Zhuhai Air Show 2014 - Updates & Discussions
- Thread starter Kompromat
- Start date
cnleio
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2012
- Messages
- 10,563
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
Drunk more, bro.
China doing business with most nations of this world, selling weapon is the part of Chinese business.
Last edited:
Bussard Ramjet
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2014
- Messages
- 3,978
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Hey can the chinese members reply to my post made before? I would be extremely grateful.
It is post #798
It is post #798
Now this is interesting.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/...lographic-UAV-Control-Center?odyssey=nav|head
China Developing Holographic UAV Control Center
ZHUHAI, CHINA — China’s biggest aviation manufacturer, Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), is developing a holographic ground control system (GCS) for UAVs.
Unveiled at Airshow China here, the “nerve center” or GCS displays the UAV as a holographic image. It allows the controller to command the aircraft, obtain flight parameters and information on navigation and guidance through a “human-machine interface.”
The controller experiences the entire process of the mission via this interface, including mission payload, route planning, flight control, identification of friend/foe, precision strikes and task assessment of the UAV operational environment.
Airshow China, known officially as the 10th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition, is being held from Nov. 11-16.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/...lographic-UAV-Control-Center?odyssey=nav|head
China Developing Holographic UAV Control Center
ZHUHAI, CHINA — China’s biggest aviation manufacturer, Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), is developing a holographic ground control system (GCS) for UAVs.
Unveiled at Airshow China here, the “nerve center” or GCS displays the UAV as a holographic image. It allows the controller to command the aircraft, obtain flight parameters and information on navigation and guidance through a “human-machine interface.”
The controller experiences the entire process of the mission via this interface, including mission payload, route planning, flight control, identification of friend/foe, precision strikes and task assessment of the UAV operational environment.
Airshow China, known officially as the 10th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition, is being held from Nov. 11-16.
It is for export but not prepared for US, while DF-21D is. So what do you want to know?
cnleio
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2012
- Messages
- 10,563
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
In All new CX-1 supersonic anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) - Chinese Answer to Brahmos thread...
#15 @SvenSvensonov and #18 @cnleio, we all give the answer to supersonic anti-ship missile like Brahmos/CX-10 etc ... future the STAR is the stealth subsonic anti-ship missile not supersonic. All Top5 nations didn't or not plan to equip supersonic missile as our main anti-ship missile, more like a weapon tech backup.
Ur Indian won't see U.S or China install supersonic anti-ship missile like CX-10 or Brahmos on our warships. Before Top5's long-range air-defense system, a 'Mig-21' supersonic missile is useless !
This is what we develop ...
The weakness of a supersonic missile is strong infrared signal & high flight trajectory & easy jamming, so u can understand why i call it as a 'Mig-21'. Before a modern air-defense DDG Fleet, it's easy to intercept some supersonic missiles.
But it's work, when u launch many supersonic anti-ship missiles to attack 1~2x enemy warship at the same time ... it called "Saturation Attack" !!!
Last edited:
Bussard Ramjet
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2014
- Messages
- 3,978
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
How hard is it to destroy a Nimitz class carrier?
The people in those forum were saying that it will take more than one or two missile strike to sink it. Is it true?
I have just read about this ---> USS America. Apparently they used it as a target after decommisioning it to check an aircraft strength. Does someone know about this?
AMDR
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,109
- Reaction score
- 16
- Country
- Location
It would probably take 3 hits, maybe 2, from a CX-1 to take down a Nimitz. A P-800 series missile like that has a massive amount of kinetic energy plus the explosive charge. A deadly but vulnerable combination.
USS America after its decommissioning underwent tests on how underwater explosives (Torpedoes) damages super-carriers . It survived these tests and was then scuttled. The results of the tests are still classified by the U.S. Navy to my knowledge.
Last edited:
cnleio
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2012
- Messages
- 10,563
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
Easy ... throw all like this to a Nimitz and once 3x hit it, im sure the A.C must sink ... pls don't try CX-10 =.=
U.S gqm-163 supersonic target
China BW-II supersonic target
Bussard Ramjet
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2014
- Messages
- 3,978
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
I am not talking about a Nimitz stand alone. We are talking about a Nimitz escorted by a range of vessels, and itself carrying F22/F35 which have an operational range of 180-200 km.
Americans were talking about the threat posed by this system the CX 1. They were talking in the context of Iran using these weapons. Here is the quote from the forum that I posted the link back.
Then someone asked what will happen in a coordinated strike, that is if China tries to attack using bombers, submarines and missiles together against the carriers. The guy has this to say about that.
To which the other guy replies this:
Interesting concept. However, it is a well known military axiom that the more complex a plan is, the more likely it is that something will go wrong.
Part of the very idea of a "surprise attack" is that it is sudden without warning. A launch of say a dozen of these missiles could be done with almost no warning.
A plan like you are talking about however, is not stealthy at all. The preparation for the attack would be seen days in advance, preparations of this nature simply can't be hidden like they were in WWII. We keep a close track on where all of their subs are at all times. And if we see them putting out to sea (they are almost constantly tied up to the dock), that would be noticed immediately. And the same with their bombers and fighters taking to the air.
Over The Horizon RADAR is pretty piss-poor for targeting, but it is effective in early warning. As is the E-2 AEW bird, with a RADAR range of over 400 miles. You would have to have a very staggered deployment if these are all going to be striking the fleet at the same time.
First, the subs would have to put out to sea. And Chinese subs are notorious for being among the noisiest subs among major nations.
Then the bombers have to take to the skies. Their only bomber is the Xian H-6, a domestic copy of the Tu-16 (and dating to 1959). These subsonic bombers (MACH .75) only carry 6 Saccade/Silkworm missiles. And trust me, the moment that the bombers start to take to the skies, the fleet is going to be moving full speed ahead to safer waters. And all available fighters will be screaming off of the carrier towards the bombers, knowing that they have to be less then 110 miles from the target before they can launch their missiles.
Oh, and BTW, the range for the SM-2 is 115 miles. So just before the bombers get in range, they will be met by the first of the inbound missiles trying to take them out. The F/A-18E/F fighters will also be streaking towards them at MACH 1.8.
And their submarine attack capabilities even if they are within range are not all that impressive. If outfitted all-out for anti-ship attack, that only gives each one 12-24 submarine launched Silkworm missiles, that are of questionable functionality (China is known to have problems with these submarine launched missiles - doctrine says for the ship to surface before launching).
The problems here is that China is known to not trust their submarines, and almost never deploy more then 1 or 2 at a time. The moment more started to take to sea, defensive postures will change dramatically. The moment bombers started to take to the skies, CAP will be increased and fighters will go out so they can meet them before they arrive.
ADA is irrelevant, since we would not be talking about a land battle. This would be an Air-Naval battle, ADA would not be within hundreds of miles of this conflict with only one exception. That would be if raising tensions had caused one concept for keeping China off of Taiwan. The US places it's CTF to the East of Taiwan, and placed PATRIOT-THAAD on Taiwan. Then I would expect almost no risk to the carrier, China would not have the range or ability to punch through the missile defenses of Taiwan.
Trust me, I do very much think of these in "multi-dimensional" ways. And with the alleged speed of this missile being over twice that of the bombers, the bombers would likely already be fighting it out with the fighters before the missiles were ever launched. And knowing the ranges, I could not understand any reason why the carrier would be operating in their range in the first place. It is a carrier with aircraft, it has no need to be operating less then 250 miles from shore during a time of heightened tensions.
I am interested here in general theatre of war where China will maybe need to push out US till the second island chain. Remember, US has substantial ground bases in the region, with the one in okinawa single handedly able to operate till chinese shores. So even ignoring that for a while. How can China take out a carrier group placed around 400 km from its shores?
How are you going to break thorugh the multiple defences of ships, counter-attack vessels, missile defence systems, and then 5th gen top notch aircraft zipping through?
Also, can you tell me more about the BW-II system?
I understand that China has much more than CX1 in its arsenal, and that is what I want to know. Your strategy.
@SvenSvensonov
@mike2000 Your comments will be highly valued and appreciated.
Americans were talking about the threat posed by this system the CX 1. They were talking in the context of Iran using these weapons. Here is the quote from the forum that I posted the link back.
"To begin with, you have to realize that it is almost impossible to directly threaten a US carrier at sea.
To start, they have a pretty impressive array of defensive ships surrounding it. Typically 4-5 Arleigh Burke class destroyers, and a Ticonderoga class cruiser. All by themselves, each of these ships has a pretty powerful anti-missile system. Working in combination, I doubt any missiles would get through.
And even if they do, the carrier then has a lot of defensive firepower of it's own.
Depending upon the ship, from 2-3 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers, 2-3 Sea Sparrow missile launchers, and 2-3 PHALANX CIWS systems. In addition, you have E-2 Hawkeye AEW aircraft. If the carrier is operating in "hostile territory", expect one of these in the air at all times.
So now you not only have the powerful and sophisticated AEGIS RADAR systems looking for missiles from the ground, you have the E-2C/D series aircraft looking for them from the air in a look-down capability. So it's ability to "sea skim" to avoid detection is greatly reduced. This may keep them out of sight of the Tico's and Burke's, but not the Hawkeye.
And the newest series, the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye has some pretty impressive capabilities. It's RADAR capabilities are tied into the AEGIS system, and can actually target and guide an SM-6 ship based missile. So the destroyers and cruisers are no longer limited to what their RADAR can see, the AEW aircraft can actually target inbound threats while they are still over the horizon from the ship, up to the 240 km range of the missile itself.
So before it can even hit the carrier, it has to get through a "crapstorm" of defensive weapons systems, each of which is designed to destroy such inbound missiles. Then it has to actually find the carrier. Not exactly an easy task in and of itself. These weapons target by RADAR, so they will target any large vessel they find (or even a rock formation that comes close to what it is looking for).
These missiles are fast (MACH 1.5+), have a decent range (around 400 miles), and pack a decent punch (750kg of HE). But they are also large, so easier to target by defensive systems then say the smaller EXOCET or SILKWORM missiles.
So to try to fully answer, is this missile a threat to US ships? Yes, unquestionably - depending on how many can be volley fired at a time. Soviet-Russian tactics dictate launching 2-3 groups of 6-7 missiles ideally (one missile of each group operating as a "controller", popping up from time to time to get RADAR fixes and navigation corrections, then relaying those to the rest of the swarm). That means anywhere from 12-21 missiles being aimed at the carrier group. Now that many missiles at a time you will have one or two get through the defensive systems. But will they actually target the carrier? Likely not, they would want to target the defensive vessels, making future waves more likely to penetrate and making the group retire from the area for fear of future strikes actually getting through.
Now is say Iran capable of launching such massive swarms? Not likely, their surface ships are all armed with missiles that are domestic or Chinese copies of the EXOCET, a missile that is much less capable. None of them can be converted to fire a missile of this size, which would mean they would need to build much larger ships before they could use them at sea. This means they are limited to ground launching.
And now you are talking about roughly 2-3 batteries of such launchers. They might be lucky enough to get 1 volley off, possibly 2 before they are then hunted down and destroyed by the aircraft on the carrier. Before the missiles are even intercepted, the CAP is going to be screaming towards theselaunchers, trying to take them out before they can fire another volley. So the best way for Iran to use them would be to fire, then immediately try to hide in pre-prepared bunkers. And hope they are not discovered.
Threat to the carrier, insignificant. Threat to the carrier group, low to moderate. But once again, depending upon the number of missiles that can be fired in a volley. 1-2 missiles at a time, almost laughably small risk. A Soviet planned volley of 20+ missiles, now you are talking a significant risk to the carrier group, a moderate risk to the carrier itself (not in being sunk, but in being damaged - US carriers are massive and remarkably tough vessels)."
To start, they have a pretty impressive array of defensive ships surrounding it. Typically 4-5 Arleigh Burke class destroyers, and a Ticonderoga class cruiser. All by themselves, each of these ships has a pretty powerful anti-missile system. Working in combination, I doubt any missiles would get through.
And even if they do, the carrier then has a lot of defensive firepower of it's own.
Depending upon the ship, from 2-3 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers, 2-3 Sea Sparrow missile launchers, and 2-3 PHALANX CIWS systems. In addition, you have E-2 Hawkeye AEW aircraft. If the carrier is operating in "hostile territory", expect one of these in the air at all times.
So now you not only have the powerful and sophisticated AEGIS RADAR systems looking for missiles from the ground, you have the E-2C/D series aircraft looking for them from the air in a look-down capability. So it's ability to "sea skim" to avoid detection is greatly reduced. This may keep them out of sight of the Tico's and Burke's, but not the Hawkeye.
And the newest series, the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye has some pretty impressive capabilities. It's RADAR capabilities are tied into the AEGIS system, and can actually target and guide an SM-6 ship based missile. So the destroyers and cruisers are no longer limited to what their RADAR can see, the AEW aircraft can actually target inbound threats while they are still over the horizon from the ship, up to the 240 km range of the missile itself.
So before it can even hit the carrier, it has to get through a "crapstorm" of defensive weapons systems, each of which is designed to destroy such inbound missiles. Then it has to actually find the carrier. Not exactly an easy task in and of itself. These weapons target by RADAR, so they will target any large vessel they find (or even a rock formation that comes close to what it is looking for).
These missiles are fast (MACH 1.5+), have a decent range (around 400 miles), and pack a decent punch (750kg of HE). But they are also large, so easier to target by defensive systems then say the smaller EXOCET or SILKWORM missiles.
So to try to fully answer, is this missile a threat to US ships? Yes, unquestionably - depending on how many can be volley fired at a time. Soviet-Russian tactics dictate launching 2-3 groups of 6-7 missiles ideally (one missile of each group operating as a "controller", popping up from time to time to get RADAR fixes and navigation corrections, then relaying those to the rest of the swarm). That means anywhere from 12-21 missiles being aimed at the carrier group. Now that many missiles at a time you will have one or two get through the defensive systems. But will they actually target the carrier? Likely not, they would want to target the defensive vessels, making future waves more likely to penetrate and making the group retire from the area for fear of future strikes actually getting through.
Now is say Iran capable of launching such massive swarms? Not likely, their surface ships are all armed with missiles that are domestic or Chinese copies of the EXOCET, a missile that is much less capable. None of them can be converted to fire a missile of this size, which would mean they would need to build much larger ships before they could use them at sea. This means they are limited to ground launching.
And now you are talking about roughly 2-3 batteries of such launchers. They might be lucky enough to get 1 volley off, possibly 2 before they are then hunted down and destroyed by the aircraft on the carrier. Before the missiles are even intercepted, the CAP is going to be screaming towards theselaunchers, trying to take them out before they can fire another volley. So the best way for Iran to use them would be to fire, then immediately try to hide in pre-prepared bunkers. And hope they are not discovered.
Threat to the carrier, insignificant. Threat to the carrier group, low to moderate. But once again, depending upon the number of missiles that can be fired in a volley. 1-2 missiles at a time, almost laughably small risk. A Soviet planned volley of 20+ missiles, now you are talking a significant risk to the carrier group, a moderate risk to the carrier itself (not in being sunk, but in being damaged - US carriers are massive and remarkably tough vessels)."
Then someone asked what will happen in a coordinated strike, that is if China tries to attack using bombers, submarines and missiles together against the carriers. The guy has this to say about that.
A well written quote. I would guess you would be pretty accurate in that one dimensional scenario. My question is when the Chinese or whomever decide to leverage their missiles in a multidimensional attack strategy. We cant say our enemies are dumb. Using a time on target multi axis attack vector from different platforms and weapons types. Say a combination attack of missiles, bombers, and submarines utilizing the strengths of each while trying to cover for their for their weakness. Using the missiles and bombers to soak up cap fighters and ADA missiles and making the Task force go into high speed mode wear they lose their ears, leaving them open to ambush by a cruse missile equipped submarine stalking at distance and a diesel attack boat stalking close in that can use their fish the moment the Task Force goes into ADA evasion mode. The Chinese do have some capability to pull off a coordinated attack like that. How would a task force fair against a combination threat like that? Me I would never do a one dimensional attack against any force if I could help it. Its too easy to defend against.
To which the other guy replies this:
Interesting concept. However, it is a well known military axiom that the more complex a plan is, the more likely it is that something will go wrong.
Part of the very idea of a "surprise attack" is that it is sudden without warning. A launch of say a dozen of these missiles could be done with almost no warning.
A plan like you are talking about however, is not stealthy at all. The preparation for the attack would be seen days in advance, preparations of this nature simply can't be hidden like they were in WWII. We keep a close track on where all of their subs are at all times. And if we see them putting out to sea (they are almost constantly tied up to the dock), that would be noticed immediately. And the same with their bombers and fighters taking to the air.
Over The Horizon RADAR is pretty piss-poor for targeting, but it is effective in early warning. As is the E-2 AEW bird, with a RADAR range of over 400 miles. You would have to have a very staggered deployment if these are all going to be striking the fleet at the same time.
First, the subs would have to put out to sea. And Chinese subs are notorious for being among the noisiest subs among major nations.
Then the bombers have to take to the skies. Their only bomber is the Xian H-6, a domestic copy of the Tu-16 (and dating to 1959). These subsonic bombers (MACH .75) only carry 6 Saccade/Silkworm missiles. And trust me, the moment that the bombers start to take to the skies, the fleet is going to be moving full speed ahead to safer waters. And all available fighters will be screaming off of the carrier towards the bombers, knowing that they have to be less then 110 miles from the target before they can launch their missiles.
Oh, and BTW, the range for the SM-2 is 115 miles. So just before the bombers get in range, they will be met by the first of the inbound missiles trying to take them out. The F/A-18E/F fighters will also be streaking towards them at MACH 1.8.
And their submarine attack capabilities even if they are within range are not all that impressive. If outfitted all-out for anti-ship attack, that only gives each one 12-24 submarine launched Silkworm missiles, that are of questionable functionality (China is known to have problems with these submarine launched missiles - doctrine says for the ship to surface before launching).
The problems here is that China is known to not trust their submarines, and almost never deploy more then 1 or 2 at a time. The moment more started to take to sea, defensive postures will change dramatically. The moment bombers started to take to the skies, CAP will be increased and fighters will go out so they can meet them before they arrive.
ADA is irrelevant, since we would not be talking about a land battle. This would be an Air-Naval battle, ADA would not be within hundreds of miles of this conflict with only one exception. That would be if raising tensions had caused one concept for keeping China off of Taiwan. The US places it's CTF to the East of Taiwan, and placed PATRIOT-THAAD on Taiwan. Then I would expect almost no risk to the carrier, China would not have the range or ability to punch through the missile defenses of Taiwan.
Trust me, I do very much think of these in "multi-dimensional" ways. And with the alleged speed of this missile being over twice that of the bombers, the bombers would likely already be fighting it out with the fighters before the missiles were ever launched. And knowing the ranges, I could not understand any reason why the carrier would be operating in their range in the first place. It is a carrier with aircraft, it has no need to be operating less then 250 miles from shore during a time of heightened tensions.
I am interested here in general theatre of war where China will maybe need to push out US till the second island chain. Remember, US has substantial ground bases in the region, with the one in okinawa single handedly able to operate till chinese shores. So even ignoring that for a while. How can China take out a carrier group placed around 400 km from its shores?
How are you going to break thorugh the multiple defences of ships, counter-attack vessels, missile defence systems, and then 5th gen top notch aircraft zipping through?
Also, can you tell me more about the BW-II system?
I understand that China has much more than CX1 in its arsenal, and that is what I want to know. Your strategy.
@SvenSvensonov
@mike2000 Your comments will be highly valued and appreciated.
Jguo
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2013
- Messages
- 43
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
You should take this discussion to another thread. This thread is about the 2014 Zhuhai Air Show.
Similar threads
- Article
