via The Diplomat.
For now, though, the upper hand is held by the United States, which has just completed the initial deployment of 24 U.S. Marine Corps Bell-Boeing MV-22B Osprey conventional, or twin tilt rotor aircraft, to Futenma Base in Okinawa. This unique aircraft, by virtue of its twisting rotors and engines at the ends of its wing, can take off like a helicopter, and then cruise at about 280 miles per hour, carrying up to 24 troops or about six tons of cargo to a range sufficient to reach the disputed islands. In a full-out surge, the 24 MV-22Bs at Futenma could potentially put about 500 troops or about 140 tons of weapons and material on the Senkakus or the Sakashimas in about one hour.and this...
The first example, delivered in May, is now undergoing final modifications in Shanghai. At least three more are expected initially, but China may build many more of an indigenous version. Developed by the former Soviet Union to give its Naval Infantry the ability to rapidly invade NATO countries along the Baltic Sea, the Zubr can lift about 500 troops or up to 150 tons of armor, weapons and material up to speeds of 66 miles per hour. With just four Zubr hovercraft, the PLAN could potentially put 2,000 troops or up to 600 tons of weapons and material on the Senkakus in about four to five hours, or it could reach the island of Miyako-jima in about six to seven hours with a much reduced payload.Read the entire article but we're seeing a widely read thought website, essentially laying out the possible moves in a meeting engagement over some disputed islands in the Pacific.
If it actually came to a race between the Osprey and the Bison, getting there first would make all the difference, as without the advantage of surprise, an adequately armed defender could significantly damage incoming hovercraft or helicopters. But the outcome would also depend on the result of intensive air and sea battles around these islands. For now, the superior performance of the U.S. Lockheed-Martin F-22A fifth-generation fighter and the Virginia class nuclear-powered attack submarine provide a margin of superiority that undergirds deterrence, but this could change quickly as the PLA Air Force increases the number of capable fourth-generation fighters supported by AWACS radar aircraft, followed by fifth-generation fighters that could even the odds, especially if China decides to strike first. Growing numbers of PLAN air defense destroyers like the new Type 052D could also help deny air dominance to Japanese and U.S. forces.
Things are warming up and instead of being reassured I'm a bit alarmed.
We are heading into a period where our forces will be at their weakest point in 50 years, China is approaching the apex of its own strength (if reports of slow downs in Chinese manufacturing are to be believed) and only now are people taking the threat seriously.
I wonder if historians will say too little too late when studying the reaction of US leaders to a rising Red Dragon.
Air/Sea battles of this size could rapidly escalate to Regional Nuclear exchange.
ReplyDeleteWarships at sea do not have the restrictions of using nuclear weapons that the Air and Land forces do.
The desire for the first telling blow most likely will make the first day of any Gut Bustin' Navy war go nuke in a Pre-Empt attack as soon as the enemy is in the right size kill box.
The Army plays football, the Navy does boxing.
A TKO don't cut it and when weapons systems and their defensive fires cancel conventional weapons out due to low CEP and being engaged and destroyed too far from the target ships.
Hence, Nuclear weapons with larger CEP and overwhelming Actual KO.
I know I'm an old fart with an opinion.
But tactics practiced in the cold war for exchanges tactical in nature, show possibly neither side scores any hits or one side overwhelms the defenses of the other and they are rendered Mission kill if not K kill.
A draw or both sides become Combat ineffective is NOT the scenario China nor the US governments want.
The first Fleet that senses defeat looming will wish to inflict a KO punch.
Sadly those scattered islands may end up resembling Bikini Atoll and be completely useless for the next thousand years.
There is a reason for this narrative on WMD and chemical weapons use.
I find I ain't skeert but am stirred, but not shook.
There are competing claims to the Senkakus -- much closer to China (Taiwan) than to Japan -- by Japan, China, and Taiwan. The islands were annexed by Japan in 1895 in the first Sino-Japanese War, and China claims historic ownership. China was cut out of post-WWII decisions. China claims that the restoration of the Senkakus to Japan violated the Potsdam Declaration which said that Japan should retain no overseas territories.
ReplyDeleteThe US has long taken the view that the United States takes no position on territorial disputes, notwithstanding the fact that the United States is bound to protect “territories under the Administration of Japan.”
This position changed earlier this year in what Japanese commentators dubbed outgoing SecState Hillary Clinton's “parting gift” to the Abe government. This was her statement at a joint news conference at the State Department following talks with Japan’s foreign minister, Kishida Fumio, on January 18 that the United States “opposes” any actions that would undermine Japanese administrative control of the Senkaku Islands.
Clinton’s statement was taken by both Japan and China as a sharp change–a “pivot” toward Japan–in the U.S. position on the Japan-China dispute. China was not happy with it. There are other island disputes between Japan and its neighbors. Japan is understandably not popular in its own neighborhood and so it needs the US as an ally.
Would the US go to war with China over some disputed islands? A war that would alienate Taiwan and a war that it couldn't possibly win?
It's according to the POTUS position in the polls, what other scandals are awaiting exposure and past scandals heat up.
DeleteObama does not wish for a war with China, I do not believe China wishes for war just those islands.
If things in the states go tits up for Barack he might be more likely to gin up at least a credible war scare.
Hill'ry was cashing checks with her lips, her arse could not cover, again.
So say the ospreys land troops there first, they can resist the ChiComs' landing but those Bison things are fast, well armed themselves and can carry 2 tanks(150 tons) worth of weight each, and the Chinese won't just bring one of them. What can an Osprey carry that can hurt it?
ReplyDeleteA Well motivated United States Marine and a Radio.
DeleteA team leader W/thump gun, Auto rifleman, assistance auto rifleman, and a rifleman and a good Gunny.
Call down everything from surrender leaflets to an Atom bomb.
Well right, talking about various types of fire support is another story, but the picture I got from reading the article was that the question was what each platform could bring right to the fight from the nearest bases. If this Island battle is going on then it seems at least possible that the air force and Navy would be busy for a while and the Grunts might be on their own for a while. I'm sure it can carry mortar teams but it can't sling load a cannon as far as I know and the Zubr is likely carrying cannon and MLRS type weapons. I'm not doubting the Marines themselves at all but if we are wargaming/planning for these scenarios, we need a better answer to the question than just "Guts"
DeleteGive them a dedicated JaBo such as an A-10 armor, ability and cannon/missile and bombs.
DeleteNow turn an Osprey into that dedicated striker.
Make An Osprey into a gunship.
It will bring itself to the fight.
Yet this is what every Marine ground element would bring Fire team, Fire team (-) can carry MANPADS, Anti armor/mechanized ATGM or RR, Mortars Big ones too! attached from weapons Bn and RLT Enough Ospreys can bring to the fight an entire Ground force of a BLT.
An Osprey could even be rendered Nuclear capable and drop a nuke.
Anything else would be sling loaded. Vehicles, arty, howitzers and such.
GUTS? That's what Gunny is for.
It seems Japan's claim resembles the same claim the US has to Spanish land taken in war as well as Mexican land.
ReplyDeleteOr the British claim prior to 1776 of the original thirteen United States.
Geologically the Islands are a part of the Chinese and Asian continental shelf hence China.
Mostly uninhabited the indigenous peoples wishes are moot.
China had first claim, Japan since 1895 until the end of the Pacific war. The US took over as trust then returned the area to control of Japan.
I'd say this is a problem for the UN, Japan, China and John Forbes Kerry (A Nam Vet I bet ya didn't know that!) why should it concern the rest of us?
Well, John Kerry is involved.
Japan favors the "exercised sovereignty" argument with the Senkakus, but that complicates Japan's claims to the Dokdo/Takeshima islands currently occupied by Koreans. Also Japan would dearly like to get back the four Kurile islands on the southern end of an archipelago stretching between the Kamchatka Peninsula and Hokkaido, which are now occupied by Russia as heir to the Soviet Union's spoils of war.
DeleteAlas what of the Neanderthal, who claimed much of Europe and beyond until the Cro-Magnon came and exercised control of the area taking the Neanderthals place.
DeleteThe China claim goes back to the 14th century when the uninhabited islands were open and allowed herbs being harvested. That's 600 years ago, archaic history now, The Japanese took over in 1895 and that also is 118 years ago.
Somewhere along old claims should be given a life span under international and national laws.
Turn the area into a world park.
Japan has everything it needs to guard its islands. It has plenty of fast jets for air cap, it has P-3 patrol planes that can fire, Soryu subs for sinking hovercraft and amphib vessings, Aegis destroyers, Western Infantry Regiment for fortifying islands.
ReplyDeleteWhat it needs is training in defending/re-taking islands.
I doubt we'd see the Chinese just land a battalion of troops out of the blue. They'd probably have some nationalist "activists" land on the islands, then when the Japanese Coast guard shows up to dislodge them, then China plays up the 'defending our citizens' card and then responds.
It's why the Japanese Navy and Coast Guard need to set up regular, persistent patrols with P3 Orion, Mitsubishi Flying Boats, F15s, Patrol Boats and permanently assigned landing parties aboard Navy vessels that can deploy via helicopters to respond to an attempted landing. It should probably purchase some drones with enough endurance to persistently watch approaches to the island.
Start training their local police how to respond to attacks, perhaps recruiting reserve forces in the area to defend themselves with MANPADS and ATGWs.
SecDef Panetta: Ospreys Key to Asia-Pacific Operations
ReplyDeleteThe Osprey is key to the department’s plans for the Asia-Pacific region, Panetta said during his Pentagon briefing with Japanese Defense Minister Satoshi Morimoto. “It will enable Marines to fly faster and farther from Okinawa to remote islands in Japan. This is a one-of-a-kind platform.” -- Aug 3, 2012
http://www.defense.gov//News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=117403
Why people think that the Abe administration want to create a japanese marines corps and buy V-22 for? So we japanese don't have to ask the Whitehouse that the USMC to do it for us. We can figth the PLAN east and south fleets without help, but our current amphibious assault capabilities are rather pathetic. We are working on that, just give us some time.
ReplyDeleteAlso Taiwan? are the taiwanese going to be safer from a communist invasion if the Senkakus fall under the control of the PLA and becoming an obstacle for any US-Japan help from Okinawa?
"What can an Osprey carry that can hurt it? "
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M777_howitzer
I'm sorry but a Zubr can be as armoured as you like, its not armoured to take artillery fire, and its going to be still for at least 3 minutes to give 500 infantrymen time to pour off. A direct hit is going to cause massive losses to any poor bugger inside it, and at 5 rounds a minute.....
Any half competent artilleryman is going to have a field day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin (in quantity)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M136_AT4 (in quantity)
If we limit ourselves to 1 Osprey per 1 Zubr, thats still 32 misiles, or rockets, hitting in a first strike, quickly followed by 32 more (two per man)
Again, the Zubr is armoured, but its defences are for shooting down helicopters, not anti tank rockets. Once those engines get hit, its weapons get hit, its going to burn, fast, and as the rear is engulfed in flames, as the top explodes, as 500 panicked infantrymen charge out of that ting boarding ramp, the defenders are going to put 20 plus rockets in to that door ramp, and the men trying to run out.
Assaulting a defended beach is suicide with anything but extreme force.
On D Day.
At *JUST* Juno beach, the allies fired 5500 5" rockets and beached three battleships and eleven destroyers for fire support.
So the Osprey Can sling a howitzer? Ok I'm impressed,I didn't know that. It never occered to me that it would be able to do so! I couldn't picture how that would work. I wouldn't think it could fly in cruise configuration with any sort of sling load dangling along behind/below it! Being able to land a couple of guns with a couple platoons or a company to secure them Would certainly go a long way to keeping that big boat respectful. I was concerned before because with out friendly artillery present the zubr can carry multiple launch artillery rocket boxes and (again if there wasn't any other support) standoff and provide a bit of shore bombardment for itself beyond the range of AT weapons. Its pretty fast and can use that mobility to land troops at multiple points all over the island to out maneuver the ground force, though I think with even just mortars to call on it might have trouble reaching land more than the initial one time. My final concern was even if they were only fresh conscripts( which they won't likely be) 500 is still a lot more than Ospreys carry in our little "race to the island" scenario here.
ReplyDeleteit doesn't matter.
Deletefirst the Osprey can sling load a M777. it can go about 50 miles with it, but it can do it. second do you think that the Chinese are going to send their ZUBR landing craft to take an island without massive air support? they can launch from the mainland and have continuous overhead coverage.
the idea that a company plus of US Marines could hold out against that type of firepower is insane.
we would have to commit almost everything we have in the pacific, put the 3rd Marine Division on alert and get them moving to the area. hope the US Army 82nd and 25th ID are doing the same and beg sea lift command to shake their ships apart going 20 plus knots to the area.
i haven't even started to talk about aircraft carriers, LHDs, LPDs and Japanese assistance.
this baby meeting engagment would either turn into a blood bath or WW3 with little notice.
Josh
DeleteTo be honest, I'm not sure if can carry the bigger howitzer, it can carry the weight, but volume may be an issue, I doubt it could sling it all the way. Theres always the 105 light gun.
It was mostly an out of the box idea
The Zubr could be heavily modifed a a proper littoral combat ship, with a dozen CIWSs and a few dozen rocket batteries, and provide fire support for others landing, but it currently doesnt exist.
Sol
True, but it ceases to be a meeting engagement at that point, the US marines on the ground can equally have fighter cover if we want, both side could just take turns MOABing the island until its underwater
My point was more that theres no way to easily remove a small well equipped force from a small island
If the US gets there first, either China starts world war three, or goes home.
A company of Marines with all it's assets could hold out for a long time.
ReplyDeleteUnless it's a Company with less than it's own organic weapons.
Range to target would be short but once inside that kill box anything could happen.
No One lands a Company of Marines and doesn't allocate Air cover and missile support from the LPH, LSD, LPD and DDG's.The approaches to the beaches would be mined as will the beaches and the sea wall.
Siting an Unsupported Marine company is not standard procedure.
Times have change fer shure but still the defense of Wake Island is an example of Fleet and Amphibious landings against Marines. As is the Marine Barracks FUBAR in Beirut.
The scenario playbook was, What can an Osprey bring with it to stop a Zubr.
A Company of Marines with a weapons section, an arty tube with crew, a radio and compass,map GPS and a known location and air support on call or on station per SOP.
I recall a situation in a long gone battle in Iraq maybe Fallujah.
Marine Force RECON 24 men infiltrated and with out organic weapons used a radio and disrupted the entire enemy attack.
This is what an Osprey can bring that can stop a Zubr attack formation.
The Battle of Fallujah, Iraq is destined to go down in Marine Corps history. Marine Recruits will soon be learning about this battle along with the other historic battles of the Corps. The battle began with an aerial bombardment on November 8, 2004. A Force Recon team was inside the city limits calling targets and providing R&S for the assault force.
Read more: http://sofrep.com/1851/force-recon-in-the-battle-of-fallujah/#ixzz2fdfk2te3
Only an insane person would put place an unsupported Unit in place to defend against this Zubr attack.
Of course a man packed suitcase nuke emplaced would do a bang up job on any landing force, delivered by Marines aboard an Osprey to stop Zubr.
But what do I know, an old guy who swabbed decks and cleaned urinals and shitters as a permanent head orderly Marine for four years, I'm not a military expert I just have an opinion, not looking for a fuss.