Jump to content

Australia to Get Nuclear Submarines


Adam_S

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Josh said:

To be fair, I don’t think the Russians had any interesT in engaging the IAF, so it’s pointless to point to the S400s as a data point. But China acquiring a new SAM doesn’t really change the calculus - Taiwanese air and sea power would basically evaporate on the first day. An actual invasion, particularly one that Taiwan’s allies opposed, is still going to be a Normandy level effort using unarmed transportation against supersonic truck mounted missiles. Ie, it will be expensive.

Chynah has bought Russian S400's but only in small numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

23 hours ago, RETAC21 said:

and it has radar that can see through mountains?

Over the horizon certainly gets trickier for fast jets - the midcourse guidance requirements must get tighter and tighter, so I doubt under most conditions these can be engaged over the horizon.  Do you think I said, "C-17" by accident?  Or do you think that when a transport plane approaches the airport under observation that the Taiwanese call a time out and then the S-500's have to wait on the side lines on the coast of China until the referee says that the game can continue?

In terms of fast jets, the impact of these SAM systems could be to force the enemy jets to keep under the radar horizon or at great distances, or heavily dispersed in deep camouflage to avoid being hit on the ground.  And, if those jets really need to be at higher altitude or in the Straights of Taiwan, or flown in large groups, tough shit, right?

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, futon said:

 Taiwan new subs will be in service and those can probably change they their homeport of operation to Okinawa or Sasebo if their main local sub base is lost.

Because some sort of magic force field will prevent the Chinese from levelling the Japanese supporting port facilities that are now a valid military target?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Russia has made similarly bold claims about S300's efficacy, so the Israelis trialled it when they thought Iran was getting it, and found that yes, it could be defeated. Just like any other system.

The Israelis seem to fire stand off missiles from outside air defense ranges, and use F-35's  when deeper penetrations are necessary.  The Russians, in turn, seem to have hauled all their fancy S-500 equipment to Syria for testing, which the IAF has handily provided against the F-35, and yet the Americans just whine about Turkish S-400's being tested against the F-35, as if the Russian engineers give a fuck whether their cool new radars are tested against Turkish or Israeli F-35's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Over the horizon certainly gets trickier for fast jets - the midcourse guidance requirements must get tighter and tighter, so I doubt under most conditions these can be engaged over the horizon.  Do you think I said, "C-17" by accident?  Or do you think that when a transport plane approaches the airport under observation that the Taiwanese call a time out and then the S-500's have to wait on the side lines on the coast of China until the referee says that the game can continue?

In terms of fast jets, the impact of these SAM systems could be to force the enemy jets to keep under the radar horizon or at great distances, or heavily dispersed in deep camouflage to avoid being hit on the ground.  And, if those jets really need to be at higher altitude or in the Straights of Taiwan, or flown in large groups, tough shit, right?

It's obvious you don't know what you are talking about, and you didn't even bother to look at a map of Taiwan, so unles the magical S-500 can "see" through solid rock, I can assure you that they won't be able to hit these C-17s you talk about, which, can fly below the radar, much to your surprise.

IMG_0818.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

It's obvious you don't know what you are talking about, and you didn't even bother to look at a map of Taiwan, so unless the magical S-500 can "see" through solid rock, I can assure you that they won't be able to hit these C-17s you talk about, which, can fly below the radar, much to your surprise.

The issue is not the mountains the C-17 is trying to hide behind, it's the ballistic attack profile of the 40N6E missile.  The battery needs some sort of system to cue it that a target is over the horizon.  Once that happens, 

Hypersonic Air Defence; Chinese PLA Prepares for Induction of Second S-400 Missile Regiment Armed with 400km Range 40N6E Missiles (militarywatchmagazine.com)

The platform’s most distinguished munition, however, remains the 40N6E which retains a 400km engagement range and is capable of speeds of around Mach 14. The missile’s unique trajectory, ascending to extreme near space altitudes before descending towards its target, provide it with unparalleled over the horizon strike capabilities and allow it to neutralise targets near the limits of its range as low as 5 meters off the ground. This allows the S-400 to target low attitude aircraft at long distances in a way no other air defence system can due to the limitations of the Earth’s curvature on conventional surface to air munitions

Wiki has this bit of description.   The missile isn't trying to "see through solid rock".  It's far above the mountains pointing downwards looking for targets.  

S-400 missile system - Wikipedia

With an active radar homing head, climbs to designated altitude then guidance switches to search & destroy mode.[33]

Effective against low-altitude targets at extremely long range (below the radio horizon).[64]

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

The issue is not the mountains the C-17 is trying to hide behind, it's the ballistic attack profile of the 40N6E missile.  The battery needs some sort of system to cue it that a target is over the horizon.  Once that happens, 

Hypersonic Air Defence; Chinese PLA Prepares for Induction of Second S-400 Missile Regiment Armed with 400km Range 40N6E Missiles (militarywatchmagazine.com)

The platform’s most distinguished munition, however, remains the 40N6E which retains a 400km engagement range and is capable of speeds of around Mach 14. The missile’s unique trajectory, ascending to extreme near space altitudes before descending towards its target, provide it with unparalleled over the horizon strike capabilities and allow it to neutralise targets near the limits of its range as low as 5 meters off the ground. This allows the S-400 to target low attitude aircraft at long distances in a way no other air defence system can due to the limitations of the Earth’s curvature on conventional surface to air munitions

Wiki has this bit of description.   The missile isn't trying to "see through solid rock".  It's far above the mountains pointing downwards looking for targets.  

S-400 missile system - Wikipedia

With an active radar homing head, climbs to designated altitude then guidance switches to search & destroy mode.[33]

Effective against low-altitude targets at extremely long range (below the radio horizon).[64]

And does it have a radar that allows to see targets through mountains first of all, so it can do all that neat stuff? me thinks not.

Let me spell it for you:

The S-500 will consist of:[30]

77P6 launch vehicle, based on the BAZ-69096 10x10 truck
55K6MA and 85Zh6-2 command posts, based on BAZ-69092-12 6x6
91N6A(M) acquisition and battle management radar, a modification of the 91N6 (Big Bird) towed by the BAZ-6403.01 8x8 tractor
96L6-TsP acquisition radar, an upgraded version of the 96L6 (Cheese Board) on BAZ-69096 10x10

76T6 multimode engagement radar on BAZ-6909-022 8x8
77T6 ABM engagement radar on BAZ-69096 10x10

So either those 2 underlined radar can see through 3000 meter high mountains or the S-500 cannot dany use of Taiwanese airspace.

There are always UFOs, of course...

Edited by RETAC21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

And does it have a radar that allows to see targets through mountains first of all, so it can do all that neat stuff? me thinks not.

Where did you get the bizarre idea that the battery itself would provide the initial targeting cues?   Do you think the Chinese are too stupid to have the AWACS  talk to the SAM battery?

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, glenn239 said:

Where did you get the bizarre idea that the battery itself would provide the initial targeting cues?   Do you think the Chinese are too stupid to have the AWACS  talk to the SAM battery?

They would put an AWACS within range of enemy air and enemy missiles? because they want to lose one to make a point?

https://sites.tufts.edu/gis/files/2017/06/Huang_Po-Chang_DHP_207_Spring_2017.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

They would put an AWACS within range of enemy air and enemy missiles? because they want to lose one to make a point?

You're confused about what's defending the AWACS?  I thought we just established its an S-500 that can put a missile on a target at 200 miles in just over 1 minute?  Anyways, sure, an AWACS, or a J-20, or some other fighter, or a UAV.   Or a satellite.  Or a guy on a hill with a radio.  The point is - why the fuck would you think that the initial targeting cueing would be done by the battery itself?

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

You're confused about what's defending the AWACS?  I thought we just established its an S-500 that can put a missile on a target at 200 miles in just over 1 minute?  Anyways, sure, an AWACS, or a J-20, or some other fighter, or a UAV.   Or a satellite.  Or a guy on a hill with a radio.  The point is - why the fuck would you think that the initial targeting cueing would be done by the battery itself?

Now, don't get all excited, I grant the initial targetting may not be done by the battery itself, problem is, what's the survability of this platform that needs to look over the East coast of Taiwan, out in the Ocean, within the range of enemy air defences? and needs to remain on station 24/7? the answer is zero, it's not a survivable proposition, since it needs to emit actively and that leads to its loss or to the US/allies working around it.

UFO's can do it, just as well as satellites (they can't), J-20s (they can't either), UAVs (yes, you guessed, they can't either) or guys with radios (on top of a mountain in enemy territory transmitting with a radio? I don't want to be that guy), so we are back to the starting point, how do you look through mountains from the China mainland?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RETAC21 said:

Now, don't get all excited, I grant the initial targetting may not be done by the battery itself, problem is, what's the survability of this platform that needs to look over the East coast of Taiwan, out in the Ocean, within the range of enemy air defences? and needs to remain on station 24/7? the answer is zero, it's not a survivable proposition, since it needs to emit actively and that leads to its loss or to the US/allies working around it.

UFO's can do it, just as well as satellites (they can't), J-20s (they can't either), UAVs (yes, you guessed, they can't either) or guys with radios (on top of a mountain in enemy territory transmitting with a radio? I don't want to be that guy), so we are back to the starting point, how do you look through mountains from the China mainland?

 

Looks to me that you didn't initially realize that the attack profile of the missile in question is straight down, so you posted a picture of mountains because you were thinking horizontally instead of vertically.  Now, you've done a bit of googling and you can see what I was talking about, that the mountains don't mean anything, so we've shift over to the dynamics of how a  network detects and  tracks targets?  

I

 

 

 

 

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Because some sort of magic force field will prevent the Chinese from levelling the Japanese supporting port facilities that are now a valid military target?  

They could if they want if they think expanding the theater is worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Looks to me that you didn't initially realize that the attack profile of the missile in question is straight down, so you posted a picture of mountains because you were thinking horizontally instead of vertically.  Now, you've done a bit of googling and you can see what I was talking about, that the mountains don't mean anything, so we've shift over to the dynamics of how a  network detects and  tracks targets?  

I

 

 

 

 

Don't set up stupid strawmen, I fully realise that the missile only get to those ranges by going up and then down, we are not all as clueless as you Glenn, but you still don't seem to understand that to hit a target at that range, it needs to fly at a very high altitude, or the cueing radars are not able to see it, as the mountains will hide it, and that you "alternative" methods of getting around this either are suicidal (AWACs) or can't be used for this purpose (everything else). 

If you actually read the wikipedia article, you would have realised this too:

"It is designed for intercepting and destroying intercontinental ballistic missiles, as well as hypersonic cruise missiles and aircraft, for air defense against Airborne Early Warning and Control and for jamming aircraft.[citation needed] With a planned range of 600 km (370 mi) for anti-ballistic missile (ABM) and 500 km (310 mi) for air defence,[21] the S-500 would be able to detect and simultaneously engage up to 10 ballistic hypersonic targets flying at a speed of 5 kilometres per second (3.1 mi/s; 18,000 km/h; 11,000 mph)[22][23] to a limit of 7 km/s (4.3 mi/s; 25,000 km/h; 16,000 mph).[24][25] It also aims at destroying hypersonic cruise missiles and other aerial targets at speeds of higher than Mach 5, as well as spacecraft.[citation needed] The altitude of a target engaged can be as high as 180–200 km (110–120 mi).[citation needed] It is effective against ballistic missiles with a launch range of 3,500 km (2,200 mi), the radar reaches a radius of 3,000 km (1,300 km for the EPR 0,1 square meter).[26][27] Other targets it has been announced to defend against include: unmanned aerial vehicles, low Earth orbit satellites, and space weapons launched from hypersonic aircraft, and hypersonic orbital platforms.[28]"

Notice how all the targets are flying at very high altitudes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, futon said:

They could if they want if they think expanding the theater is worth it.

The rules of neutrality do not allow for warships of combatant powers to use a neutral port as a base.  So I think if Japan did that then Japan would be expanding the war theatre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RETAC21 said:

Don't set up stupid strawmen, I fully realise that the missile only get to those ranges by going up and then down, we are not all as clueless as you Glenn

See, I don't think you did.  I think you genuinely did not know about the ballistic attack profile of the S-400/S-500 series.  Because, why else would you post a picture of a mountain range that is largely irrelevant to the targeting and attack problem?  

Quote

, but you still don't seem to understand that to hit a target at that range, it needs to fly at a very high altitude, or the cueing radars are not able to see it, as the mountains will hide it, and that you "alternative" methods of getting around this either are suicidal (AWACs) or can't be used for this purpose (everything else). 

The engagement envelope of the S-400/500 series in ballistic profile is at least 480km.  That's  a circle of about 725,000 square kilometers.   Taiwan is only 36,000 square kilometers, about 5% of the total engagement zone.  If Taiwan were 725,000 square kilometers, (say, more like mainland China near Taiwan), then I would agree that the C-17  would stands a better chance of getting in and out if the AWACS problem can be solved.    But it ain't.  It's 36,000 square kilometers and in this fucking game that's tiny, and size matters.

The S-500 is protecting the AWACS from attack, (both by engaging hostile fighters inbound as well as by shooting down any air to air missiles fired at it).  So the AWACS CAN operate to some distance into the Straights of Taiwan, (maybe about one third to one half way across?).  Second, the AWACS has a detection range against C-17 sized targets of maybe 250nm.   Third, the distance between Quanzhou, China, and Chenggong, Taiwan is 182nm, from Fuzhou to Taipei 137nm.  Two AWACS protected by two S-500's can shut down most of the air ingress routes, and whatever's left can be covered by the UAV's or other systems, (The Taiwanese air defenses will have been suppressed or at least badly disrupted by hypersonic missile attacks).  That's the problem of Taiwan - it's too small and too close to China.

 

 

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2021 at 1:12 AM, Josh said:

Everything is a game changer with you. How'd those S300s to Syria work out? Or the supporting Russian S400s that you thought might share radar data with the Syrians? Has the game changed yet?

Here's a typical IAF attack into Syria, (two days ago),

Israeli air raids hit Syria, two soldiers wounded: State media | Conflict News | Al Jazeera

The military said Israeli warplanes fired missiles while flying over neighbouring Lebanon. It added that Syrian air defences shot down most of the Israeli missiles without elaborating.

The F-16's, (or whatever) keep outside the Syrian AD net using Lebanese territory and fire stand off missiles.  These presumably use nap-of-the-Earth to weave around SAM positions until approaching their targets.  S-300 is designed for defense against conventional aircraft approaching within its engagement range, the Israelis are simply using tactics that it's not designed for.  The price for the Israalis in doing that is in the article - their attack result was just 2 wounded, which is much less than what they could do if they launched an all-out assault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

See, I don't think you did.  I think you genuinely did not know about the ballistic attack profile of the S-400/S-500 series.  Because, why else would you post a picture of a mountain range that is largely irrelevant to the targeting and attack problem?  

The engagement envelope of the S-400/500 series in ballistic profile is at least 480km.  That's  a circle of about 725,000 square kilometers.   Taiwan is only 36,000 square kilometers, about 5% of the total engagement zone.  If Taiwan were 725,000 square kilometers, (say, more like mainland China near Taiwan), then I would agree that the C-17  would stands a better chance of getting in and out if the AWACS problem can be solved.    But it ain't.  It's 36,000 square kilometers and in this fucking game that's tiny, and size matters.

The S-500 is protecting the AWACS from attack, (both by engaging hostile fighters inbound as well as by shooting down any air to air missiles fired at it).  So the AWACS CAN operate to some distance into the Straights of Taiwan, (maybe about one third to one half way across?).  Second, the AWACS has a detection range against C-17 sized targets of maybe 250nm.   Third, the distance between Quanzhou, China, and Chenggong, Taiwan is 182nm, from Fuzhou to Taipei 137nm.  Two AWACS protected by two S-500's can shut down most of the air ingress routes, and whatever's left can be covered by the UAV's or other systems, (The Taiwanese air defenses will have been suppressed or at least badly disrupted by hypersonic missile attacks).  That's the problem of Taiwan - it's too small and too close to China.

 

 

I see the problem, you not only believe in UFOs, you also believe the Earth is flat. Then all the non sense you posts may make some sense.

With some luck, the PRC will call you to organise their attack on Taiwan, which will be a bonus for the Free World, but I suspect they actually know about this stuff you ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/9/2021 at 4:32 PM, TrustMe said:

Chynah has bought Russian S400's but only in small numbers.

I think that the Russians publicised a production quantity per year of their high-end systems that was about 2-3 missiles per week. they can't have many to sell. (Might have been whatever S500 uses, I can't find the article now.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RETAC21 said:

With some luck, the PRC will call you to organise their attack on Taiwan, which will be a bonus for the Free World, but I suspect they actually know about this stuff you ignore.

My favorite part was when you were talking about how the Taiwanese were going to shoot down the AWACS, and you completely forgot to remember that the S-500's would be protecting the AWACS.  Being the best SAM system in the world, I'm guessing these are not made out of monkey shit and can offer protection. I also doubt Russians spent 20 years evolving an 'over the horizon' ballistic trajectory AA missile without accounting for mountains or the curvature of the Earth, or that a small island like Taiwan can expect anything except to be blanketed in UAV's and other forms of surveillance if the balloon goes up.  

 

 

 

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, DB said:

I think that the Russians publicised a production quantity per year of their high-end systems that was about 2-3 missiles per week. they can't have many to sell. (Might have been whatever S500 uses, I can't find the article now.)

Russia inducted the S400 into service in 2007 so it's been out for a while. Their should be plenty of missiles in stock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

My favorite part was when you were talking about how the Taiwanese were going to shoot down the AWACS, and you completely forgot to remember that the S-500's would be protecting the AWACS.  Being the best SAM system in the world, I'm guessing these are not made out of monkey shit and can offer protection. I also doubt Russians spent 20 years evolving an 'over the horizon' ballistic trajectory AA missile without accounting for mountains or the curvature of the Earth, or that a small island like Taiwan can expect anything except to be blanketed in UAV's and other forms of surveillance if the balloon goes up.  

 

 

 

RUSSIA STRONK!  Harping on about how little you actually know doesn't make your point stronger, it just wastes electrons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...