participate then.Some contend the USAF "threw" the fight to gain approval for the Raptor

Cope India 2006 had F-16 block 50s, AWACS, the MKIs flew in mixed sorties. By that I mean MKIs and 16s against MKIs and 16s

Even though the USAF flies it, Block 50 is not the latest, Block 60 is. Block 60 is miles ahaed of anything that China can field, let alone an equivalent of JSF and F/A 22.

Beg to differ. Block 60 is the customized 50 version for UAE only. USAF does not fly a Block 60. They do fly a limited block 52 (AESA)


FC-1 is fielded with BVR missiles, ever heard of TC-2 Sky Sword II?? Their Mirage 2005's are also armed with MICA.

Huh? FC-1 (thunder) is China dude! I am talking Taiwan. MICA and MICA II are considered short range. The Mirage took out a target 67km away. Whoopee!! here is the link

http://www.taiwanairpower.org/af/mirage.html





Arming a division, does not make an Army modern.[/QUOTE]