When US sells the Apache to Taiwan, will this pose a serious threat to China?

That's assuming that the Apaches won't be downed by the air cover any PLA invasion force would have, or the TY-90s mounted on Chinese copters.

Skywatcher said:

That's assuming that the Apaches won't be downed by the air cover any PLA invasion force would have, or the TY-90s mounted on Chinese copters.

Click to expand...

It is relatively easy for helicopters to merge in with the ground clutter, making them virtually undetectable from other aircraft.

FugitiveVisions said:

Apaches can probably get to the beach quicker than armored columns can, so they can wreck some serious havoc on the first wave. It's too dangerous to put a warship like a 054A by the beach, so the first wave must have a few air defense vehicles like Tor.

Click to expand...

The 054A has more than enough range to sit away from the beach, and nail any opposing helicopter.

Oh and it uses SARH, which mean the missiles will be drawn only to the thing which is illuminated. Ship radars are right from the beginning, meant to deal with ground and surface clutter.

crobato said:

Oh and it uses SARH, which mean the missiles will be drawn only to the thing which is illuminated. Ship radars are right from the beginning, meant to deal with ground and surface clutter.

Click to expand...

Yes fleet support and MANPADs would be the biggest protection that any landing Chinese troops would have against Apaches attacking them as they land. I would put PLAAF aircraft after those two (ground clutter issues and the fact that they would probably be distracted by A2A combat) and the TY-90 after that.

There are also the wheeled HQ-7s to contend with that can be landed from any ship that can support a vehicle with four wheels. I would say these vehicles are the most serious threat to any helicopter, given that they are, after all, the PLA's standard field air defense unit. They're backed with electro-optical systems, so ECM and ground clutter won't affect them.

crobato said:

There are also the wheeled HQ-7s to contend with that can be landed from any ship that can support a vehicle with four wheels. I would say these vehicles are the most serious threat to any helicopter, given that they are, after all, the PLA's standard field air defense unit. They're backed with electro-optical systems, so ECM and ground clutter won't affect them.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

It also depends on whenever the Apache's are equipped with the Longbow radar, and if they are, watch out. Then, they can hide behind cover with only the radar mast sticking up, and launch radar guided Hellfires with virtual impunity. No SAM can hit a target that is hiding behind cover.

They would have to get closer than the HQ-7's range, and if the Apaches use radar, they would be basically giving themselves away to some other measure. How do you expect to use radar to tell one vehicle from another? How do you know its a truck, a tank, an IFV, a car, the HQ-7 itself, and whether or not your contact is PLA or ROCA or just civilian? Once he uses his radar, the SAM vehicle would be alerted to it and would already be aiming while the helicopter is searching for the target, not to mention identifying and authorizing. By this time, the SAM is already on its way.

SAMs use a proximity fuse. Even if it hits only the radar mast---it does not even need to hit it---the blast would still take down the helicopter, blowing its blades. And if there are helicopters next to it as well, they all go down with the blast.

The Taiwanese military wants the latest version of the Apaches, of course its gonna be equipped with the best. And who knows what strategy the military will use, the pilots are going to be trained by the US. Probably some US strategy, don't forget Chinese arms haven't been tested on the battlefield while US arms have. The US therefore have more extensive strategy and weapon upgrades while the Chinese don't.

That's the other thing. How will your helicopters fly if you have another logistical goof up? Imagine if you actually got invaded, and all those helicopters could not fly because of the wrong "batteries"?

crobato said:

They would have to get closer than the HQ-7's range, and if the Apaches use radar, they would be basically giving themselves away to some other measure. How do you expect to use radar to tell one vehicle from another? How do you know its a truck, a tank, an IFV, a car, the HQ-7 itself, and whether or not your contact is PLA or ROCA or just civilian? Once he uses his radar, the SAM vehicle would be alerted to it and would already be aiming while the helicopter is searching for the target, not to mention identifying and authorizing. By this time, the SAM is already on its way.

SAMs use a proximity fuse. Even if it hits only the radar mast---it does not even need to hit it---the blast would still take down the helicopter, blowing its blades. And if there are helicopters next to it as well, they all go down with the blast.

Click to expand...

SAM's also use direct line of sight targeting. If I am behind a hill with only a very small part of me sticking out, your missile will probably hit the hill not me. There is not one SAM in existence that is capable of non-line of sight engagement.

Also, not all the Apache's have to stick their radars up at the same time. The AH-64D is equipped for cooperative engagement. If I have 4 Apache's hiding behind a hill, only 1 will need to expose his radar for a brief moment and take a look. After taking a look with the radar, the fire control system will digest the radar signature, consider the targets.

Furthermore, if we are using the Apache's to combat a landing, you will essentially will know that anything that moves out in the distance is enemy. You form engagement zones; say a Apache is 4km away from the landing zone behind cover. It takes a radar look, and sees targets all the way out. You know that friendlies are at most 3km away from your position. Therefore, anything beyond 3km away from your position will therefore automatically be considered hostile.