Do you lads get taught this routine all in the same place before you are allowed onto the net Echo?. You exhaust the options you have for countering my argument technically so then you resort to vacantly blurting out that it would never happen anyway so its all irrelevent?. You all follow exactly the same tactics?.
This one is 1/10 on your part.
Anyone on this site will tell you my opinions of the RAF and that they are not all that high. They have though nearly 70 years of experience in maritime patrol and, more specifically, oceanic patrol missions. They still make glaring mistakes in long-range ship recognition despite first-rate technology and all that operational experience. How do you justify the PLANAF doing any better with poorer kit and a fraction of the experience?!.
Like I said, don’t use the Royal Navy or AF here, it’s hardly relevant.
Look up the words RESOLUTION and ASPECT. There is a picture of a Chinese radar display scope on this thread – its an old-style PPI. You are not getting the resolution on that scope to tell which contact is a ‘bit wider in the beam’. You need a SAR capable radar and about 10m resolution to tell detail at the level you are talking about. You’d also need to be about 100km from the target…which might be just a bit risky!. Also you need the target to be at the correct aspect to your radar platform to get the correct profile. From stern port quarter a Nimitz is going to have a near identical radar profile to a VLCC even at 10m SAR res.!!!. 2/10 Echo – must do better.
Right, so the Nimitz is just going to hide in a sea lane and sit there. 😀 And the escorts will follow behind like a line of ducks . . .
Of course you can. The problem, which no-one has solved yet, is finding the carrier and fixing its position for long enough to coordinate a strike of sufficient weight to saturate its defences.
The Soviets/Russians could find them, I’m sure the Chinese could manage, they are not the Iraqis.
What have Combat Air Patrols got to do with the kind of ocean reconnaissance that the PLANAF is capable of mounting at extreme standoff. The CAP is programmed to form a barrier between a set HVU and a pre-determined threat axis – hence the other acronym BARCAP. You are suggesting that the PRC has enough recon assets to BARCAP the whole South China Sea?.
Extreme stand off is a little bit of a stretch for 500KM off shore. FORCAP simply means they would be escorting strike groups or recon groups, which is what I’ve been saying repeatedly.
LOL. What makes you think I’m the only one who knows the way this works in the real, non-internet fantasy, world!. A USN Lt Cdr painted the pic clearly enough above. I’ll let you into a little secret, lots of Warfare Officers, in Navies all over the world know what the limits of OTH targetting are!. Why do you think so few OTH missile shots have ever actually been attempted!:rolleyes:
Don’t ask me, because NATO’s missile technology is pretty amateur as compared to that of the Russians in terms of OTH? :rolleyes: More realistically, what do you think aerial guidance platforms have been developed for? :rolleyes:
Sign In
