What's new

Japan's best strategy to defeat China at sea

. .
From China's coast to the Diaoyu Island, it is less than 400km.

PS, China now has the air refueling technique.

View attachment 195030



If the war ever happened again between China and Vietnam, PLA will definitely bomb your country into oblivion instead of sending the troops on the border.

how many minutes left for your J-10 to fight ? fly 300 - 400km and need refuel ? they must spend time waiting for their turn too. Like in gas station.

bomb by what? Vietnamese suffered multiple time ( millions ton ) of total weight of bombs China could drop on us. What's up?
 
.
I prefer that it fails during a test,so we will find a solution concerning it than during a real situation.
Yes... your things never failed because nobody reported it i guess. :azn:

Well, the failed tests cannot hide from the US infra satellite groups.

There is nothing we can hide if we failed our SLBM test.
 
.
how many minutes left for your J-10 to fight ? fly 300 - 400km and need refuel ? they must spend time waiting for their turn too. Like in gas station.

bomb by what? Vietnamese suffered multiple time of total weight of bombs China could drop on us. What's up?

The Diaoyu Island is only 300-400km from China, so we don't need the air refueling for our J-10A/B.

To Vietnam, the modern PLA will probably use the hypersonic weapons.

With the speed and gravity force, 1kg of TNT will be equivalent 1 ton of TNT. That's why the US is also desperately pursuing this technology.
 
.
The Diaoyu Island is only 300-400km from China, so we don't need the air refueling for our J-10A/B.

To Vietnam, the modern PLA will probably use the hypersonic weapons.

With the speed and gravity force, 1kg of TNT will be equivalent 1 ton of TNT. That's why the US is also desperately pursuing this technology.

Hmm 1kg = 1 ton

what's your "hypersonic" ?

your J-10 has very little time in air combat, and doesn't dare to chase enemy fighters in worrying of 400-500km way back.

Even Vietnam Su-22M4 has longer range of combat.
 
. .
year 1kg = 1 ton

what's your "hypersonic" ?

your J-10 has very little time in air combat, and doesn't dare to chase enemy fighters in worrying of 400-500km way back.


Whereas JASDF's F-15Js can be launched into Senkakus in less than 10 minutes time ;)

1554688[1].jpg



14331042_2007091009411012237400[1].jpg
 
. . .
1. J-10A has 500km of combat radius ; F15J vs J11B , F2 vs ... F35 delivered this year. When J-20 or J-31 delivered ?

2. Liaoning is scrap, so don't care much about J-15, few Chinese pilots can take off from Liaoning.

3. Izumo would be platform for F35 STOVL not Hyuga


All of your argument is just invalid crap.

F35 is still facing many trouble, dont expect to see it operational before 2019.

J-15 can flew from Liaoning, only it carry limited ammo and have small chance againts a/c launched from Nimitz. But still the J-15 with limited weapon is more than enough to destroy helicopter a/c like hyuga.

F35 that Japan intend to buy is not the STOVL version.
Hyuga need modification if it want to carry STOVL F35.

Stop daydreaming speculation.
 
.
Hmm 1kg = 1 ton

what's your "hypersonic" ?

your J-10 has very little time in air combat, and doesn't dare to chase enemy fighters in worrying of 400-500km way back.

Even Vietnam Su-22M4 has longer range of combat.


Hey hey hey, PLAAF has hundreds of J-11A and J-11B. Outnumber F-15J of Japan Air force.

Why you only stick to J-10??
 
.
All of your argument is just invalid crap.

F35 is still facing many trouble, dont expect to see it operational before 2019.

J-15 can flew from Liaoning, only it carry limited ammo and have small chance againts a/c launched from Nimitz. But still the J-15 with limited weapon is more than enough to destroy helicopter a/c like hyuga.

F35 that Japan intend to buy is not the STOVL version.
Hyuga need modification if it want to carry STOVL F35.

Stop daydreaming speculation.

F35 is not like development of ARJ-21, you know.
J-15 take off from Liaoning is not realistic as Mig-29 take off from Vikra A/C

Hyuga again ?
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom