Strategically how big of a deal is this?

quote:

Originally posted by Rev. A. J. Forsyth:
Although it was a fictional book, "Ghost Fleet" by Cole and Singer is an exceptional read of how a conflict with China might play out. The book itself is very well written, highlighting technology that is available today. The interesting thing to me is that some predictions from the book which was written in 2015, are coming true today. - Drone swarms, microchip corruption, facial recognition, etc.

A couple of my favorite thriller authors have written about a war with China: David Poyer with his The War With China series, and Larry Bond's Red Dragon Rising series.

China can be destroyed with a collaborative boycott and naval blockade.

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
Strategically how big of a deal is this?

From what I've read, this could cause big trouble for American Carrier Battle Groups (CBG). Our CBGs are a prime way of showing the flag and projecting power. The Sovs (and PRCs) have been trying for decades to come up with an effective counter to this threat.

CWIS and other defensive systems can shoot down regular missiles; the allure of hypersonic weapons is it vastly complicates the CBG's defensiv strategy. There currently isn't any good defense against these weapons (that the public knows about, at least). . .

So, if China can deny CBGs from operating near, say, Taiwan, it would make China's attempt to invade much easier.

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:
China can be destroyed with a collaborative boycott and naval blockade.

Blockade is an act of war, and a boycott would hurt the US more than (or, at least as much as) China.

What are hypersonic missiles? The media is making a big deal about since they're basically a really fast cruise missile capable of changing course making them harder to shoot down. Are they really that much better than an ICBM? Media said ICBM's are easy to shoot down because of a predictable course. Who can shoot down an ICBM with any degree of regularity? I know we've done it, but who else? Did China really do this? Back in the 90's National Review had this big story about how American companies were selling dual use technology to China. Specifically helping them with staging and MIRV technology. Big scandal that went no where. What it told me is China was 40 years behind us in missile tech. The media made a big deal over China's new aircraft carrier. Its WW2 technology. It doesn't have a catapult. So, is a hypersonic nuclear capable missile that much of a strategic advantage over our nuclear delivery systems?

ICBM leave from earth, hit low earth orbit and reenter, then "terminal" phase to target.

Very "ballistic" and predictable, as well as many sensors that can detect the preparation and boost phase of flight to target "interceptors".

The "hypersonics" are fired, rise to much lower altitude, can fly unpredictable course and even though slower than ICBM, they are still much faster than "normal" aerial targets and trying to track and "kill" them is a greater challenge, and add the likelihood of many being fired simultaneously, from random sources and using many "decoys", the ability to get weapons on target(s), becomes a more likely case.

(think "Pop Fly" vs "Line Drive")

And using ICBM will likely result in a serious counterstrike and rapid escalation.

Chess/Checkers.

It's complicated.

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
What are hypersonic missiles?

Missles that are able to fly faster than Mach 5.

quote:

Are they really that much better than an ICBM? Media said ICBM's are easy to shoot down because of a predictable course. Who can shoot down an ICBM with any degree of regularity? I know we've done it, but who else?

You nailed the difference, for ballistic missiles, the warhead travels in a parabolic trajectory, which makes it fairly easy to calculate its destination and trajectory. With that data, building the solution to intercept is much easier. There's a variety of anti-ballistic missile tech out there, the US has two, the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense and the Navy's Ballistic Missile Defense Aegis system. Does it work, yes; efficacy...I've read anywhere between 55% to 90% hit probability; we've got A LOT of data and results. India, Russia and China have similar systems in varying levels of effectiveness.

What makes hypersonics a threat is they aren't on predictable flight paths like a ballistic missile warhead, thus making intercept nearly impossible. Combine that with utilizing the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System, that makes things rather scary and should sober-up anybody who thinks China is simply a bunch of ideological farmers.

quote:

Did China really do this?

So, is a hypersonic nuclear capable missile that much of a strategic advantage over our nuclear delivery systems?

China is well past that point when the Clinton admin gave away certain technologies in a misguided theory of diplomacy. They've made immense investments in various technologies, to include highly advanced wind tunnels that will allow them to test and develop a wide range of flight and space vehicles. Their current JF-12 tunnel, can simulate Mach 5-9 speeds; their newest project JF-22, which started const in 2018 with a 2022 completion date, is expected to hit Mach 30 speeds! The US's most advanced tunnel, Large Energy National Shock Tunnel (LENS II) is able to achieve Mach 7-18.

In the general sense, the US has theorized about hyper-sonics and had a handful of tests for about two decades however, its never gone beyond the developing data phase. Such projects bounced around between NASA, various universities and defense contractor special interest projects but, it's never received national investment and use-focus until recently.

There's a lot of unknowns within this realm of weapons development, I think its safe to say that the gentleman's agreement to not weaponize Space is now over. What we know is that US tech is usually quite solid with robust electronics and guidance...development however takes forever. Russia, likes to put all sorts of fearsome tech out on the market, like the Shkval super-cavitating torpedo; the reality is there's all sorts of limitations and its electronic components aren't very good. China, it remains to be seen, as they're just getting into the weapons export market. They're making a lot of progress at an impressive clip, however if the quality of their advanced weapons is like how their residential buildings are constructed (all sorts of short-cuts taken), we'll hold an advantage.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
however if the quality of their advanced weapons is like how their residential buildings are constructed (all sorts of short-cuts taken), we'll hold an advantage.

That's what I've been thinking as well.

I like to think we have technology that we’ve kept secret for potential threats like this but with this cowtowing administration, I’m not sure we’d use it if it existed.

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:
China can be destroyed with a collaborative boycott and naval blockade.

Blockade is an act of war, and a boycott would hurt the US more than (or, at least as much as) China.

Unfortunately you are correct. Until Americans are willing to make short term economic sacrifices and bring manufacturing home (I think some guy said this a few years ago), we will remain firmly in the grasp of China.

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:
China can be destroyed with a collaborative boycott and naval blockade.

Blockade is an act of war, and a boycott would hurt the US more than (or, at least as much as) China.

Unfortunately you are correct. Until Americans are willing to make short term economic sacrifices and bring manufacturing home (I think some guy said this a few years ago), we will remain firmly in the grasp of China.

Its a two-way street. China is dependent on food imports to sustain its population, and thus its reliant on other countries. In return, China dominates the raw materials industry in plastics, medication, textiles, chemicals and metal; manufacturing/assembly may happen in a separate country but, in order to get the raw goods, they'll have to purchase from China.
The fragility of a global supply chain, under the theory of just-in-time delivery has been exposed by the pandemic. The global dominance of materials by China has forced the world to pay attention to not only what's going on in Beijing but, also the decisions made in boardrooms and legislatures.

Great points. However, China is actually addressing their food shortage and doing something about it. The US is doing nothing to address its raw material and manufacturing shortages.

This news story was first reported in April 2020 and later in the July/ August 2021 time frame, and a quick check shows that it was posted in the Corona virus thread by Sigfreund and wcb6092, but I only learned about it recently, and as I believe this story supports this thread topic, I'm going to include different articles on it here as further proof of the China threat.

[Note: hyperlinks at the linked website article.]

Emphasis added in bold.

==========================

New Virus Poses ‘An Existential Threat To Life As We Know It On This Planet’

October 11, 2021 • By Greg Albaugh

The Biden administration’s apparent unwillingness to conduct a serious official investigation of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 that holds China accountable for its actions and lack of cooperation could result in a pandemic much more lethal that the current one, warns a leading researcher.

Dr. Steven Quay, whose research became part of a State Department probe of the origin of COVID-19 under President Trump, told Fox News’ Martha MacCallum on Friday that “all of the evidence points toward the lab theory.”

“There’s no evidence that supports a natural origin at this point,” he said. “So I think we’re done, at this point, with the investigation.”

But it’s more vital than ever to stop the dangerous “gain-of-function” research going on at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, he said.

Raw data from patient specimens posted in the National Institutes of Health’s gene bank showed researchers at the Wuhan lab in December 2019 were manipulating genes from the highly lethal Nipah virus, Quay said.
The Nipah virus, which causes severe inflammation of the brain or encephalitis, has a death rate of about 80%, Quay warned.

“If you didn’t like the pandemic that was just 1% lethal, this thing they were working on in December 2019 has an 80% lethality,” he told MacCallum. “It needs to be stopped.”

Quay told “Fox Business Tonight” on Thursday that virus research at the Wuhan lab poses “an existential threat to life as we know it on this planet.”

He explained to MacCallum on Friday that Wuhan scientists were manipulating Nipah viruses, just as, he believes, they engineered SARS CoV-2.

“This is their next project, if I could call it that,” he said.

Quay contends that the questions scientists have concerning viruses that pose the risk of a pandemic can be answered through the creation of “pseudoviruses,” which he said have “zero potential infectivity.”

But the Wuhan researchers were taking one-third of the entire genome of the Nipah virus and moving it around, via synthetic biology.

“If they completed a synthetic version of Nipah and then have a lab accident, like a believe SARS-CoV-2 was, we then have a virus that has a much higher lethality,” he said.

“We really need to focus on stopping this kind of dangerous research.”

MacCallum noted the Biden administration had an opportunity this week to put pressure on China regarding the origin of the pandemic when National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan spoke with a top Chinese diplomat. But Sullivan didn’t bring up the subject, according to a readout.

Quay is the founder of Atossa Therapeutics in Seattle, a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company developing novel therapeutics for oncology and infectious diseases.

He earned his M.D. and Ph.D. from the University of Michigan, was a postdoctoral fellow at MIT, a resident at the Harvard-MGH Hospital and a faculty member of Stanford University School of Medicine. He has more than 360 published contributions to medicine and has been cited more than 10,500 times, placing him in the top 1% of scientists worldwide. He holds 87 U.S. patents and has invented seven FDA-approved pharmaceuticals that have been prescribed to more than 80 million people. He is the author of the best-selling book on surviving the pandemic, “Stay Safe: A Physician’s Guide to Survive Coronavirus.”

We have a whistleblower

Last week, Quay wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal with Cal Berkeley emeritus physics professor Richard Muller citing four studies, including two from the World Health Organization, that provide strong evidence for the lab-leak theory,

One study, published by Nature Medicine, concluded the original SARS-CoV-2 pathogen was 99.5% optimized for human infection, which is strong confirmation of the lab-leak hypothesis.

Another clue to the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is found in the virus’s “furin cleavage site,” which is too complex to have been the result of spontaneous mutations.

The furin cleavage site enables the virus to bind to a human cell and release its genetic material, helping make the virus more transmissible and harmful.

The NIH database, researchers point out, shows no furin cleavage site in more than 1,200 viruses that can exchange with SARS-CoV-2.

Meanwhile, a 2018 grant application by EcoHealth Alliance founder Peter Daszak for research at the Wuhan lab proposed splicing furin cleavage site sequences into bat viruses so a research team could look for changes in infectivity.

Muller and Quay conclude: “We have an eyewitness, a whistleblower who escaped from Wuhan and carried details of the pandemic’s origin that the Chinese Communist Party can’t hide. The whistleblower’s name is SARS-CoV-2.”

See Quay’s interview explaining the furin cleavage site:



https://m.youtube.com/watch?ti...N6M&feature=emb_logo

===============================

Anyone wanting to know more about the Nipah virus can check this technical article by Dr. Quay:

https://drquay.com/news/forens...ion-of-the-nipah-vi/

It seems to me that humanity would be done a great service if the scientists working on this project just happened to get dead one day.

This and China ramping up their nuclear delivery system tells you everything you need to know about these warlike savages. China will start WW3. The time is fast approaching where the world will be powerless to stop it from happening.

The real issue is getting people to admit that Commies can't work in a pathogen lab.

The Soviets had leak issues, as well - there's been serious talk that, in a thousand years or so, when their old bioweapons island becomes land (its on a lake which will slowly dry out), it will have to be nuked/should be nuked now...

And, honestly, it really should be nuked now...

That the ChiComs put their facility in a city, is bizarre, and more evidence that they have no expectation that their researchers would ever lock themselves down.

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:
China can be destroyed with a collaborative boycott and naval blockade.

You do realize they have the largest Navy in the world right? Perhaps not the best Navy, but the biggest by far.

It is all in their plan, there will be a terrible price the world will pay sooner or later.

[Note: hyperlinks at linked news story.]

Emphasis added in bold.
=============================

China Builds Missile Targets Shaped Like U.S. Aircraft Carrier, Destroyers in Remote Desert

By: H I Sutton and Sam LaGrone
November 7, 2021 11:12 AM • Updated: November 7, 2021 12:58 PM


An Oct. 20, 2021 satellite image of a target in the shape of a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Taklamakan Desert in Central China. H I Sutton Illustration for USNI News Satellite image ©2021 Maxar Technologies Used with Permission


The Chinese military has built targets in the shape of an American aircraft carrier and other U.S. warships in the Taklamakan desert as part of a new target range complex, according to photos provided to USNI News by satellite imagery company Maxar.

The full-scale outline of a U.S. carrier and at least two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers are part of the target range that has been built in the Ruoqiang region in central China. The site is near a former target range China used to test early versions of its so-called carrier killer DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles, according to press reports in 2013.

This new range shows that China continues to focus on anti-carrier capabilities, with an emphasis on U.S. Navy warships. Unlike the Iranian Navy’s aircraft carrier-shaped target in the Persian Gulf, the new facility shows signs of a sophisticated instrumented target range.


A target in the shape of a U.S. Destroyer in the Taklamakan Desert in Central China. H I Sutton Illustration for USNI News Satellite image ©2021 Maxar Technologies Used with Permission



The carrier target itself appears to be a flat surface without the carrier’s island, aircraft lifts, weapons sponsons or other details, the imagery from Maxar shows. On radar, the outline of the carrier stands out from the surrounding desert – not unlike a target picture, according to imagery provided to USNI News by Capella Space.

There are two more target areas representing an aircraft carrier that do not have the metaling, but are distinguishable as carriers due to their outline. But other warship targets appear to be more elaborate. There are numerous upright poles positioned on them, possibly for instrumentation, according to the imagery. Alternatively these may be used for radar reflectors to simulate the superstructure of the vessel.

The facility also has an extensive rail system. An Oct. 9 image from Maxar showed a 75 meter-long target with extensive instrumentation on a 6 meter-wide rail.


Target range in the Taklamakan desert in Central China. H I Sutton illustration for USNI News


The area has been traditionally used for ballistic missile testing, according to a summary of the Maxar images by geospatial intelligence company AllSource Analysis that identified the site from satellite imagery.

“The mockups of several probable U.S. warships, along with other warships (mounted on rails and mobile), could simulate targets related to seeking/target acquisition testing,” according to the AllSource Analysis summary, which said there are no indications of weapon impact areas in the immediate vicinity of the mockups. “This, and the extensive detail of the mockups, including the placement of multiple sensors on and around the vessel targets, it is probable that this area is intended for multiple uses over time.“

Analysis of historical satellite images shows that the carrier target structure was first built between March and April of 2019. It underwent several rebuilds and was then substantially dismantled in December 2019. The site came back to life in late September of this year and the structure was substantially complete by early October.


Detailed Photos of the mobile target at the Ruoqiang facility. H I Sutton Illustration for USNI News Satellite image ©2021 Maxar Technologies Used with Permission


China has several anti-ship ballistic missile programs overseen by the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force. The land-based CSS-5 Mod 5 (DF-21D) missile has a range of over 800 nautical miles. It has a maneuverable reentry vehicle (MaRV) to target ships. The larger CSS-18 (DF-26) has a range of around 2,000 nautical miles.

“In July 2019, the PLARF conducted its first-ever confirmed live-fire launch into the South China Sea, firing six DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles into the waters north of the Spratly Islands,” according to the Pentagon’s latest annual report on China’s military. The Chinese are also fielding a longer range anti-ship ballistic missile that initially emerged in 2016.

“The multi-role DF-26 is designed to rapidly swap conventional and nuclear warheads and is capable of conducting precision land-attack and anti-ship strikes in the Western Pacific, the Indian Ocean, and the South China Sea from mainland China. In 2020, the PRC fired anti-ship ballistic missiles against a moving target in the South China Sea, but has not acknowledged doing so,” reads the report.


A Nov. 5, 2021 Capella Space synthetic aperture radar image of the target in the shape of a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Taklamakan Desert H I Sutton Illustration for USNI News


In addition to the land-based anti-ship ballistic missiles, China has a program to equip the People’s Liberation Army Navy H-6 bombers with a massive anti-ship ballistic missile. First revealed in 2018, the CH-AS-X-13 will likely be the largest air-launched missile in existence, and would be large enough to accommodate a hypersonic warhead.

Another possible launch platform for anti-ship ballistic missiles is the new Type-055 Renhai Class large destroyer. Described as a guided-missile cruiser, it will be capable of carrying anti-ship ballistic missiles, according to the Pentagon report.

It’s not the first time China has built an aircraft carrier target in the desert. Since 2003, a large concrete pad, roughly the size of a carrier, has been used as a target. The slab, which is part of the Shuangchengzi missile test range, has been hit many times and is frequently repaired. The new site in the Taklamakan desert is 600 miles away and is much more evolved. The newer ship targets are closer approximations of the vessels that they are supposed to represent.


DoD Graphic


While questions remain on the extent of weapons that will be tested at the new facility, the level of sophistication of what can now be seen at the site show the PLA is continuing to invest in deterrents to limit the efficacy of U.S. naval forces close to China – in particular targeting the U.S. carrier fleet.

According to the Pentagon report released last week, a primary objective of the PLARF will be to keep U.S. carriers at risk from anti-ship ballistic missiles throughout the Western Pacific.