Chinese CVGs are very impressive

[Hongjian]

The SCS island bases fulfill two missions:

1. Extend China's patrol zones in the SCS during peace time and limited conflicts with other claimants by offering basings and refueling/rearming points for naval and air assets.
2. Becoming 'pickets' during war-time: Every JDAM and Tomahawk striking those bases, every VLS-cell and aircraft hardpoint expended is one less that can threaten Zhoushan Naval Base in Sanya, Hainan Island, as well as other more vital military installations in mainland China. At the same time, those bases are potent of a threat by themselves that ignoring them would threaten any USN rear-line logistics when the mission is to strike mainland targets.

This is basically the rehash of the WWII era Chinese doctrine of 'magnetic warfare', which was used against the Japanese invaders: Fortify certain cities heavily to bait the Japanese to concentrate forces to take them, while China could preserve their own precious mobile forces to strike the Japanese in other parts, whilst ensuring that they face fewer enemy forces as they are now committed to the siege of those 'magnetic cities'.

[DWReese]

I understand your points, and I basically agree with them.

That being said, the basic problem is that the atolls which the courts have ruled belong to these various surrounding nations have lost control of their property. I get it, who really cares? But, China is using them for their own defense purposes, and that sounds like a great idea. I'd do it too if I was China. So, the issue becomes, how important to these other nations are the Chinese having possession of the atolls. If it isn't that important, then just let China have them and be done with it. But, if they collectively see Chinese control of these as being a threat, then a planned covertly-planned air strike from land-based aircraft could put a real hurting on the poor Chinese forces assigned to those bases. A follow-up attack to pretty much destroy them, or at least incapacitate them. How does China react is the big question?

My only point in this is, if these nations, or the US, want to dispute China's possession of these atolls, then they could (and should) do it sooner, rather than later. They continue to get more fortified each day.

In the end, a calculated attack could take them out, but it could also open up a whole new problem in the region that no one is actually wanting. I think that it is all about appearance, either globally or regionally strong or weak. How important is that is the question that each nation has to ask itself?

Doug

[DWReese]

It is very understandable the reason WHY China wants these atolls. If I were in their position, then I would want them, too. They provide added security. And, in some respects, I can see their legitimacy for having them. None of the nations that claim ownership of them have actually done very much (or anything) to develop them. So, it appears that some are merely upset about the potential Chinese presence so close to their own actual boarders.

In the end, the other nations have to gauge their level of being upset. Are they upset enough to fight, or merely upset enough to file a protest? If it isn't something that they are willing to risk war over, then it becomes of display of strength versus weakness.

It may be an disputed area that has significant value to China, or it could be merely a group of shallow rocks that your ship could have hit if it was low tide before they were built up. Is it worth going to war over? Are the rocks a threat to your nation, or are you merely disputing China's use of them?

And, if you do participate in a military solution to remove China from these locations, how will they respond? Will nations actually nuke each other if the atolls that they had developed were already destroyed? Is it worth it?

This is like playing Blind Man's Bluff.

Doug

[DWReese]

It is kind of interesting how we veered off and away from the Chinese CVG missile defense ships. I have replayed that portion of the scenario many times, and it really takes a coordinated attack to get through to the core of the TF.

In fact, I reversed the scenario and sent 20 Chinese long-range bombers (instead of the 6 that the scenario has), each armed with four missiles, to attack the allied TF. The 80 missiles were more than enough to wipe out that TF. But, 80 missiles against the Chinese CVG probably wouldn't do too much other than to deplete their SAM stock.

Their missiles are pretty good.

Doug

[Hongjian]

I cant really remember what sort of missiles the Chinese long range bombers used. But if they were YJ-12 supesonic AShM (basically an enlarged and long range Kh-31), then 80 of those are even enough to penetrate an US CVBG defense and take out at least one or two Burkes.

One has to remember that SM-2s and the other SAMs used by the TF are all not capable of engaging sea-skimmers over the horizon, so they only have that short window of opportunity to engage the YJ-12s when they come into the 20 nautical mile radius, even if they detected them way before. And since they are supersonic, that window is further being reduced.
The only sure way to completely defend against saturated attacks of modern sea-skimming supersonics like the YJ-12, Oniks and Brahmos is to engage them with SM-6 or similiar long range active radar guided SAM that can engage them at their maximum engagement distance - or by sending fighters for anti-missile CAP (that are less reliable, since they may miss the approach or run out of AAMs at the critical moment).

Same problem applies to the Chinese naval force as well, btw. The HQ-9A and B modeled in the game are not active guided and cannot engage sea-skimmers over the horizon (in reality, the HQ-9B is active guided as specs released during past Zhuhai Airshows and Defense Exhibitions have shown). So they are just as vulnerable to a, say, Indian or Russian supersonic AShM attack with mass volume of Brahmos/Oniks missiles. No amount of VLS cells will be of any worth if your missiles can only engage vampires at the last moment.

[SeaQueen]

ORIGINAL: DWReese
What I am talking about is if TODAY, right now,this group of allied nations wanted to vanquish the Chinese from the atolls that that the courts have already said belong to them, then they could coordinate some strike missions and covertly attack them using air units and blow them to smithereens, long BEFORE China could come and help to defend them, or before the atolls could actually do anything to stop the attacks themselves.

Today, it's only a few hours flight to anywhere in the South China Sea for an bomber armed with cruise missiles. They wouldn't fly just one, they'd fly them by the regiment. Even worse, it's only a few minutes of fly out time for a ballistic missile to hit any target in the SCS or in one of the neighboring countries. That means that everything in the South China Sea could be struck on short notice, today. Today, there's several islands, and they're not all close to each other. Woody Island is way up north. Fiery Cross Reef, on the other hand, is hundreds of miles south. It's not like a single attack could quickly wipe them all out simultaneously. They're spread out.

To enter the South China Sea you have to pass through one of several choke points. You could go through the Straits of Malacca, the Luzon Straits, the Sulu Sea, the Java Sea, or the Taiwan Straits. All of those are probably patrolled by submarines or other Chinese naval vessels intent on keeping track of exactly what is entering and leaving the South China Sea. Furthermore they have the area covered by maritime patrol aircraft, UAVs and radars. There are land based fighters and surveillance aircraft as well. It's unlikely you could just sail into the SCS with an expeditionary strike group and some Marines, or maybe a B-2 and just take the islands without being noticed. There's also satellites. They're aware of what's going on, and would take steps to prepare and hopefully deter the kind of aggression you're talking about. Their job is to make sure that it is NOT easy to do what you described. Shortly after the first bomb landed, you could expect the ballistic missiles and bombers (which were already on alert) to fly. Ships and submarines in the area would let loose with their missiles and torpedoes. The whole SCS would turn into a shooting gallery.

All that means that you can't just flow a small, mission specific, strike force into the SCS by itself. You need to also flow the forces in to protect them. It doesn't do you any good to bomb the islands, or land some marines on them if you can't protect the forces to support and sustain them. You don't win if you land the marines, retake the islands, but the amphibs that carried them are sunk because now they're stranded, or the aircraft carriers establishing air superiority above them are sunk leaving them vulnerable to air attack. That means you also need lots of CRUDES, submarines, and land based aircraft including everything from bombers, maritime patrol aircraft and tankers, to cargo aircraft for moving bombs, gas and missiles around. The land based aircraft would also be vulnerable to attack from ballistic missiles and cruise missiles too, so you'd also need to flow in air defenses to protect them.

Mobilizing all that is a major deal. It would probably be very noticeable the Chinese government officials charged with defending their country from foreign aggression. It'd be a huge effort for any nation involved in such a conflict. That in itself might be enough to give the Chinese enough warning to prepare even more. Just getting all the ships ready to fight that battle is enough for them to be concerned, sortie their fleet (including the carrier) and operate at an elevated state of readiness. They might look at the strike force assembling in the SCS and decide to strike first before it's ready to go, and hopefully preempt the attack. By the time all is said and done, it's starting to shape up to be one of the great fleet confrontations in history. The outcome could dictate the path of the 21st century in a way similar to how The Battle of Trafalgar or Midway did. War in the SCS would be fast and terrible, by necessity involving a volume of land and sea based forces working together in a way that is almost beyond living memory. It could actually define our times, in a way that the Spanish Armada defined British power for hundreds of years. It wouldn't be clandestine, or easy. It'd be a major conflict between two near-peer adversaries involving all the latest technologies.

[DWReese]

Thanks for the info.

I was just about to flip it and try the YJ-12s (that is what they were) against an American CVG to see what the results would be.

The Allied TF in the scenario did not have any a/c to help with the defense at the time, so it was just the missiles (observed as you said in the last 20+ miles, or so) and the ship SAMs.

Thanks again.

Doug

[DWReese]

I understand exactly what you are saying, but I might not be making myself clear about what I am saying.

Take our Spratly Island scenario. There are probably six (maybe 7) atolls which are located in the same general area. None of which are very far from Malaysia, Brunei, or the Philippines. All are probably less than 200 miles away.

If, on any given day, someone were to authorize a strike on these seven atolls using a/c from these countries, I believe that they could be armed, launched, and carry out a successful attack that could pretty much destroy most of whatever the Chinese have built on those particular locations without much difficulty.

I'm not taking about any other targets such as Woody Island, or other targets closer to China. I do believe that they could put a severe hurting on these places using just a couple of squadrons of a/c at the most. That is my point. I'm not sure what China's subsequent response would be. Sure, they could launch ballistic missiles and target those countries. But, they doesn't mean that they would. And, even if they did, the atolls would still be completely destroyed, regardless of what happens afterward.

The fact that 3, 4, 5, or 6 of the atolls were completely destroyed is my point. There really isn't much that China could do to stop that. If, on a day of peace, a couple of squadrons were given orders to destroy those atolls, I'm sure that they could do it, and China could not prevent that without advanced knowledge. That is my point. Nothing more, and nothing less. That's why I'm saying that they are as far away as the moon. A squadron of planes taking off low and heading toward the atolls is not enough to send a Chinese CVG, or scramble jets from Woody that could arrive in time to prevent the destruction, if that is what they wanted to do.

Now, if you disagree with that, then I may be wrong, and I'll be glad to admit that. But, I do believe that on any given day, an order could be given and carried out, and those atolls in that specific area would cease to exist before the Chinese could react to prevent it. If I'm wrong about that, then please help me to understand why. What defenses does China have on those atolls that if they were caught unprepared that they could PREVENT their destruction?

Thanks for discussing this with me.

Doug

[Raptorx7_slith]

Those countries don't really have the capability to completely destroy 7 islands in a single strike.

[Anathema]

Take our Spratly Island scenario. There are probably six (maybe 7) atolls which are located in the same general area. None of which are very far from Malaysia, Brunei, or the Philippines. All are probably less than 200 miles away.

If, on any given day, someone were to authorize a strike on these seven atolls using a/c from these countries, I believe that they could be armed, launched, and carry out a successful attack that could pretty much destroy most of whatever the Chinese have built on those particular locations without much difficulty.

ORIGINAL: raptorx7

Those countries don't really have the capability to completely destroy 7 islands in a single strike.

Exactly. Brunei has no fighters or bombers only transport aircraft and helicopters. The Philippines only has 12 Kai FA-50, along with some OV-10 Broncos, A-29 Super Tucanos and SIAI Marchetti S.211s. Malaysia does have 10 Mig-29s, 18 Su-30s, 8 F/A-18s and 13 Hawk 200s, but that is hardly enough to take on China. It is a similar situation with Thailand and Indonesia who each have a similar number of aircraft as Malaysia.

It would suicidal for any of those countries to pick a fight with China, even if they were to work together to wipe out the island bases or invade them they simply don't have the forces to do so and the inevitable retaliation would wipe out their forces, leaving them with no hope of holding the islands in the long run or bringing the conflict to a successful conclusion.

[SeaQueen]

ORIGINAL: DWReese
If I'm wrong about that, then please help me to understand why. What defenses does China have on those atolls that if they were caught unprepared that they could PREVENT their destruction?

I found this map on the internet. It's almost a year old, but I think it's pretty illustrative:

https://csis.carto.com/builder/9c94120f ... f77d/embed

According to this, even without any deployed naval forces, any nation attacking those islands could potentially face an IADS, and land based fighters. That information is old, so they might be able to do that today. The Chinese also patrol that area continuously with surface naval forces and probably submarines (whether they're ready for war or not). The whole point of keeping forces deployed continuously is so that they're never unprepared. The surface naval forces add their SAM coverage to the area and the submarines threaten any naval forces that come near enough to be a threat. If their carrier is at sea they could add even more fighters to the area. All this is under the bubble of land based bomber-launched cruise missiles and ballistic missiles from the mainland. So even if one tried to launch a fast, sneaky attack on those islands, it's unclear how effective it would be, because of the land and naval-based SAMs, along with the land-based fighters. Even if it was successful, they'd suffer terribly as the Chinese took revenge with land based aircraft, ballistic and cruise missiles.

[DWReese]

They don't have to destroy all seven by themselves. Collectively, between the three, they should be able to come up with several squadrons that could eliminate some of them. It doesn't matter how many are "completely" destroyed or how many are incapacitated. My point being that the atolls are isolated and are far enough away from any real type of fixed support that could actually defend them and keep them from being destroyed, whole or in part, before help could arrive. Essentially, they are like being stuck on the moon. Sure, relief could arrive, but it would be days before ships could be there, and it wouldn't stop them from being destroyed.

If destruction (or a portion of it) is actually the Allied goal, then they could accomplish it without before China could stop it. Woody is about 400 miles to the NW, and they are essentially 200 miles to the S and SE. They could be there, and take care of business, and be back before the Woody Island a/c could even get there.

Does anyone know if there are other atolls (islands) and such that have been further developed and actually has a/c that are actually operational at this point as a fighter squadron?

Thanks

Doug

[SeaQueen]

This article, dated from March of last year, suggests that they may have fighters out there right now on Fiery Cross Reef and Subi.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sout ... SKBN16Z005

ORIGINAL: DWReese
Does anyone know if there are other atolls (islands) and such that have been further developed and actually has a/c that are actually operational at this point as a fighter squadron?

[DWReese]

I saw that article when it came out, as well. The funny thing about it is that they have never followed up on it by reporting that any a/c have actually been assigned to the "bases." That's why I was asking about that. The article said that a/c could soon be assigned, but it is almost a year old now, and "we" haven't ever heard about a follow up report makes you wonder.

I'd love to find out. If these a/c have already been assigned, and if the defenses have been upgraded with sophisticated SAMs, then everyone has waited way too long to do anything about this. They are no longer "disputed islands." They are now Chinese islands. Case closed.

What's the old saying, "Possession is nine-tenths of the law."

Doug

[DWReese]

As I said in my other response to your post, if China already has all of these things in place, then there is no longer a question of them being "disputed." These belong to China. Everyone waited way too long to try and stop them. In fact, it looks quite impressive.

If they were to also claim, and enforce, a 12-mile maritime border around each of these atolls/islands, then they could put up a huge barrier to restrict traffic through the area.

It appears to me that China has really done an impressive job of going out, and getting what they wanted, and no one ever stood up to them.

Doug

[SeaQueen]

It's true, building facilities on the islands is aggressive but what's often overlooked is that the Vietnamese have done similar things:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-18/v ... ay/8037248

You could look at it as the Chinese responding to what the Vietnamese were trying to do. All of the nations in the dispute do sneaky and often awful (but mostly non-violent) things to try to bolster their claims. China is unique in the sense that it actually has the military power to violently assert itself. As long as things remain peaceful, and none of the saber rattling turns violent, I can't imagine anything terrible happening. The hope is that the various nations involved will eventually agree to a peaceful resolution of the dispute.

The US and probably other nations (UK, AUS, NZ come to mind) as well, specifically set out to sail and fly through the area in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). UNCLOS says that they can basically sail wherever they want in that area, and that none of those islands constitute the territorial waters of the People's Republic of China. Along the way they record their path on a chart so that later when the PRC representative says, "That place is ours!" a bunch of diplomats from all over the world can pull out a pile of charts and say, "Nope... that's not what you agreed to in UNCLOS, that's not how we've been treating it, and you didn't do anything about it but yell at us on the radio." It's a bit of a legalistic song and dance, where they do something aggressive but non-violent, whatever they're doing gets challenged, and the status quo is preserved, but that's what deterring aggression is about, isn't it? In my mind it's all about preserving the status quo until something hopefully changes (who knows when?) and a peaceful solution can be worked out.

The interesting bit from a game perspective is what happens if deterrence fails, and the PRC for some reason decided it was tired of just yelling at sailors and pilots on the radio and stomping their feet at the UN?

ORIGINAL: DWReese
It appears to me that China has really done an impressive job of going out, and getting what they wanted, and no one ever stood up to them.

[kevinkins]

I wonder how strategically significant the disputed islands are given their low lying position along the ring of fire? Makes me wonder if the Chinese are thinking tactically short term before their investment is ruined by the eventual geologic forces like an earthquake and maybe even a tsunami. Kansai International Airport is sinking under its own weight. Artificial islands are hard to maintain in the best of times unless they are secured on bedrock.

Kevin

[TyeeBanzai]

ORIGINAL: kevinkin

I wonder how strategically significant the disputed islands are given their low lying position along the ring of fire? Makes me wonder if the Chinese are thinking tactically short term before their investment is ruined by the eventual geologic forces like an earthquake and maybe even a tsunami. Kansai International Airport is sinking under its own weight. Artificial islands are hard to maintain in the best of times unless they are secured on bedrock.

Kevin

I would imagine they either have done calculations and believe the islands are sound, or, they didn't think of that at all and a major embarrassment is at hand.

Is there a history of underwater earthquakes and tsunamis in that region specifically though? If it does not occur often, they might be gambling that surrounding nations will cede to China's claims before the islands are destroyed, and thus if they are destroyed after said agreement is reached, there won't be any major consequences.

[DWReese]

The range circles that you provided in that map are pretty easy to see why China would like to have possession of these atolls/islands. They can easily choke off anything coming near the mainland.

The courts have already decided that many of these belong to other nations, but China doesn't recognize/abide by those decisions. Hence, the "I'm the biggest kid around and I can do whatever I want" attitude. Unless you challenge them, they will do whatever they want.

The US plan of diplomacy is a joke. That is kind of like negotiating with a burglar who breaks into your house and steals your jewelry, TV, and stereo. "Okay, I'll let you have the TV and the stereo, just please return the jewelry." That's ridiculous. If the laws say this, then this id what should happen. But, no one wants to challenge China, so they grow bigger and bolder every day.

I can see "why" they want the islands, and I can see that the others are laying claims to them in an effort to just keep China from having them, because they really had no plans for their use anyway. So, I can even see both sides.

It obviously boils down to "who wants it the most", and "what is anyone else going to do to stop it?" Obviously, China wants them the most, and no one is going to do anything to stop them. From your evidence, it looks as if it's a closed book at this point. China wins.

Doug

[kevinkins]

I am sure China knows all about the threat which is why they may want to use the advantages generated by the islands sooner rather than later. 100% conjecture of course. If interested, I will start a separate thread for the geologist out there.

"The risk of large tsunamis in the South China Sea region primarily comes from the Manila trench that lies to the west of Luzon in the Philippines. The Manila trench system is interesting in that it shares many of the characteristics of the source areas that brought on the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake, as well as the Japan trench of the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake. Both disaster events had caught many people by surprise."

http://www.earthobservatory.sg/news/tsu ... ly-thought