China and Russia Defeat the US says...

[WillBrink]

But like I mentioned, the Ohio class is already quieter than the ocean around it. Being quieter, I would think, solves nothing. Maybe they can now run faster and still maintain that level of quietness, but being quieter is a moot point don't you think?

I read/heard somewhere that the modern subs are quieter at flank speed than the 80's tech sub sitting tied to a dock with their reactor running.

A tad above my pay grade, but my understanding is it's a constant cat and mouse game where they're tech one step behind ours in terms of how quiey we are and their ability to detect us. I do know there was a time we knew where all their subs were, and they didn't know where most of ours were due to the wide gap in tech between us. I know they made progress in their subs quietness, then they collapsed and their programs went to chit. I'd imagine a sub really can't be too quiet, so improving that aspect always a goal. That's my non professional understanding of it. It may also be out tech is many steps above theirs and their being able to detect us not a major focus vs other goals, but no doubt what we know considering how secretive the sub service is, it's really a WAG on my end. Maybe they're now working on increasing the noise level as to not be appear as a black hole on the ocean.

I write about subs a bit in my fiction as I love those boats. My uncle was a LT sub commander in WWII and was chased around a bit by the Japanese. News of the next gen subs:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...big-expensive/

[pinzgauer]

Folks that I know whose job it is to know tell me that China's entire conventional mil emphasis is defensive + regional power projection. Which is formidable, but does not have much force projection beyond neighbors / regional.

Minimal deep sea sustainment capability, etc.

Yep, good anti ship missiles. A bunch of subs which would be quite good at coastal/ regional patrol/defense. And are doing so.

And yes, big giant armies. But again, without much capability to project across an ocean. But very strong defensively and regionally.

Russia is different, but has some of the same issues. Both have huge borders they have to defend, which is why they need the big armies. Both have huge reserve elements which could be called up.

Not to say that if desired, they could not Duke it out with us. But a Red Dawn type invasion of the US military scenario would be virtually impossible without internal subversion, also unlikely. And very difficult logistically.

But why bother, we are driving China's economy. Get military with us, we'd fold on our significant debt obligations. They would crash.

Play dirty bomb or EMP, we'd retaliate with nukes.

Supposedly similar with Russia. Insufficient deep sea sustainment. We have 11 supercarriers. Russia may have 1 that is more than an aircraft/helo cruiser. Sold their planned supercarriers apparently to the Chinese. Maybe China has one. Maybe.

You guys can diss the carriers, but really hard to do large scale warfare without them.

Lots of things to worry about. But China/Russia invading the US in a military attack is not one I lose any sleep over.

Little green men, cyberstorm, commercial warfare, proxy wars, subverting allies, yep those are all things to keep an eye on as they are real risks. Maybe even the panda massage chairs sleeper cells!

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

I always assumed depth and speed numbers were not even close to accurate.

Always thought the sonar nets and signal processing acting like the AWACS Of the sea was the real advantage.

[The_War_Wagon]

Did the simulation account for a rifleman, behind EVERY blade of grass?

[vicious_cb]

Folks that I know whose job it is to know tell me that China's entire conventional mil emphasis is defensive + regional power projection. Which is formidable, but does not have much force projection beyond neighbors / regional.

Minimal deep sea sustainment capability, etc.

Yep, good anti ship missiles. A bunch of subs which would be quite good at coastal/ regional patrol/defense. And are doing so.

And yes, big giant armies. But again, without much capability to project across an ocean. But very strong defensively and regionally.

Russia is different, but has some of the same issues. Both have huge borders they have to defend, which is why they need the big armies. Both have huge reserve elements which could be called up.

Not to say that if desired, they could not Duke it out with us. But a Red Dawn type invasion of the US military scenario would be virtually impossible without internal subversion, also unlikely. And very difficult logistically.

But why bother, we are driving China's economy. Get military with us, we'd fold on our significant debt obligations. They would crash.

Play dirty bomb or EMP, we'd retaliate with nukes.

Supposedly similar with Russia. Insufficient deep sea sustainment. We have 11 supercarriers. Russia may have 1 that is more than an aircraft/helo cruiser. Sold their planned supercarriers apparently to the Chinese. Maybe China has one. Maybe.

You guys can diss the carriers, but really hard to do large scale warfare without them.

Lots of things to worry about. But China/Russia invading the US in a military attack is not one I lose any sleep over.

Little green men, cyberstorm, commercial warfare, proxy wars, subverting allies, yep those are all things to keep an eye on as they are real risks. Maybe even the panda massage chairs sleeper cells!

Ding ding ding. Winner winner, chicken dinner.

Did the simulation account for a rifleman, behind EVERY blade of grass?

People need to stop watching Red Dawn and come back to the real world, sorry but you won't be using your AR-15 against the communist hordes(not foreign anyway). People should be thinking in terms of limited objectives like control of the Taiwan straits or seizure of the Baltic states instead of all out total war.

[chuckman]

You guys can diss the carriers, but really hard to do large scale warfare without them.

Sure you can. CAGs are a supportive role to large (i.e., land-focused) campaigns, especially now that the heaviest platform will be the F-35. Seaborne campaigns are entirely different matter, and there you really do need the carriers. But agreed that in China nothing will be land-based, or significantly so, and that carriers will be an important asset in our Maritime strategy.

[WillBrink]

Did the simulation account for a rifleman, behind EVERY blade of grass?

Meh, they'd never invade, nor is that even on the radar I suspect of our focus. We can say a lot of things about the Russians and the Chinese, stupid is none of them. If it kicked off, they'd make sure it was some place to their advantage, where it was our supply lines that were stretched and vulnerable. If in the far future we are so militarily depleted and weak, and they so strong, they could mount an effective campaign to invade CONUS, who knows. That's generations away if it happens at all. Does not mean we ignore the possibilities. In our time, any conflict between us will happen in some far away location close to them for the advantage, and if we lose (due mostly to lack of will and public support) they will negotiate a peace deal that leaves them with what it is they wanted, and we'd lose major face and mojo with the world. As the world is now fully financially dependent on each other, I don't think any of us could actually afford it, and we will continue the proxy stuff and attempt to outflank each other in biz and influence. If we over isolate the Russians, we leave them with little to lose by going on an expansion push as the Japanese did, so it's best we keep them contained but don't pull post WWI thing they did to Germany, giving us WWII.