sadly i see that isn’t easy to understund how i try to say.

-If Taiwan will be helped by US this will automatically means that Taiwan isn’t capable to be a free land by its self, and this will limit it’s sovreignity in vantage of the US. So, i am not so sure that Taiwan would be so happy to see that at the first missiles fired ” the americans will come”.
the eventually chinese blockade with mines and subs would be a disaster for the Taiwanes economy, no problem if the taiwanese are capable to defend them selves.

-About the LA vs Victor: i am sure that the possibilties to be lock the victor is highly dependant by the situations. personally, i have no doubt that the tactic you ( SOC) suggest could work, but not necessarly as advertized. No always, atleast. More, who said that the victor is alone?
I am however sure that if the victor is slow less than 5 knts a LA can detect first only at less than 15 knts. above This speed limit the range of every sonar is severly degraded while the rumours will incremented. i don’t think that a LA sailing at 30 knts can detect anithing, and sure not a slow moving victor. but one thing is hunt a enemy sub, another fullowing a 20 knts carrier group. it’s a world of difference.

But there is more. expecially in low waters, expecially if there are dozens of subs around, HOW hell a LA can detect a sub that waits at the bottom of the sea?

How it will be able fullowing at 10-15 knts one sub and not to not fall under the ambush of another? So functions the things. How many LA-Seawolf must be requested to sanitize the Yellow Sea? i would rememnber that the british subs were enough to treating the argentinians flett but not the submarines, that continued to operate against the brisitsh and i would say, the RN is the better ASW fleet of the europe. they almost didn’t othere 20 years ago.

-When i heard stuffs like : the soviet SSN were worse than the US because they were more noisers” i am really sad. the soviet SSN were anti-ship primarly. The US were anti-sub. I’d say that this is different and that’s not a chase that the soviet were faster.

So let’s say that a sturgeon fullowed a November SSN. The sturgeon being almost invisible to the othere because the noise and the sensors could lock the november at 10 km vs let’s say, 3 km. this at 5knts. but the november thinks to be fullowed and accelerate to 28 Knts. The sturgeon also acclerate bt only at 25. So the november goes away at 3 knts and the range of lock decreases from 15 to 5 km with both at maximum speed. the sturgeon loose the lock and if not slowing, cannot re-lock the november. But the november escape away and if the sturgeon slows at 15 knots, the november in 2 hours will be away of 50 km and the hunt will be impossible. So, happened once when a alpha sub was lost by a LA simply because it went at high speed distancing the US sub. Not sure because it was less noiser.

Conclusion: when we talk about the submarine warfare it’s nothing sure, and the tactic is foundamental. Int the aircraft warfare there isn’t dependance of the radar range by the speed and so many other factors and the things are a bit predictable. In the water world almost nothing is really predictable, and if there are a lot of subs around you can only sure that something they will do. And the taiwanese navy for sure isn’t enough to deal with such treaths like the sub force of the chineses. Perhaps the Japaneses, but not the taiwaneses.

Edilsonetc. why you connect the brain with your hand while you write your posts?

Gabbageman, listsn, i don’t say that you are wrong, but if you don’t put the Aegis in the Taiwan strait, how you will have the control of that sea? Or you risk higly or you loose the hand. Period.

About the junks. You seems also a guy that believe in the new reliogion of “high tecnology”. so, say to me, how could costs a missile defence for the England in 1945 let’s ipotize that the patriots were available , to assure that the V1-V2 treath were neutralized? In the Gulf in DS allied fired 140 patriots for no more than 40 scuds. for 6000 V-2 how many Patriots should be required? With such numbers, in a little country, even if the 10% reaches the targets 8ctity, industry etc.) the things will be catastrophic.

The pint is that China, with such metods is matematically sure to defeat taiwan. If Taiwan has 2000 Sams plus AA plus 4000 AAMs even with 1000 tomawahk you cannot be sure to win and 1000 tomahwak costs. But if you have insthead 10000 “v-1” you can be quite sure to put a 20-30% of them at the target. There isn’t defence for that.

So i think that fullow the “ultra -high-tech” isn’t so good. Pakistan and china with 150 millions $ have developed the FC 1 , how many times higher is the check to develope as example, EFA or F-22?

quote:
The point is that PLAN submarines that aren’t called Kilo are acoustically challenged. Forget 688-class subs. Vikings and Orions will make short work of them, not to mention any surface ship with a torpedo tube or an ASROC launcher. What the 688-class subs will do is keep your PLAN subs and ships away from the US CVN battle group.

The problem is , in my humble opinion, that this will be in short a fully fighted war between US and China. Us were much prudent when Israel was attached by Arabs in 1973, and then when Kuwait was also attached in 1990. Do you really think that, with all the troubles already present in US policy, they would fight a fully war with China to defend, like you have said, a non recoinnissed country? Once in a simple tourist airplane i have seen a SSN sailing under few meters water: if i had two deepth charges, what can be happened to that sub?

I though that this should be done for the horrendous Tibet invasion, insthead. Atleast they weren’t never declared that Dalai Lama is the real president of China or something else.
So, i don’t seriously see how, perhaps for a mine field or a fishing webs, a LA subs or even a Seawolf cannot be lost in a similar contest. And if you rememnber how bad was taken by the public world opinion the loss of Kursk, i have no problem to say that the US won’t risk nor a total war with China nor human losses probably heavy for themselves. More the economic field.
More the fact that the China is really a nuclear power. And even if it is beatable by US in a nucleaur war, Who can dare to have the responsability to order to bomb 1300000000 chineses?

More, with today’s winds and the war in Irak “because it was a treaht” i think that China has 100 times more reasons to think to KO Taiwan because Taiwan is really a treaht for China, and even a country non recoinssed by ONU, i’m wrong?

Over all this and the ipotetic US intervention, my guess is overall about the “v-1” concept: i can only repeat, that i am not wondered if one day the Chineses will show to have several thousands of cruise missiles (over to hundreds ballistic) built with cheap construction but neverthless quite efffective, capable to saturate and exausted the Taiwaneses defences day afterd day, in one-two weeks.

I can only think that, if Chineses have let’s say the exactly copy of V-1 or V-2 and in the same numbers ( 40000 total), and they fire them at 1000 for day ( the germans thinked to do so with 3000 for day) Taiwan, that is under the max range of these weapons cannot survive despite the ultra-modern defences available, more than a week or two. On this and not on the possible US intervention i would like discuss, and also if is realistic to have a cruise missiles at less than 100000$ (bear in mind that this is chines manufacted, in HUGE quantity, and the tecnology needed is just trivial to boiult: insthaed as example to a titnium alloy and othe advanced stuffs, alluminium, steel, plastic, even wooden compense-like happened for V-1, He 162 and other projects: and i would rememnber that a V-1 needed only 280 work hours. with let’s say a glonass director and a turbojet how can good even today such stuff?)

regs.
And if someone has datas updated or particulars about i will be happy to update my wargame simulation about this.

i’d want to start with my personal theories about these ipothetical war, with all fullows: it vtalks about the V-1 modern version and the difficults for a US sub to fight in the Yellow sea.

“cough-cough!”

i have found this topic about the Taiwan-China air war and , after the world is considerably changed in these 4 years, i would restart this discussion without foundamentalists like Halla-u-akbar to talk abut the real question of Taiwan vs China.

–I think that the real problem is the naval aspect of this war. The chinese navy wasn’t never at the top of the quality in the types of ship deployed, but it is the most noumerous navy of today and the years ago, also. Sure, the taiwaneses ships are more advanced, -generally, not to compare a sovrenennji with a Perry!-, but the chineses have the edge in the strategic enviroment. What it means?

-Often i heard that Taiwan needs 8 new subs to fight the Chinese’s submarine fleet capability.
Apart that the numbers will be not so changed by that, it’s not so clear another thing: even if the Taiwan could have the half of US subs this will be not enough! China isn’t Taiwan. Taiwan is a small isle entirely circlable by China. Pechino is 1500 km away by taiphei. There isn’t a single piece of Taiwan that cannot been reached by aircrarfts and missiles of China. This can be true for perhaps a 1/10 of China treated by Taiwan fighters and eventually, missiles ( i don’t know if exist a taiwanese missile with 1000 km range) but not for the most part of the country.

-Taiwan is vulnerable to the maritime engargo: if the chineses subs are for the most part obsolete, neverthless they can treath every civil ship, and in some ocasions, also military surface vessels. Not forget how was difficult for the RN fight the treath of argentinians subs in 1982. The 4 old subs of Taiwan aren’t minimally capable to treath the naval traffic and the military fleet of China, and this will not change even if the two countries will exchange their subs fleet. The Romeo class and derivates, to not to talk about the 12 Kilos, can send 20+ mines each on the sea botton, and the Facs are capable as well to mine the sea (there are atleast 200 Facs capable to send 10 mines each): How hell the Taiwan navy will be able to deal with the deployement of let’s say-1000-2000 mines in few days?

–About the US navy interervention, in this case i would remember that the war of mines is it’s greater weak point: In the Gulf even a Aegis cruiser was almost sunk by a single mine and sailing in the taiwan strait once it was mined isn’t safe even for a carrier task force.
-Also the US subs are over valued: they could be the best and powerful in the world, but i am pretty curious to see how a sub 110 mt long like a LA could do if it hunt the Romeo subs in the Yellow Sea. there is a huge difference with the ocean: the deepth is generally well less than 100 mt, most likely 50-60. The deepth immersion of 500+ mts of a nuclear subs cannot be worthed there. More, there isn’t the possibility to go over a third of the 30 knts capability of these subs. In shallow waters, even moving faster than 10 knts can let a subs discovered by every simple gunship like Shangai class and bombed with deepth charges or RBU, simply seein the wawe moved by such monster in the sea. and, neeedless to say, a Romeo-Ming sub can be more manouvrable , to not to talk to be able simply to eait in a bottom ambush to the pursuing US subs. And all this don’t count the mine fields and the anti- submarine webs.

–But there is more. Two of the strong point of Taiwan are the isles of Quemoy ad Matsu. These famous little isles are cleary in danger in a war with China and there isn’t carrier group that can do anithing about.
These isles are more a treath for China, with even special forces intrusions, than a defence for Taiwan. The reason is simple; they are less than 12 km by China.
-The problem is that actually every artillery piece of division or higher, 100 mm or higher, can reach these isles and so, hundreds of artilleries can bomb these with thousands of shells destroyng everything on the surface. a fighter can go across in less than a minute, a helicopter in less than 5, an anphibian tank or IFV in 1-2 hours. So i think than in a war China should invade these isles while bombing with some aircrafts and ballistic missiles Taiwan. The psicological and material effect should be devasting for Taiwaneses. I

–n every case, it’s obvious that in the long race, the China strenght is destined to growth more than Taiwan and so, perhaps the reunification under Pechino is only a question of years, beacause Taiwan havn’t the strengt enough to be free by China, expecially because isn’t declared a indipendent country, but the legal China. Sin that the RPC is today far popular than Taiwan as “Legal China”.

V-1 MADE IN CHINA?

—Another thing to say is that if asked to me, i don’t follow too much the race for the best fighters and so on between China and Taiwan. There is a best way to have the edge of the question that buy hundreds of flankers (valuable, however, as choice) spending billions $ and not have the guarantee to whip th Rocaf.

-Few days ago i have made a research about the V-1 and V-2 missiles of germans in WWII. They made something 10000 V-2s and 30000 V-1, really cheaps these latter. and easy to use.
Now, i think that if the Chineses have literally all these weapons, exactly these V-1 and V-2s with the right range to hit taiwan (200-300km), well, i have no doubt that there will be no defence capable to defend Taiwan: how can costs a missile defence like these? How the british can defend theyrself by the V-1/V-2 with a ypothetic WWII Patriot missiles, when there aren’t dozens but thousands of missiles to deal with? Saddam launched in DS less than 100 missiles while the germans fired even 300 V-1 in a single day. How long can go Taiwan if they must shot down every day hundreds missiles before run out of SA-AAM missiles? And how they could hold hte situation under control if only a third of this amount reach the town and the industries of the isle?

The industrial potential of China is much higher today than the germans of WWII, so insthead to try to fight the taiwaneses fighter why not to produce a lot of cheap cruise missiles? Cheap but effective?

We know the javelin missile, as example: it could be a great weapon but it costs 70000$. The Tow 2A costs only 12000, six time less, and it has greater perforamnces, except for the fire and forget capability. A evergreen Milan missile costs something like 3000$, 20 times less than the javelin, and can do a good job neverthless. So, the question could be what it is the best cost-effective rapport? Insthaead to have the cruise missile like the tomahawk, costing 1000000$ each, and with a high level tecnology, it could be possible to have a reasonably weapon to send a 500-1000 kg warhead at 250-400 km and 700-800 km/H, at level about 100 mts, with a Cep of 300-1000mt, at maybe 40000 -100000$. If chineses started build these weapons, let’s say, at the end of 80’s and spending less a billion dollars to have 4000-6000 of these weapons, i am pretty sure that in a eventual war the Taiwaneses , despite in recent years more reinforced than the Chineses ( F-16, M.2000 etc), could be hoverelmed by such simple, brutal treath, as well with the ballistic missiles and sea mines. They could have a lot of damages by these weapons, and despite the number of HAWK missiles and TK,Patriot, (perhaps 2000 HAWK and 1000 of the others) and other types, they could seriously run out of missiles tryng to shot down all these weapons, leaving them vulnerable to the chineses fighters after.

RUSSIAN CONNECTION

–Sin is that China wasn’t capble, for really unknown reasons, to benefit fully of the breakdown of Soviet Union. If the Chineses could do it, i think that they should came in ex-Urss and buy for few money all they can, new or “quality used”, among the depots of the Ex Evil Empire.

As example, insthead to instist with the domestic craps ,spending billions $ to have a punch of B-7 or J-7M, why not buy at the beginnings of ’90s :

-some 100 fencers , even of older versions,

-buy the unselled fulcrums and a lot of new others, perhaps with the license.: total: 200-500, without waiting for the J-10 until now

-Buy 100-200 Mig-27 and a similar amount of Su-17M for 400-700 million dollars.

-Buy a lot of ARMs like the AS-11-12.

-Buy some badgers bomber and ECm with AS-6.

-Buy 2000-3000 T-72s, and a lot of Bmps, Btrs, artillery pieces etc. for few billions $.

-Buy 200-300 launchers for SA-6-8-13 each, and 200-300 ZSU also, for 200-300 $ millions, over an handful of SA-10.

– Buy 4-6 victor II-III class subs, and 4-8 Tango also

Just for example, let’s remenber that teh bulk of the chineses army is still the T-59, and not over 5000 APC are in service, when the ex soviet countries selled similar veicles sometimes for less than 20000-100000 $ each. (let’s think to the ex-DDR sales to Sweden: aBmp for less than 20000 $).

In other words, what is old for the Soviet-russian (ex., a T-72A or Bmp-1, Sa-6, ZSU, Charlie-Victor) is still a huge improvement for the Chineses. So, this could been a real lost occasion to improve the China armed forces. Why, i don’t know, maybe multiple reasons of politic convenience, but it was as complex a lost occasion and only a part of it was slowly utilized ( Su-27, Il-76, Sovrenennji) and the huge amount of money spent for the defence could be better spent: imagine to have for a 1 billion $ hardware enough to have a couple of armoured division with T-72, Bmps, Sa-6-13, Zsu, as example. The Ex Urss at the beginnings of the 90’s could sell almost everything at very low price.

BUT iN DEFINITIVE….

but i still think that the most surprising consideration is that Taiwan cannot even today defend itsself by the missiles fielded by germans in the WWII so if the chineses spent few hundreds $ to have some thousands of “modern” V-1 (they costs much less than teh V-2 and are more easy to operate) the Taiwan Isle can fall in few days. In every case, even the most strong forterss can fall if it is circled and strangled, and so, i think that even with the current weapons China is able to “do it” except if US would dare to enter in forces in the Taiwan stat: but seriously, they would do it?

Study about a possibilty of Chinese “economic cruise”.
caracteristic of a possible chinese cruise missile (compared to V-1):

IOC: 1990 (1944)

dim:6,5*4*0,7m

weight: 1500-1900kg (2100)
cell: 450 Kg
electronics:100 kg
warhead:250-750 kg
engine:120 kg
fuel:200 kg
rocket ATO: 200 kg

speed: 750-800Km-H(550-650)

warhead: 250-750 Kg (450-850)

range:320-400km (240-320)

type of warhead: HE 500-600Kg, ICM, ECM, ARM, Recce (HE)

Powerplant: 450-500KGS jet (300 kg Pulsojet)

fuel:250-300l. (600-1000)

height:100 or 1000 mt (300-1500m)

Cep: 300m with radio goniometry, 1000 without (10-20km?)

Guide system: inertial, autopilot, altimeter (forward looking eventually),
helped with radio-goniometric precision antenna ( a sort of grounded GPS, with sources on the land), not paricularry compact or sophisited, lather eventually helped by GPs or Glonass (precision reduced to 20-100 mt).

effective radius of air explosion or ICM: perhaps 250-300 mt with explosion at 100 on the ground (0,3 sqm kms)

stealth: eventually modifics at the engine bay and the nose, wings in plastic or compensed wood, RCS :0,3-1 sqmtr. plus the low IR emission and the low height flight (70-120 mt).

number built: until 2-3 for day, in war time 50 or more. 700-1000 for year by the 1988-90.

cost: 40000-100000 $ each

regs