Is this a realistic scenario?: https://youtu.be/vJXWJ-Px5tU?si=1MqqBS7SSrP35o2G
>>62865995Yeah China proved it in reality too some time ago since the west has fallen and Taiwan was taken in just a day.
>>62865995Three Gorges Dam would cease to exist(and with it most of chinklandia) 24 hours before Chinks can target any US carrier
>>62865995More or less. CMO has some notable problems with its missile simulation, but if a carrier gets caught in a bad position on day 1, it's probably fucked. The problem the Chinks have is getting the other 12.
>>62866000good thing China has more missiles than all the west combined and all hypersonic too unlike the gay west
>>62866003too obvious, but I'll give it a pity (You) anyway.
Implessive
sure. a single cvbg isn't getting through a concerted attack with hypersonics, or even supersonic sea-skimmers.but, they aren't going to put a cvbg in a situation that this will happen in most instances, since there's no need for it.
>>62865995No, chinkland would lose its entire navy and airforce, and usa would lose a bunch of missiles and bombs.
>>62865995>make whale swallow nuclear bomb>mind control whale to swim under carrierez
>>62865995has anyone been playing sea power recently? game is fun but needs a lot of quality of life changes imo
>>62865995Can we stop with the "missile hits a carrier" shit please? What, you want to waste half your stockpile to potentialy hit it? Go for it, retard.
>>62866078Hypersonics move faster retard
>>62866063too obvious, but I'll give it a pity (You) anyway.
>>62866000>The other 12Are a week away
>>62866081Yeah, but how do you know where to hit?
>>62866084You tried
>>62866094Radar dumbass. No wonder gays have taken over
>>62866101>RadarThen educate me, retard. I know you are desperately trying to sound smart.
>>62866108not him, but the chink hypersonics have terminal active radar. you just need isr to get the location of the target before launch.isr is one problem the houthis had with their antiquated asbms. if it's delayed long enough, the target can be out of the seeker cone's fov.though, the chinks should probably put image recognition on them, since active radar can be spoofed.
>>62866129>before launch. So useless against a carrier?
>>62866136no. since it's on open ocean, the fov will be good enough. it's actually the same for all anti-shipping ordnance that relies on active radar; you need the current location and general direction of the vessel to set up your shot and how wide or long you want the seeker cone if available.(houthis can bullseye a tanker if they know where the tanker is when it's moving, with slower and less advanced seeker heads.)
>>62866146Aren't tankers much slower compared to aircraft carriers? Carriers also don't go in straight lines. Sure, you can find the general place where it is, but your missile won't find it.
>>62866159I should add to this, that China doesn't have a hypersonic maneuverable missile.
>>62866159just giving an example of what can be achieved by more antiquated missiles. the "rv" and warhead section of china's less advanced missiles, like the df-21, are functionally the same as pershing ii; they have control surfaces that guide the warhead to the target based on radar return. they'll be hypersonic for most of their time in the atmosphere, but they'll probably impact around mach 4-5. the speed of the carrier is more than a tanker, but it doesn't matter here. (it'll be harder to hit a carrier at long range with subsonic and supersonic cruise missiles with active radars, since the time of flight is far longer.)
>>62866180Yeah but at that point it is so slow, that even if it magically is on the trajectory to hit it, the defense will deal with it.
>>62866192They MIGHT deal with it, but Mach 4-5 at close range is a hard intercept, made harder with multiple missiles incoming at the same time. Even in the best case most US interceptors are 80-90% P/K, which means you basically have to devote 2 interceptors per incoming missile to get close to assuring none will get passed. It's not THAT hard to overwhelm the missile defences of a CSG with a large enough saturation attack.
>>62866160Nor do they magic plasma-defeating radar. I’m getting tired of explaining psychics to /k/ which never seems to stick.
>>62866192you're correct that on terminal they have a much easier time at defending against them, just like how ukraine can manage to hit khinzal and iskander under similar conditions when they're targeted. but some have gotten through and damaged/destroyed components of said batteries in ukraine.you don't want to be in this position in the first place due to that reason, and it'd be why high value units like a carrier will be kept out of range, and other means will be used to attack chinese shipping under a ballistic missile umbrella.
>>62866094Not him but aircraft carriers are massive. Spy satellites easily have a 10 square meter per pixel res. You really can't hide a whole cargo carrier sized ship
>>62865995Supreme Commander remake looks shit ngl
>>62866160What are the DF-17 and DF-27?
>>62866192Hypersonic missile impacts target less than 10 minutes after launch.A carrier can't manouver even 5 km from predicted course in that time.You really think less than 5km is enough for the missile to loose it's target?
>>62866321With these, a CBG can't even get close enough to Taiwan to do anything effective.
>>62865995Buy an ad instead of trying to shill your shitty channel here
>>62866101Chaff and jammers. Standard on all US navy ships. Since a hypersonic missile has a coat of plasma it's radar is going to be fucked up to begin with. It's not going to be able to tell the difference between a cloud of aluminum threads and a carrier deck. Jammers put the final nail in the coffin, drowning out any radar return so the missiles can only see the jammers.
>>62865995I love this scenario.Which stands, btw.
>>62866129>>62866146>By some accounts, an ASBM or other missile arrived at a very shallow trajectory, with minimal warning, without a chance for interception, and splashing down around 200 meters from the Eisenhower. Details gathered from interviews with Yemen-focused U.S. and U.K. intelligence officers for this study. Names of interviewees, and dates and places of interviews withheld at interviewees' request. The Houthis propagandized the carrier's departure. See "America's withdrawal from the Red Sea confirms the fall of the myth of Washington's great power," Sabant - Saba Agency, May 1, 2024.Even the Houthis managed to get extremely close to the target, 200m is literally less than the entire length of a US Nimitz carrier:https://ctc.westpoint.edu/a-draw-is-a-win-the-houthis-after-one-year-of-war/
>>62866321DF-27 is now known to have ~8,000km range, so it's in the ICBM class. Which would threaten a CVBG globally.In theory, with enough of them, they could cripple the US carrier fleet in a surprise attack. Though, the US would probably respond with at least a limited nuclear attack on military targets of their own, so it's probably not worth it.
What's the USN doing for missile defense now that the last 9 Ticonderoga class cruisers are slated for decommissioning? AEGIS was a pretty important part of missile defense of a CBG as well as locking down contested airspace.
>>62866556hopes and prayers (that south korea will pick up the slack in building ships for the USN)
>>62866532cool pic where is it from ?
>>62866587JeffHolly, a chinese military artist. He has a twitter with the same name.
>>62866508>Since a hypersonic missile has a coat of plasma it's radar is going to be fucked up to begin with.The formation of a plasma sheat is not given, it depends on the nosecone shape and the speed. You can also erase a plasma sheat by water injection. One thing that is not mentioned is that a good hypersonic missile will eject active decoys on approach, which means that the defenders will have to spend far more than 2 missiles to be certain that they got the threat. It means that the chinks can get a soft victory by forcing the carrier battle group to deplete their stores of standard and patriot missiles to such a low level that they will have to make a hasty retreat.
CMO without classified models is not realistic, no
>>62866296Sure, and ASAT weapons have existed since the 60's. How are you going to locate the carrier once the satellites get shot down?
>>62866612>The formation of a plasma sheat is not given, it depends on the nosecone shape and the speed. You can also erase a plasma sheat by water injection.Plasma is just a side effect of an object moving through the atmosphere at mach 5+. There are ways to reduce it but not cancel it out entirely. It's not just a matter of compression but the fact that the air molecules are being forced out of the way fast enough to rend electrons from protons. Water injection probably isn't going to work without so much mass it compromises the missile. >One thing that is not mentioned is that a good hypersonic missile will eject active decoys on approach, which means that the defenders will have to spend far more than 2 missiles to be certain that they got the threat. It means that the chinks can get a soft victory by forcing the carrier battle group to deplete their stores of standard and patriot missiles to such a low level that they will have to make a hasty retreat.The first problem is that at hypersonic speeds the missile will have a limited window to course correct so any contact that isn't on an intercept course with the carrier will be ignored. The second problem is that active decoys take up mass. This cuts into the Missile's payload, making a more expensive missile that's less effective. The third issue is assuming that a particular fleet is the primary attacker and not just a decoy for a SSGN making a cruise missile attack on PLAN naval supply yards. Remember, SSGNs don't need to surface to launch.
>>62865995>PL-15 has a longer range than AIM-120>but the US win anyways because they have better skilled personnel!What kind of cope is this?
>>62866081Hypersonic also have a predictable target, you don't need to be fast to stop a pitbull biting a kid, you just need to be in the way to hit it with a sword.
>>62866532tourists won't get it.don't worry anon. I understand.
>>62866674>memory holed the sm6 on an f18 already
>>62866556anon, I...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer
>>62866689Yeah, which is overmatched by PL-17 in service already.
>>62866088>surely it will only take 3 days THIS time
>>62866695Burke carries a lot less missiles than Ticonderoga.
>>62865995>launch literally every missile you have to sink 1 carriersure but at what cost
>>62866698>this is what changs actually believe
>>62866703There's also a lot more Burkes than Ticonderogas.
>>62866707Unfortunately, this is what the Pentagon actually thinks.https://x.com/clashreport/status/1856763221090169313
>>62866381What the fuck is "predicted course" for a nuclear aircraft carrier, nigger? You know they can turn on a dime, right?
>>62866543>By some accounts>unnamed sources
>>62866719>retards and terminal contrarians not understanding wargamesTale as old as time, the wect has fallen for sure
Big surface ships are almost universally outdated and should all be retired. The only things that will exist in the future are small numerous stealthy submarines that are unmanned. They will only briefly surface to release payload then go back to hide somewhere. It's a similar story with manned aircraft.
>>62866719>exaggerating a hostile nation's capabilities to get more fundingTruly shocking.
>>62866763Apologize.
>>62866673>The first problem is that at hypersonic speeds the missile will have a limited window to course correct so any contact that isn't on an intercept course with the carrier will be ignored.Active decoys are not necessarily just ejected pods, they can be miniature missiles of their own, flying next to the HGV. >The second problem is that active decoys take up mass. This cuts into the Missile's payload, making a more expensive missile that's less effective.The benefit of smart decoys is that you drain the defender of his irreplaceable defensive missiles. The carrying HGV does not even need to hit to be effective in this case as it will cause the enemy to spend at least 6-10 defensive missiles. This would maximize the chink advantage in logistics and manufacturing capability as well as the american disadvantages in logistics and manufacturing. Those 600 pac-3 produced per year and 200 standard missiles per year will be enough to intercept ~100 chink decoy ejecting HGVs and they would have to be shipped across the pacific. I am pretty certain the chinks can produce more than that in a year if they chose too.
>>62866866It's the same numbers game that gave America the advantage in WW2. Sure the J-35 probably is like 75% as capable as an F-35 but China will probably reach a point where they can produce 5x as many J-35 as we can produce F-35.
The funny thing, is that all this discussion is irrelevant. So you sink one CBG. Good job.Now Ohios and Virginias roll up to your coast and dump Tomahawks at anything and everything of military value. Starting with command and control. You know, the thing your fancy hypersonic ding dongs need.
>>62866556they're extending their lives for at least another several yearsbut the burkes can do the same thing
>>62866719>We make the enemy stronger than us in our wargames so we can practice adverse conditions and come out strong>This means China strongLmao>We lose
>>62866719Funny that he sees it as I do >>62866544Whilst it's probably an overestimation to some degree, in theory if DF-27 works as stated, it could hit all of them in a surprise attack. It'd be the same if a Minuteman-III variant had a conventional warhead and targeted the same.
>>62866885US definitely has submarine supremacy, albeit you don't want them to get too close. Using them to hunt warships, subs, troop transports and so on will be their main tasks. Hitting airfields and ballistic missile sites would be useful, but it might be too risky.
>>62865995There has been a sudden and inexplicable uptick in chink shill threads in the past week or so. Has Xi finally decided on a timeline to invade Taiwan?
>>62866960It's just you, schizo. There's a basedlennial vibe going around about downplaying china to cope with their insecurity about missing gwot and ukraine.
>>62866866>Active decoys are not necessarily just ejected pods, they can be miniature missiles of their own, flying next to the HGV.Which is worse. Putting in a guidance system would make the decoys as expensive as the missile. Without guidance systems the decoys wouldn't track the carrier and CIC teams would ignore them.>The benefit of smart decoys is that you drain the defender of his irreplaceable defensive missiles. The carrying HGV does not even need to hit to be effective in this case as it will cause the enemy to spend at least 6-10 defensive missiles. This would maximize the chink advantage in logistics and manufacturing capability as well as the american disadvantages in logistics and manufacturing. Those 600 pac-3 produced per year and 200 standard missiles per year will be enough to intercept ~100 chink decoy ejecting HGVs and they would have to be shipped across the pacific. I am pretty certain the chinks can produce more than that in a year if they chose too.The problem is that the missile is still facing Jamming and Decoys. These measures are bad enough for traditional ship killers but a hypersonic missile doesn't have time to change course once it's close enough to burn through jamming and has the resolution to figure out which radar contact is real. If the missile is lucky it'll understeer and sail right into the ocean. If it's not the missile will tear it'self appart with a 90 degree angle of attack.Modern radars are precise enough that the carrier group will know which missiles are going to miss from the outset so it's likely that only a fraction of the hypersonic missiles will even cost the USN an anti-missile missile.
>>62866966So the invasion is on, got it. Thanks, Chang.
>>62865995I don't think that carrier killing or other minute detail will decide any war between China an dthe US.It will mostly come to a few things:>How quickly the US can retool it's industry to make bombs, rockets, drones and microchips.>How fast the chinese can take stuff and hope ti withstand US countermeasures.>How cucked europe is in helping their best fren out.
>>62866728Predicted course is current speed current and heading for 10 minutes you dumb nigger.You can turn as much as you want but you are not getting further than 5km from predicted course in 10 minutes. Especially if you have a destination are heading for.
>>62866321Exclusively land-attack weapons with no terminal guidance?
>>62866883>Sure the J-35 probably is like 75% as capable as an F-35>China will probably reach a point where they can produce 5x as many J-35 as we can produce F-35.lmao, both of these are so wildly wrong you have to be delusional to belive this
>>62866988>Which is worse. Putting in a guidance system would make the decoys as expensive as the missile. Without guidance systems the decoys wouldn't track the carrier and CIC teams would ignore them.The decoys need only to track the HGV to ensure that they follow the same course and fly nearby enough to not be discernable from the HGV radar echo by surface based radars. They can even be "dumb" and be remote controlled from the HGV. It would be advisable to equip them with an autopilot that is programmed to continue flying on an intercept course in case the HGV is destroyed and visual confirmation of the interception is blocked by a cloud layer, since modern interceptors go for a direct hit and the resulting impact produces quite a large blast, which would not happen with a hit on a decoy. That way the defenders will have to launch more missiles. >The problem is that the missile is still facing Jamming and Decoys.ECM suites on ship suffer from the same problem as SAM sites trying to defend against anti radiation missiles. You are just putting a target on yourself. The HGV is diving down at 85-90 degrees and will have a nice view of the carrier deck from above, and all the non stealth planes and gear and the steel flight deck and superstructure itself will generate a large radar return. This isnt your soviet clunker missile from the 1960s with an analog control system, it will be an aesa radar backed by an enormous amount of data processing. Unlike the soviet era clunkers, it will not go for the largest radar echo, it will go for the most likely radar echo. It might even track the large wake the carrier generates when it runs at full speed. We already have empirical data of the effectiveness of active decoys from Ukraine, the ukies ripple launched 32 pac-3 to take down 5-6 khinzals and their decoys and these are simple pod decoys.
>>62867181This completely ignores the killchain reaction time even if you do track the carrier constantly but also the fact that those quasi-ballistic missiles have very limited maneuvering capability against targets not directly within the missile path. Pershing II was designed that way to improve accuracy because terminal guidance allowed it to single out targets within its scatter zone, not expand the range of the missile. That's also why there have been exactly 0(zero) successful ballistic missile hits on a moving target to date.
>>62867240>The decoys need only to track the HGV>the decoys only need to be guided missilesthe absolute state of hypersanic shills
>>62866719>when you are weak appear strong>when you are strong appear weakIt's your own fucking book. Also>wargames
>>62867240>the ukies ripple launched 32 pac-3 to take down 5-6 khinzalsi love this russoid cope when Ukrainians are using PAC-2's IRL
>>62867251>but also the fact that those quasi-ballistic missiles have very limited maneuvering capability against targets not directly within the missile path.Thats not a major problem because the chink HGVs will be datalinked with the chink carrier tracking network. This is given considering the short flight time of the HGVs. Instead of a TU-95 with big bulge radar the chinks will use large recon drones and radar/optic satellites. The recon drones can be considered disposable in this scenario.
>>62867335>because the chink HGVs will be datalinkedMight as well talk about space lasers if you've discarded any semblance of discussion of realistic capabilites.
>>62867240>The decoys need only to track the HGV to ensure that they follow the same course and fly nearby enough to not be discernable from the HGV radar echo by surface based radars. In which case the interceptor that kills the HGV also kills the decoys. They're proximity fused fragmentation heads after all.>ECM suites on ship suffer from the same problem as SAM sites trying to defend against anti radiation missiles. You are just putting a target on yourself.That's why the Carrier isn't the one with the jammer. All the escorts have jammers up to bait missiles onto themselves rather than the carrier. Sure, this means the USN is down one Burke but with all those decoys and limited payload space the HGV doesn't have enough room for a big warhead. The escort just needs to make a pit stop in Japan to weld the hole shut. >The HGV is diving down at 85-90 degrees and will have a nice view of the carrier deck from above, and all the non stealth planes and gear and the steel flight deck and superstructure itself will generate a large radar return. This isnt your soviet clunker missile from the 1960s with an analog control system, it will be an aesa radar backed by an enormous amount of data processing. Unlike the soviet era clunkers, it will not go for the largest radar echo, it will go for the most likely radar echo. It might even track the large wake the carrier generates when it runs at full speed.Except it has to acquire a target from extremely far away in order to have time to course correct and has to deal with the missile's own plasma wake distorting radar returns. This in addition to US chaff, active decoys, and smoke screens. >We already have empirical data of the effectiveness of active decoys from Ukraine, the ukies ripple launched 32 pac-3 to take down 5-6 khinzals and their decoys and these are simple pod decoys.Citation needed.
>>62867335Those will be even more vulnerable to jamming since they're so far away the radar return is basically non-existant.>opticSmoke. Screen.
>>62867251>limited manouvering capability>only need to change course max 5kmNot a problem
>>62866719>ClashreportIs this xiggers preferred shill media lately, pretty much non stop spam articles.I'm assuming it's "anonymously" based in Russia.
>>62865995>carrier captain decides to travel along the entire chinese coastline alone making his ship as exposed as possible because... he just does okay!
>>62867377Then show me a single test of the real thing, chang. I'm tired of your disingenous theorycrafting that defies reality.
>>62867385That's literally FONOPS that the USN does all the time
>>62867240Anon, you're missing the sheer size of an ICBM tier missile vs interceptors.
>>62867395I imagine a war breaking out would cause some sort of change to the operating procedure
>>62867395Do you think USN will be doing FONOPS in wartime?
>>62867251>0(zero) successful ballistic missile hits on a moving target to dateNot true, Ukraine was lobbing MLRS at Russian warships near the start of the conflict, apparently it managed to hit one a couple times, to limited success I might add. But just being pedantic.
>>62867353>In which case the interceptor that kills the HGV also kills the decoys. They're proximity fused fragmentation heads after all.Modern interceptors like pac-3 use hit to kill. They have an ultrashort range proximity fuze. And the decoys will have to have some kind of autopilot so they can be set to follow the HGV original course. >That's why the Carrier isn't the one with the jammer. All the escorts have jammers up to bait missiles onto themselves rather than the carrierUnlike conventional anti ship missiles the HGV does not attack along the surface but strikes from above. An escort cannot place itself between the carrier and the threat. Conventional anti ship missile tactics does not apply here. >Except it has to acquire a target from extremely far away in order to have time to course correct and has to deal with the missile's own plasma wake distorting radar returns. This in addition to US chaff, active decoys, and smoke screens.Datalink + super high speed means that it will be on top of the carrier in no time. And plasma sheating is not a problem at sub mach 10 speeds. And smoke screens? Surely you jest.>Citation needed.Check the archives, the ripple launch when the ukies shot down these khinzals was impressive.
>>62867360>Smoke. Screen.Smoke screens defeat satellites now? So you will have a burke laying a smoke screen right in front of the carrier and the carrier will run into it? Is that your idea? You seem to think that the HGV attacks like a conventional anti ship missile.
>>62867398>Anon, you're missing the sheer size of an ICBM tier missile vs interceptors.The launch vehicle will not participate in the attack, only the detachable HGV warhead.
>>62867407>Not true, Ukraine was lobbing MLRS at Russian warships near the start of the conflict, apparently it managed to hit one a couple times, to limited success I might add. But just being pedantic.It was a "tochka" tactical ballistic missile and some of its submuntions landed on a pair of russian landing ships in port, setting them on fire.
>>62867419You are retarded, but it's OK.ICBM based missiles require so much mass to reach a CSG they are not cost effective even if a CSG has to waste 15 missiles to do it.All the CSG has to do is carry more missiles than you can launch at them, decoys at the ranges you're talking about is farcical, the screening vehicles are going to be able to see the kill vehicles thorough IR for fuck sake.
>>62867416Sounds to me like you’re just making your decoys more and more complex, which A) means more shit to go wrong, and B) means less and less stuff you can stick on the actual useful missile.And it means they’re harder and harder to replace when they get blown up by cruise missiles launched from submarines.
>>62867423Yes well done you dumb retard.I was talking about cost.>>62867429Nah, they were using shorter range MLRS on ships near Odessa.Can't remember where I read it, but the Ukrainians said they used Grad. Reverse image search this. Ignore the reddit post I stole it from.
>>62867433Also, if you’re using an ICBM based missile, that just means it will be indistinguishable from a nuclear weapon, thus caused a nuclear counter strike
>>62867453Especially if you launch them in enough numbers to saturate the defenses of a CBG.One or two launches can be waved off as “oh, we are just launching some satellites on short notice”Two dozen or more? Yeah, that looks like a nuke strike.
>>62867453I've played HAWX before, I shot down the nukes flying towards the CSG with my F16, it's fine, noone will retaliate, kek.My favourite part of games of that era like heatseeker etc were that we could magically tell the difference between a nuclear missile and a cruise missile.
>>62867461You can tell the difference between an ICBM and a cruise missile.You cannot, however, tell the difference between an ICBM carrying a nuke and an ICBM carrying a conventional warhead.
>>62867458They're also extremely visible. You'd see them launch from space pretty early if you have good counter launch sats, they'd be able to track intended landing zones pretty accurately if they're mostly ballistic, alongside time of attack. People always forget the US has missiles that intercept at different altitudes.
>>62866532>>62866596chink cope > vatnik copei bet winnie the pooh strokes his rice dick to these images every night.
>>62867467Or, technically speaking, an ICBM based launch platform carrying a communications satellite.
>>62867467In this case anon, the nukes were in cruise missiles. HAWK was a ride, heatseeker even funnier. Emulate them if you get the chance.
>>62867419Smokescreen counter electro-optic tracking. Unless you really want to send radar waves through the ionosphere for a target track.
>>62867416>Modern interceptors like pac-3 use hit to killPAC-3 is the exception, not the rule. The Standard Missile series uses both radar and contact fuses and are blast fragmentation. > And the decoys will have to have some kind of autopilot so they can be set to follow the HGV original course.>will have to have some kind of autopilot>Will haveSo Once Upon a Time.> An escort cannot place itself between the carrier and the threatIrrelevant. A missile can't hit what it can't see and jamming ensures that the jammer is all it will see.>Datalink + super high speed means that it will be on top of the carrier in no time.Which is the problem. Chaff and jamming is most effective at range and being fast means the missile can't turn quickly without tearing it'self appart.>And smoke screens? Surely you jest.It's really for electro-optical tracking.
Scooby Doo is peak entertainment
>>62867643Do you just make shit up you should work for call of duty black cocks 5
>>62867776No one knows what kind and of dog he is he might be a pitbull. Who are notorious for violence. /K/
>>62866543Yes, and Russian EW completely disabled a Burke and left its crew sobbing for mercy.
>>62866596This is unreal ciws system has 340 degrees of airspace control specifically to beat the Stallion anti shipping sub launched missile
>>62867806Maybe if all your knowledge wasn't based on dangerous waters Christine would have never left you.Code name bitchstine
>>62867802No they didn't the alleogh burke has aegis
>>62867461I do su ,37 jousting with the gun pods
>>62866737My pipes can me back clean I dont burn dope
>>62865995>The US cant shoot down a hypersonic missile moving at Mach 7>Ignore that in the early 2000s the US show down a satellite moving at Mach 27.
>>62866960There was an alleged order by Xi to be ready for the conquest of Taiwan by 2027. So the earliest time window is April 2027, could also be October 2027 ir April 2028.Nobody knows. Good signs that the invasion might happening are the following:>Gigantic stockpiling of canned protein. We're talking ludicrous amounts that wiuld get noticed.>Frequent and brazen incursions into Taiwan's aiz and cheeky manouvers near US bases.>Sudden and very suspicious movements by chinese rocket forces.>Large, very Patriotismus excercise by PLAN to encircle Taiwan and access everyone of fearmongering. >Chink shills flooding everything with disinfo similar prior feb 2022.
>>62866919>Firing Tomahawks from 2,500km away is "too risky"
>>62866249>I’m getting tired of explaining psychicsOk, Nostradamus
>>62867395>FONOPS in event of a major warbruh
>>62867400>>62867399>>62868086Didn't you even watch the entire video? The confrontation started when the USN was conduting Its usual FONOPS in the SCS
>>62868179So then the war starts and what? How is wrecking a carrier with thousands of US servicemen going to help china against US retaliation? Especially since their entire hope for the taiwan resolution and further expansion hinges on US bumbling about and doing nothing while being distracted by internal politics?
>>62867181>You can turn as much as you want but you are not getting further than 5km from predicted course in 10 minutes.The fuck are you talking about? The area a CVN can be in 10 minutes is a 10 kilometer circle from where you saw it. A CVN doing 30kt travels 1km every minute and they can turn 90 degrees in about 1 ship length. What whacked out drugs are you doing?
>>62867772>The Standard Missile series uses both radar and contact fuses and are blast fragmentation.SM-3 is hit-to-kill too. So is THAAD and GBMD for that matter. Only dual-purpose missiles like the SM-6 don't.
>>62868179>start WWIII against the US the way Japan started WWII>except they sunk the entire US battle fleet instead of just one ship>and they still lost
>>62866204If your large saturation attack is made up exclusively of hypersonics then the cost per intercept problem inverts and sending the missiles becomes more expensive than shooting them down.Its an unsustainable strategy because anything less than the absurdly expensive strike package required to achieve saturation leaves you short billions of dollars in high end PGMs and the enemy with a still functional carrier
>>62866321Glide vehicles
>>62866543By some accounts your mum is a classy lady who doesn't put out until at least the third dateAnyone who has actually met her knows better
What happened to this channel anyway?
>>62866719Is this the former fox news reporter?
>>62866866>irreplaceable defensive missiles.USN vessels can reload at sea
>>62868025There is a more immediate sign to watch for which is the construction of one or more mulberry style artificial harboursUntil you see one of those nothing will continue to ever happen but as soon as the chinks start building one shit is about to go down
>>62869042>the construction of one or more mulberry style artificial harboursAnon...
>>62866543Has the world gone absolutely fucking retarded in the last couple years? Since when have literal terrorists been a reliable source of information fucking ever? It's like people believing that israeli snipers are blowing childrens heads off because some retarded palestinian said so. Everyone just believes whatever these goat fuckers say now.
>>62869109Much too small for an amphibious invasion, ESPECIALLY a contested amphibious invasion
>>62869019Not yet. They only got started doing tests this year. Part of the whole Taiwan 2027 thing hinges on this being a proven technique by then.
>>62868179So plan to defeat the Evil West is to start WW3 and immediately unify everyone against them (with no allies on their side btw), and granting the Navy carte blanche to just do retaliate by any and all means. Alright. Spin that wheel.
>>62869128> Since when have literal terrorists been a reliable source of information fucking ever? At the very least, since October 7.I don’t know what it was about that specific event, but since then there’s been a major shift from people being skeptical of Hamas all the way to “Hamas says Israelis are raping babies? Fuck yeah they are! I bet they’re eating them after too!”
why is this board obsessed with chinks?
>>62870227Chink shills are still seething over the Century of Humiliation and are desperate to be taken seriously by their western betters, in spite of their technological and emotional inferiority.
>>62870227for many of us, they're the future enemy.
>>62870227AN EXCERRANT PRAN GENERAR!
>>62867783It's more plausible than an HGV with active decoys.
>>62870453This, the best part is theyll kick shit off and wind up in a second century of humiliation
Go away Chang.>>62870227Literal chinks.
>>62870453They'd actually be in a decent place right now if Mao didn't stab the Nationalists in the back. Capitalism with lots of social safety nets worked out great for most of Europe.
>>62865995The true dark star would decapitate the entire Chinese defensive cabinet at mach 7 before they could issue an order to do anything. No I'm not kidding.
>>62866321>Ballistic MissileAt that point why not put a nuke on it, because that's what everyone is going to assume it is.
Imaging making SpaceX starship into a colossal MIRV with like 500 cruise missiles. Could clear a region's entire navy in a single shot while being launched in Texas.
So if carriers are so vulnerable why are the chinks trying so hard to build them as fast as possible?>>62871775Starship packed to the brim with LRASM is one of the hottest concepts imaginable, but escalation weenies will never accept it because it would look a lot like an ICBM.
>>62871822….or they can just dump a bunch of LRASMs out the back of a plane. A plane would cost around 0.5 million to fly. A Starship launch costs 100 million. Even if Elon’s claim of $10m launches in the future becomes a reality (it won’t) it’ll still be 20x more expensive than flying a damn plane.
>>62869430I strongly suspect it’ll end up not being possible in spite of the Navy sounding optimistic about the project. I bet that the laws of physics involved in hanging a long and heavy container vertically from a crane being tossed around is going to be too much to handle no matter what. It’d be possible but only in pristine conditions.
>>62871822>So if carriers are so vulnerable why are the chinks trying so hard to build them as fast as possible?To protect shipping. To bully poor countries.
>>62871857That's the cost of one F-35 for potentially winning an entire war.
>>62871950If they can win a war with 500 tonnes worth of LSRAMs, they can win the same war with flying two C-5s (285 tonnes each) worth of LSRAMs at 1% of the cost. Is winning the war faster by several hours worth the 100x cost premium? Additionally, Rapid Dragon exists now whereas this Starship Dragon approach is only notional. If they call it “Void Dragon” I can get behind it though.
>>62871969Yeah well say the enemy is intercepting or endangering your C-5s.
i'm surprised torpedoes hitting ships is still a thing. i'd think there would be a lot of ways to stop them, if you know where they are coming from.
>>62866296Great now list the hypersonic weapons capable of sinking a carrier even with a direct hit
>>62866719>Republicans lying about the capabilities of America's enemies to secure more fundingDid you retards learn nothing from Bush and Cheney?
>>62865995In reality, China is going to underestimate America's capabilities, plant their TELAR along the coast, and American submarines are going to use satellite data to take them out with tomahawks before they can launch. China will move their assets around and satellites will approximate their locations, American stealth bombers will go hunting, and take most of them out. That's if they don't act like a bunch of chimpanzees and launch everything they have at Taiwan first. If that happens, certain holes will be found in China's three gorges dam and Beijing will have to decide whether to continue their assault or commit their military to humanitarian aid.
>>62872053See, the trap is that a HGV doesn't have enough room for a warhead so it'll just punch a hole in a Carrier, at best causing a mission kill.
>>62871940Then it should be obvious they don't expect to enter into actual armed conflict with the US because they know we could delete their entire shitbox navy in 24 hours.
>>62872332They don't need their Navy, they can sink a CBG with mainland missiles if it's anywhere remotely near Taiwan.
>>62867399>>62867400>>62868086That's why you sink as much ships during FONOPS, and before war breaks out.
>>62867939Satellites are predictable, hypersonics aren't. They also don't try to hide themselves
>>62869438Missile spam go brrrrrEveryone with a bone to pick with the great Satan is an ally. And America has made plenty of enemies over the years.
>>62872543>That's why you sink as much ships during FONOPS, and before war breaks out.How do you go about that, exactly? Best you can do is kill the incomplete CBG that's doing fonops. What next? Get your shit pushed in and boast about surviving the next 20 years of US occupation in the typical turdie fashion?
>>62872482And russia defeated the entire Ukrainan air force in the first 24 hours with Iskanders.
>>62872556>great SatanDelusional shitskin has no idea why every chinese neighbor sides with US against them.
>>62872482They need their navy to invade Taiwan, but a flight of B21 raiders with Quicksinks can deny that.
>>62872556Are you fucking retarded and never heard of this little thing called the Pacific Ocean? >durr da houthis will shoot bottle rockets from de souze at a CSG dats 8,000km away !!Shut the fuck, you retarded mong. India is literally in a border war with China right now, and Pakistan is a lapdog to America. Who do you fucking think is going to help the Chinese in any way tangible way? Who? Name one. I gotta hear this shit.
>>62865995At the time yes it was, but after all the drone and missile incepts in Middle East recently, especially the Iranian attack, the scenario is not realistic. The USN learned a lot. >>62866556>AEGIS was a pretty important part of missile defense of a CBG as well as locking down contested airspace.AEGIS isn't the top of line anymore. I can't remember the new acronym. Also AEGIS is software not hardware. >>62866698Even if that is true, which the USN doubts, there is not evidence of it being able to hit fighter or missile sized targets. The SM-6 can do that and there is the operational evidence to back it up. Even if its not guided the whole way by the launch platform it can link to other platforms for guidance.
>>62867470mutt cope > all :)
>>62872970100 more years of Chinese humiliation when they fail to take Taiwan and the average Chinese starves to death in the famine and poverty that follows.
>>62872610Palletized QS-ER and strategic denial of the entire strait. China doesn’t have the capacity to land troops and armor on the island and if they did they’d get mowed down. Taiwan is Iwo Jima x 1000
>>62865995no, they will just use the Russians to sink a carrier with a sub in the event of an all out war
>>62871698yes, but when has chinks cared about their own people?
>>62871940Only the west bully poor countries but (You) tried
>>62872594>Chinese eradication of the fallen western hegemonftfy
>>62873109how would that cause poverty?
>>62874143(you)
>>62865995the best Chinese strategy is a Pearl Harbour surprise attack against the nearest carrier group and a yolo rush on Taiwan and then hope US just gives up.any failure to disable all nearby us ships, any delay in taking Taiwan or a second nearby carrier group or literally any reaction from the US and it fails.China doesn't even have time for a 3 day SMO.
>>62869438>and immediately unify everyone against themEurope here. Depends on what your new administration does regarding Ukraine.Call me a pussy or a traitor, I dont give a fuck. The same way "Ukraine is far away and is Europe's problem, why would I pay up taxes and send weapon to them? Pay up, I'll vote Trump", which is a take I can understand and read multiple times here on /k/, then allow me to say exactly the same about Taïwan.
>>62865999>We gonna daaaaaaaaaaaamHonestly this notion is as pathetic as head monke's "nook ook oook I will noook", with the difference being one is chest thumping grognads on the internet and the other is official policy from a chest thumping grognag.
>>62874974the threat that you will defend Taiwan makes it less likely China will actually attack. if you message that you're not going to defend Taiwan then China's calculation changes and they're more willing to attack once they think they have a good chance of victory.Biden messaged weakly about Ukraine in early 2022 as if we weren't going to do much to support Ukraine. and honestly US support to Ukraine has been merely equipment, advice and intel. If Biden had said the US would bomb Russians directly, maybe Putin might have reconsidered, even if it was an empty threat.
>>62874974All we asked for was 2% into your own defense spending>plus 10% for the (big guy)and you threw the world's biggest bitch fit. With frens like these, who needs enemies?
>>62874994We don't need to spend 9000% especially when most of Europe is close enough to 2% anyway, and way more than that for Eastern Europe. Not counting germany, they're a joke. Throw a fit at them, not at the rest of Europe, especially Eastern Europe. Now how about you don't throw a child tantrum and let Europe and Ukraine use their fucking Storm Shadows the way they should be used, instead of blocking it just because they have a shitty little burger component in them?Europe don't need to increase spending. You just need to stop being fucking retards, as throwing 500 of these missiles Ziggers can't do shit about on key energy distribution and factories would cripple them back to the dark ages. No need to spend more.With friends like these, who needs enemies?
>>628749942% is more than fair.But MAGAtards are also too retarded to understand what we get in exchange for protecting these countries with our military. We get an enormous, unfair advantage in dictating economic terms to those countries. It isn't a charity.They have to buy from our MIC, they have to buy lots of other non-military stuff from us because thats how life works. It is not frequently remarked upon, but this defense gives us incredible leverage at shaping policy for these countries. Not the ability to dictate, but still very influential.>b-b-but Europe fined Apple/Google/Microsoft!>w-we're getting cucked!a few things1. GOOD! We should have a small but significant fraction of that consumer protection shit here. Do you know how disgusting and hypocritical it is that the proudly-independent citizens of this great country will bitterly complain about the PATRIOT Act (based) but bend over when Big Tech does 10x worse (cringe)?2. Apple has $166 billion in cash (as in, liquid cash in bank accounts) and makes almost $400 billion a year... I think they'll manage somehow
>>62866719> Chile's new Esmeralda cruiser can destroy all US warships in 20 fortnights> Chile is building a navy specifically dedicated to destroying the United States> In every naval wargame conducted by the Admiralty, the USN loses to Chile> Germany's new Tiger tanks can destroy all US tanks in 20 days> Germany is building an army specifically dedicated to destroying the United States> In every wargame conducted by the Army, the US loses to Germany if it doesn't have 3:1 numerical advantage> Russia's new MiG-25 fighter can destroy all US fighters in 20 hours> Russia is building an airforce specifically dedicated to destroying the United States> In every wargame conducted by the Pentagon, the US loses to Russia--> YOU ARE HERE
>>6286722220% and that’s giving China a LOT of credit.
>>62872092>merely pretending to be retarded>MAGAtard nomineesomebody tell him
>>62874188EU and USA cut off trade and blockade China when they lose the war. Russia no longer capable of delivering fuel. China will have no access to hydropower and most of its power plants will have been destroyed. China loses access to cheap iron and fuel, basedbean and pork imports, and they have 1.4 billion people to feed this time.China is very dependent on foreign trade. Taiwan better be worth it because their economy will collapse over this.
