Chinese Air Power analysis - Justin Bronk

Discuss air warfare, doctrine, air forces, historic campaigns, etc.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post02 Oct 2022, 14:38

not_kent wrote:You also seem to equate diameter of MLRS to how advanced they are, size is not always everything. Precision weapons can make do with smaller warheads.


But that is point, Chinese do have GPS rockets Russians don't or have it in quite small numbers probable high cost, because of tiny Russian electronic industry.

For example look Belarus Polonez:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonez_( ... t_launcher)

It based on Chinese tech not Russian tehc, it use GPS guided rockets, two variants, one with 50-200km range and second one with 120-300km both are 301mm diameter.

So if Belarus based on Chinese tech can cover Taiwan be sure Chinese mlrs can it too, plus they have systems with even bigger rockets which use GPS:

https://youtu.be/jRN5jKwyz_M
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2966
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 00:37

A300.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8966
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 06:05

tphuang wrote:
I think you should read through this. This is if they do intend to go kinetic against Taiwan. There won't be any advanced warning or major landing force build up. They will first complete exhaust ROC military. Everything will start off as a blockade. They will only land when ROC military is ready to put up the white flag.
https://rentry.co/tw-human-material-state
The a million man across straits theory is such a stupid analysis of how China would approach this conflict.

I don't think they will actually even need to go kinetic against Taiwan. they have the world's large cutter fleet and a whole bunch of 056s. They import close to 100% of their hydrocarbons and are only 70% self sufficient in food. Taiwan has enough natural gas to last 7 days. China can just stop crude carriers and LNGS from reaching the main Taiwanese ports. https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-is-c ... 1663585457

China's goal is to prevent Taiwan from declaring independence and to prevent Western countries from having a 2-China policy. As long as it can prevent that, it won't go kinetic.

Blockading China is really hard. I will just leave it as that.


Sounds good in theory but that's about it. Just do a little history on the US Island Hopping Campaign during WWII. The Allies assaulted island after island on a scale China couldn't even match today. (i.e. Non-Nuclear) Yet, the overall results were nothing short of disappointing. While, the following land invasions suffered very high casualties rates.

Nor, can't China hope to maintain a blockage around Taiwan until they capitulate! On the other hand China has only very limited access to the open blue waters. Which, the US and her Allies would cut off quickly....along with the SLOC that supply China with the vast majority of both imports and exports. Which, would make short work of her economy and limit the re-supply of her armies.

This idea China can just bombard Taiwan into submission is more "folly" than fact. Nazi Germany only fell after the Allied Armies came knocking on Berlin. While, Japan succumb only after two Atomic (Nuclear) Bombs and a Russian Invasion of China!
Offline

not_kent

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: 12 Aug 2021, 12:59

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 11:58

milosh wrote:
not_kent wrote:You also seem to equate diameter of MLRS to how advanced they are, size is not always everything. Precision weapons can make do with smaller warheads.


But that is point, Chinese do have GPS rockets Russians don't or have it in quite small numbers probable high cost, because of tiny Russian electronic industry.

For example look Belarus Polonez:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonez_( ... t_launcher)

It based on Chinese tech not Russian tehc, it use GPS guided rockets, two variants, one with 50-200km range and second one with 120-300km both are 301mm diameter.

So if Belarus based on Chinese tech can cover Taiwan be sure Chinese mlrs can it too, plus they have systems with even bigger rockets which use GPS:

https://youtu.be/jRN5jKwyz_M


Once again could you enlighten me on exactly how you know what China has found from launching missiles over Taiwan?
And how does launching missiles that Taiwan did not try to intercept tell you anything about Taiwan's SAM capabilities?

Why do you need to talk about other countries tech, the subject is what China can do not Belarus.
What other guidance systems do the MLRS use other than GPS? GPS can be jammed or spoofed.

BTW nothing on the link you provided indicates that the system was based on a Chinese MLRS;
"The system was designed by the Belarusian Plant of Precision Electromechanics in cooperation with a foreign country, probably China." Also it sounds like the Belarusian improved the system - so its specs do not mean that the Chinese have the same capability.

China does have HARM - The disadvantage of the Eagle Strike 91: in order to ensure high power, high speed, and long range, the price paid by the Eagle Strike 91 is huge weight and huge volume, and the excessive diameter makes it impossible to use a double pylon , This makes the J-8 aircraft can only mount one in the lower centerline, and even the powerful Su-30 can only mount 4. Although it can still mount 4 R77s for anti-air at this time, but the additional After the sling and other plug-ins were added, the Su-30, which was originally known for its mobility, may have difficulty exerting its advantages. More seriously, as the three most commonly used attack modes of anti-radiation missiles: self-defense mode, preset mode and casual mode, such weight and volume make it usually only suitable for preset mode.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4287
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 12:49

tphuang wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:I think China has some serious weaknesses when it comes to air power, somewhat similarly to Russia. For example their EW and SEAD capabilities don't seem very good. Yes they do have some ARMs but those are Russian or derivatives of Russian ARMs and those have not fared well in Ukraine. No dedicated SEAD aircraft AFAIK. They have small number of EW aircraft but nothing like US Growler fleet for example.

Sure J-20 could very well cause problems but Taiwanese F-16s with AESAs will likely also be formidable opponent for those. Most of their attack aircraft are rather obsolete and would have serious problems trying to get to Taiwan. Sure their cruise and ballistic missiles would cause havoc on the island, but I doubt they would weaken the defences enough to allow successful landing.


This is the kind of posts that really alarm me. And this seems to be very prevalent with people that don't follow PLA closely. Despite people within Dod telling rest of the world that China is the pacing threat, it gets compared to the Russians by your average natsec types. Despite statements like this from people high up in USAF, people think China is weak in EW (when it is actually one of their strongest points)
https://www.airforcemag.com/article/dom ... -spectrum/
The Chinese became so good at electromagnetic spectrum warfare in the interim that today “they absolutely believe that [EMS] superiority is a prerequisite for victory,” Hinote said, suggesting that denying China use of the spectrum could be enough to deter it from fighting. “Maybe it’s enough that we deny the use of the electromagnetic spectrum to China,” he said, by filling “the airwaves with electromagnetic energy to the point where you could walk on it. … To make it so difficult to operate in the electromagnetic spectrum that it’s mutually denied space.”

Actually, it gets even worse than that. People think that China's Air Force is not as good as Russians because they bought Su-35s back in 2016.

Your last sentence just shows you have no idea how they will target Taiwan. I would guarantee you that most of their cruise and ballistic missiles will not be used against Taiwan. Those are aimed at wiping out everything within second island chain.

Feel free to read this. This is just what ETC's Air Force can bring against Taiwan. It does not include the MRLS salvos they can launch.
https://rentry.co/9iuwc


Ok then. You have not provided any proof of supposed great Chinese EW and SEAD capabilities. USAF has also made statements that Russia is really great at EW, including that article you pointed out. But they have been totally unable to even seriously degrade Ukranian air defences which is mostly composed of ancient S-300, Buk and SA-8 variants. China would have to be really seriously better at EW and SEAD to be able to penetrate far more sophisticated Taiwanese defences with Patriots and Sky Bow systems concentrated on a small geographical area and also defended and supported from sea with some rather capable ships especially if US, South Korean and Japanese navies get involved. I'd like to know what kind of assets China has for both EW and SEAD to counter that. Couple of J-15Ds isn't going to cut it at all...
China has a handful of supposed Growler-like J-16D along with handful of other aircraft for EW. For SEAD they don't really have equivalent

A lot of Chinese ballistic and also cruise missiles have too short range for the second island chain. Those will be used against Taiwan as most of their MLRS won't have the reach and also can't destroy some target types in Taiwan. What other weapons they have to destroy targets in Taiwan? Attack aircraft and bombers themselves can't get close enough to attack anything with bombs or many missiles.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 13:51

Russia don't have fleet of serious drones, China do have, in fact Russian fleet of less serious drones are problem too, so they are forced to buy Iranian drones.

China have Global Hawk class drones for example and have huge number of Perdator like drones, and lot of Harpy like drones.

Russia can't use MLRS against Ukrainian SAMs, China can.

So it is quite clear why China SEAD capability is much better then Russia especially if we compare Ukraine war and potential Taiwan war.

Also China invest in stealthy EW ucavs too:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1271498.shtml
Online

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4977
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 15:58

My take on things: Until the shooting starts, it's very difficult to determine who's proficient in what...

Sure, you can (and most defense analysts do) count hardware - that's easy enough. The speculation not long ago was that Russia would do just fine with SEAD, as someone here pointed out. But SEAD doesn't take place in a bubble, and is susceptible to the other issues Russia is having (such as logistics, basic maintenance etc.). Thus, the opportunity to dramatically over estimate your opponent is certainly there.

I am confused though, as to how badly the Russians mis-understood their own capabilities (or lack thereof). Putin/Russia went on a spending spree about a decade ago, modernizing for example the Russian Air Force. They bought (and continue to buy) various Flanker variants, that on paper are very capable machines. Far superior to Ukranian models, and vastly out-numbering Ukraine in virtually every area. But under the surface, they had to have known about many other deficiencies. The lack of flying hours every month. The lack of reliable GPS to help guide the aircraft to their targets. The limited supply of PGM's and de-facto, the training of crews to use them. The inability to coordinate with ground, sea and space based assets. You didn't need to fall flat on your face during Red Flag to be aware of these shortcomings. So where was the disconnect?

Scared to tell Putin/their superiors the truth?

If so, he (and his troops) sure are paying the price for it now...
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 17:06

USAF praising RuAF SEAD capability could just be gib me money.

I really don't see what was so great about RuAF SEAD before this war started.

Kh-31 is their primary ARM which isn't really good choice, for example it would be interesting to see RCS of that missile:

https://p.turbosquid.com/ts-thumb/Tr/3D ... 7/001a.jpg

There are newer versions of Kh-58 which are quite better option then Kh-31, but I doubt they bought them in any meaningful numbers if at all:
http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/aerospace-sys ... h-58ushke/
Offline

jessmo112

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1042
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 19:40

tphuang wrote:
jessmo112 wrote:How is the last point about radars even remotely accurate considering that Taiwan uses patriot?
And your missing the point. China is improving in ASW but they don't have enough ASW and fighter over match to fight a coalition. That's Taiwan, Japan, the U.S. Australia, SK, and possibly India on a 2nd front.
Russia held the promise of a strong partnership, but Putins days could be numbered.
How do the Chinese track and kill allied subs that are nearly 1k miles away and don't have air cover?
You realize that Tomahawk has a 1k mile range correct?


I'm only telling you what China has found from launching missiles over Taiwan. Most of Taiwan's air defense radars are old and badly maintained. This is not a military that is prepared to defend itself. It's more interested in buying high profile shining tools rather than one that would work in a real fight. For example, Taiwan just launched a 10k+ ton LPD recently. You might want to ask the Taiwanese how a LPD is going to help defend themselves https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... d-yu-shan/

Yes, a lot of American defense types are alarmed by this, but that hasn't changed the culture there.

The general premise on ASW is this. USN SSN is the real threat to PLAN, because China has a huge advantage in surface combatants in the regions. Also, the threat of H-6K and shore based hypersonic AShM like DF-17/26/100 means that US CSGs generally will stay about 800 to 1000 nm off the coast of mainland.

The offshoot of this is that SSNs will be the main threat. Because they have unlimited range. China is not really threatened by Japanese SSKs as much because they can only move so much in a day before they need to snorkel to ventilate. As such, if they have persistent coverage with KQ200s (which they should) and drones, they should be able to find the SSKs and hunt them down. also, Japan doesn't have that many Soryu/Taigei class SSKs.

Against SSN threat, you probably won't see Chinese surface combatants get too far off mainland, since that will leave them outside of the range of MPAs. What they do have in this area is their own version of SOSUS, a lot of AUV/UUVs, diesel submarines, 054/056s with TAS and SURTASS ships like Type 927 http://www.hisutton.com/Chinese-Navy-Ty ... -Ship.html that can be used to cue up MPAs and Z-20s. You can see their effort with underwater gliders here https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutton/2 ... a5a9776693 and https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... ian-ocean/. They've basically flooded SCS with it.

The modern day MAD is pretty effective in short range against even Virginia class. That's kind of the strategy we are seeing from China. Flood the nearby water with a lot of water sensors to cue up MPAs and helicopters. It's only been been a few years since they started adding modern ASW MPAs and helicopters, but the pace is pretty high. So it would be easy to miss the progress they made here. I'd expect them to have probably the 2nd large MPA and ASW helicopter fleet in a few years. So, that seems to be China's immediate play. Their longer term play is Type 095 class.


This Is what makes all of the talk of an easy blockade and and easy victory nonsense.
The USA has 3 or 4 moves.

1. Flood the area with a wolf pack of SSNs engage the destroyers with long range TLAMs and harpoons.

2. If troops are boarding have Ohios launch about 400 TLAMS at the depots docks and assembly areas.

3. If they are not docked saturate the SAGs from 509 moles away.

4. Have F-35Bs launching from FOBs or a tanker basket 500 miles from where the subs are operating. Every few hours fighters rotate in and out. Any ASW platform gets killed.

Keep in mind that the closest Japanese island is 70 miles away from Taiwan. Drawing Japan into the fight is inevitable And the Combined fleet of Jaoan and the U S. Is a problem.
Offline

jessmo112

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1042
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post03 Oct 2022, 19:42

milosh wrote:Russia don't have fleet of serious drones, China do have, in fact Russian fleet of less serious drones are problem too, so they are forced to buy Iranian drones.

China have Global Hawk class drones for example and have huge number of Perdator like drones, and lot of Harpy like drones.

Russia can't use MLRS against Ukrainian SAMs, China can.

So it is quite clear why China SEAD capability is much better then Russia especially if we compare Ukraine war and potential Taiwan war.

Also China invest in stealthy EW ucavs too:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1271498.shtml


1. Buy nassams
2. Ameaams have home on Jam ability.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2966
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post04 Oct 2022, 00:44

Got to say it's a great testimony to Chinese counter intel that most people have no clue about the capabilities of the various departments of the gsd (nka JSD), the 701 program etc. I recall China used to spend as much as 10% of its budget on Intel esp elint/sigint.

It's like how anyone can say offhand how many fighter squadrons India has but never about China.

Btw, Taiwan is getting nasams, I think 2024. Not a bad buy actually.
Last edited by weasel1962 on 04 Oct 2022, 01:03, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

jessmo112

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1042
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post04 Oct 2022, 01:00

Japan is moving into third in military spending..
https://www.army-technology.com/analysi ... ary-power/

You will have China #2 fighting #1,#3 and India which should be top 5. The numbers don't add up for China.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2966
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post04 Oct 2022, 01:06

Tricky because China stil enjoy a huge advantage on production/labor cost. Also they are smart enough not to fight everyone at once. Note also the counter balance strategy eg supporting Pakistan vs India, NK
vs SK/Japan.
Offline

jessmo112

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1042
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post04 Oct 2022, 03:36

weasel1962 wrote:Tricky because China stil enjoy a huge advantage on production/labor cost. Also they are smart enough not to fight everyone at once. Note also the counter balance strategy eg supporting Pakistan vs India, NK
vs SK/Japan.


How..
On earth..
Will they do that?....

U S forces are imbeded with Japan, SK.
Are they going to not strike Okinawa?
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4287
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post04 Oct 2022, 06:18

milosh wrote:Russia don't have fleet of serious drones, China do have, in fact Russian fleet of less serious drones are problem too, so they are forced to buy Iranian drones.

China have Global Hawk class drones for example and have huge number of Perdator like drones, and lot of Harpy like drones.

Russia can't use MLRS against Ukrainian SAMs, China can.

So it is quite clear why China SEAD capability is much better then Russia especially if we compare Ukraine war and potential Taiwan war.

Also China invest in stealthy EW ucavs too:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1271498.shtml


Ukraine doesn't have a fleet of serious fighter aircraft with advanced weapons, Taiwan does have. Ukraine doesn't have a fleet of serious naval ships either, but Taiwan does have and especially USA, Japan and South Korea do have. Taiwanese naval ships are not state-of-the-art currently, but they are upgrading their capabilities and even the old ships offer decent early warning and defence against all kinds of drones and attack aircraft. Naturally their Patriot, Sky Bow and other quite advanced and highly concentrated AD systems would be very difficult to penetrate using drones. Ukraine doesn't have nearly as advanced AD systems (until NASAMS and Iris-T SLM gets there) and not nearly as concentrated as Taiwan. It will be very hard nut to crack for the Chinese.

China possibly can use their heavivest MLRS against Ukranian SAMs but those are also much bigger than regular MLRS rockets and more like tactical ballistic missiles. Taiwanese and USN SAMs should be able to shoot at least some of them down. How many of those rockets and launchers do China have? Btw, Russia did use Smerch for SEAD as they took out one Ukranian S-300P battery.
PreviousNext

Return to Air Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: zhangmdev and 22 guests