China's SCS Strategy Thread

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
Using an ICBM for a conventional strike is calling for armageddon. It actually makes massive sense but it is just too dangerous. IMO, China should focus on H-20 and SSGNs.

If the US decides to use cruise missiles, ballistics, or whatever on Chinese civilian targets, then in that situation, China would have to first remove the regional threats (if that hasn't already been done) from which those strikes are carried out and consider retaliating on US civilian populations. China doesn't have the H-20 yet and won't have a significant strategic range bomber fleet for at least another decade. It doesn't have SSGNs like Russia does. It needs to build up both ASAP. SSGNs are a step below the escalation ladder compared to SSBNs and SSBNs won't be used to launch missiles with conventional warheads since China has relatively few of them to waste for that purpose.

In the meantime, in order to maintain that ability to retaliate against conventional strikes on civilian centres, China ought to produce more intercontinental ranged missiles delivering MaRVs and MIRVs. Building several hundred DF-41 and arming them with conventional warheads is actually much easier, quicker, and cheaper to do than building a few dozen H-20 and SSGNs or building up regional bases around the US to commit the same retaliatory strike if China is hit first. The US has bases not only for the purposes of launching offensive weapons out of. China doesn't have those extra needs so those expensive (and in China's case impossible) bases are not worthwhile.

Theoretically you're not allowed to use nukes if you were hit with conventional weapons. So how can China balance the US base threat? It can of course destroy them but will take significant hits before it can manage that. Simply said, China needs to build up even more ICBMs and focus on getting a fleet of SSGNs that are capable of approaching continental USA. Oh and a few dozen H-20s would certainly make the Americans think twice about sending thousands of conventional missiles at Chinese cities. China is in defence from aggression in these situations so every retaliation below using nuclear is totally justified. The problem is China probably doesn't have that many DF-31 and DF-41 to use with conventional warheads. It also is not even close to fielding H-20 and any SSGNs, let alone do that with numbers. What it can do in the meantime to guarantee the Americans don't initiate strikes is to scrap NFU and directly tell the Americans that any conventional strike on Chinese cities would mean a nuclear response from China since it has no other alternative at the moment. To be honest, the Americans know that well enough. NFU is just there for political and diplomatic purposes.
 

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has rebuffed a call from China to withdraw vessels from disputed areas of the South China Sea and said
he would not bow to pressure, even if it jeopardises his friendship with Beijing.
Spicy

I am afraid that Duterte is mistaking this for the 2015 period. Big mistake, at this time right now, China is openly fighting for survival against the US.

If he remains standfast on his positions then I dont foresee a good outcome. IMO, this matter is unnegotiable for the Chinese

Anyway, interesting development, lets see what will happen
 

BoraTas

Captain
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Spicy

I am afraid that Duterte is mistaking this for the 2015 period. Big mistake, at this time right now, China is openly fighting for survival against the US.

If he remains standfast on his positions then I dont foresee a good outcome. IMO, this matter is unnegotiable for the Chinese

Anyway, interesting development, lets see what will happen
Can it be a Chinese-Duterte plot to get him elected again? If Duterte loses the replacement will be anti-China for sure.
 

steel21

Junior Member
Registered Member
What kind of logic is that? Because most countries in the world can't produce a plane, so anything flying is great? Yeah, Tu-95 and H-16 are still great for attacking nations in huts or after their military is wrecked. But they are not viable options for attacking any modern nation with air defenses. They have no speed, no stealth, and no maneuverability. If they are caught, they can't run and can't hide. All these 2 designs are good for are attacking weak nations or nations that are already defeated.

H-20 is the critical platform for striking nations that can actually pose a threat to China. It can circumvent modern air defenses and doesn't require that the skies and hostile SAMS be cleared to operate.

These platforms do not support each other; extra platforms overcomplicate maintenance and training while bogging down resources. Obsolete bombers like the H-16 and Tu-95 take up money that should be spent on modern bombers. They take up pilots lives and needlessly endanger them. It is a deadly insult to put a pilot in a Tu-95 when something like the H-20 is available. These old designs are ready for the junkyard or for second hand sale to warring African nations. They have no place in modern combat or any modern air force.
Yup. Forget Tu-95 and 160, H-20 is the way to go. Beside, buying obsolete shit from other people will only sap your own development team of critical resources and experience.
 

Attachments

  • E1Vx0ZeXMAAOtz2.png
    E1Vx0ZeXMAAOtz2.png
    887 KB · Views: 7

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
Can it be a Chinese-Duterte plot to get him elected again? If Duterte loses the replacement will be anti-China for sure.
Doubt that this is an elaborate scheme. It seems to me that China has started making moves to ward any potential US shenanigans on SCS.

On the other hand, Philippines has been hijacked by US traitors and Duterte is surely feeling the pressure to act "tough" on China. don't forget, media, opposition parties, NGOs, diplomatic corps, military (not sure on that) are on the US pocket and they are now on open war against Duterte for being "soft" on China

@ansy1968, any thoughts?
 

davidau

Senior Member
Registered Member
B-52 is about 15% faster both cruise and max, payload about 40% higher, 11% higher service ceiling, range 9% higher. It's a superior plane for sure.

US could afford better things later while Russia was much poorer so they kept buying the cheap bomber. This isn't China's direction.

Russia's, no doubt.

Yeah obviously. It's ludicrous to say that China should start building Tu-95. America and Russia moved on to better things decades ago.

B-52 is about 15% faster both cruise and max, payload about 40% higher, 11% higher service ceiling, range 9% higher. It's a superior plane for sure.

US could afford better things later while Russia was much poorer so they kept buying the cheap bomber. This isn't China's direction.

Russia's, no doubt.

Yeah obviously. It's ludicrous to say that China should start building Tu-95. America and Russia moved on to better things decades ago.
This is China's SCS Strategy Thread, what has it got to do with H-6, TU-59 , B-52?
 

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
“We have a stand here and I want to state it here and now again that our ships there... we will not move an inch backward,” Duterte said, adding “I will not withdraw. Even if you kill me. Our friendship will end here.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top