So with that cleared up.
Now enter the J-20's...or I should say the J-20's will be leading the fight against our Carrier Battle Group in this scenario.
A two ship formation of J-20's flew ahead of the main force of SU-27 fighters to locate and provide targeting information. The Chinese are nothing but thorough. The J-20's on the surveillance mission are really redundant. They have purposefully placed their space station in orbit to remain over the Pacific ocean. Chinese Astronauts wear two hats. Scientist and Military Intel Specialist. They have been keeping tabs on the US carrier since it left Pearl Harbor. Additionally they have a constellation of spy sats that are equipped with one mission in mind. Maritime surveillance.
The J-20's are the vanguard of a group of 40 others that are headed to the CBG.
The mission.
Destroy the Escorts.
The good news for the Chinese and the bad news for our guys is this. The Chinese have been eating our lunch for years. Not only do they have a network of spies inside both our defense industry and government but they have also penetrated our computer systems.
Because of this the Chinese have improved the coatings on the J-20. When we developed stealth pods to carry missiles externally on the F-35 and F-22, the Chinese simply helped themselves to the information that we labored to produce.
The J-20 fly high and fast. They've been vectored by sats and the space station. Once they've located the prey they relay that information to the follow on strikers.
The strike J-20's benefiting from the improvements follow the same flight path. The Burke's pick up intermittent reflections and fighters are scrambled just in case.
Now that the CBG has been located the Recon J-20's pull back. Its up to the strikers now. They're coming head on to the Burke's providing cover and since the J-20's frontal cross section is where this airplane is stealthiest they never pick them up.
The J-20's launch at distance...mere minutes before the other parts of the strike package let off.
The Burke's are good...but the Chinese only have to be lucky.
This was a heavy escort group. It had 10 Burke's assigned to the CBG.
After the J-20's are finished only 5 remain. The opening salvo of this mythical conflict cost the US 1500 sailors dead, 900 wounded and recovered and 400 missing.
May I ask, where the heck is the CAP? I have to admit this looks good on paper, but the CAP would take down either a few J-20s or a few vampires, this scenario leaves that variable out entirely.
ReplyDeleteall will be answered in due time...be patient but don't get heated or assume that i've gone over to the dark side because i'm trying to illustrate a point.
ReplyDeleteRoger that, so does that mean that you will post on how to defend against this scenario in the near future?
DeleteSolomon is not capable of offering solutions. Well, except for women that get a bit too uppity around him. He knows how to put them in their place.
DeleteAs many a police officer can attest, no doubt.
http://navy-matters.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/whats-old-is-new-again.html
ReplyDeleteSomething of interest to you Sol (right up until the last paragraph where you'll probably get annoyed) but the article makes a good point.
Minor point. A space station with an orbit that remains over one spot is "geostationary" which would put it around 22000 miles up and pretty useless for surveillance. Substitute a constellation of ocean surveillance sats and you're cleared to proceed with the thought experiment. (Thought I should bring it up before some smart*** did)
ReplyDeleteI have been enjoying this look at the extent of the underestimation of PRC capabilities, but giving the Chinese every possible weapon? While I understand the need to plan for the worst case scenario, I think we can all agree that the Chinese can win if they get every advantage possible while the US remains at its current capabilities.
ReplyDeletethe US is about to strike back....be patient...
ReplyDeleteSo you're going to fly a non-stealthy F-35 against a stealthy J-20 in BVR? Isn't the whole premise of the F-35 that, in that situation, the non-stealthy plane is toast?
ReplyDeletei think what was true after Pearl would be the same here, a sleeping giant that will be unstoppable, our nation will bleed at times, but we are too strong to die.
ReplyDeletethe difference between a war with china & pearl harbour.
Delete1> china is a 800 pound gorilla with enough manpower & resources to hang in their in a fight, japan was also a 800 pound gorilla but without the same manpower & resources.
2> remember korea, it wasn't the koreans that stopped us
3> china is way bigger than any other enemy we would ever fight, check out point 1 again
4> china doesn't have to win they just have to bleed us, till we give up, the same thing as a win in their eyes.
IN 1941 the US was willing to invade the Japanese Home Islands if need be as well as sacrifice blood and treasure. Do our current generations of citizens have the willingness to sacrifice? Like darren1678 said, China just has to make it so costly that we won't want to continue the war.
DeleteWe need to develop an America version of Yakhont supersonic cruise missile to replace the Tomahawk.
We need to develop cruise missiles that have sub-munitions that can be independently targeted and launched during the cruise missiles flight. A cruise missile with ELINT detection to target SAM and ballistic missile batteries would be useful
We need supersonic anti-ship missiles (the Japanese and the Taiwanese already have them)
We need an AAM with more range than the AMRAAM for CAP missions
We need faster drones that can detect and target independently should they lose contact with their remote pilots.
AND we need a Navy that can turn out ships better armed, less expensive than the LCS.
No, the F-35/AIM-97 combo was for Grim901's reference to China getting Backfire bombers.
ReplyDeleteFor the J-20, a -120D is just fine.
@Spudman. AAM ESSM or AIM-120 with 10" motor (there are two different designs of that one), or the Westinghouse AAM.
ReplyDeleteFor an MRAAM, the GD/Westinghouse AIM-152 AAAM was my favorite too.
ReplyDelete@ Paralus: Yeah we need all that stuff but unfortunately we've forgotten how to build it and the geniuses in D.C. are too stupid to see the ramifications.
ReplyDeleteI'm new to your blog so let me start by saying that I enjoy your entries immensely! It's good to see out-of-the-box thinking.
ReplyDeleteI understand that your scenario isn't an attempt to present a realistic assessement but, rather, a warning of the consequences of the spending and tech development trends currently taking place in China and the US. Nevertheless, a couple of points stand out that weren't accounted for.
The obvious consensus among every serious analysis I've read is that both sides will lose their space based surveillance and GPS satellites on day one of a conflict. We have, and have demonstrated, the capability to destroy satellites from Navy ships and Air Force planes. We may have other methods as well. So, the one-sided depiction of Chinese guidance from space doesn't even account for today's US anti-space capabilities. Consider, further, what the loss of GPS will mean to the Chinese (and us!). Planes, ships, and missile guidance packages will have no precise locating/targeting data.
The US is currently finding that stealth is becoming easier to detect than we had hoped. Consider the stealth plane that was shot down in the Serbian conflict by an old Soviet system. The US is working on indirect stealth detection now (detection using not just direct radar reflection but indirect detection from multiple sources such as stray radio waves and whatnot - it's just a signal processing exercise). Combine that with the E-2 Hawkeyes and a wartime CAP that would operate hundreds of miles from the carrier and the odds of detection go way up. UAVs operating hundreds of miles out would provide additional detection opportunities. Of course, if you want to postulate a "magic" stealth capability that simply can't be detected then, sure, a carrier would be an automatic kill.
Finally, a carrier entering enemy waters without support would be a foolish thing to do. The Chinese airbases are well known. A carrier would be part of a multi-faceted operation with Air Force and SSGN sub strikes devoted to disrupting Chinese efforts.
As I said, your point about the relative development trends is well taken but your scenario fails to account for even today's US capabilities. Still, I enjoyed the read and you made your point!
Well done!
ComNavOps
Navy-Matters Blog