60th Anniversary National Day Parade
- Thread starter AssassinsMace
- Start date
Yeah I know... But I am looking at the exact or approximate figure.. Anybody had an idea?
vesicles
Colonel
For the Chinese govn't, this was the money well spent. In their mind, boosting national pride would enhance stability and foster a better environment for further economic development. To them, this was a long term investment. And a cheap one compared to anything else. Think of how much money you have to pump in, in another manner other than the one they had, to convince people that their country is powerful, stable and harmonious and that it's safe to spend their money and invest. Diverting the same amount of money to a few jobs is only a short term solution to a long-term problem.
Of course, how Chinese people really think about the celebration is a totally different matter...
It does , it has laser , GPRS and radar terminal guidance. The ship cant evade it. Its traveling at Mach 10 and worse the Air defence radars have trouble picking it up as it is likely to be a very small , very high velocity object. They even had trouble with the 1950 style Scuds.
Forget carriers , every major country for 50 years has thought up ways to take them out they are too big and vulnerable. This includes the new Balistic missile , skimming high speed Cruise missile or Russia's mythical under water missile.
Future is drone air craft , high altitude scram jet bombers and cruise missiles , Naval air power is at its end prob best is drones on cheap expendable converted tankers.
I agree on your proposition, but if we look at current status, realistically. Aircraft carrier had been the best back bone for power projection. Even the USN was building new Carriers, same with the British, French and Italian navies.
Even the Indian Navy was expanding its carrier fleet.
Second major problem of drones, was how much fuel can it carry. Since it carries lesser fuel, its range will still be much limited. Unlike aircrafts loaded on a carrier.
Wich you know why? Because you got one in your backyard to play with and a CVN in your local town lake as a mock target wich you repeatedly killed in real world tests?I actually do have doubts how radar, laser and all that fancy radio stuff in a small warhead that is engulfed in a probably plasma like cone when entering the (lower) atmosphere at M10 does at finding a ship in the ocean. I guess problems can be fixed, but I doubt it's a highly reliable weapon after just a few short years of development.
Like 20 years ago when even then the majority of missiles was actually detected though not sucessfully intercepted due to yet incapable missiles?
And yet even China, wich as you make it sound, has the ultimate anti carrier weapon and should see the uselessnes of carriers, plans to built multiple of them.
What I believe a force with big (enough) resources will be able to do, is to force a CSBG to stay outside a certain threat range and hence reduce it's operational impact in theater.
This then boils down to a problem of sustainability and endurance. Either the CSBG cannot break the defenses and is forced to retreat at some, or it will score a tactical victory and be able to exploit that breach in the defesne. Of course, a trap can always be made and even a carrier be lured into it, but that is not the general negation of carriers.
Furthermore a carrier does not always right away have to come in close to a cost, but can controll the waters around a certain theater, thus limiting the inflow of supplys into a certain theater and thereby still achieve a strategic effect.
