well plaaf may get some good aircrafts in future like j-10 and j-12 and what not but just look at usaf 1000+f-16s.more than 500 f-15s(if these two are not considered the best as of now then what aircraft are?) and add to that f-18e,f22 and the jsf,china does not have aircraft like b-52,b2 or f117 nor does it have the kind of surveillance infrastructure that usaf has,usaaf also has a proven capability of long range deployments and dont forget usnavy has f-18e's and will get jsf's they have orions (considered to be top class submarine hunter).usaf and usnavy also have extensive and current combat experience(they are continually trying out new things and evolving new strategies.)the chances for plan wether assisted by plaf or not are very less.us will be clear winner.
Is China capable of crippling US CSF's in Chinese ses?
- Thread starter Superbug
- Start date
- Status
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
How many American's cared enough about Iraq, to make it worthwhile going to war? The answer: 1!!!berry580 said:
If American assets were deployed to defend Taiwan in a state of "heightened tensions" and someone made a mistake (hey they happen, look at the infamous EP-3 "incident", whoever you believe was at fault in that incident, neither side actually wanted to crash 2 aircraft into each other), it wouldn't take very much at all to start a serious war, one that may not turn Nuclear, but one that would be very costly for everyone...
Deltared075
New Member
You will not see F22 or JSF deploy for combat for next 5 to 10 years. Ya.. US have thousands of modern fighters, but where they want to locate all these fighters around China? on Pasific Ocean? ya right US fighter can swim!aaaditya said:
Ever hear of AESA? Spread Spectrum technology? China's best radars use passive phased arrays. Twt tubes and ferrite phase shifters. They operate on static frequencies, and can be jammed by saturating the twt tubes with signals. AESA radar elements have their own t/r modules (MMICs). They can shift frequencies electronically, and all the elements can be working together on separate frequencies. i.e. They can ignore the jamming signals.berry580 said:
Effectively, yes.berry580 said:
I'd say the fighter wing on the CVBGs are more than a match for the entire PLAAF.Deltared075 said:
Also U.S operate airbase in Japan, S.Korea and Guam.
I'm not sure if I'm missing something here. But the USN won't be using F-22's, and the JSF is part of the future CVN mix. At the moment the SuperHornet is the principle fleet air asset - and will be until the JSF takes over.Deltared075 said:
The USAF or USN don't need either the JSF or F-22 to play in the Pacific.
1) Thats what Carrier air groups are for
2) Thats what Whiteman AFB is for
3) Thats what SSGN's are for.
4) Thats the whole reason behind stand off weapons.
Air Groups are only part of the toolbox.
The whole nature of intercontinental warfighting is very very different from continental warfighting.
People who seem to think that a future war is based around the "clash of the titans" between the PLAAF/PLAN and USN in a set piece engagement haven't been paying attention to how the US conducts its theatre event warfighting.
As a sidenote - the USAF has over 51 F-22's that are now active. IIRC 41 of those are in operational training squadrons - another words in wartime they would be active straight away if they were required. There are actually more flying F-22's than France has in operational Rafales.
btw.. the F-22 is right on schedule in a few months. It's due to be deployed in December 2005 - not in 5 years time. At that stage the already existing training squadrons will also qualify as active if necessary.Deltared075 said:
-----------------------------
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Feb-09-Wed-2005/news/25831476.html
Nellis airmen launch last leg of F/A-22 Raptor testing
By KEITH ROGERS
REVIEW-JOURNAL
The "Green Bats" airmen at Nellis Air Force Base said Tuesday they have launched the last leg of testing for the nation's air superiority jet that will make the F/A-22 Raptor ready for combat operations in December.
The first of 175 test sorties began Friday and will run through the fall with a final exam this summer by Air Force evaluators, said Lt. Col. Art McGettrick of Nellis' 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron. The unit patch features a toothy, knife-wielding green bat of the flying mammal variety.
This last test phase will focus on the Raptor's weapons capabilities and tactics for using the fast-flying, stealthy fighter-attack jet in combat. The result will be a manual of more than 1,000 pages that details war-fighting scenarios against other aircraft and weapons systems to ensure air-space dominance.
"It's like a playbook for the football team," McGettrick said.
While the 422nd carries out the tests with 14 pilots to fly the seven, single-seat Raptors assigned to the squadron, the 59th Test and Evaluation Squadron manages the force development evaluation.
The test phase will also continue to look at the plane's suitability for being maintained. The squadron needs to ensure the Raptor is reliable and that its radar-evading capabilities stay intact through all the rigors of combat. And, the airmen want to show that if something breaks, it can be fixed.
Maj. Craig Baker said the realm of tests includes "wringing out of sensor capabilities" to testing and evaluating night-vision goggles and putting the plane's air-to-ground and other weapons systems through the paces.
"We are going to drop bombs on targets," Baker said, referring to the the two, 1,000-pound GBU-32 smart bombs, also called Joint Direct Attack Munitions.
The Raptor is also equipped with air-to-air intercept and Sidewinder missiles and a pop-up cannon that can rapidly fire 20mm bullets, said Maj. Mike Kensick, of the Green Bats squadron.
The Raptor, which can fly at more than 15 miles per minute, was designed to replace the aging fleet of F-15C Eagles, most of which are about 25 years old and are showing signs of cracks, corrosion and fatigue.
The Raptor has first-look, first-kill capability against multiple targets. In tests against F-15s and F-16s posing as aggressors, the Raptor has been invincible.
"We just clobber them every time," McGettrick said.
He said with other nations such as Russia, China, India, Iran and North Korea having so-called fourth generation fighter jets and access to surface-to-air missiles that can defend more than 1,000 square miles of air space, it's essential for the United States to stay ahead of the curve.
Many of those systems are for sale in foreign countries and "anybody with a checkbook can buy modern weaponry," he said. "Even though Afghanistan didn't have much of a military, the next adversary might."
----------------------
http://www.f22-raptor.com/media/documents/press_release_2005_feb_1.doc
PRESS RELEASE -- Secretary of the Air Force, Directorate of Public Affairs
Release No. 02/01/2005
February 1, 2005
F/A-22 demonstrates air dominance with completion of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The F/A-22 Raptor demonstrated "overwhelmingly effective" warfighting capability according to the Initial Operational Test and Evaluation report by the Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M.
During the test, it met or exceeded performance expectations in altitude, speed, maneuverability and survivability. It also performed significantly better than the F-15C in all air-to-air mission areas, leading to a rating of "effective" by AFOTEC.
"The Raptor operated against all adversaries with virtual impunity," said Maj. Gen. Rick Lewis, Air Force program executive officer for the F/A-22. "The ground-based systems couldn't engage the Raptor, and no adversary aircraft survived. That is air dominance, and that's exactly what the Raptor was designed to give us."
AFOTEC also evaluated the Raptor's sustainability in field operations as "potentially suitable," because the aircraft met interim milestones but did not meet every requirement needed before the Raptor is declared operational. The Air Force is already working to address the deficiencies AFOTEC identified to get the aircraft ready for operational use.
Raptor flight training is on-going at Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., and flight operations have begun at Langley Air Force Base, Va., the home of the first operational Raptor squadron. Follow-on test and evaluation of the Raptor's air-to-ground capabilities will be conducted later this year. This December, the Raptor is expected to reach initial operational capability, which means it is able to conduct combat operations.
The next program milestone for the Raptor will be an evaluation of its Initial Operational Test and Evaluation by the Defense Department's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation. This independent evaluation of the Raptor's test performance will be used to help decide whether to move the Raptor from limited to full production levels.
----------------------------
http://www.af.mil/news/story_print.asp?storyID=123009736
F/A-22 on track to go operational
by Chris McGee
National Museum of the U.S. Air Force Public Affairs
2/2/2005 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio (AFPN) -- The F/A-22 Raptor, the Air Force’s next-generation air superiority fighter, performed well in recently completed operational testing and is on track to go operational in December, the director of the program’s combined test force said.
Speaking prior to a lecture he delivered at the National Museum of the United States Air Force here, Lt. Col. Evan Thomas, a Raptor pilot who commands the 411th Flight Test Squadron at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., said testing finished ahead of schedule.
“I’m very optimistic,†Colonel Thomas said. “The airplane did very well in operational testing.â€
He said the process of readying the Raptor for its operational testing -- from refining and validating the aircraft’s key attributes to training pilots -- proved a significant effort and enabled operational testing to be conducted successfully and ahead of schedule.
Even so, Colonel Thomas said obstacles remain to be cleared between now and December.
“There are still a lot of challenges,†he said. “It’s going to be an uphill fight throughout this year, not only for us on the Air Force Materiel Command developmental test side, but also for Air Combat Command units standing up the first squadron at Langley (AFB, Va.). These are challenges, but we can (overcome) them.â€
The 27th Fighter Squadron at Langley AFB -- the first squadron to transition to the Raptor -- received the first operational aircraft Jan. 18 from Tyndall AFB, Fla., where the 43rd Fighter Squadron is training future Raptor pilots.
Pilots with the 27th Fighter Squadron will train on the aircraft by flying missions over the next few months while maintenance crewmembers will train on a separate F/A-22 that arrived at Langley AFB Jan. 7.
Colonel Thomas said the aircraft’s package of stealth, supercruise and integrated avionics will give the Air Force and the nation the best capability to operate in combat environments.
“Being able to proceed to a target at supercruise and get there very quickly to deliver a Joint Direct Attack Munition onto the target is a clear advantage,†he said. “You can’t have a fighter over every inch of enemy territory, but with a Raptor, you can have more of a central location and cover far more ground in a short time.â€
The F/A-22’s capabilities, combined with an understanding of history’s lessons, make the case for the Raptor’s value in future conflicts, Colonel Thomas said.
“What 20th century warfare taught us is the overwhelming importance of air superiority,†he said. “That is an enduring air power lesson the Air Force has learned, and the F/A-22 is a key component in ensuring that we can establish and maintain air superiority anywhere in the world well out into this century.â€
-------------------------
As a sidenote, a B-52 successfully JDAM'd a target vessel recently in carriage and release trials. So the capacity to stand off and reach out and hit other naval assets (replenishment, refuelers, ASW, mine warfare assets) has just multiplied. It means that dedicated AShM's can be carried by assets that can get through an IADS that the B-52 might be more vulnerable to.
If were talkin Airstrikes against aircraft carriers, even the new J-X stealth fighter of the Chinese will be unable to get through the radar shield as the SPY-1 (das the right designation?) radar on board an Aegis system can detect stealth craft of even F-22 capability, a fact the Japanese Aegis ships were kind enough to prrove to the USAF. However the Plasma technology developed by the russians DOES have the capability to beat the SPY-1 radar AND the E-767 AWACs of the japanese martime SDF AND the E-3s of the US. Principally because of the ion gases surrounding the aircraft rather then radar absorbant material.
So let the chinese get production rights of Tu-160s or Su-34s and fitt em with this techno and then lets see watll happen although ill bet political clearence for such technology is NOT forthcoming.
So let the chinese get production rights of Tu-160s or Su-34s and fitt em with this techno and then lets see watll happen although ill bet political clearence for such technology is NOT forthcoming.
Sorry Corsair, but I have to disagree with you. First of all, no F/A-22 has operated in the vicinity of a Japanese Destroyer. The only operational squadrons fly out of Nellis and Tyndall, with the first combat squadron scheduled to be formed up at Langley this year. Second, surely you are not trying to imply that Japan somehow has knowledge of AEGIS that the US doesn't posess?corsair7772 said:
Even the Russians admitted long ago that this was a pipe dream. First of all, the only application of this so-called "plasma stealth" is in the form of a screen that fits in front of the radar antenna within the radome. It also blinds the aircraft's own radar when it is in operation, so it's tactical merits are marginal, to say the least. The US has long been aware of this technology, but we have chosen a different approach.corsair7772 said:
Wrt external plasma, even assuming you could build a plasma generator small enough to fit in a fighter AC, there is no way to keep a cloud of ionized gases from being sheared off by the airstream. So to say that such a technology has the ability to beat SPY-1 or any other radar is extremely speculative, to put it nicely. The technology simply doesn't exist. I won't even get into the other issues wrt thermal and electromagnetic signatures.
I'd have to agree with highsea on the issue of Plasma radar. It's been a non starter for years - and there are numerous technical reasons for it not working on aircraft. Part of my job entitiles me to membership of the Assoc of Old Crows .
The AOC deals with members who have been involved with issues such as electronic warfare and their associated arms of operation. I have never once seen any documents or technical briefings which indicated that Plasma had undergone a revival or that the Russians were still pursuing it. The closest thing to Plasma ever achieved was the conversion of electrostats to a fortm of bistatic radar. The science just doesn't work on planes at all. Plasma is one of those cute urban myths that people throw up as a "hail mary" response to counter current stealth platforms.
I can assure you that there is more chance of the USN demobbing all of her CVN's than Plasma being current or emerging technology.
As for AEGIS. The Japanese have an export version of AEGIS - and the Kongos also have a higher COTS ewarfare component (to reduce costs). None of the COTS systems would be able to be integrated into SPY-1. SPY-1 is also not a system where they could go and modify it - it just isn't designed that way.
As for the JSDF being able to fly against F-22's. Again that's incorrect. AFAIK none of them have been off CONUS - and they certainly have not been provided for non-US personnel to evaluate. Unless the Japanese parked their Kongos off of the california test range they wouldn't have even seen an F-22 in the flesh. Again, AFAIK, none of the F-22's have been flown over water for numerous security implications - they have been flown only over continental areas and always well within national limits.
I think someone is spinning you a fairy story Corsair...
The AOC deals with members who have been involved with issues such as electronic warfare and their associated arms of operation. I have never once seen any documents or technical briefings which indicated that Plasma had undergone a revival or that the Russians were still pursuing it. The closest thing to Plasma ever achieved was the conversion of electrostats to a fortm of bistatic radar. The science just doesn't work on planes at all. Plasma is one of those cute urban myths that people throw up as a "hail mary" response to counter current stealth platforms.
I can assure you that there is more chance of the USN demobbing all of her CVN's than Plasma being current or emerging technology.
As for AEGIS. The Japanese have an export version of AEGIS - and the Kongos also have a higher COTS ewarfare component (to reduce costs). None of the COTS systems would be able to be integrated into SPY-1. SPY-1 is also not a system where they could go and modify it - it just isn't designed that way.
As for the JSDF being able to fly against F-22's. Again that's incorrect. AFAIK none of them have been off CONUS - and they certainly have not been provided for non-US personnel to evaluate. Unless the Japanese parked their Kongos off of the california test range they wouldn't have even seen an F-22 in the flesh. Again, AFAIK, none of the F-22's have been flown over water for numerous security implications - they have been flown only over continental areas and always well within national limits.
I think someone is spinning you a fairy story Corsair...
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Just to dive in here again. I think that the PLAN could potentially sink a CVN but they would have to throw pretty much everything they had and risk it all.
For the reasons mentioned, a sneak sub attack would not have much chance of succeeding.
By the way, what kinds of anti-submarine weapons do USN destroyers and frigates have? Are they mostly helicopter launched, or do they have on-board systems normally?
For the reasons mentioned, a sneak sub attack would not have much chance of succeeding.
By the way, what kinds of anti-submarine weapons do USN destroyers and frigates have? Are they mostly helicopter launched, or do they have on-board systems normally?
indianguy4u
New Member
well guys this us wishfull subject to talk about b`coz no country in the world r in the position to stand against the american hegemony ok!!!. Also if china had such a capability they would already annexed taiwan ok it will take atleast 70-80 yrs for any country to challenge the american even if whole world resist them
lol well in this case it was this chinese technician in PLAN i met in Beijing whose kinda anti american(no surprises there).gf0012-aust said:
Well its not much of a source, but u might wanna read this book "Kilo class". Its an excellent read and very much related to the topic. Then you might be better able to appreciate PLAN abilities against the USN.indianguy4u said:
The largest of the fleets is already based out of Japan. It has been beefed up with another 5 Aegis equiped vessels in the last 3 months. In addition, the US has been practicing surging the CTF's. They surged 7x CTF's a few months ago. They've just surged 3x CTF's into the Mediteranean.Musashi_kenshin said:
also US aircraft are within 3hrs flight time of Taiwan.
Chinese Submarine Stalks US Carrier
Agence France-Presse
Nov 14, 2006 - 5:40:03 AM
Washington: A Chinese submarine approached a US aircraft carrier in the Pacific Ocean last month and surfaced within firing range of its torpedoes and missiles before being detected, The Washington Times reported Monday. The newspaper said the encounter highlighted China's continuing efforts to prepare for a possible future conflict with the United States despite the administration's efforts to try to boost relations with the Chinese military.
The submarine encounter with the USS Kitty Hawk and its battle group also is an embarrassment to the commander of US forces in the Pacific, Admiral William Fallon, who is engaged in an ambitious military exchange program with China, the report said.
Citing unnamed defense officials, the paper said the Chinese Song-class diesel-powered attack submarine shadowed the Kitty Hawk undetected and surfaced within five miles of the carrier on October 26.
The surfaced submarine was spotted by a routine surveillance flight by one of the carrier group's planes, The Times said. The Kitty Hawk battle group includes an attack submarine and anti-submarine helicopters that are charged with protecting the warships from submarine attack.
The submarine is equipped with Russian-made wake-homing torpedoes and anti-ship cruise missiles, the paper said.
The Kitty Hawk and several other warships were deployed near Okinawa at the time, as part of a routine fall deployment program. The Times said Chinese submarines rarely have operated in deep water far from Chinese shores or shadowed US vessels.
So what do you think? There was quite a bit said in the "IS the US Navy overrated?" thread.
Agence France-Presse
Nov 14, 2006 - 5:40:03 AM
Washington: A Chinese submarine approached a US aircraft carrier in the Pacific Ocean last month and surfaced within firing range of its torpedoes and missiles before being detected, The Washington Times reported Monday. The newspaper said the encounter highlighted China's continuing efforts to prepare for a possible future conflict with the United States despite the administration's efforts to try to boost relations with the Chinese military.
The submarine encounter with the USS Kitty Hawk and its battle group also is an embarrassment to the commander of US forces in the Pacific, Admiral William Fallon, who is engaged in an ambitious military exchange program with China, the report said.
Citing unnamed defense officials, the paper said the Chinese Song-class diesel-powered attack submarine shadowed the Kitty Hawk undetected and surfaced within five miles of the carrier on October 26.
The surfaced submarine was spotted by a routine surveillance flight by one of the carrier group's planes, The Times said. The Kitty Hawk battle group includes an attack submarine and anti-submarine helicopters that are charged with protecting the warships from submarine attack.
The submarine is equipped with Russian-made wake-homing torpedoes and anti-ship cruise missiles, the paper said.
The Kitty Hawk and several other warships were deployed near Okinawa at the time, as part of a routine fall deployment program. The Times said Chinese submarines rarely have operated in deep water far from Chinese shores or shadowed US vessels.
So what do you think? There was quite a bit said in the "IS the US Navy overrated?" thread.
I personally don't trust the Washington Post very much. They are known for their overblown stories and inaccurate reporting.Chinese Submarine Stalks US Carrier
Agence France-Presse
Nov 14, 2006 - 5:40:03 AM
Washington: A Chinese submarine approached a US aircraft carrier in the Pacific Ocean last month and surfaced within firing range of its torpedoes and missiles before being detected, The Washington Times reported Monday. The newspaper said the encounter highlighted China's continuing efforts to prepare for a possible future conflict with the United States despite the administration's efforts to try to boost relations with the Chinese military.
The submarine encounter with the USS Kitty Hawk and its battle group also is an embarrassment to the commander of US forces in the Pacific, Admiral William Fallon, who is engaged in an ambitious military exchange program with China, the report said.
Citing unnamed defense officials, the paper said the Chinese Song-class diesel-powered attack submarine shadowed the Kitty Hawk undetected and surfaced within five miles of the carrier on October 26.
The surfaced submarine was spotted by a routine surveillance flight by one of the carrier group's planes, The Times said. The Kitty Hawk battle group includes an attack submarine and anti-submarine helicopters that are charged with protecting the warships from submarine attack.
The submarine is equipped with Russian-made wake-homing torpedoes and anti-ship cruise missiles, the paper said.
The Kitty Hawk and several other warships were deployed near Okinawa at the time, as part of a routine fall deployment program. The Times said Chinese submarines rarely have operated in deep water far from Chinese shores or shadowed US vessels.
So what do you think? There was quite a bit said in the "IS the US Navy overrated?" thread.
It has been confirmed.
- Status