We had a good run, but its over now. Posted on May 24, 2023 by PrepHole Contributor We had a good run, but its over now.
This is why I order Korean food instead of Chinese. Nothing but trust issues
Charity begins at home
I ran 200 simulations in C&C generals. GLA prevails.
China will grow larger.
"in a simulation run on a mainstream war game software platform"
lmao they bought the retards from grim reapers to create them a "simulation"
DCS is extremely terrible for running simulations, even small scale ones you are trying to game one way or another don't run like you think they should. The AI sucks ass and things like player fox 3 don't work right when the players use them how they should be used.
I could see Gay Retards selling out to China.
Funny considering that every time I've seen them use the chunk hypersonics they get cock blocked by SM6
> his simulation stands
I feel strange. I've been teleported back to 2015.
Actually thinking about it now, I feel like 2016 to 2022 was an exercise in Russia psyching itself up for an invasion attempt somewhere, that got blown the fuck out, and now we're back to the same shit but with China this time. Invasion of Taiwan by 2029, calling it.
china is actually kind of scary from a 'can have their forces vaporized but make new ones in a week' standpoint.
Their tanks yeah, their ships and planes lmao no.
>said the german/japanese citizen about the US in 1938
Oh god here comes the "they can make freighter hulls with 3 bulkheads, a top speed of 14 knots and a crew of 15 which means they can also shit out high quality DDGs" meme.
I just ran simulations in Civ V and Washington nuked Beijing every time. And twice a tank was lost to Zulu Impi.
Jon Wendy from Li Vonia Michigan district here, I say we dont push the Chinese Dragon too much with our chopsticks writing a letter to Chairman Biden as we speak
You're a dumbass for not catching the obvious sarcasm.
Yeah, so sorry. Enjoy
Fun fact: the Mujahideen were the guys who went on to become the Northern Alliance. You know, the side the US helped after 9/11. The Pakistani ISI more or less created the Taliban after 1989 in order to make Afghanistan into their puppet.
>a simulation run on a mainstream war game software platform
what did they mean by this
War thunder or DCS
CMANO, many such videos on garden gnometube already
Command Modern Operations
THE SCENARIO STANDS
oh to be a chinese academic
As someone who actually was an academic I wish I was in China during those years
Government literally sends spies to foreign research hubs to steal all their work and then give it to incompetant lazy Chinese "researchers" who do nothing but plagiarize and lie
Real easy life, being a researcher who never has to actually do research
> double the range
that's just it? if i spam 24 rockets with a hit chance of 80% I get a higher chance for all 24 rockets hitting than I get for zero hits.
24 hits = 0.8^24 = 0.0047 = ~0.5%
no hits = (1 - 0.8)^24 = 0.000000000000000016777216 = 0.0000000000000016777216%
any hit = 1 - (1 - 0.8)^24 = 0.999999999999999983222784 = ~100%
If that chance to hit is less than 99%, then it's not a precision guided weapon.
If digits, next chink missiles fired in anger explode before clearing their launch tubes.
ChatGPT knows what's up.
Bite it, Chang
i bet the moment Chinese missiles are launched, Americans are just going to jump off the ships into the sea - the same as they fled the bases, when Iranian missiles were launched. Atleast in the sea you are not going to burn alive and be killed by exploding munitions and radioactive leaks from the damaged nuclear reactor.
two more weeks!
Why is 4chan filled with so many boot lickers? I swear these people wouldn't fucking fight for anything, they just want some strongman to come and do it all for them
it's paid shilling 100%
there are maybe 10 real posters on 4chan
It's very simple
After 2016 China took notice of PrepHole and now pays an army of trolls to argue that China is awesome and better than the west.
Doesn't work though because anybody with an IQ above 60 can tell they're paid shills
Subhuman shills. We'd slaughter them and decorate the country with their skulls.
>people who simp for hitler and/or absolute monarchs would love to be subjugated by a totalitarian surveillance state
Color me surprised
4chan is filled with literal shitskins and third worlders who hate the west because of skill issues
Go back to Funnyjunk.
>The dreams of Chang
>sees a military vacate an area before the missiles are even launched
>not a single injury
>was it unparalleled sigint?
>no, it must have been the sheer cowardice that propelled the soldiers away at relativistic speeds before the missiles could reach them
somehow neither "they knew the launch was coming and left" nor "the launch happened and they evacuated the entire target area while the missiles were in transit" is terribly encouraging for the efficacy of missile attacks on American forces
If this was SIGINT or SBIRS, why didn't US side just intercept the Iranian missiles? Or what is it, that you claim - USA can't intercept Iranian missiles but can intercept much more advanced Chinese hypersonic missiles?
Trust me anon you don't want a US BMD capability near you if you want to start shit.
why are you just passively aggressivelly sneer some indirect bullshit instead of simply answering the question? Why Americans didn't intercept the Iranian missiles? Simple question - you either answer it, or just hiss like a snake under a boot something uninteligable, trying to change the topic.
I can FEEL your smug smile holy shit
>the OP is calling other people passive aggressive
I hope you actually live in mainland China so you get to have the Russians-in-Belgorod-when-the-bombs-land experience once the US retaliates.
Really. I don't live in the US or a NATO country and even though my country could feasibly cut ties with the US and hold ground during a small conflict with them, I don't go around bragging because that's not something you do with these people.
If you live in the US or under their umbrella and you're saying this shit you are pathetic.
Nice try DF-21D-san. Post rocket nozzle or GTFO you lewd slut.
i'm not a ballistic missile so i'm safe
>when you post online, no one knows you’re a Chinese hypersonic missle
Im a fairly calm missile myself.
>why didn't US side just intercept the Iranian missiles?
because a few holes in an empty barracks are stupid easy and cheap to fix (these aren't exactly hardened structures). that should be pretty clear from just a rudimentary understanding of base logistics
not responding with an intercept is actually direct evidence it was sigint, as it indicates they already knew it would be a one-off
>because a few holes in an empty barracks are stupid easy and cheap to fix (these aren't exactly hardened structures)
If this was coming from the Russians, after the HIMARS strike, you would call it MEGA COPE and you know it. But you somehow in your fucked brain think its appropriate for the strongest army on the planet to let itself be attacked, and then not even call article 5 of NATO treaty and destroying Iran with collective might of the Western world for DARING to attack American bases.
Maybe if China sinks your carriers, you would also say that "replacing the carrier is easy, and we can replace those fallen sailors with migrants just by opening Mexico border for 2 days, so its no biggie".
Anon that was called a joke
The US didn’t want war with Iran. Iran didn’t want war with the US. It was all theatre for internal politics on both sides
You now remember the Iranians shot down a civilian airliner and fucking TRUMP was working overtime to make sure that blew over and wouldn’t rile up the civilian population in the states to demand war.
I’m a moderate and I think a war with iran would be miserable. I don’t think anyone could want it. We’d destroy their government in 3 days and execute every head of state but any invasion would be completely miserable and any insurgency would make Afghanistan look like Grenada. No one wins, just a bunch of mommas losin
I remember Iranians shooting down American drone. US didn't do shit in response to this neither. And if you think US doesn't want war with Iran, what makes you guys think US wants war with China? War with China would be catastrophic for USA in all regards, possibly lasting decades, requiring draft, war declaration, curfews, arrests and detentions of huge groups of US population, suspension of elections, air sirens, bomb shelters, food shortages, riots, worker strikes, mandatory work in the factories - complete removal of freedoms and breaking of normal life. Who wants that?
>idk how your shithole does it but in America "attacking the military" means attacking the people, not bruising the hardware.
>detentions of huge groups of US population
Yeah that shit went over so well the last time we did it and totally wasnt a giant fucking mistake.
Its going to happen again - If war starts, all Asians would be arrested, no one would ask if you are Taiwanese, or Hong Konger, or Falung Gong ally cultist, or from Korea, Japan - you have slanted eyes? You going to the camp, because we not going to bother to check.
congratulations on being the dumbest moron on planet earth
God I fucking wish.
the usa doesn't want war because it doesn't need war
it is already on top of the world, has a lot of allies and has fairly bright future ahead of it
Iran doesn't want a war because it would get demolished. But it needs to rattle their saber for domestic politics.
The usa doesn't want to invade them because that's an other decade+ of occupation quagmire.
China wants a war because it feels that it needs to become the number one. But knows it would get beaten so instead it does fucked up shit like flooding the usa with drugs.
>War with China would be catastrophic for USA in all regards, possibly lasting decades, requiring draft, war declaration, curfews, arrests and detentions of huge groups of US population, suspension of elections, air sirens, bomb shelters, food shortages, riots, worker strikes, mandatory work in the factories - complete removal of freedoms and breaking of normal life. Who wants that?
War with USA would be catastrophic for China in all regards, possibly lasting decades, requiring draft, war declaration, curfews, arrests and detentions of huge groups of US population, suspension of elections, air sirens, bomb shelters, food shortages, riots, worker strikes, mandatory work in the factories - complete removal of freedoms and breaking of normal life. Who wants that?
fixed it for you. Altough China already has half of that so not nearly as big a change as you'd think
Because Iran is largely harmless. Letting China run amok would be a global catastrophe worth the risk. And not every conflict needs to be total war you retard. Blockade the strait of Manilla while SEADing and hitting chinese launchers and dodging incoming. There wouldnt be boots involved unless China decides Korea or Japan is on the table. This fate is in China's hands, they can let Taiwan live in fucking peace like they have or seethe and start a massive war.
Tactical advantage of being a lying chink shill?
Aren't you a dumb one.
>strongest army on the planet to let itself be attacked
idk how your shithole does it but in America "attacking the military" means attacking the people, not bruising the hardware.
otherwise we'd be at war with our own people for scuffing the paint
i do like how you completely ignored the fact not responding was clear evidence it was a sigint-based decision in the first place, but i suspect that's less you strategizing your bullshit and more the details just going over your head
You now remember USS Liberty
Took you long enough to start mentioning garden gnomes
did you think anyone but certain politicians and a certain evangelical christian cult that thinks garden gnomes controlling jerusalem will facilitate the rapture (no, sadly, i am not kidding) actually supports israel in america? people were quite pissed about that, and still are
>people were quite pissed about that
Define pissed. If pissed is mere 1 second of frowning when USS Liberty incident is mentioned possibly once in a year, then its completelly irrelevant. How many times it has to be mentioned for them to be pissed for one minute? 60 times? How many times you heard it being mentioned on TV and NOT on the imageboard or alt-right youtube video or twitter post?
How long ago did that happen you fucking sperg?
>im getting btfo on every front better hit the garden gnome button
i define pissed as "literally the only remaining support for israel in america comes from those demographics and they aren't exactly growing"
Bro no one young likes Israel, Israel worship/zionism is a Gen X/Boomer thing.
>i do like how you completely ignored the fact not responding was clear evidence it was a sigint-based decision in the first place
Chinks are crazy and it'll lead to their downfall anon. Even incredibly obvious gestures of goodwill (actual ones) like evacuating support staff, keeping only the minimum required combat personnel outside to ensure base security, not immediately retaliating once the launches were detected, were just not picked up on by these retards.
In another world where the US wanted a war they would have fired 100 or so Tomahawks the moment the launches were detected over Iran and we'd be making memes about the F-14 being a critically endangered species after 90% of the remaining fleet was destroyed.
>complete removal of freedoms and breaking of normal life. Who wants that?
All I'm going to do is point out that yeah, you have a point, China has had most of that since late 2019. How would you like it if the quarantine, border controls, arbitrary arrests and so on had random bombings mixed in? And not small ones like you get with the Uyghurs.
Maybe because there wasn't a Patriot battery in the area? They weren't really needed much after Saddam was toppled.
>US blatantly assassinates second in command if Iran
>Iran launches some missiles that destroy a jungle gym and a shack, zero deaths
>Iran proceeds to shoot down an airliner
>total Iran death count: 250 civilians from an airliner and one general
>US death count: some dirt
keep dreaming chang
The dirt was capitalist dirt! It was very evil!
动态网自由门天安门天安门法轮功李洪志Free Tibet 六四天安门事件The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安门大屠杀The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派斗争The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大跃进政策The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人权Human Rights 民运Democratization 自由Freedom 独立Independence 多党制Multi-party system 台湾台湾Taiwan Formosa 中华民国Republic of China 西藏土伯特唐古特Tibet 达赖喇嘛Dalai Lama 法轮功Falun Dafa 新疆维吾尔自治区The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 诺贝尔和平奖Nobel Peace Prize 刘暁波Liu Xiaobo 民主言论思想反共反革命抗议运动骚乱暴乱骚扰扰乱抗暴平反维权示威游行李洪志法轮大法大法弟子强制断种强制堕胎民族净化人体实验肃清胡耀邦赵紫阳魏京生王丹还政于民和平演变激流中国北京之春大纪元时报评论共产党 独裁 专制 压制 统一 监视 镇压 迫害 侵略 掠夺 破坏 拷问 屠杀 活摘器官 诱拐 买卖人口 游进 走私 毒品 卖淫 春画 赌博 六合彩 天安门 天安门 法轮功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 刘晓波动态网自由门
get rotated chang
American propaganda used to be about belittling and mocking the enemy force. Nowadays they overly exaggerate the threat in order to scam the congress for more gibs. Kinda reflects on what the top brass think priorities are. Once morale was more important, but now machines and softwares do all the work, so whats the point of morale anymore? That is, not taking into consideration the fact that they're all greedy fat cats with no respect towards the people they're supposed to defend
Winnie the Pooh 刘晓波动态网自由门 动态网自由门天安门天安门法轮功李洪志Free Tibet 六四天安门事件The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安门大屠杀The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派斗争The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大跃进政策The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人权Human Rights 民运Democratization 自由Freedom 独立Independence 多党制Multi-party system 台湾台湾Taiwan Formosa 中华民国Republic of China 西藏土伯特唐古特Tibet 达赖喇嘛Dalai Lama 法轮功Falun Dafa 新疆维吾尔自治区The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 诺贝尔和平奖Nobel Peace Prize 刘暁波Liu Xiaobo 民主言论思想反共反革命抗议运动骚乱暴乱骚扰扰乱抗暴平反维权示威游行李洪志法轮大法大法弟子强制断种强制堕胎民族净化人体实验肃清胡耀邦赵紫阳魏京生王丹还政于民和平演变激流中国北京之春大纪元时报评论共产党 独裁 专制 压制 统一 监视 镇压 迫害 侵略 掠夺 破坏 拷问 屠杀 活摘器官 诱拐 买卖人口 游进 走私 毒品 卖淫 春画 赌博 六合彩 天安门 天安门 法轮功 李洪志
Jesus christ all I see are burgers coping in this thread.
Can your aegis or what the fuck fancy toys you have nowadays shot down all these chink missiles when they start spamming them?
If not you might as well scrap your carrier groups because they are useless now in the pacific.
hello there "shitposting aussie"
Post the original image
Cry about it.
can you defend against a stealth preemptive nuclear strike? no? Might as well delete your country now
The fact is, and i'm telling you this as a non american, nobody believes them anymore. The chinese are universally aknowledged as pathological liars and cheats, you can't assess the strength of a nation based on whatever party approved bullcrap they send to the press (which happily gobbles up as hard truth). They don't even have the machinery necessary to make the tiny balls inside the ballpoint pens, much less be able to outperform the USA in what they do best, aka military engineering
Is it absolutely impossible for those missiles to perform what the Chinese are claiming they can do?
You do realize they don't have to outperform you burgers in every areas of military engineering. If those missiles do as advertised, how are your carrier groups going to operate on the pacific?
In that situation, the USN would probably want to put more deck space into aerial refuellers and sail farther out in the Pacific. The great thing about carriers is they can move
every step of the supply chain in china is subject to fraud, corruption and just "make it trough the day" attitude
the "if" isn't so much that the rocket as planned can do it but that if the rocket as made, transported, stored and used can do it
You talking about military supply chains or civilian supply chains?
The Chinese have sold plenty of military equipment to foreign nations, how frequently did those not perform as advertised?
Were they even used outside parades in Sub saharan africa?
I don't fucking know why don't you burgers buy a few and test them out.
If the bolts don't pop out and engines don't start smoking then maybe these missiles aren't a laughing matter.
why would you assume there is any difference?
government enterprises on the civilian market are just as if not more corrupt and fraudulent as the "privitely" owned ones
the chinese export sector also has a merited reputation of stacking their wares so the good ones are first for sampling and then pushing in all the shit under it
so 5 export models is no proof that the rest of the stock is any good
>why would you assume there is any difference?
Why wouldn't there be a difference. One is where national security is under question the other Chang nobody is trying to make two more buck.
Look if they are such a fucking paper tiger why is your own government and intelligence community sweating fucking bullets when it comes to the Chinese?
I'm sure the chinks are exaggerating some stuff but you burgers are coping rent free.
>I'm a burger
I do not assume there is a diffrence because the goal of self enrichment at the cost of everything else is the same
and since civilian officials from the opposing faction are still being corrupt fully knowing that xi set up his anti corruption policy to get to frogmans followers
So why would an offical in military or arms industry not also be corrupt?
Also by all accounts I've found chinese mre's contain rotten meat so yea if you can't get your soldier mre's cleaned up why could you get other procurement cleaned up?
>why is your own government and intelligence community sweating fucking bullets when it comes to the Chinese?
same reason they were sweating bullets over the Russians
Assume the worst and you'll never be disappointed
America assumes everyone is hyper-competent until otherwise shown
>your own government and intelligence community sweating fucking bullets when it comes to the Chinese?
We've been trying to shift our focus to the Pacific for the last 25 years, but we still haven't gotten around to it. Oh yeah, they're totally sweating bullets about China.
>just "make it trough the day" attitude
Not in the missile and rocket field. For example Chinese space station operates without incidents for years. Chinese never lost astronauts to some retarded catastrope so far, unlike USA where the foam and o-rings were source of tragedy.
>that we have been told off
just like the soviets never lost a cosmonaut before they got Juri into space
Yes and Russia never officially lost tens of astronauts either
Remember that time a Chinese rocket went sideways and landed in a worker's village. They locked all the reporters up at the launch site until they bulldozed the fucking evidence and went, "No worry, camp empty. Everything fine bye bye round eye." Not to mention years dumping toxic rocket exhaust over population centers because it was funny? I can only imagine the shit we didnt hear about.
irrelevant to the fact that Chinese space station is in space right now and everything works fine there. American rockets have their own share of malfunctions on the ground, so don't get me started.
Anon your fucking statement was they never had any problems UNLIKE AMERICA, when they literally have, are you actually retarded?
no it shows that if shit goes sideways the chinkies try their level best to hide it
it is just that in this case they can't hide it
I'm pretty sure that there have been fuckup in orbit. But they unlike in the west where it get's in the media and the issue is open for discussion. In chinkland it is kept secret, covered up and mentioning gets you sent to a black prison.
It's the good old if a tree falls in the forrest
but now it's the "if shit goes sideways in china but it get's covered up, did shit really go sideways?"
So the Tiangong-1 making an uncontrolled crash into Earth doesnt count? Again, I would love to be a fly on the wall in a Chinese space station.
What is the safest rocket in the world right now and which space station does it service with crew and cargo launches? Which country operates reusable liquid fuel rockets? What’s their turn around time from landing to next launch? How often does this rocket system launch? What’s the maximum number of landings before said launcher is expended? What’s it’s cost to orbit both in flat cost and per kg? Which rockets are cheaper in the global market? When will LM9 complete development and what will it look like? Which nation is developing orbital refuelling? Which nation is developing in situ fuelling? Which nation has a rover currently active on mars? Which nation has achieved flight on mars? Which nation is providing launch vehicles for outer systems missions?
Btw the ISS was always gay and LEO cucksheds are for queers. Congrats on building your own LEO cuckshed, now you’re only 40 odd years behind. You’re better than the Russians, at least.
Hey now the ISS is perfectly fine for what it is as a research center in orbit, the bad part was focusing on it entirely over actually going to the moon/Mars, thank we’er fixing that...slowly
Sorry anon, I don’t make the rules, LEO is for cucks. It says it in the bible. If it’s not deep space, it’s not real. It’s like fucking a thicc bitch from the back with a 3 inch cock and calling it sex. It doesn’t really count if only your tip gets wet
Yeah they’re on completely different levels I agree with you, one is making sure our species isn’t extinct if earth randomly expolodes with other is seeing how to toast bread in space in the most efficient way
Well the thing is that the tech for an actual presence on the moon or even GETTING to mars hasnt been on the table and wouldnt have been reasonable in any capacity and largely still isnt. The Apollo missions themselves were mostly a gigantic waste of time and resources for what little science they actually did and were mostly a PR stunt to shit on the Russians more than anything. We stopped going because it wasnt worth it anymore and in many ways it still isnt. Reusable rockets and the like are step in the right direction for a more sustainable presence on the moon and the computer tech advancements make everything a lot easier but its still not something that could be considered viable.
All of these assholes that cry about how important it is to get to the moon or mars fail to realize that there isnt much reason to be there yet is all im saying.
Isn’t the moon covered in a type of fuel we can currently make use of? As for Mars well mining etc, though that goes for the moon and asteroid belt too
Yeah but collecting that shit and getting it back home isnt close to viable yet. Japs were able to collect a speck of dust off an asteroid and return it to earth so there's that.
>Yeah but collecting that shit and getting it back home isnt close to viable yet
Ah not cost efficient, fair.
Pretty sure he was talking about that as a way to fuel stations on mars itself. Either way those pockets are EXTREMELY hazardous to deal with and you still have to deliver all of the infrastructure to the moon to harvest and use it. Then you have a base on the moon. What then? What actual use is there for a moon base currently? You can run a lab and do some basic science but how much of that could just be done on the ISS instead? You could seed a large base. Sure now what is that colony actually going to DO? Mining is out of the question with current tech and investment. Tourism would be a no go. Just about the only thing that would be interesting would be a space telescope but with the regolith and shit it would be a nightmare. Radio telescope is just about the only practical use because you can just turn a crater into one on the cheap. Is that ACTUALLY worth the investment?
>In many ways it’s easier than going to the moon
haha no. Also just going somewhere to go somewhere has no actual value and sending people doesnt do a whole hell of a lot more than just sending rovers at the end of the day.
Mars is more habitable than the moon and easier to both land and take off from, the only difficulty is literally the transit time and the communications issues, the latter is very solvable, and the former is a soft problem not a hard problem.
>Mars is more habitable than the moon
Technically true in the same way that the bottom of the ocean is more habitable than the middle of a fucking volcano but neither are good places for people to be. The rest is absolute bullshit though. The moon has FAR less gravity which is the PRIMARY issue for take off and landing. The sheer distance involved multiplies the supply constraints as well. No matter how much sci fi you read about them jerking off hydroponics and the like the simple fact is you will still need to store and transport 90% of all food and water you would need for your entire stay and the transit back and forth. The logisitcs alone means manned missions to mars is a long way away.
The issue isnt getting there its getting there and back alive which takes so much goddamn space and weight its impractical in every sense of the word.
Less gravity makes it harder to land. Mars still has low enough gravity that it’s easy to take off from. Atmosphere is far more important for landing than gravity too. Aerobraking is OP
Landing is HALF of the issue of a manned mission unless you want to send people there to die. The problem is sending enough fuel to land a mission with all of the supplies needed PLUS the cost to leave the planet again. Landing difficulty is less of an issue the more you can get computers to handle it for you as well. You dont have to manually do all of that shit and rely on precalculated math done by dozens of people days in advance anymore.
Anon the reason landing and taking off is a “problem” is because of fuel expenditure. Hence why I referred to aerobraking, and gravity capture. It saves a fuckload of fuel. Also there’s fuck all places you can really hang out on the moon. I’m very bullish on the issue of supplying, tbqh. That is literally just a matter of lowering the cost per KG to orbit. If you’ve got a vehicle that can transit to mars and land reliably, and it has a shitload of upmass at a low cost, there’s really no reason not to solve the supply problem by simply launching several extra cargo craft. Unless it costs over 500 million per launch-to-mars for one of these there is literally no reason no to do this and to use this to build in redundancy of supply. Even in situ refueling can be sped up this way by simply sending an automated refuelling plant (which certainly isn’t the simplest thing ever done) to arrive long before your crewed craft does and get to work. It’s quite doable. The bottleneck right now is basically
>deep space long transit time crewed craft
>cryogenic fuel transfers
>habitation modules for the Martian surface
The second is being solved right now during the HLS program. The latter is being worked on by contractors for later Artemis missions - any lunar module development will be harder than a Martian one lol. The first problem isn’t easy but orion exists, no one thinks it can’t be done it just needs doing
Anon I can think of three times recently lunar landings have failed precisely because they did not have the fuel required to slow their descent enough to avoid pancaking because they couldn’t aerobrake or anything. F9 has control surfaces but not aero brakes because it stages very early. Starship will aerobreak while super heavy will use essentially the same control surfaces to land similarly to F9 first stage. The reason why Mars lands have previously been hard is 1 poor telemetry 2 extremely tight mass budgets.
You are overestimating the atmosphere of mars as well. Aerobraking and the like doesnt work unless you have a fairly thick atmosphere which mars does not. Every issue you have with landing on the moon is present on mars with the added demerit of having to fuck around with a much higher gravity. In no way is it easier overall to land on mars than the moon. You can talk all you want about running out of fuel and the like but the simple fact is if you are running out its your own damn fault for not accurately doing the math to find out how much you need. And the simple fact is you need MUCH more of it to land and take off from mars and its the MAIN influence on difficulty.
Aerobreaking on mars works it just doesn’t work if you’re exclusively using it. You get captured by Martian gravity, orbit the planet while descending into the atmosphere, orbit several times slowing down bit by bit, use propulsive landing at the end.
Also no you don’t need more fuel to land on mars. I don’t know where you got that idea. It being farther away does not make it harder to land on anon.
LANDING IS ONLY HALF OF THE PROBLEM AS I HAVE SAID A HALF DOZEN TIMES. If you are putting men on fucking mars you have to get them OFF mars which means carrying the fuel down you need to get up which means more fucking fuel needed.
he's gotten fixed to the conclusion mars is easier for some reason, understanding the rocket equation is too much for him
How hard is it to understand that getting things onto and off of something with actual gravity is harder than something like the moon? You can practically fart and make it to orbit from the moon.
NTA, but it's you who doesn't understand the rocket equation.
And how hard it is to understand that aerobraking is free propellant, and that bigger planets with atmospheres have greater tolerances?
Holy shit, unironically look at a dV graph, it literally takes less propellant to land on mars than to land on the moon.
Landing a human on mars is hypothetical. Eating a salad on mars is hypothetical. Doing a cartwheel while shooting a laser pistol is hypothetical...
Everything is hypothetical until it's done. At one point, standing on Antarctica was hypothetical.
You literally do not need to carry the fuel to mars anon. What did you think I meant when I explained in situ fuelling? This is what is put forward by both nasa and spacex.
RIght and that is totally a thing that exists in the near future and doesnt require an absolutely fucking massive amount of logistics to get working. Super easy to just fucking land a refinery on mars. If we are going to bring in a bunch of hypotheticals ill just casually mention we should build warp tech and just fucking teleport there and back.
It’s not that difficult tbqh. Sorry that you’re not up to date with what’s being written and said. You do know that there’s going to be testing of in situ refueling on the moon for Artemis IV/V?
This isn’t some meme technology that relies on a breakthrough to do anon. We know in broad strokes how to do it. We’re really no farther off technologically than the US was from putting a man on the moon after they put a man in space. The biggest hurdles are mainly that NASA dropped the ball majorly with several contracts and developments - namely space suits - and have wasted their budget on SLS. Tbqh I think cryo refuelling in orbit is a tougher problem
Look guy at this point its all still purely hypothetical and is in no way proven to be practical in any sense of the word. To hedge your bets on all of that is the silliest shit you could be doing and basing your entire thought process on what COULD work and what MIGHT happen is really fucking stupid. Sure it MIGHT be possible to get fuel collected on mars but how much and how long it would take and how much infrastructure it would take to do that can make the whole thing absolutely fucking impossible. "Its easier to land on mars because all of this tech that doesnt exist and might work" is the worst fucking position you could have.
Anon, people know how they’d get the fuel, how they’d power the refining process, have rough estimates of the time and amount of power required and the square footage of solar panels necessary. It’s sub 100 tons of equipment (probably)
Literally no one thinks it’s a “might” that you can get and refine methalox on mars, or that the process is only a “could work”.
At this point the argument has evolved but if you read my initial post you’ll see I said “in many ways it’s easier than going to the moon.” And I stand by that
It’s easier to land, it’s more hospitable, both in absolute and proportional terms there is significantly more land on which one can land and stay, the temperature fluctuations on the moon are a bitch and a half, regolith is gay, lunar orbit is a nightmare, etc. in other ways it’s harder - telemetry and transit times are the big ones. Quite frankly though if something goes wrong on the moon no one can get to you in time anyway so in that sense it’s not less isolated.
Space… is hard. But it’s not impossible by any means, going to mars for a multi month stay is not some feat of science fiction, it simply requires NASA and US companies to leverage and develop existing technologies and systems.
I dunno why you’re so worked up about this anyway, especially since you’re fairly ignorant on the subject.
A bunch of thoughts on paper at the end of the day are still thoughts on paper. They are not practical uses and there is nothing guaranteeing that they are feasible in the slightest. The only way to know if they work is to fucking go out there and actually DO it. Then it will fail and you will have to figure out why and revise the whole thing until it works if you can get it to work. I am not and will never say it is impossible just that if you think any of this shit is as easy as what a bunch of assholes write up in a white paper you are delusional. All of this tech you are jerking off so much about is decades off from ever reaching even a fucking test phase. Anything that is still only words on paper is hypothetical and that is the bottom fucking line. Without practical tests and research into it you cannot rely on it.
Smart people write papers every day and are wrong or over estimate the capabilities or feasibility of what they are putting down. You cant just assume that any of it is going to actually happen and plan like it will or base your entire veiwpoint on it. If you were out here saying that it MIGHT be easier to land on mars if this shit pans out i would respect your opinion on it a hell of a lot more than you DECLARING that it is based on shaky unproven research that has never been tested.
Skimmed your post, realized it was gay. Didn’t read, enjoy coping and seething. Don’t bother replying btw
Go read The Case for Mars. The basic engineering got worked out back in the '90s, including small-scale test rigs that operated in re-created Martian atmospheres. The only real gotcha is the power requirement (converting carbon dioxide and hydrogen--or worse, water--to methane and oxygen is *highly* endothermic). Zubrin posited a UGV the size of a small truck with a micro-reactor and a power cable. Elon is more interested in solar panels and batteries, because that means he doesn't have to try to get a new reactor design approved by the nuclear-hating government bureaucrats.
In short, there's nothing that would be considered non-trivial other than building a rocket that can land on Mars, be refueled, and take off again... which is part of why Starship looks the way it does.
>easier to both land and take off from
it basically doesn't get easier than the moon for takeoff/landing
if you mean fueling... debatable, we wouldn't know until we started prospecting, but the elemental components for a hydrolox fueled rocket are fucking EVERYWHERE
No the moon is harder to land on than mars and I’m not joking. Between the smaller amount of landing sites, the lack of atmosphere and lower gravity it unironically is harder to land on - assuming you have the right telemetry.
If my years of kerbal space program have taught me anything, landing in a low g environment is ANNOYING AS FUCK
the issue here is heat - AFAIK, a lot more landers have been lost to planetary atmospheres than to hard impacts.
besides, the skycrane landing approach still works in vacuum and it's extremely successful for landings so far - even Earth-based relaunch-capable vehicles aren't using atmosphere for braking, they're using it for control/stability (unless SpaceX is slapping on parachutes i don't know about)
The lack of atmosphere makes it *easier* to land on the moon. Mars has just enough of an atmosphere for re-entry to cause thermal issues, and not enough to allow for practical heavier-than-air flight. That's why such exotic designs as airbags and skycranes have been used on Mars, whereas very simple probes were able to land on the Moon back in the '60s. Starship is partly the way it is in order to land a large payload on Mars without having to use ruinous amounts of propellant to slow down from interplanetary speeds.
helium-3 but without some major fusion breakthroughs it's not useful. tritium from nuclear reactors makes enough for stuff like medical needs
Ahh that's why it floats
We should go to mars to go to mars. And we are definitely capable of doing so, very little needs to actually be invented to do so. We need to apply known technologies and techniques, but it’s not even remotely implausible to get to mars and do an extended stay of about 3 months. In many ways it’s easier than going to the moon
There's no real point right now other than bragging rights. That being said I agree.
That's silly, because it forces you to use a Venus Flyby. It's much safer to stay on Mars for 2 years until the next optimal launch window comes around.
That was during the 90s when China's space and military funding was cut below that of Italy's. Deng was like that and would have lasted forever, but I guess America had to swipe their cock around and blew up China's embassy in Belgrade and conduct piracy against Chinese commercial shipping.
YWN be a spacefaring civilization. Your rockets are a pale imitation of Soviet, let alone US. You have never sent men past LEO.
Yeah they just use expendable villages for unscheduled non-propulsive landings kek
>Chinese never lost astronauts to some retarded catastrope so far, unlike USA where the foam and o-rings were source of tragedy.
Because the Chinese have never invented rocket technology you deranged bug, you brought them from the USSR, who are responsible for the vast majority of deaths in spaceflight
>claim to have strung bridge cables via rocket
>no video evidence of what would be the coolest shit ever
yeah, you guys say neat shit happens, but without evidence it is all fake and gay
>unlike USA where the foam and o-rings were source of tragedy.
40% of the space shuttle fleet was lost with all hands onboard. Thats a pretty high life time loss rate.
33&1/3%, actually (2/6; 1/3); well, like that country song: 2 out of 3 shuttles surviving ain't bad.
Nonetheless, the mismanagement of the shuttle program was criminal, and those responsible should be charged with multiple counts of manslaughter et cetera.
>Chinese space station operates without a catastrophic failure visible to outside observers for years.
The Soviet space and military rocketry programs had a better safety record than NASA's... until the Soviet archives were opened after 1991 and it retroactively became far, far, far worse.
My favorite incident was the ICBM test that killed 300 people that the Soviets successfully covered up. Turns out a 5-star general who "died in a small plane crash" was actually so thoroughly killed by the rocket explosion that his corpse was only identifiable by his partially-melted rank insignia.
The only evidence i've seen from these hypersonics is that they are actually hypersonic unlike Russia's, and they can hit a target attached to a fucking rail. Their accuracy, especially for what China claims, is dubious to be extremely generous.
>If those missiles do as advertised, how are your carrier groups going to operate on the pacific?
On the 0.01% chance that these missiles work as advertised and are able to hit moving targets thousands of miles away (lol), we can shoot them down with SM2/3/6 of the Aegis system, which is far more advanced than the Patriot system that were able to shoot down all 7 Khinzals in Kyiv.
If China attacks a US carrier fleet it will be the exact same outcome when Japan did it. Except the Japanese were an actual threat.
> Except the Japanese were an actual threat.
Japan didn't have nukes and missiles capable of reaching US mainlands
Japan didn't have 1.3 billion population
Japan wasn't the second world economy when it attacked USA, its economy was smaller than UK, Germany and USSR.
Japan didn't have 5th gen fighters, nuclear submarines, satellites and lasers.
japan had stuff that was proven to work by raping the chinkies for nearly half a decade at that point
>Japan didn't have nukes
China will never use them
>missiles capable of reaching US mainlands
US missle defense says hi
>1.3 billion population
How many are capable of being deployed in combat?
>wasn't the second world economy when it attacked
If China makes an unprovoked attack on Amerixa, they would be as fuck as Russia is now
hasn't been a thing since 1988
>5th gen fighters, nuclear submarines, satellites and lasers.
The US has all that and theirs are superior.
China is a paper tiger. China is the sick man of Asia.
>What if the world was made of pudding?
>Simulation assumes an 80% hit rate
>Other simulation assumes a 90% hit rate.
>Burgers are the ones coping.
...please tell me they didn't also have 90%+ hit-to-kill ratios
With between 19 and 22 hits destroying an entire Carrier Battle Group, I suspect it was a 100% hit-to-kill ratio.
this post made me realize that china is not weak, but is very strong
Americans never accept defeat, so when their carriers will sink - they would never admit that China did this, instead they will believe that aliens attack them, that it was Israel, that it was inside job and they were sunk by secret NGAD American fighters, or secret American underwater submarines, or secret American space lasers.
But American ego would never allow them to admit that they were humiliated and humbled by the Chinese. So the conspiracy theories would be insane.
Yeah, Americans would never thoroughly document any loses or humiliations. Now let's pop in Platoon or Apocolypse Now. For comparison we'll watch Chinese movies about thier ill conceived invasion of Vietna-
OK, you are just being retarded. One thing they US does do is not hide when shit goes horribly wrong. Unless it was whoever actually attacked us in 2001.
But all of our military fuckups are published.
>mainstream game software platform used by China's military
ha suck on this pig dog western guijlo evil spirits
we have sunk your battrefleet in genjin impact! china numba 1 military technology for train in genjin impact!
Do this retards think the Carrier group would just sit there doing nothing while 2 dozens of """Hypersonic""" (lol) missiles are launched against them?
With that hit ratio, they're assuming the entire carrier strike group is in port and completely unmanned.
Remember when the Russians said that their Khinzal hypersonic were not just capable of defeating all existing western air defence systems but also all future western air defence systems that will be developed over the next twenty years?
I can't help but suspect that similar flaws may exist in the premises used for these war games
at least go with a reasonable number like 200. 24 is just a ridiculous scenario
Why do I have this odd feeling that the gift shop at China's Ministry of National Defense sells loaded dice for some reason.
US doesn't put enough resources into space technology. They have knowledge and resources, but not the will. They are falling behind, but they can't see it anymore, because of the all propaganda how superior their military is. Money spend into research doesn't mean anything if no results is got from that research.
But the US is probably doing as many military satellite launches as everyone else combined
>US doesnt put resources into space technology
You fucking wut m8?
Lack of peer to peer conflicts creates complacency but lemme tell you something: if they poke Uncle Sam that would really bring the shitstorm of the millenium, the "let's dont poke _________" only applies for the US
>what is USSF
btw the Star Wars program is (almost) feasible today with SpaceX being capable of spamming satellites on a weekly basis.
My source is picrel, but I'm absolutely convinced that part of the payloads of Starlink (maybe one in fifty) is sats for a Brilliant Pebbles system.
Nah. Musk is extremely autistic about avoiding military uses for starlink because he wants to avoid it being seen as a US state asset. Because that would lead to it possibly being banned or restricted in various markets, and starlink is a cash cow he wants to ride into monopoly. Not that it doesn’t open the door for such a thing of course
Which is why they're offering the military a separate constellation, if they're willing to pay for it. That allows SpaceX to try to keep Starlink as a civilian concern.
You may recall that Elon had no problem with UAF using Starlink to communicate (even to call for artillery fire), but objected to the use of Starlink to directly control kamikaze USVs. A fine line, perhaps, but an important one.
Elon is a One China bro
It will be Gwynne Shotbad once the dust settles
Elon says hi.
It's CMO isn't it
Maybe. I've seen CMO being used by pro-American side to prove that Chinese hypersonics can't destroy the carrier, but the data for Chinese rockets and the trajectories was hypothetical. It is possible that Chinese researches uploaded the characteristics of their rockets into this simulation and got the different result from the assumptions based on speculations.
Yes, the reference to the "white paper" with an "80% PK" is so fucking obviously CMO holy shit. I bet they put like 30 DF-21D batteries up against a Gerald R Ford class, put like one Burke next to it, deliberately gave it SM-3 IAs instead of the modern ones, """forgot""" to include the X-band sea tracking radar or coverage by TPY-2 or anything from a Ticonderoga or satellites because they're "too optimistic", had the things running in circles at 2 knots and then got the oh-so-surprising result that 1-in-30 times one DF-21D will get through and wreck the catapults.
I'm stunned that we're seeing my-simulation-stands posting in 2023 from an official Chinese media outlet. This doesn't feel real.
>It is possible that Chinese researches uploaded the characteristics of their rockets into this simulation
I'm not 100% sure but I'm pretty sure a "simulation" of CMO's caliber would come under export restrictions for the professional version. It's not really a simulation but it's close enough.
Maybe you should read the article first
>The military planners selected vessels deemed the US Navy’s most superior – the CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford, accompanied by a CG56 Ticonderoga-class cruiser the San Jacinto, and four DDG-103 Arleigh Burke-class Flight IIA guided missile destroyers.
>The Ford-class carrier, commissioned in July 2017, boasts exceptional technology and design advancements, according to the researchers. Features include a pioneering electromagnetic launch system and state-of-the-art radar and electronic warfare systems.These sophisticated technologies detect incoming threats while multiple layers of armour and protective systems are designed to lessen the impact of missile attacks and other enemy firepower.
>The strike group’s cruisers and destroyers were also equipped with advanced weapons and defensive measures, including radar systems that could detect incoming threats while simultaneously tracking multiple targets, the researchers said.
It wasn't assumption like in Grim Reapers "US 2025 carrier group against Chinese 2010 carrier group, GO!"
>trusting some chink media that some other chinks didn't cheat to get the result they want
Anon I’ll believe blatant propaganda the day they actually fire one of those fucking missles at us
I'll settle for an actual fucking test
Should Chinese invite your personally or US NAVY electronic signals reconnaissance ship to measure the speed, radiation, infra-red emmissions, trajectory, maneuvers, radar reflection, cross section and every possible metric of the test, so Americans could later create effective counter measures based on the gathered data?
I would settle for proof that it has 80% and 90% accuracy at 1200 and 2000km. Ill put a target in dingy myself.
We already know they had to buy info on hypersonic development from Russian scientists including some of the ones that were arrested after their failed attack on a Patriot system, I think we have a fair idea of how their missiles will perform already assuming they even have any functional ones.
ah, so it's completely unbelievable. 24 missiles would be defeated by SM-3's before needing to even consider using SM-6's and that ignores electronic countermeasures
You don't have enough sm3 and sm6 on a single destroyer to stop 24 ASBM
They actually have. A pair of Ticonderoga ship and Burke consists of 218 cells. If SAM systems consist of 30% of the total loadout then it would be sufficient enough for 24 and even going to 50(base on the assumption of 50% interception rate which is way below the current rate of SM-3&6).
SM-3 cant hit targets that are not in outer space, and Chinese Hypersonic GLIDE Vehicles are cruising within the atmosphere (they glide, because y'know, they need AIR)
SM-6 can potentially intercept them, but the pK is very low because HGVs are maneuverable and fly a crazy spiralling attack pattern that is unpredictable.
In the scenario, China is using their less capable HGVs (assumed to be DF-17 1st gen HGVs) to draw the fire of the entire carrier group's SM-6. Due to the standard doctrine of two shots per missile per engagement, a considerable amount of missiles will be spent to hit even a dozen "decoy" HGVs, opening the way for the higher tier HGVs (assumed to be DF-27 2nd gens) to kill and mop up the carrier group.
SM-6 are maneuverable on its right. Not quite in terminal but in flight, it is. The middle of that flight path you posted is vulnerable.
That's where SM-6 will shine. IB will be on the more advanced weapons.
You can literally mod the professional edition of CMO to give any stats you want to any weapons/platforms.
Oh btw you haven't posted the actual paper (nor is it easily findable on the internet, curiously) probably to avoid getting BTFO. The article clearly states that
>During the simulation, the PLA used its sea-based surveillance network to detect and identify the US carrier group
Which is obviously the Sino-SOSUS sensor/facility in the game (completely worthless, literally just the existing SOSUS sensor with a higher "technology rating"). Worthless.
It also doesn't state whether or not the US side had access to supporting sensors, such as, again, the sea-based X-band radar, any forward deployed TPY-2s, SBIRS, or anything that would give the firing ships target cuing. The stated range of SM-D Blk IIA is 1325 in CMO which is only achievable if, as you can see in the Guidance Type column, the launching system has knowledge of the missile that far out and can plot an intercept. Ticonderoga Baseline 4 from 2018 (which is also incredibly obviously the one they're using, same with the Burkes) has a radar with the ABM qualifier (which is the only one capable of seeing high altitude and space targets because the game is, again, a game) with a range of 175 nmi.
Oh and a thing about SM-3s in the game.
They are given a waypoint to "seek to" in front of the missile (with reasonable energy/time constraints so it doesn't just fire missiles at targets it can't hit) and after that the "terminal sensor" in the missile activates and can fire. This is not how SM-3s work IRL, and if you trick the game into auto-firing on a target detected on a descending trajectory the missile will frequently bug out, aim a few hundred km high or low of the missile and not even get the chance to make a impact roll. You can easily waste 20+ SM-3s this way and it applies to all BMD interceptors.
So basically, by deliberately depriving the US of a critical and always-used part of the SM-3 kill chain you can falsify the outcome.
Please go fuck yourself.
Same anon, a bit of clarification.
>They are given a waypoint to "seek to" in front of the missile
This is also how AIM-120Ds, that have a two way datalink, work in the game. But with those it actually works. An F-35 launch a missile, turn cold, and another F-35 can transmit updated target information to the missile, at which point the "seek-to" point updates and the missile changes course. This is mid-course guidance and is an accurately simulated part of the game.
The problem is that SM-3s don't do it. All public literature on SM-3s we have states that it can get mid-course updates and maneuver, with power, through the atmosphere up until about 30 seconds to intercept. The SM-3 in CMO DOES NOT DO THIS and the generic missile guidance simulation (the same used for SM-2s etc) assumes it will happen. As a result you get situations like this:
>vampire detected, 1000 km altitude, mach 15, trajectory heading for target ship
>game simulates the speed of the SM-3, the altitude, whether or not the intercept point will be "in space" (SM-3 requires it, SM-2 can't handle it etc), and finds a point in space for the seek-to point (generally like 5-10 nmi short of the actual intercept location)
>game fires it
>SM-3 at this point just guides dumb to that location
>the missile pitches down, speeds up (this is NOT hypersonic waveguide stuff, it's normal ballistics)
>the SM-3 does not correct
>the SM-3 flies to the intercept point, sees nothing is there (as the missile is now 300 nmi behind it and 100 nmi below it) and just flies off
A real SM-3 will plot a feasible intercept location to begin with (accounting for ACCELERATION AND DROP OF THE FUCKING VAMPIRE) then provide updated targeting information to it as it flies there.
So yeah the chink is full of shit and I hope he gets eaten by an escalator.
sounds like one of the many bugs
Imagine the US carrier group in South China Sea, where does this sea-based X-band radar, and forward deployed TPY-2 should be deployed to be usefull? Do they always accompany US carrier groups?
SBIRS can only tell you - "there is an infrared spike in that Chinese province" then some guy can say " Wow, PLA Rocket force division is in that region, we better go and tell our guys there something might be coming their direction, or maybe its just wild fire". SBIRS cannot help with targeting.
>where does this sea-based X-band radar, and forward deployed TPY-2 should be deployed to be usefull? Do they always accompany US carrier groups?
In the bases we build with our allies, which I know is a foreign concept for the Chinese just as much as it is for the Russians
You're full of shit and you just got called on it, make a new thread about something like GMLRS ripoffs that you can actually pretend to be superior with.
>where does this sea-based X-band radar, and forward deployed TPY-2 should be deployed to be usefull? Do they always accompany US carrier groups?
You don't even know the platform I'm talking about you sad piece of shit. It weighs 45 tons and is always in the pacific whenever someone decides to throw missiles around. You not knowing the exact appearance of it, its function and deployment history the moment I refer to it means you shouldn't talk about this subject at all.
The shit about SBIRS is also so fucking ignorant and wrong it would be painful if it didn't just make me feel sorry for you. It is public knowledge that SBIRS is accurate enough to determine the type of missile and its heading and has been since 2020 when the system was used to provide advance warning of the Iranian missile attack. The missiles were in the air for 6 minutes and SBIRS alone was capable of determining an impact point and providing that information to the targeted air base.
In Iran it was controlled information leak by the Iranians that wanted to save face for Soleimany killing, but also didn't want to escalate to a war, so they warned US through multiple channels about incoming attack. It was a fucking theater and SBIRS had nothing to do with it.
>controlled information leak
Yeah ok lmao, the statements in the same article of doing the same thing to 1000 other missiles a year aren't true and are just lies because you, in your basement, decide kek
I've done a bit of messing about with it, even without EA-18Gs just to be fair (CMO's EW model is a bit simplified) and even with the ultra capable automatic Patriot battery level response times of Chinese SAMs it's pretty easy to get a bomb onto basically any target in mainland China. It's just too large of a country.
So what you’re telling me is bombing the three gorges damn can happen?
>Military hit by precision strike, no threat to civilians
>In response, let's commit a war crime!
holy shit, anon. that's only if the chinese go full chimp and strike our bases in korea and japan.
>attacking vital military infrastructure is a war crime
nuking shanghai with a 10mt warhead would be less cruel to the civilian population if we are going to argue about economic targets being military infrastructure.
SM-3 still cant intercept endo-atmospheric targets, Juan.
Nice try, but your carrier will end up like Kyyivvv's Patriot SAM.
Still operational? SM-6 is for the endo part and a few years from now, it would be optimized for HGVs and the simpler hypersonic missiles.
That said, anon is right. A lot of wargames have biases. There's a war game that gave SAMs 100% interception rate which is dubious.
>multiple layers of armour
Bold of you to assume they actually ran a simulation.
Chinks and communists are never to be trusted. Anything coming from their filthy mouths is a lie or just posturing. They are inferior in all aspects. Tianamen square 1989, democracy, great leap forward, blabla chink pasta.
There's no difference between them and the vatniggs.
I can only imagine the chinks launching their missiles only to be stopped by the aegis cruisers. It's cope, why don't they take Taiwan and hypersonic the carrier battlegroup to death then?
Because Xi hasn’t hit Putin levels of psychological degradation yet
Because why would they attack a Chinese autonomous province unless it was acting up, like the Uyghurs?
It’s quite funny that you believe the PRC has been set on military conquest for the last 80 years and the only thing stopping them was the US.
Chinese lack of strength has been the determining factor in China not being more aggressive militarily
Odd that they deliberately restricted their population, denying themselves free human wave attacks against their neighbors.
It’s almost as if they’re not Western Imperialists.
>Odd that they deliberately restricted their population, denying themselves free human wave attacks
India superpower 2030!
The only neighbor of India that anyone would want is China, and they have some of the most inhospitable landscape in the world between them.
>wanting china as a neighbor
All of China's neighbors would like to have a word with you
24 "hypersonic" ballistic missiles would have trouble hitting an undefended cargo ship, much less a carrier.
lmao oxymoron monkeys can't be that you garden gnome don't slander our noble field
>Sinks entire Carrier Battle Group with 24 missiles
Remember kids garbage in garbage out. If you feed a simulation a bunch of inflated bullshit about a weapons platform and it performs well it doesnt mean that the actual capability of said weapons platform lives up to those standards. Russia is the second strongest military on paper after all. Any simulation of Ukraine would have had them being steamrolled in hours. And here we are over a year into the 3 day operation.
Simulations dont mean a fucking thing if the data isnt accurate and i will guarantee you that it isnt.
Did they also game out the US response, and how successful it would be?
Off topic but holy shit the board has slowed down so fucking much after they starting “invading” that Russian providence, are the shills and 4chan that speechless? It’s so nice, they aren’t even trying, like here, Chang’s been gone for ages
Why is it that Russia and China always win in their wargames and USA loses in theirs?? Is USA really that bad?
The US sets up wargames to find weaknesses and test. Russia and China set up wargames to prove they'll win.
>US practices chess from disadvantaged positions and missing pieces
>Russia and China practice chess with engines on and US is played by a 600 ELO bot
USA always win their wargame too, mutts are just as bad
>reverse cargo cult in full effect
They always lose. Dude, there's a barage of post here early in the Ukr-Russian War about wargames. And vatniks always like to say that the US lose it.
In fact, there's an annual tradition in news reporting for US losing in their wargames.
that is flat out wrong
we lose all the time, everyone does. You learn from losses as it shows where you are weak so you can fix shit before the real stuff happens. In some cases we even lose on purpose so politicians give the military more money. Just read CSIS's conclusion from a chinese taiwan invasion simulation, they arnt even being subtle about it
"CSIS developed a wargame for a Chinese amphibious invasion of Taiwan and ran it 24 times. In most scenarios, the United States/Taiwan/Japan defeated a conventional amphibious invasion by China and maintained an autonomous Taiwan. However, this defense came at high cost"...... "Victory is therefore not enough. The United States needs to strengthen deterrence immediately."
There's clearly some confusion here regarding the nature of "wargames". The term is a broad catchphrase for almost any simulated military action.
Some wargames are intended to train troops. These usually follow a fixed script, because the whole point is to have troops experience certain events in the field so that they can practice their training on how to handle them. Other wargames are highly-speculative simulations intended to look into the future and predict the strengths and weaknesses of certain techniques or types of equipment. Some are high-level training tools designed to make the players think deeply about potential strategic situations they might someday have to deal with if things went really wrong. And some are propaganda, fudged heavily in order to make a military (or a particular system) look really good (or really bad, in order to encourage funding of something "better").
It's not enough to just label something as a wargame and make a blanket generalization from it. You need to determine what the purpose of the wargame was, and whether it accomplished that purpose.
Don't forget, sometimes the script is written for you to lose on purpose, to show the players what could happen if everyone went along with a bad plan.
For instance, think about a wargame with a totally unprotected carrier with no group. Your carrier is intended to lose that one, and its to show the players what that looks like, how quickly it might happen, how it might happen, etc.
Then everyone can agree "yeah we shouldn't do that in real life, lets protect our carriers with groups" and then you can wargame different carrier groups, for instance.
Setting up wargames where you win can be helpful to, but done too often its just a tool for fellating your own military. Losing all the time is also a sign the military is trying to scare politicians into giving them more money for projects to "fix" the failures.
Ukrainian Air Defense and Air Force shouldn't have survived the 24th of February. The odds were overwhelmingly in favor of Russians. Just the sheer number of aircrafts and long-range missiles available was enough to overload any Ukrainian capacity to organize the resistance in the airspace. Yet the final day preparations plus the unimaginable incompetence of Surovikin and his retards allowed Ukrainian Air Force to survive and conduct combat operations until the aid arrived.
Hypersonic Missiles could be cool, but I strongly favor the side that has been better trained and has both actual combat experience and competent military intelligence. If US Navy knows that they are going to be hit at least a day in advance, I just don't see how that might succeed.
The Air Force didn't buy into the deescalation talk and took the NATO forewarnings seriously. At zero hour almost every aircraft that could fly was ordered airborne and dispersed. That combined with the Russians dogshit accuracy and BDA allowed them to survive and stay in the fight, and the ground personnel that stayed behind were alert and prepared to repel VDV attacks. There was a lot that went wrong on the Ukrainian side on the first day, but the Air Force pulled in clutch and saved a lot of lives for it.
t. knower of things
>source: Stephen Chen
>He thinks Chinese made missiles won't have a 90% failure rate
Do you know anything about quality assurance standards in China?
Google "chabuduo", it's the motto of all Chinese manufacturers
It means "good enough", or essentially "if it's good enough to trick the customer it's good enough to sell, even if it fails after 2 days"
If you're running wargames you ought to be running them until your side loses and then you can deduce what to do right and what to fix. If you run wargames and it just pats yourself on the back you're doing it wrong. They shouldn't be propaganda self-flagellation but rather a way to get into the enemy's mind and think "How would I beat myself?"
So China should be more focused on how would the US counteract these hypersonics and not "look at our good our shit is".
I do expect Chang will do a pearl harbor though, as that's the only way you can really hope to try and even the playing field.
So they WANT to loose? Because that’s the one thing that would literally turn the country into blood thirsty retards again, who needs propaganda when they’re just giving it to us at that point, they’d just need to ask and WAR and vengeance at any cost like like after 9/11
Where could the next pearl harbour be? Guam?
Probably hilariously pearl harbor given how tone deaf China is
I think the Chinese are honestly retarded enough that they’d strike basis in Japan, Australia, the Phillipines and possibly South Korea at the same time they make their move on Taiwan. I think in their minds it would demoralise people into not helping the US, those countries won’t join in anyway, China is only striking US bases, etc etc. I don’t think they’re smart enough to try and keep those parties neutral, I think they believe their own propaganda that might will scare them off and everyone will understand everything
>scare the US off
>meanwhile in reality
The Chinese populace by an overwhelming majority believe that the war in Ukraine proves that the US will not intervene in a Chinese military invasion of Taiwan. I know because I have to deal with mainland Chinese regularly,
the only way they pull this off is with a large attack on US infrastructure, so the focus is on getting the US up and running again while China basically cements it's control of the SCS.
But attacking the US would trigger Article 5 so NATO would have to intervene. I dont think the Chinks want the Royal Navy on their asses
Very reliable source.
Anyone got that copy pasta about the aircraft carrier groups? I remember something about impossible anti-Torpedo torpedoes
>kill one carrier
>put 20 death stacks on your border
not a good idea
Its fun to play on the table like that, but when you actually have to fight a war with a peer adversary that can lob missiles very far away i can imagine those generals would be scared shitless. They probably like Russians, just signed up for millitary career, and in their risk calculation was only solving logistics of bombing some bum fuck of nowhere durkas in middle east
And Chinese missiles can kill a lot of admirals, since they often love to perch their asses on big ships.
You're a dipshit. Admirals have been on flagships since the dawn of naval combat. If you truly think that they would be averse to conflict because their ships might get attacked, why are you on this board? It's like saying, "Soldiers won't fight because they are afraid they will die."
>"Soldiers won't fight because they are afraid they will die."
Thats exactly whats going to happen. You already saw how that particular soldier leaked the secret information. And he wasn't even under risk of death. If some soldiers would face the choice of facing combat and dying on some insignificant Snake island, or droppin their uniform and escaping into the Philippines jungle to live like a king, many of many would pick the latter.
>"whoa, have you ever seen movie?"
There were half a million US soldiers in Vietnam at its peak.
>half a million US soldiers
Am i supposed to be impressed? In war with China that wouldn't be enough to hold on to anything. Now think about how war with Vietnam culturally mindfucked and broke USA, and imagine it magnified by x1000. Thats war with China.
Would any of you fine gentlemen like to post a photograph of a personal firearm you own? Seeing guns, owned by civilians demonstrating their civic pride and exercising their right to bear arms, always cheers me up 🙂 don’t forget the timestamp!
Wow, I never thought about it that way. It truly is over, and I have fully surrendered to the New Chinese Century.
>escaping into the Philippines jungle to live like a king
this person has never been outside for more than 48 hours
>escaping into the Philippines jungle to live like a king
Pretty sure the average burger would last longer in frontline combat than in the Philipine jungle.
How a war with China would go is us wondering "How the fuck did they become so weak?" after one billion chinks die in the first week, somehow, while wumao spam PrepHole with CHINA NUMBA WON after successfully retaking Pingpong Village (Population: 2)
There won't be PrepHole if war with China starts, for you to brag about, because it either will be destroyed with strikes on Japan, or in cyber attack, or going to be shut down because American soldiers would use it to leak secret information, because lots of Americans would be against war and would use any chance they have to help China win by leaking whatever secret documents they have everywhere.
>chinky has to deal with internet censorship
>project his lack of access to the clearnet on the rest of the world
>he thinks the PrepHole hivemind is located entirely in a server rack in Hiroshimoot's basement in Tokyo
>would use any chance they have to help China win by leaking whatever secret documents they have everywhere.
>US war games
>”we fucking lost badly against X and Y due to them doing everything perfectly and our forces fucking up all the time!”
>”We need to develop new doctrines and weapons tech, pronto!”
>Chinese war games
>”HOLEE FUK! We absolutely crushed our opposition every goddamn time!”
>”We’re fucking perfect and infallible in combat!”
My simulations in Roblox show that China will defeat the US in a week.
China will glow stronger!
maybe neoliberalism was a bad idea.
and hold on this is a radical idea.
intentionally supercharging the the economy of a mortal enemy for the benefit of an extreme minority of economic elites at the expense of american citizens was a really really really really really dumbfuck idea.
I just ran my own simulation of the same scenario 200 times. 23 missiles missed by 2-3km each time, and the last missile somehow ended up hitting Xi.
good morning sirs, you curry smelly shit stained moron
how do you deal with this?
Duh muh wargames
while the US has demonstrated its capability to shoot down ballistic missile, it currently doesn't have the mean to intercept hypersonic weapon like hypersonic glide vehicle (Avangard, DF-ZF) and hypersonic cruise missile (Zircon) which China and Russia have
Yeah, and our railgun and laser weapons programs went suHispaniciously dark after people started yammering about hypersonics all the time. Pure coincidence, I'm sure.
Dont need that complicated of an interceptor when you can angle your nose cone payload 🙂
>We tested our missle against one singular aircraft carrier operating alon for some reason and found that we would win!
So did they test with the rest of the group literally designed to take down missiles?
That’s why the US has a dozen carriers
Such a thing would be a tragedy but those same simulations show a decimated PLA navy as well.
"rare published report"
Hm yes how strange the only time they decide to publish a 'report' on any of their usually highly-secretive anything it just happens to be a "we'd totally win you guys all our weapons are unstoppable". Seems entirely credible.
Gweiloblos, i feel so demolalized
I've been running my own simulations.
>Bring home 25% over two months
>Carefully observe their reaction to this
>Open up the country to trade and diplomacy
>Secure Taiwan and let communism fail on its own
>Chinese Christianity threatens communism like the USSR
We can not let our Taiwanese Christian brothers be taken and tortured or persecuted, and we should not week a global war. A de-escalation would be a strategic move. We could float ships up the West Coast for defense and national morale. We can protect our coasts from here, but we do not need to show weakness to the communists to secure Taiwan.
>We can not let our Taiwanese Christian brothers be taken and tortured or persecuted, and we should not seek* a global war.
It's an extremely tense situation. America clearly has the upper hand here, and a massive navy relatively. Would still be the major force if we started showing signs of de-escalation. But we should leave our Pacific coast unguarded.
>But we should not* leave our Pacific coast unguarded.
We should NOT leave the coast unguarded. Same goes for the Atlantic Coast and Russia. To protect the USA and the American people is the highest purpose of our military.
>simulation run on a mainstream war game platform
Yeah Chang, I'll bet when you put all the perfect on-paper numbers in there it works just great. Now lets see the real world performance numbers.
i have a question
why do these simulations matter when china regularly embarrasses themselves in real-world multinational wargames?
There was a wargame simulation many years ago where Russia would attack Poland, the result was a disaster, Poland suffered huge casualties and NATO would fight a large battle against Russian forces with huge losses on both sides. Meanwhile in reality...
this particular wargame used a tico without Aegis, the wrong carrier (Atlantic/not kitted for forward operations in the contested Pacific), and other sneaky cope tricks to improve odds dramatically... and still only got 80%
that's 80% to hit, not to sink - 4 weeks and hundreds of thousands of pounds of ordinance failed to sink a basically empty the USS America, an old Kitty Hawk sitting still and taking a beating... it had to be detonated from the inside with pre-placed explosives
now imagine that attempt with evasive motion & people on board plugging / fire controlling
while SINKEX tries to make the target as hard to sink as possible, modern US supercarriers can implement many of the same measures while under operation, this is where the billions $USD go and why no one cares about Chinese attempts at cloning them; they look similar superficially, but anyone can build a big empty tub, as Russia's Navy why it needs tugs to even leave dock
short of just lobbing nukes at a carrier and praying the crew hasn't begun taking protective measures; US carriers have been hardened against nukes since the results from tests on the USS Independence came in nearly a century ago... you'd need to get into the megaton range but at that point what the fuck are you doing?
none of that matters to China shills, but I hope the infinite pajeets reading this learned something new
prior to Desert Storm, the US was projecting 30,000 casualties within a month
dude, if the carrier is hit and burned a little, its not operational and easy target for finishing off for the next wave of whatever China decides to throw at it. Once they do enough damage to render carrier inoperational in launching planes, then even supersonic missiles or even subsonic missiles could finish the carrier.
>dude, if the carrier is hit and burned a little, its not operational
(1) doctrine disagrees
(2) history disagrees
you have never seen a supercarrier IRL
>many years ago
there's your problem
Wargames are made under worst case scenario and even then they cut short stuff like supplies.
I read it long time ago, i remember it was set up with both sides having their Army in position for the war unlike the ukraine war.
The wargames were played by six student teams, or approximately five persons each. There were three red teams, representing Russia, China, and North Korea; combatting three blue teams representing Taiwan, Indo-Pacific Command (Korea conflict) and European Command. All of these teams were permitted to coordinate their activities both before the conflict and during. Interestingly, although it was not part of the original player organization the Blue side found it necessary to have a player take on the role of the Joint Staff, to better coordinate global activities.
Prior to the wargame, the students were given a list of approximately 75 items they could invest in that would give them certain advantages during the game. Nearly everything was on the table, from buying an additional carrier or brigade combat team, to taking a shot at getting quantum computing technology to work. Each team was given $200 billion dollars to invest, with the Russians and Chinese being forced to split their funding. Every team invested heavily in hypersonic technology, cyber (offensive and defensive), space, and lasers. The U.S. team also invested a large sum in directed diplomacy. If they had not done so, Germany and two other NATO nations would not have shown up for the fight in Poland. Showing a deepening understanding of the crucial importance of logistics, both red and blue teams used their limited lasers to defend ports and major logistical centers.
>Because the benefits of quantum computing were so massive, the American team spent a huge amount of its investment capital in a failed bid for quantum dominance. In this case, quantum computing might resemble cold fusion — ten years away and always will be. Interestingly, no one wanted another carrier, while everyone invested heavily in artificial intelligence, attack submarines, and stealth squadrons. The U.S. team also invested in upgrading logistics infrastructure, which had a substantial positive impact on sustaining three global fights.
Sorry OP, they won in 20 simulations but the part you're leaving out is that 10,000 simulations were ran.
>Need 24 wunderwaffen to sink one carrier
Even the burgers agree.. https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/09/politics/taiwan-invasion-war-game-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
>A war over Taiwan could leave a victorious US military in as crippled a state as the Chinese forces it defeated.
>At the end of the conflict, at least two US aircraft carriers would lie at the bottom of the Pacific and China’s modern navy, which is the largest in the world, would be in “shambles.”
>Those are among the conclusions the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), made after running what it claims is one of the most extensive war-game simulations ever conducted on a possible conflict over Taiwan
>CSIS ran this war game 24 times to answer two fundamental questions: would the invasion succeed and at what cost?
>The likely answers to those two questions are no and enormous, the CSIS report said.
>“The United States and Japan lose dozens of ships, hundreds of aircraft, and thousands of service members. Such losses would damage the US global position for many years,” the report said. In most scenarios, the US Navy lost two aircraft carriers and 10 to 20 large surface combatants. Approximately 3,200 US troops would be killed in three weeks of combat, nearly half of what the US lost in two decades of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.
>“China also suffers heavily. Its navy is in shambles, the core of its amphibious forces is broken, and tens of thousands of soldiers are prisoners of war,” it said. The report estimated China would suffer about 10,000 troops killed and lose 155 combat aircraft and 138 major ships.
>The scenarios paint a bleak future for Taiwan, even if a Chinese invasion doesn’t succeed.
>“While Taiwan’s military is unbroken, it is severely degraded and left to defend a damaged economy on an island without electricity and basic services,” the report. The island’s army would suffer about 3,500 casualties, and all 26 destroyers and frigates in its navy will be sunk, the report said.
>Japan is likely to lose more than 100 combat aircraft and 26 warships while US military bases on its home territory come under Chinese attack, the report found.