Only The F-35B + V-22 can keep kadena Open!

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

jessmo111

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2015, 02:49

Unread post29 May 2016, 06:17

Recent revelations about Chinese advances in missile tech, are really alarming!
It Must be understood, that ballistic missiles alone wont shut down the base. any smart attacker
will likely follow up the attack with Fighters or long range bombers. The whole Idea is to stop the U.S. from launching sorties, and thereby gain air superiority in the SSC region.

"This situation got serious in 2014 when China revealed (apparently by accident) the existence of the DF-26 IRBM (Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile.) This one had a range of 3,500 kilometers and was based on the earlier DF-21. There had been reports of such a missile since 2007 and the DF-26C appears to have entered service sometime after 2010. The DF-26C is notable because it has the range to hit American military bases on the Central Pacific island of Guam. Armed with a maneuverable conventional warhead a DF-26 could take out key American military installations on Guam if enough of them were used at the same time. That would overwhelm existing American anti-missile systems there. ."

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/hticbm ... 60528.aspx

Its My humble opinion, that Guam will be saturated with ballistic missiles, in any future conflict with China! I think the following should happen.

1. The USAF should team with the Marines, and buy several squadrons of F-35Bs specifically for the defense of Guam and Kadena.

2. The USAF and Marines should train with dispersal tactics TOGETHER.

3. Fresh Super shelters should be built on Guam, and Kadena.

4. The AF should purchase the roll on roll off refueling kits for V-22s and base them on Guam.

5. The Divert bases on Tinian should be beefed up. maybe some land reclaimed, and new shelters built.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... hina-15316

Would 30 or More F-35Bs be enough to keep a continuous CAP over Guam while AFs are being repaired?
Can the V-22 provide enough tanking support?
discuss
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post29 May 2016, 08:16

Guam has THAAD so ballistic missiles would be a toss up on effectiveness. At any rate a ballistic missile would be a huge deal for china to use, conventional or not, the US looks at pretty much any Ballistic missile as a nuclear threat and responds in accordance with that, unless something has changed.
Offline

hurricaneditka

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2015, 04:42

Unread post29 May 2016, 08:55

geforcerfx wrote:... the US looks at pretty much any Ballistic missile as a nuclear threat and responds in accordance with that, unless something has changed.

I don't think that's true at all. North Korea semi-routinely launches missiles as an act of provocation, and we don't respond at all, at least not militarily, and especially don't respond as if we sincerely believe it's a nuclear weapon. At least one of their launches even flew over Japanese territory. We shrugged and went on with life.
Offline

jessmo111

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2015, 02:49

Unread post29 May 2016, 10:23

At times I wish we had a giant oil tanker sized ship, that was covered in vertical launchers. You could stuff it with hundreds of SM-3, SM-6. Or a defense with the small foot print, and cheapness of iron dome, but the ability to engage these ballistic missiles.
Offline

bigjku

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 679
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2012, 21:00

Unread post29 May 2016, 12:44

jessmo111 wrote:At times I wish we had a giant oil tanker sized ship, that was covered in vertical launchers. You could stuff it with hundreds of SM-3, SM-6. Or a defense with the small foot print, and cheapness of iron dome, but the ability to engage these ballistic missiles.


I wish I had a unicorn and an invisible flying car.

The targets aren't cheap and neither are the defending missiles. There are legit concerns about the bases in Japan. I think firing such weapons at Guam is a different ballgame though. That is us territory. You can hardly blast off a few dozen ballistic weapons at us territory and then complain if the us starts unloading with its own weapons on your territory. And the us can deliver a lot more weapons for a lot longer than China can.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7690
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post29 May 2016, 12:53

EMRG and DEW are envisioned to reverse the cost equation in favor of the defense.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3282
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post29 May 2016, 14:19

jessmo111 wrote:At times I wish we had a giant oil tanker sized ship, that was covered in vertical launchers. You could stuff it with hundreds of SM-3, SM-6. Or a defense with the small foot print, and cheapness of iron dome, but the ability to engage these ballistic missiles.

The "Arsenal Ship" idea has been around for a long time, but never acted on because there simply aren't that many weapons sitting around waiting to be loaded on a ship. You get to a point where the cost of the weapons themselves becomes the dominant factor, and putting that many on a ship makes it a single point of failure. The trend is toward "swarm" strategies and firepower distributed around the fleet in order to make it robust against losses.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1205
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post29 May 2016, 15:08

hurricaneditka wrote:
geforcerfx wrote:... the US looks at pretty much any Ballistic missile as a nuclear threat and responds in accordance with that, unless something has changed.

I don't think that's true at all. North Korea semi-routinely launches missiles as an act of provocation, and we don't respond at all, at least not militarily, and especially don't respond as if we sincerely believe it's a nuclear weapon. At least one of their launches even flew over Japanese territory. We shrugged and went on with life.


I'm sorry but if Chinese bloggers are imagining that China can launch a "swarm of ballistic missiles" at US territory, without the very real possibility of Beijing rising to the sky in a mushroom cloud, along with the blogger's basement in Shanghai, some one is smoking something. The only reason it wouldn't happen is if calculations showed that conventional weapons could accomplish the same thing.

This fantasy of China using "swarms" of weapons, without a heavy counter attack on Chinese home territory is hilarious. The B-2 counter attack alone, launched out of Missouri,after having breakfast, would put an end to "swarms of ballistic missiles" threat. There is a reason the Chinese use "fishing boats" and "Coast Guard" ships, and Russians use "little green men." Swarms of missiles doesn't quite fit the model, and gets one's hands slapped all the way up to the elbow. These are fantasy scenarios.

MHO
BP
Offline

les_paul59

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 330
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2016, 05:57

Unread post29 May 2016, 15:21

Blind Pilot is right, china knows that any act against U.S. territory will be met with a response of overwhelming proportion.
Last edited by les_paul59 on 30 May 2016, 01:33, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1205
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post29 May 2016, 15:22

blindpilot wrote:... Swarms of missiles doesn't quite fit the model, and gets one's hands slapped all the way up to the elbow. These are fantasy scenarios.

MHO
BP


It is the threat of capability, and discouraging of show of force in a conflict that has meaning. Actual unloading of the magazines is another thing all together.

So does the US sail a CTF into harms way (South China Sea) to make a point. Self evidently it does, since they just did. If the Chinese want to send something other than a few frigates to challenge that, we end up with escalation. At some point a "tsunami" undoes all the dredging and island making. These "islands" are easier to "sink" than a ship is.

Assertion by shoving ones chest out only works until you get a fist in the face. So one should be prepared for that reality.

BP
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2582
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post29 May 2016, 20:55

blindpilot wrote:
blindpilot wrote:... Swarms of missiles doesn't quite fit the model, and gets one's hands slapped all the way up to the elbow. These are fantasy scenarios.

MHO
BP


It is the threat of capability, and discouraging of show of force in a conflict that has meaning. Actual unloading of the magazines is another thing all together.

So does the US sail a CTF into harms way (South China Sea) to make a point. Self evidently it does, since they just did. If the Chinese want to send something other than a few frigates to challenge that, we end up with escalation. At some point a "tsunami" undoes all the dredging and island making. These "islands" are easier to "sink" than a ship is.

Assertion by shoving ones chest out only works until you get a fist in the face. So one should be prepared for that reality.

BP


x2
Offline

jessmo111

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2015, 02:49

Unread post29 May 2016, 21:20

bigjku wrote:
jessmo111 wrote:At times I wish we had a giant oil tanker sized ship, that was covered in vertical launchers. You could stuff it with hundreds of SM-3, SM-6. Or a defense with the small foot print, and cheapness of iron dome, but the ability to engage these ballistic missiles.


I wish I had a unicorn and an invisible flying car.

The targets aren't cheap and neither are the defending missiles. There are legit concerns about the bases in Japan. I think firing such weapons at Guam is a different ballgame though. That is us territory. You can hardly blast off a few dozen ballistic weapons at us territory and then complain if the us starts unloading with its own weapons on your territory. And the us can deliver a lot more weapons for a lot longer than China can.


Arsenal ship disagrees with you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenal_ship?wprov=sfla1
Attachments
2016-05-29-13-18-04--2048755272.jpg
2016-05-29-13-17-59--1240899054.jpg
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2582
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post29 May 2016, 22:08

"Arsenal ship"??

Internet vaporware.
Offline

jessmo111

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2015, 02:49

Unread post29 May 2016, 22:36

les_paul59 wrote:Blind Pilot is right, china knows that any act against U.S. territory will be meant with a response of overwhelming proportion.


You are correct. Just the response from Diego Garcia, and CONUS alone would be devastating.
10x B-2s carrying 150 SDB each hit 1500 aim points on the 1st day. Then the OHIOS, B-1s with Jassm, B-52s with ALCMs show up.
The United states could very well hit 2000 targets a day for weeks. The only thing that would stop us is running out of smart weapons. And notice we haven't even mentioned the 7th fleet. Just bombers and subs.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1205
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post29 May 2016, 23:18

My main point is that swarming saturation attacks of ballistic missiles in order to kill one Air Craft Carrier/Air Base or create area denial .... um .... is not a strategy. Now if you can sneak some little green men in on a fishing boat and get disproportionate risk-costs, then that might be considered. But I wouldn't, for example launch "swarms of ballistic missiles" at China or Russia just to see how they react. That is sort of what M.A.D. is about. Area denial with ballistic (or even cruise) missile swarms is a non starter of desperate origin, and unlikely to ever find practical use.

BP
Next

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: knowan, swiss and 19 guests

cron