China's Air Force Goes Underground, or How One Small Bomb Can Knock Out China's Air Force.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Wrabbit,

I remember reading a great article on this somewhere. It might have been on ATS. The article included a PDF detailing a China/US nuclear response.

What I found very interesting is that this PDF stated that the US Nuclear subs in the Pacific were likely to target the Chinese nuclear bunkers during a strike. However, the Chinese were likely to target US cities with their nuclear strike. I think it might have been a RAND pdf but I'm not sure about that. If you ever find the pdf document please let me know!
edit on 4-8-2012 by METACOMET because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
www.ausairpower.net... older link with a wealth of information on the topic at hand

In strategic terms, the PLA's underground airbase infrastructure provides a capability to deny at this time even the United States the opportunity to inflict massive early attrition upon the PLA's fleet of combat aircraft, while these are on the ground. This would force any opponent, including the United States, into a protracted aerial war of attrition, before decisive losses could be inflicted upon the PLA combat aircraft fleet. The inherent survivability of the PLA's impressive underground airbase infrastructure has not been a major consideration in the ongoing debate in the United States on the utility, and indeed intended design, of the replacement heavy bomber aircraft. If the defeat of the PLA's underground airbase infrastructure is part of the intended role of this future aircraft, then this aircraft will need to combine the survivability needed to repeatedly penetrate what is becoming the most capable Integrated Air Defence System in existence, with the ability to deliver heavy “earthquake bombs”. Anything less will result in unsustainable combat attrition.


pretty interesting read as well as information on chinese fighters as well as details in the annex section of the link that were very informative on the construction of these bunkers



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Could the earthquake bomb or seismic bomb close the opening of this bunker?

Or could the US use a nuke bunker buster?

Would ether have the power to seal the opening or collapse the whole thing?

Or will they use the rods of god on these?
edit on 4-8-2012 by grayghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
LMAO!! Stupid ass comment. Umm the roads can be repaired within hours? Dont you think if the tunnel entrances are collapsed and entrance roads bombed that a freaking pavement crew is on stand by while bombers are flying around over head? Seriously? We arent talking about broken asphalt but craters which would need to be filled in, smoothed over, repaved etc. Can be repaired within hours? Geez.



Originally posted by auraelium
reply to post by Thunderheart
 


Silly thread, roads are easily repaired, probably within a few hours after bombing, repairing roads is easier than repairing 30 million $ planes, also runways can be destroyed too and hangers full of planes are even more easily destroyed so i dont see tour point.... i think the chinese are on the ball here.
edit on 4-8-2012 by auraelium because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by grayghost
 


from the link i posted it would take repeated dropping of bunker buster bombs depending on the strategy they use and the facility in question and shape of the runway,but repeatedly hitting the same areas or a series of areas could either obliterate the runway or at best case scenario cause either the cavern floor to shoot up from below or collapse from above and entomb/destroy the hidden air craft

didnt see the rods from god part mentioned but im sure if we have them that some nations would be trying to come up with some defense but kinetic energy is pretty hard to defend against on those levels



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


The same thing with a US air craft carrier, damage the Runway of the aircraft carrier and you do not even need to sink it to make it non-operational as I have stated in my previous threads about what Iran would do in self defense from a US act of aggression, or someone who could do it more successfully would be Russian or Chinese forces.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   
I think you all make the mistake and assume this is geared to protect them from the US. If that was the case then yes it is waste of time and money and cruise missles would easly slip though air defenses and take out the runways over and over. The fact is Russia, Tawian, Japan, the Koreas, Vietnam and India all on China's borders are what the Chinese see a primary threats. The US of course is much more dangerous but, outside China attacking a US ally they know conlfict with the US is unlikely. These bunkers are very useful when you face a threat like one of the other regional powers where conflict is most likely.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
LOL if you can penetrate the defenses of an aircraft carrier GROUP then damage the runway on a specific carrier that would be something. Trust me. The US isnt sending carriers to places where they think the enemy can sink them. There are counter measures....HUGE counter measures. Sink a US carrier and you have sealed your fate.



Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by stumason
 


The same thing with a US air craft carrier, damage the Runway of the aircraft carrier and you do not even need to sink it to make it non-operational as I have stated in my previous threads about what Iran would do in self defense from a US act of aggression, or someone who could do it more successfully would be Russian or Chinese forces.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Having seen what passes as 'science" in China, not to mention engineering, I am doubtful that they could consistently deploy any force they have. I have no doubt of the ability of any human force to be fierce (despite the history of China being that of a bumbling doormat in Asia), but to put that force where it can do anything....


...regardless, if there is war between our two nations, it will be using technology that we have sent our scientists over there to work on, in coordination with the Chinese. They have less legalities to worry about, and much more experimental latitude.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by bjarneorn
Don't all airfields have the same problem really?
------------>>

Not all.
One of your your neighboring countries have designed a large percentage of their roads as runways, and spread their airforce all over the country.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
LMAO!! Stupid ass comment. Umm the roads can be repaired within hours? Dont you think if the tunnel entrances are collapsed and entrance roads bombed that a freaking pavement crew is on stand by while bombers are flying around over head? Seriously? We arent talking about broken asphalt but craters which would need to be filled in, smoothed over, repaved etc. Can be repaired within hours? Geez.



Originally posted by auraelium
reply to post by Thunderheart
 


Silly thread, roads are easily repaired, probably within a few hours after bombing, repairing roads is easier than repairing 30 million $ planes, also runways can be destroyed too and hangers full of planes are even more easily destroyed so i dont see tour point.... i think the chinese are on the ball here.
edit on 4-8-2012 by auraelium because: (no reason given)


and.... nowadays airstrikes go on for what.... days? if anything can blow a crater in it...and is being blown up repeatedly all night by these earthquake bombs and bunker busters... and the technology we have, we'll know when the paving crew is out there and we topple them and their tractors... I think this mountain they're burying under is the air fighter's gravestone.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by stumason
 


The same thing with a US air craft carrier, damage the Runway of the aircraft carrier and you do not even need to sink it to make it non-operational


yeah... the couple hundred trigger-happy marines just itching to blow holes the size of yangmei into some lemon-colored folk doesn't amount to much, huh?



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Why is everyone assuming that it would be the US at war with China?



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   
why bomb the road when you can blow up the 'entrance' to the underground bunkers, if the entrance gates are blocked with rocks, the planes inside are literally out of service...



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
First, the Chinese do not wait for a 'pavement crew', the local people in the thousands would have the road sufficiently serviceable in a very short time. Ditto with blocking the entrances.

As for the Carriers, the Chinese proved an important lesson for the USA when they surfaced an attack Sub inside the defensive perimeter of a battle group. Like to see the US Navy surface a Sub within the security perimeter of that Chinese Air Base. ROFL.

China has proven without any doubt that it can take out Carriers with out concern. It can afford to swap Subs for Carriers, the US has only a few.

P



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 05:49 AM
link   
If the roads are destroyed, it would give the military engineers some work to do



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
of all the bombs dropped on the Ho Chi Minh trail the mission of the NVA never stopped, neither would the Chinese.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Why are you so unpleasant to other people regarding their opinions? People have the right to have an opinion as much as you do, and they are not stupid or morons just because it's not the same as yours.

Usually people who claim or act like they know the answer to everything are the same ones who are most ignorant.

In case you aren't aware, in order to actually disable a runway you have to bomb it several times. Mostly because combat aircraft can take-off in relatively short distances, but also because one hole is easily fixed. If that is true to the runway, which needs to have a lot better pavement than a taxi access, it's very easily achievable in access roads.

If you have a crater as wide as the taxi access, you just need to fill it with surrounding dirt, make it smooth and compact enough and then put something on top that will prevent the aircraft that go through it from sinking into the hole, by applying weight to it. As long as the cover for the hole (that is already filled) is larger than the hole itself, then it should be fine. Fighters are heavy, but they aren't heavy enough to make craters while moving.

You also mention the impossibility of removing the aircraft due to collapsed doors or entrances. But you are dismissing a very important thing. The fact that an entrance is possibly one of the strongest points of a structure. The same concept that makes doorsteps a emergency safe zone in case of an earthquake in most buildings with good safety standards. If that concept is true to most civilian buildings, you can imagine how strong a tunnel/bunker-like structure would be.

And if you try to cover the entrance by bombing it around, then you are faced with two problems:

1- Bombing the top of the structure and facing with the hard task of overcoming a natural obstacle, that is most provably reenforced from within, taking advantage of the mountain strength.

2- Bombing the perimeter of the entrance, which goes back to the point that access roads can be easily repaired.

It's not something that the members that said it are making up on the spot. It's something that is a reality. Military forces are able to build bridges between small gaps in a matter of minutes, not to mention other much more complex structures and operations.

Covering a hole in a expendable road isn't all that hard, considering the fact that it doesn't even need to be done by valuable manpower.

You make also a claim that, in my opinion, is a bit unrealistic.

You say that in order to null the repair efforts "all it takes" is a constant surveillance from the invading air force. I seriously think that you aren't aware of the effort it takes to any modern air force.

If we are supposing it's not a super-power like the U.S. attacking, then it's a effort most air forces can't take. You need constant patrol above the airfield, which exposes you to any AA defenses. Making a patrol raises an issue that U.S. pilots faced in Vietnam. You can fly-over a place and do surveillance and get away with it, but if you fly above it twice or even more than three times, then your pattern is known, making any surveillance effort an easy target, even against the most basic AA systems.

But you can argue that a country like the U.S. has a very sophisticated system for air operations. Which is true, that's why countries like Israel depend on American solutions for their problems.

One of the problems with the patrols meant to prevent the repairs, is refueling. You either go back to an airfield with fuel for your bombers/fighters, or you refuel mid-air. Refueling mid-air solves some problems, but causes others.

Instead of just exposing your aircraft to AA systems, you are now also exposing your refueling tankers, a very important air force asset that shouldn't be put in compromising situations. Now you are faced with two more problems, avoiding an attack on your patrols, and avoiding a possible attack when you are more vulnerable (while refueling).

If you don't make the decision of constant patrols, then you are just opening the door for the repairs to be made, and the chinese are actually very good in fast-paced engineering problems.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by MikhailBakunin
 


Yes, it's all possible, and there is yet to be constructed a building that cannot be demolished one way or another.

But to destroy even one of these bunkers takes a lot of logistics and a serious attack effort. Not all planes can carry those bombs, and the ones that do are very expensive and of high value.

Again, we are only talking about one of these bunkers. A single airfield can have several of these bunkers if the airfield has more mountains surrounding it. Most provably, the chinese have a complex network of these bunkers all around the country. A country that makes a serious effort into making one of these structures isn't stupid enough to put all the eggs in one basket.

People are quick to be judgmental and critic to these type of tactics, but it was that same attitude that made combat in Vietnam so hard. Their tunnel system was a nightmare for the american forces, and even against such an outdated enemy like the Vietnamese, the americans suffered heavy casualties.

If they applied the same logic to these airfield, then it's not a matter of them being a sitting duck. It's a matter of them becoming a huge advantage to the chinese. If you can defend your air force long enough to sustain the first waves of attacks, then you can make up a heavy resistance on a further point in time.

By looking at the tactics that the U.S. military has been using, a lot of their moves go around attacking before being attacked, or even before giving an opportunity to let them know what's hitting them. If the U.S. already has air-superiority fighters that can be a nightmare to any foreign air force, you can imagine how easily they can take out aircrafts in their most vulnerable condition (still on the ground).

Avoiding that first sting that is fatal to your forces, can prevent a country like the U.S. from dominating a war. At least from the start point.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 05:48 AM
link   
Oh look, another war mongering American itching for a conflict.





top topics
 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join