Speaking of hypersonic missiles, here is what I think is a good video on the problems with hypersonic missiles. Also remember a carrier group especially a carrier is a moving target not sitting still and moving at a unpredictable path of 30+ knots. Maneuverable hypersonic missiles moving at Mach 5 is moving at over 1 mile a second. So the navigation commands it received may no longer be valid as it has already traveled some distance, etc. Remember the carrier is also moving. We currently are not able to communicate with a hypersonic vehicle as it has a heated plasma sheath covering it. Remember the Space Shuttle and the radio blackout period while it travels at hypersonic speed reentering the Earth's atmosphere. So questionable GPS guidance for hypersonic missiles. Enjoy and God Bless

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:

quote:

Originally posted by CQB60:
...
They fear Western nuclear submarines to the point they see them in their nightmares.

How do we know this ?

...
Chinese missiles would probably destroy US airbases in Japan and as far as Guam, and sink two US aircraft carriers and between 10 and 20 destroyers and cruisers as the invasion opened.

Why would they only destroy two carriers instead of ALL of them, and ALL our ships within range of their new carrier destroying hypersonic missles ? Assuming they destroyed all our carriers and ships as they came into range using their new hypersonic ship killers for which we apparently have no defense for, and destroyed all our bases in Japan and Guam, then what ? That's sounds like a big dent that we couldn't just buff out. That sounds like serious trouble. If it is, how could we proceed to victory in saving Taiwan in that scenario ?

...
But the Chinese invading force itself would be destroyed before it ever occupied any significant part of Taiwan and ultimately it would be prevented from its goal of capturing the island’s capital Taipei, according to most scenarios tested.

How would that work ? I thought the Chicoms would destroy all our carriers, ships, and bases in Japan and Guam. So with all that eliminated, what would be left in place that could destroy the invading forces ? At that point it sounds like we wouldn't have much anything left except our subs that could lob nukes into China. But I thought that would be the least desirable solution, nuking the mainland. So short of that, we'd have little remaining in terms of kinetics, besides radiation poisoning. Is that the case ? I doubt the US would want to use nukes on the China mainland, unless I guess if they already destroyed our ships and bases, Congress could consider that a default state of war. Is that what you're suggesting ? An intercontinental nuclear exchange for the island of Taiwan ? I get the disaster of China taking over Taiwan given the world's dependence on Taiwan chip making and having an ally off the coast of China. But good lord is that all we'd have left ?

You need to have a little faith in our country. I doubt all our carriers would be deployed to fight China. We have many friendly country's with us who hate China. It would not be a one sided dance and we would destroy that country handily. Their junk isn't perfect because it's Made.....I think ping needs to lose economically and now. People here should be leaving the Chinese garbage on the store shelf and just walk away. Stop clicking that Amazon button too. Oh I forgot, we just can't do that, can we?

Cheap Chinese pliers falling apart isn't because the Chinese can't make pliers, it's because of Americans want to buy $4 pliers from Walmart.

Three things that must not be underestimated:

1) They have a huge industrial base;

2) They have a huge skilled workforce;

3) They have a centralized government that can command both of the above.

How many snowflakes here can last 14 hour days on a factory floor, sleep in a factory dorm, eat some pickled vegetables and rice, and repeat the next day, seven days a week? How many of your household items were made by a Chinese worker doing just that?

quote:

Originally posted by maxdog:
The recent reports of hypersonic tech supposedly developed by China seems scary to me if true. Supposedly it’s ahead of us. I’ve heard that our military elites say we can retaliate with stealth tech. But, can we stop their hypersonic missiles?

Everyone needs to calm down about hypersonics. Are they impressive, certainly; an orbital bombardment system, if fully realized and developed certainly needs to be taken seriously. China recently tested one out, we (Joe Public) have no idea how it did other than we know they sent something around the world; the Soviets worked really hard at this during the Space Race/Cold War...didn't work. Objects going around the world travel at hypersonic speeds so, this is nothing new, can they do it within the atmosphere? There's the trick, communication is impossible due to the plasma bubble that forms at those speeds at lower atmospheres (relative to space) and that eliminates data links and other comms. What comms are available are vulnerable, eliminate just one part of the tracking and communication matrix, and hypersonics are useless. Why are comms important, if they're trying to hit an aircraft carrier, it's going to need constant targeting update...you're trying to hit a moving target. An aircraft carrier can travel 6-700 miles in one 24hr period...thats A LOT of water to scan and create a targeting solution.

Keep in mind, Russia has launched a handful of their hypersonic missiles into Ukraine...hasn't really amounted to much. There's also a cost issue, as each missile is estimated to cost around $15m on the low-end to $100m on the high-end...unless you're mounting a nuclear warhead on it, thats an insanely costly amount for a platform of questionable accuracy. I can take that same amount and launch 50-60 missiles of varying capability, overwhelm your defenses and likely create more damage than a single hypersonic missile.

quote:

Our admirals brag about our carrier groups and their invincibility. Do we have tech to defend against hypersonic stuff? If not, our carrier groups are nullified.

USN ships have much more defensive than offensive capability; Navy offense comes from its airplanes and submarines. Combine that with a network of all the other ships in your task force, and you have quite the defensive web to get through. Then layer-in all the assets not organic to that task force, such as satellites, UAVs, land-based assets and the defensive bubble gets quite a bit more complex.

60-minutes, surprisingly did a very balanced report on the Navy in the Western Pacific. Adm Papparo knows the game and what's at-stake, CNO Gilday I'm continually disappointed with.



At bit of a post-script commentary

quote:

Originally posted by reloader-1:
The Japanese, at a fraction of China’s manufacturing potential or population, hurt us quite badly in WWII.

We underestimate them at our peril. The only time we fought China directly, in a time they were still living in the pre-industrial era (Korea), we suffered severe losses.

Their entire military is built to counteract ours. Not Russia, not India, not any European power, but the US.

We would lose a crapload of ships, sailors and soldiers in any conflict with China.

I agree with this sentiment. It won’t be the walk in the park some would make it out to be.

Their equipment may be technically inferior, but they have more of it. Similarly, their men may not be as well trained, but they have more of them, too, and they don't care how many of them get killed. Not saying we can't win, but it will be costly.

quote:

Originally posted by WaterburyBob:
Our military is heavily dependent on satellites for our technological superiority, isn't it?

My worry with China is their anti-satellite development.
If they first take out a number of our military satellites, they bring our capabilities down a good bit.
Then, it's a more level playing field for them.

Good ole Bill Clinton gave them that technology for a million-dollar campaign contribution. Loral Space & Communications Ltd.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Cheap Chinese pliers falling apart isn't because the Chinese can't make pliers, it's because of Americans want to buy $4 pliers from Walmart.

I 100% agree. China makes what they're contracted or want to make. Case in point: Lenovo laptops. Top notch stuff because they want to compete with products at a higher price point. (It also doesn't hurt that many top notch laptop companies also manufacture in China)

I doubt they are overly concerned about things like DEI, rooting out white supremacy, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Cheap Chinese pliers falling apart isn't because the Chinese can't make pliers, it's because of Americans want to buy $4 pliers from Walmart.

Three things that must not be underestimated:

1) They have a huge industrial base;

2) They have a huge skilled workforce;

3) They have a centralized government that can command both of the above.

How many snowflakes here can last 14 hour days on a factory floor, sleep in a factory dorm, eat some pickled vegetables and rice, and repeat the next day, seven days a week? How many of your household items were made by a Chinese worker doing just that?

Several years ago, I had a friend that was trying to make optics that would compete with Zeiss, Swarovski, and Leica. To keep costs manageable, he was looking to China for production. He told me that China has three levels of manufacturing plants. The lowest level makes the proverbial $4 pliers. The next level is better quality and the highest level are the plants that make quality products or assemble products that are upper tier. There are substantially more plants at the lowest level according to what I was told.

I’d be surprised if China doesn’t use the highest level plants for their advanced weapon systems and the lower levels for their basic military supplies like ammunition and the QBZ-95A. I imagine the real question is whether they have enough capacity to make high-end products not low tech military products. IOW, they won’t run out of bullets but will they run out of missiles?

As a reference, I have several optics made for my friend at the highest Chinese factory. They are well designed and built. The lenses are NOT on the level of an upper Swarovski but they are good and I suspect the lens quality was the design not the manufacturing of the same.

Finally, quantity has a quality all of its own. I think WW2 and the German Wehrmacht’s tanks are the classic example. We had a hard time competing one-on-one but when you have multiple tanks the quantity overcame the qualitative advantage of the 88mm gun and a German tank’s frontal armor.

I've seen the "ski jump" carriers in port in Dalian, China. They look silly. That was in 2019.

China is very good at propaganda. They have many trolls planting social media and traditional media stories about how great their military hardware is and about their hypersonic missiles. I'm not sure what to believe, but I doubt any of it is as good as is claimed.

But they are a nuclear power, so we are not going to get in face-to-face war.

Taiwan is smart enough to destroy the chip fabs if China attacks. And I'm sure they will make that clear to China. What good is an island if the thing China wants is useless?

If China attacks Taiwan, just embargo all food shipments from the western hemisphere. They will starve in months. China knows this too...

quote:

Originally posted by BB61:

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Cheap Chinese pliers falling apart isn't because the Chinese can't make pliers, it's because of Americans want to buy $4 pliers from Walmart.

Three things that must not be underestimated:

1) They have a huge industrial base;

2) They have a huge skilled workforce;

3) They have a centralized government that can command both of the above.

How many snowflakes here can last 14 hour days on a factory floor, sleep in a factory dorm, eat some pickled vegetables and rice, and repeat the next day, seven days a week? How many of your household items were made by a Chinese worker doing just that?

Several years ago, I had a friend that was trying to make optics that would compete with Zeiss, Swarovski, and Leica. To keep costs manageable, he was looking to China for production. He told me that China has three levels of manufacturing plants. The lowest level makes the proverbial $4 pliers. The next level is better quality and the highest level are the plants that make quality products or assemble products that are upper tier. There are substantially more plants at the lowest level according to what I was told.

I’d be surprised if China doesn’t use the highest level plants for their advanced weapon systems and the lower levels for their basic military supplies like ammunition and the QBZ-95A. I imagine the real question is whether they have enough capacity to make high-end products not low tech military products. IOW, they won’t run out of bullets but will they run out of missiles?

As a reference, I have several optics made for my friend at the highest Chinese factory. They are well designed and built. The lenses are NOT on the level of an upper Swarovski but they are good and I suspect the lens quality was the design not the manufacturing of the same.

Finally, quantity has a quality all of its own. I think WW2 and the German Wehrmacht’s tanks are the classic example. We had a hard time competing one-on-one but when you have multiple tanks the quantity over came the qualitative advantage of the 88mm gun and German tank’s frontal armor.

You can get whatever quality you want in China if you are willing to invest in the facilities, equipment, people, and management. Apple makes world class stuff mostly in China. "3 levels" is simplistic, and a generalization if you are trying to get stuff on contract. But then my company doesn't hire Chinese plants to build our products, we have Joint Ventures (where required) or our own plants, so we have more direct oversight.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
I've seen the "ski jump" carriers in port in Dalian, China. They look silly. That was in 2019.

China is very good at propaganda. They have many trolls planting social media and traditional media stories about how great their military hardware is and about their hypersonic missiles. I'm not sure what to believe, but I doubt any of it is as good as is claimed.

But they are a nuclear power, so we are not going to get in face-to-face war.

Taiwan is smart enough to destroy the chip fabs if China attacks. And I'm sure they will make that clear to China. What good is an island if the thing China wants is useless?

If China attacks Taiwan, just embargo all food shipments from the western hemisphere. They will starve in months. China knows this too...

That won't matter, if Taiwan destroyed its chip production while China rolled over them, China would detain everyone with any expertise, and force them into slave labor, or hire them at high wages to replicate their former chip manufacturing capabilities in China.

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:
That won't matter, if Taiwan destroyed its chip production while China rolled over them, China would detain everyone with any expertise, and force them into slave labor, or hire them at high wages to replicate their former chip manufacturing capabilities in China.

Too simplistic.... China's goal is land, not technology; Taiwan would become the largest militarized piece of property in the world in a post-China invasion.

The US designs most of the world's high-end micro-chips.
Dutch manufacture ASML makes the high-end machines which builds medium and high-end chips. Each machine is about $200m eACH.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) produces nearly 60% of the semi-conductor chip market in THE WORLD, they are the largest purchaser of ASML machines. Just about every chip that goes into a modern vehicles, medical, space, and personal electronic devices is made by TSMC. TSMC's high-end US production plant in Phoenix is nearly completed; they also have operational chip plants in Washington and NY state.

Well damn, I thought they wanted the damn chip factories. The rest of it though, whether they really do want those chip factories or not, sounds far worse, other things being equal, and notwithstanding the Taiwanese of course.

quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:

quote:

Originally posted by CQB60:
...
They fear Western nuclear submarines to the point they see them in their nightmares.

How do we know this ?

...
Chinese missiles would probably destroy US airbases in Japan and as far as Guam, and sink two US aircraft carriers and between 10 and 20 destroyers and cruisers as the invasion opened.

Why would they only destroy two carriers instead of ALL of them, and ALL our ships within range of their new carrier destroying hypersonic missles ? Assuming they destroyed all our carriers and ships as they came into range using their new hypersonic ship killers for which we apparently have no defense for, and destroyed all our bases in Japan and Guam, then what ? That's sounds like a big dent that we couldn't just buff out. That sounds like serious trouble. If it is, how could we proceed to victory in saving Taiwan in that scenario ?

...
But the Chinese invading force itself would be destroyed before it ever occupied any significant part of Taiwan and ultimately it would be prevented from its goal of capturing the island’s capital Taipei, according to most scenarios tested.

How would that work ? I thought the Chicoms would destroy all our carriers, ships, and bases in Japan and Guam. So with all that eliminated, what would be left in place that could destroy the invading forces ? At that point it sounds like we wouldn't have much anything left except our subs that could lob nukes into China. But I thought that would be the least desirable solution, nuking the mainland. So short of that, we'd have little remaining in terms of kinetics, besides radiation poisoning. Is that the case ? I doubt the US would want to use nukes on the China mainland, unless I guess if they already destroyed our ships and bases, Congress could consider that a default state of war. Is that what you're suggesting ? An intercontinental nuclear exchange for the island of Taiwan ? I get the disaster of China taking over Taiwan given the world's dependence on Taiwan chip making and having an ally off the coast of China. But good lord is that all we'd have left ?

You need to have a little faith in our country. I doubt all our carriers would be deployed to fight China. We have many friendly country's with us who hate China. It would not be a one sided dance and we would destroy that country handily. Their junk isn't perfect because it's Made.....I think ping needs to lose economically and now. People here should be leaving the Chinese garbage on the store shelf and just walk away. Stop clicking that Amazon button too. Oh I forgot, we just can't do that, can we?

You got me wrong. I don't have faith in the current administration or the current heads at the Pentagon. And I never said all our carriers would be destroyed, I said why wouldn't China destroy all of them that came into the theatre for war that were within range. Cmon dude.