You are just blowing smoke. You clearly have a vivid imagination
and what appear to be an erotic fixation with military hardware.

Oh by the way the S-300’s the Chinese have are S-300PM1’s.

The Su-27 is 1970’s technology and including the Chinese J–
11 less then 100 have been produced in about a half dozed variants.

Other then the DF-15 China’s ballistic missiles have been designed for the nuclear mission, missiles with nuclear warheads don’t use a GPS guidance for the obvious reasons.

You must learn the difference between intelligence and propaganda someday. Yes I believe that the sources of information I have are more accurate the Taiwanese TV or American TV.

The number of launchers come form a PRC source, how many do you say the Chines have?

As far a damage from your imaginary Chinese missiles I think we got a good idea of how much pop they have in 2003 when a Chinese Cruise Missile hit a shopping center in Kuwait. I will take you at your word on accuracy of Chinese missiles and assume that that shopping center in the early morning hours was the target. Since Chine Cruise Missiles have a 350/500Kg. war head, ballistic missiles have smaller 165 Kg. war heads the amount of damage that can be expected for a direct hit by a Chinese missile. The shopping center opend on time a few hours after the hit.

So until your next rant. Have a good week or what ever. Maybe next time you can talk about your military career, uh!

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Without getting into the above debate, I really think you should do some due diligence and check your source. “Dr.” Carlo Kopp is a fraud, plain and simple. A simple Google search ought to give you PLENTY of things to think about before you reference him again. The man is not a defense professional and there are numerous instances of him making claims that are outright lies(I.E. his claim to have flown in a Super Hornet). You have some points that deserve to be examined in your posts, but better references are needed in order to be taken more seriously.

http://geimint.blogspot.com/2007/10/chinas-j-10-i…

Let me get this straight; in your first post you talked about how both Taiwan and China have such accurate intelligence on each other, and that there could be no surprise attack by China.

Then in your reply to me, you dispute the comments made by Taiwan Ministry of Defense official General Yu Sy-Tue on March 17th, 2010 openly discussing the movement and relocation of 8 battalions of S300 PMU2 missiles to the aforementioned location at Longtian AB in Fujian. Did you look at the link to the Focus Taiwan TV that I attached? The good general’s comments both confirm the number, location, and the type as the S300 PMU2. Are you saying that you have better intelligence then the Taiwanese military? If so, please share with us the source of your information.

You then again repeat your unverifiable comments about the S300 being deployed in the no fly zones. I can find no evidence that this ever happened, and I again dispute your statements. US fighters did not fly against the S300 SAM missile system at any time during any of the gulf conflicts, IT NEVER HAPPENED. Attached below is a link to very good research by Dr. Carlo Kopp documenting every missile system ever deployed by Iraq in both gulf conflicts, you will note that the S300 is not listed. While Saddam Hussein attempted to purchase the S300 system after Desert Storm, the purchase request was refused by Russia.

http://ausairpower.net/Analysis-ODS-EW.html

The Chinese missile guidance systems now have GPS/GLONASS capability and this has been documented by many reputable sources. I might also add that the civilian access level to the GPS system is quite accurate enough do get the job done.

Your number of available of conventional ballistic missiles at 280 is ludicrous. There is more then that number in just one missile type out of the four conventional ballistic/cruise missiles capable of hitting Taiwan. Just adding the production numbers for the DF-11 and the DF-15 gives a figure of 1000 missiles. See the link below for the NTI Research Center again confirming the large number of missile capable of striking Taiwan:

http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/China/Miss…

Your final comments about the F-16C/D I find amusing. The Russian Flanker was specifically designed to kill teen series US fighters (F-16, F-18, and F-15). While I have a personal affection for the Viper, it is no match for the advanced Flanker variants now across the Straight of Taiwan. China now has 138 SU-30MKK and 120 J-11A/B fighters in service.

Additionally, the numbers of the J-10A fighters are rapidly growing, with an additional 120 aircraft on order to replace the existing Soviet era J-7’s (for a total deployment of 300 J-10’s).

Unless the US is willing to sell advanced F-15’s (SE/SG), F-35’s (HA), or F-22 Raptors to Taiwan in serious numbers, this is a losing game.

With the members of the Chinese Military now openly talking about taking Taiwan by force by 2018, we are running out of time and options if we are actually going to defend this nation from the super power developing across the Taiwan Straight.

Sad to say if there is a war between Taiwan and China, we are in obligation to act by law to defend Taiwan.
But before that will happen, give peace a chance.

In response to RSF,

Good try RSF but no cigar. Post 1 on the S-300PMU2’s, Last know and confirmed deployment of these systems was in Beijing Provence, since they are defensive weapons and there is no indication that Taiwan is going to invade or strike at China why would they move this asset into Yuan Provence? It would only signal China’s intent.

On the S-300 system, first off it’s doubtful that they are the latest Russian exported variant the PMU2 since Russia is one of China’s prime concerns and Beijing is China’s crown jewel.

All that said during the ten years of no fly the US became very familiar with the S-300/SS-21 system and became very good at various ways to defeat it. In 1991 the S-300 scored about a half dozen hits “officially” on US and UK aircraft in 2003 the S-300 system scored zero, in fact the Patriot downed more friendly aircraft then the S-300PM’s of Iraq. It is very likely that this technology and tactical information has been passed on to the Taiwanese military by the US.

On ballistic missiles. I will grant your numbers form sinodefense although I think they are by a factor of two,to high but such small numbers don’t really make a difference. None of these missiles are currently in a position to be fired at anybody, they are in storage in central China. The most likely places where these missiles might be places since the ballistic missile is either a defensive or a terror weapon is in the SW part of China on the India-Kashmir-China border, on the Amur River or the Vietnamese border. After the somewhat less them impressive ballistic show of 2006 the 2nd. Artillery Corp moved it’s HQ unit Yuan provence out.

Foot note: During the 1991 Gulf War Saddam fired his Scuds from mobile launchers at will, the US couldn’t and didn’t hit any before they fired their missile. In 2003 Saddam didn’t get a single Scud off, all were destroyed by US aircraft before they could launch. One would think that Taiwanese pilot training at Nellis would be well exercised in finding mobile launchers before they launched.

On accuracy. Since China doesn’t have an operational GPS Constellation and it is unlikely that the US, EU or The Russian Federation would let China use one of there systems for targeting that they have any such systems as you describe. The best estimates is that a typical Chinese BM has a 2Km. CPE. for Nuclear weapons that’s OK but for conventional warheads it’s not very good.

One item you didn’t mention are the mobile launchers. It does appear that all of China’s BM’s are mobile, so the number of launchers would determine the size of the strike.

The Chinese have two types of mobile launchers but for this discussion I will lump them together. Now assuming that all of them are operational, a huge assumption by the way, the Chinese have for the DH-10 20–30 launchers and for the BM’s DF-11 and DF-15 anywhere from 210–250, each launcher is good for two-five uses before it has to be refurbished.

That would give China a Max first strike of 280 missiles if everything you say is correct and all my assumptions are correct. It is very unlikely there would be a second strike.

The damage done by 280 165Kg. explosions on Taiwan would be minimal at worst.

The missile threat by China to Taiwan is rather small. Meanwhile the F-16D’s with nine hard points is an excellent strike aircraft that could without much trouble penetrate China’s AD even if all the S-300/SS-21’s were in place in Yuan provence. Of course all this would take place in the first hour of any conflict.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

China has 900 — 1000 land based conventional missiles capable of striking Taiwan. Most of these are now modern mobile launcher systems, with accurate GPS/GLONASS guidance systems. These systems are positioned so that they can strike at Taiwan with little or no warning. Some of the systems of concern are:

DongHai 10/ChangJian 10 (cruise missile system)
DongFeng 11(short range ballistic missile)
DongFeng 15 (short range ballistic missile)
DongFeng 21 (medium range ballistic missile)

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/the…

http://www.sinodefence.com/strategic/default.asp

http://focustaiwan.tw/ShowNews/WebNews_Detail.asp…

What is holding China together is a highly centralized government. If Taiwan becomes part of the PRC, the economic power center of China will become less centered. Taiwan, as well as Taiwanese firms and affluent individuals, will exert influence from within. China, in my opinion, will begin to fracture, and eventually devolve into several nations, including a once again independent Taiwan.

Let’s see if the Chinese Government is foolish enough to take that Trojan horse by force.

Does anyone know where the 3 subs that Germany was selling to Greece are going to go now with Greece refusing to accept them?

I can’t find much to disagree with HKDan here. The only missing elements are the domestic US politics which are no small issue.

Rand Corp. goes back to the 1950’s and it’s role in developing the USAF and advising on nuclear issues. Among the right of center tanks it is among, if not, the most cerebral. That said Rand has at times had a relationship with the Nationalist Chinese/Kuomintang (KMT) and of course dealings with the General and Madam Chiang Kai-Shek. This is no small issue.

The China Lobby as it is now called is very active in domestic American politics and spreading out money to members of Congress who are friendly to Taiwan and Nationalist efforts. The recent Supreme Court ruling on campaign finance is very welcomed by the China Lobby.

If it’s of any interest, concerning the politics, it appears that Taiwan has a preference for Democrats and the Mainland China has a liking for Republicans. Both Nixon and the Bush family are highly though of in Mainland China.

This paper kinda fuses both those interest together. The statement that the F-16D’s the Taiwanese have requested will not make any difference in the power balance is definitely aimed at Congress and President Obama, in saying go ahead sell the F-16’s to Taiwan.

The other side of this issue for Rand is saying that China is aggressively building and modernizing it’s air power and we need the F-35 as a counter measure to that build up.

The notion that either China or Taiwan could launch an surprise attack on one or the other is absurd. The cross channel intelligence gathering of both countries is among the most active in the world. It’s not unlike MAD magazines Spy vs, Spy.

The issue of ballistic missiles is a non starter. Even making the assumption that China could move a large number of missiles in place for an attack unnoticed, which with the number of Taiwanese spies and over head ISR would make such a move nearly impossible, Taiwan has dispersed its military assets around the country very well and with it’s Patriot 3’s and alert aircraft is more then able to minimize any Chinese ballistic missile attack on the island.

The punch line her is that a ballistic missile has to work the first time and if it doesn’t there is no plan B. In WW II Hitler learned this lesson very well with his V-1’s and V-2’s. They don’t return for a reload. Ballistic missile are a very expensive way to make war, that is one of the reasons the US ground forces abandoned non nuclear ballistic missiles in the 1960’s and the Tactical Nuc in 1985.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner