Russia has slightly over half of the population and economy of the Soviet Union.
As for the air force it is way smaller but far more capable.
A lot of those aircraft were single engine MiG-21 and MiG-23.
PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC
- Thread starter SEAD
- Start date
As for the air force it is way smaller but far more capable.
A lot of those aircraft were single engine MiG-21 and MiG-23.
New US thinktank report proposes a major redeployment from Korea/Japan to Guam/Marianas/Palau/etc. Retreating from first to second island chains. It bears repeating that this is not formal policy, just a proposal from one faction ahead of the Pentagon's annual Global Posture Review.
It also claims that a US defense of Taiwan is unnecessary.
It also claims that a US defense of Taiwan is unnecessary.
Defense Priorities isn't taken seriously in DC. Although Elbridge Colby might agree with them on some things.
This is exactly what China wants, that US retreats out of east asia just because China is too powerful and defeat is becoming inevitable. Sensible voices in the US will slowly advocate for voluntary retreat just to prevent catastrophic defeat.
This is the peaceful transition of power that China wants
As I have previously stated, the transfer of the Marines from Okinawa to Guam was the result of a primary and a secondary factor:
Primary factor - Local opposition to the American military presence;
The relocation of the Marines from Okinawa to another location was long overdue due to local grievances about the American presence on the island.
Secondary factor - The reestablished Japanese Amphibious Brigade can now comfortably assume American military obligations;
PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC
This: Because your imagination limits you? is fishing for a cheap gotcha. As for my post, that was mirroring the original wording of the post I responded to. And there is no contradiction, because you have again overlooked the original context. Which I already pointed out. That's why there...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
In reality, it is a redeployment of forces in East Asia to make American forces less vulnerable to Chinese first strikes.
This is far from a peaceful transition, because what appears to be in the planning is a long-term rivalry in the Western Pacific with the Americans allocating their forces to a long-term strategy against China in a world where China has or has not captured Taiwan, but with a much more capable and stronger China in the future.
I was reading this document, and it states that the DF-27 HGV is capable of hitting Hawaii with conventional munitions.
I'm well aware that sources vary the DF-27 HGV's range from 5,000 km to 8,000 km. The range from mainland China to Hawaii is >8,000 km.
I don't know if this is blatant US Army propaganda to get funding, because throughout the article they mention that the point is not to argue favorably for a larger budget for the USA and a smaller one for the USAF/USN, but if the DF-27 has this capability it will be a huge expansion of the PLARF's A2AD.
I'm well aware that sources vary the DF-27 HGV's range from 5,000 km to 8,000 km. The range from mainland China to Hawaii is >8,000 km.
I don't know if this is blatant US Army propaganda to get funding, because throughout the article they mention that the point is not to argue favorably for a larger budget for the USA and a smaller one for the USAF/USN, but if the DF-27 has this capability it will be a huge expansion of the PLARF's A2AD.
China Should be able to increase range of DF-27 HGV without altering fundamental aerothermodynamic design aspects through a variety of means. For example by developing utra high bandwidth control alone (increasingly possible with ever increasing computational power) that provides:
1. Sufficient stability to the glide vehicle with required flight control authority at higher upper atmosphere ( Lower flight dynamic control).
2. Minimizing energy losses by developing higher level control algorithms, that generate near real time optimal flight path that finds best compromise as far as need to avoid detection, tracking, impact point prediction by enemy is concerned while also respecting glide vehicle's fundamental operational/design limitations (e.g. error propagation not just due to sensor and control response uncertainties but also due to alteration in vehicle dynamic characteristics due to uncertain impact of heat transfer, permanent or extremely slowly recovering elasto-plastic micro-geometry changes due to aero-thermal loads along the flight path as well as due to reliability and quality control issue and so on). With enough computational and flight test data, one can develop more advanced data driven digital twins models that more accurately reflect actual flight vehicle (rather than the theoretically, computational or previously data drivenly envisioned one) allowing more advanced data driven optimization of flight paths, control systems, some changes in subsystems that almost always will lead to better range and better other things. Meaning even when a flight vehicle is operational, a determined team can furhter optimize the flight vehice without too many changes in the existing design.
Also slight or not so slight re-optimization by small changes in aerodynamics (aerothermodynamics) , structural and other design aspects should also increase the range with some negligible loss in final speed and/or in-flight agility.
Furthermore, allowing some actual tolerable energy loss without significant decrease in speed in mid or terminal flight regions, can add to the already designed range.
The point is like subsonic or supersonic flight, there are always options in hypersonic flight vehicles that allow final range enhancements without lowering the payload.
I see no reason current DF-27 HGV range is final one. It likely is being improved with better control and guidance algorithms along with other aspects such as the ones discussed above. Other countries improve exiting flight and control aspects. China likely does more of that than other nations. Its a very safe bet.
1. Sufficient stability to the glide vehicle with required flight control authority at higher upper atmosphere ( Lower flight dynamic control).
2. Minimizing energy losses by developing higher level control algorithms, that generate near real time optimal flight path that finds best compromise as far as need to avoid detection, tracking, impact point prediction by enemy is concerned while also respecting glide vehicle's fundamental operational/design limitations (e.g. error propagation not just due to sensor and control response uncertainties but also due to alteration in vehicle dynamic characteristics due to uncertain impact of heat transfer, permanent or extremely slowly recovering elasto-plastic micro-geometry changes due to aero-thermal loads along the flight path as well as due to reliability and quality control issue and so on). With enough computational and flight test data, one can develop more advanced data driven digital twins models that more accurately reflect actual flight vehicle (rather than the theoretically, computational or previously data drivenly envisioned one) allowing more advanced data driven optimization of flight paths, control systems, some changes in subsystems that almost always will lead to better range and better other things. Meaning even when a flight vehicle is operational, a determined team can furhter optimize the flight vehice without too many changes in the existing design.
Also slight or not so slight re-optimization by small changes in aerodynamics (aerothermodynamics) , structural and other design aspects should also increase the range with some negligible loss in final speed and/or in-flight agility.
Furthermore, allowing some actual tolerable energy loss without significant decrease in speed in mid or terminal flight regions, can add to the already designed range.
The point is like subsonic or supersonic flight, there are always options in hypersonic flight vehicles that allow final range enhancements without lowering the payload.
I see no reason current DF-27 HGV range is final one. It likely is being improved with better control and guidance algorithms along with other aspects such as the ones discussed above. Other countries improve exiting flight and control aspects. China likely does more of that than other nations. Its a very safe bet.