PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

[bebops]

Think of LRASM as a missile version of F35 or F22. It probably uses the same stealth material to reflect radar signals.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

LRASM are 3.5 million each. Do you have pricing for each HQ-9 interceptor for comparison?

Problem with using HQ-9 is not that China cannot afford to produce HQ-9. A 052D or 055 can only carry a limited number of HQ-9s. That's why a quad package AD missile is needed. Once HQ-9s are exhausted, destroyers have to return to port to replenish. A task force that returns to port to replenish is a task force not out at sea supporting offensive operations or exerting sea control or conducting other naval missions.

 

[bebops]

How about using land based HQ9 to protect the ships? Replenish missile on a ship takes longer than land based launchers. If HQ9 can protect anything from first island chain, it is all good.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

How about using land based HQ9 to protect the ships? Replenish missile on a ship takes longer than land based launchers. If HQ9 can protect anything from first island chain, it is all good.

You would need to spot it with aerial sensors first.

 

[supersnoop]

I have my suspicions that quad pack missiles are lacking in performance relative to the threats PLA is expected to face. We’ve seen FM-3000N in 2021, but nothing in service, and no fresh rumours for years. Seeing the recent performance of the PL-15, we can safely infer that it is not a technological issue. Should the HQ-16(FE) being a larger size theoretically be able to house a more powerful seeker to detect these stealthy cruise missiles? Can it use the datalink to improve probability of detection?

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Another major advantage of LRASM is its relatively cheapness and ease of production. LRASM are designed to be utilized in large scale saturation attacks. If you are expending HQ-9s to intercept LRASM, then you already lost. What PLAN needs to counter LRASM is a quad packable short to medium range AD missile.

If you want an idea of how survivable subsonics are vs modern air defense, look at how basically everything subsonic above FPV drone size gets intercepted in Ukraine by both sides or compare the interception rate of Iranian subsonics vs. ballistics. Even low flying Kalibrs and 'stealthy' Storm Shadows get hit easily.

Tomahawk, a much less sophisticated missile, is still $2M+ too.

Kinematics matter a ton.

 

[vincent]

Most of you guys seem to forget the existence of PLAAF.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

If you want an idea of how survivable subsonics are vs modern air defense, look at how basically everything subsonic above FPV drone size gets intercepted in Ukraine by both sides or compare the interception rate of Iranian subsonics vs. ballistics. Even low flying Kalibrs and 'stealthy' Storm Shadows get hit easily.

Tomahawk, a much less sophisticated missile, is still $2M+ too.

Kinematics matter a ton.

LRASMs are easy to intercept, but destroyers have limited VLS tubes. Hence why a quad packable AD missile of moderate performance would be perfect counter. The LRASMs do not have to actually sink the destroyers. Just force them back to replenish in order to prevent those destroyers from being able to partake in offensive operations or other naval missions.

 

[gelgoog]

I would be surprised if there aren't at least programs to develop more more modern SAMs for the PLAN. Just looks at the technical specs for HQ-29 or PL-15.

 

[AndrewS]

I would be surprised if there aren't at least programs to develop more more modern SAMs for the PLAN. Just looks at the technical specs for HQ-29 or PL-15.

Also remember that the Chinese Air Force will be launching PL-15s as the first line of air defence