Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sukhoi-30mki

I wonder if they don’t actually mean target drones. We don’t even have unmanned fighters in use.


3 posted on 01/08/2013 1:21:41 AM PST by Mr. Blond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Mr. Blond

I think these are basically cruise missles.


4 posted on 01/08/2013 1:28:55 AM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Blond
No, not target drones. Basically jury-rigged UCAVs - and I have to say it is a remarkably intelligent idea. Remarkably. Every time I've raised the issue of the extreme vulnerability of US carrier groups in the S.China Sea (and I do not mean vulnerability to the so called 'carrier killer- ballistic missile, which is really not that much of a threat and based on something the Soviets had in the late 70s, but rather to more conventional cruise missile attacks) I always get met with the ubiquitous 'but we have AEGIS capability, with Standard missiles present to make short work of any vampires coming in.'

Well, here is the answer to the AEGIS/Standard combination. Simply have a large number of cheap airframes vectoring in on the ships. Now, the defending position is simple - either a) shoot down the oncoming targets, or b) do nothing. For the first option, it will probably take two missiles fired per target based on past AEGIS engagements (e.g. the shooting of the Iranian airliner by the USS Vincennes). That means that each incoming target will soak two missiles. For the second option, doing nothing, there is the danger that the plane will do damage to the ship.

How does this play into Chinese strategy?

Well, the first wave would be comprised of these drones ...which would primarily be meant to soak in any and all available missiles (be they from ships or planes). A secondary objective would be to do actual damage, but the main goal is to act as a missile sieve. Once that is done, the second wave of incoming cruise missiles from bombers (the Chinese are getting more TU-22M bombers, a design that would be obsolete were it not for the fact that it carries supersonic cruise missiles) and aircraft, as well as from D-E submarines. That is the real threat, and in the crazy milieu brought about by the drones and partially depleted missile magazines, there is a great chance the second/third saturation wave will be successful.

Does this mean sunk ships? Not necessarily, although that could happen to an Arleigh Burke. But it will most probably mean some level of mobility kill looking at what happened to the USS Cole, and will most definitely mean a capability kill due to damage to sensors.

These are not target drones. They are a cheap way of ensuring that some of the bite from USN AEGIS capability is muted a tad, and hopefully (to the Chinese) muted sufficiently to ensure a higher success probability against USN assets in the area.

I would say that as it stands right now, the only US tactical assets that can operate with total impunity in the S.China Sea are the Virginia Class SSNs and the Ohio-based cruise-missile carrying SSGNs. Even the F-22 Raptor cannot operate in the area (not because it would be shot down, but because, based on a study by RAND, there would be so many targets that after the Raptor's finished all their missiles, there would be enough Chinese Sukhois left to shoot down the refueling planes, and the Raptors would run out of fuel eventually and crash in the sea).

16 posted on 01/10/2013 1:46:39 AM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson