Does Australia need Long Range Firepower
It would seem logical to start serious co-operation with the Indonesian's and the Philippines I'd say - the TNI has a big army , a small air force and a "coastal/brown water" navy. Working together with the RAN and the RAAF would give the high end high tech a big boost while leveraging a substantial ground force. If you HAVE to fight better to do it N of Sulawesi than outside Broome
Australia’s Strategic Update: What it means for Indonesia
The Indonesian archipelago would play a critical strategic role in any confrontation with China- including further afield in north east Asia or Taiwan . China's vulnerability to energy and trade through the shipping routes is significant and it would not be difficult to blockade with regional cooperation. China is well aware of this which is why I find their current spread of aggression odd.
The article above provided an excellent overview of the complexities of dealing with Indonesia from an Australian perspective.
The Indonesian archipelago would play a critical strategic role in any confrontation with China- including further afield in north east Asia or Taiwan . China's vulnerability to energy and trade through the shipping routes is significant and it would not be difficult to blockade with regional cooperation. China is well aware of this which is why I find their current spread of aggression odd.
The article above provided an excellent overview of the complexities of dealing with Indonesia from an Australian perspective.
My Indonesian colleague who runs an airline there and has lived there for the past 30 years tells me that the weak point is West Papua and China has been pumping huge money into PNG and supporting the West Papua Movement through the "back door".
I guess the question is where are you going to fight and who are you fighting?
It's hard to see the Red Army ploughing through Indonesia so you're thinking of fighting the Chinese Navy and Air Force somewhere north of Indonesia & PNG. You have to ask if that is likely or effective unless you are fighting alongside the USA - in which case Australia is going to be a bit of a side-show to the main action which will take place much further north - Taiwan and the N Pacific
It's hard to see the Red Army ploughing through Indonesia so you're thinking of fighting the Chinese Navy and Air Force somewhere north of Indonesia & PNG. You have to ask if that is likely or effective unless you are fighting alongside the USA - in which case Australia is going to be a bit of a side-show to the main action which will take place much further north - Taiwan and the N Pacific
They've had absolutely no problems coming right down to the Coral Sea!
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-...20war%20games.
Have a look at a map to see how close that is.
China has a port and big airfield in Solomons, Vanuatu and has done a deal with Bougainville plus big bucks in PNG and a new arrangement in Kiribati. Check the map and approaches to Australia. Almost a copy of the Japanese blueprint in WW2...
"What makes you think they'd stay North of Indonesia?"
I don't see them trying to invade 273 million Indonesians - most of whom seem to have quite determined views on the Chinese.
I don't see them trying to invade 273 million Indonesians - most of whom seem to have quite determined views on the Chinese.
With no disrespect intended - I think you're missing the point.
If we're talking hot war - they don't need to invade Indonesia - you're thinking land or land air campaign.
The PLA Navy are quite capable of denying Australian sea-lanes, interdicting or simply harassing shipping.
In fact they're transitioning right now from being a green water navy, to a blue water navy.
They have a nascent carrier capability to project air-power at distance and in addition, operate nearly 70 diesel electric and nuclear boats.
China could effectively sail right around Indonesia and any other country in the way and make things very, very difficult for Australia if it really needed to.
They don't need to put a single PLA boot on Australian soil, or anywhere else in South East Asia to do so.
In my view, that's the most likely scenario for a shooting war - a drawn out air-sea campaign at long distance, with isolated vessels sunk - jets shot down BVR - and if they got really irritated - drop a cruise missile or two with a conventional warhead on one or two Australian bases.
Not all out total war.
The yellow hordes aren't going to come sweeping over the Timor Sea in landing craft after they've blitzkrieged their way through every country between us and them.
What have we got that they want - some food producing land, a lot of mineral resources, and a few irritating US bases?
That would be a similar scenario to the one facing Japan during WW2, and why the Japanese were never seriously going to invade Oz.
The Japanese Naval high command was gung ho - but the Army said `don't be crazy, think of how long the supply lines would be.'
I think the Chinese are far more likely to get so cocksure that they'll feel they can reach out at long range and punch us a couple of times to remind us who's boss in the neighbourhood.
I agree with Hugh White's assessment.
We need nuclear powered boats with conventional cruise missiles, plus small diesel electrics for the work that's currently being done in the South China Sea littoral waters, and as many underwater UAVs as we can afford.
Not more surface ships and certainly not the Collins successor.
In addition to ABM defence interceptors, we need more F-35s and LRASMs.
And given the lead time we need to start thinking right now about a domestically developed nuclear deterrent.
EDIT: Noting that it is Wikipedia:
If we're talking hot war - they don't need to invade Indonesia - you're thinking land or land air campaign.
The PLA Navy are quite capable of denying Australian sea-lanes, interdicting or simply harassing shipping.
In fact they're transitioning right now from being a green water navy, to a blue water navy.
They have a nascent carrier capability to project air-power at distance and in addition, operate nearly 70 diesel electric and nuclear boats.
China could effectively sail right around Indonesia and any other country in the way and make things very, very difficult for Australia if it really needed to.
They don't need to put a single PLA boot on Australian soil, or anywhere else in South East Asia to do so.
In my view, that's the most likely scenario for a shooting war - a drawn out air-sea campaign at long distance, with isolated vessels sunk - jets shot down BVR - and if they got really irritated - drop a cruise missile or two with a conventional warhead on one or two Australian bases.
Not all out total war.
The yellow hordes aren't going to come sweeping over the Timor Sea in landing craft after they've blitzkrieged their way through every country between us and them.
What have we got that they want - some food producing land, a lot of mineral resources, and a few irritating US bases?
That would be a similar scenario to the one facing Japan during WW2, and why the Japanese were never seriously going to invade Oz.
The Japanese Naval high command was gung ho - but the Army said `don't be crazy, think of how long the supply lines would be.'
I think the Chinese are far more likely to get so cocksure that they'll feel they can reach out at long range and punch us a couple of times to remind us who's boss in the neighbourhood.
I agree with Hugh White's assessment.
We need nuclear powered boats with conventional cruise missiles, plus small diesel electrics for the work that's currently being done in the South China Sea littoral waters, and as many underwater UAVs as we can afford.
Not more surface ships and certainly not the Collins successor.
In addition to ABM defence interceptors, we need more F-35s and LRASMs.
And given the lead time we need to start thinking right now about a domestically developed nuclear deterrent.
EDIT: Noting that it is Wikipedia:
The PLAN's ambitions include operating out to the first and second island chains, as far as the South Pacific near Australia, and spanning to the Aleutian islands, and operations extending to the Straits of Malacca near the Indian Ocean.[127]The future PLAN fleet will be composed of a balance of combatant assets aimed at maximising the PLAN's fighting effectiveness. On the high end, there would be modern destroyers equipped with long-range air defense missiles (Type 052B, Type 052C, Type 052D, Type 051C and Type 055); destroyers armed with supersonic anti-ship missiles (Sovremenny class); advanced nuclear-powered attack and ballistic missile submarines (Type 093, Type 095, Type 094, Type 096); advanced conventional attack submarines (Kilo and Yuan classes); aircraft carriers (Type 001A, Type 002 and Type 003) and large amphibious warfare vessels (Type 071 and Type 075) capable of mobilizing troops at long distances.
Last edited by tartare; 8th Jul 2020 at 04:42.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What have we got that they want - some food producing land, a lot of mineral resources, and a few irritating US bases?
Is this for real. Some weapon industryvlobbyist can learn something here.
Is this for real. Some weapon industryvlobbyist can learn something here.
"As the strategic environment of the Indo-Pacific deteriorates, Australia’s relationship with Indonesia will assume even greater importance. Canberra must be ready to accept, however, that despite growing strategic convergence, its views will not always align with those in Jakarta, and there are relationship risks ahead that require policy consideration now" -thanks gnadenburg - it's clearly an issue - not everything each country values is the same in the other - but it may be a case of my enemies enemy is my friend I suspect in this case.
tatare - I think you need to remember the distances - from the northern most point of Iran Jaya to Darwin is 1400 kms - as post 20 points out that really restricts how many RAAF fighters can go north (2) and that applies in spades to anyone coming the other way. It's easy to say " the Chinese can just sail around Indonesia" but from the N end of the Philippines to New Caledonia by sea is 6700 kms - roughly the same as from Murmansk to Boston Harbor
...and do those sorts of distances prove any obstacle at all to a fully embarked Chinese nuclear powered carrier?
China is rapidly developing that capability - the Type 004.
Or to a nuclear powered submarine?
Their boats might be noisy now... how about in a decade?
Or to a large unmanned, underwater vehicle?
Cheaper and quicker to develop than anything manned.
Following the logic of your argument, absent ICBMs, Australia shouldn't need to worry about a military threat from China because we're simply too far away, and the Indonesians and others are an obstacle?
In the medium to long term, the threat clearly is not just focused north of Indonesia, or PNG for that matter, or predicated on the Chinese having large, well developed bases in Thailand or the South West Pacific to operate from.
Anyone who believes Chinese assertions that they are simply defending to the Nine Dash Line or their immediate neighbours is naive in my view.
Every sign points towards them wanting long term to hold at threat a huge arc from the Bay of Bengal, down as far as the Coral Sea, and possibly even out as far as the mid Pacific.
China is rapidly developing that capability - the Type 004.
Or to a nuclear powered submarine?
Their boats might be noisy now... how about in a decade?
Or to a large unmanned, underwater vehicle?
Cheaper and quicker to develop than anything manned.
Following the logic of your argument, absent ICBMs, Australia shouldn't need to worry about a military threat from China because we're simply too far away, and the Indonesians and others are an obstacle?
In the medium to long term, the threat clearly is not just focused north of Indonesia, or PNG for that matter, or predicated on the Chinese having large, well developed bases in Thailand or the South West Pacific to operate from.
Anyone who believes Chinese assertions that they are simply defending to the Nine Dash Line or their immediate neighbours is naive in my view.
Every sign points towards them wanting long term to hold at threat a huge arc from the Bay of Bengal, down as far as the Coral Sea, and possibly even out as far as the mid Pacific.
For me the issue is not how many carriers and subs the Chinese military has but its the way they are controlled and commanded. Central command such as the CCP has over the military does not lend itself to the flexibility and swiftness of decision making that would be required in a major conflict. It was only after Stalin took away the political control of its military that it started to perform well. The Japanese also seriously uinderestimated US industrial capacity when they thought they could knock the US out of the Pacific. I can see the CCP making the same mistake as they view their system of government to be morally and culturally superior. The hope is that the current defense policy is sufficient to warn the CCP that Australia is not asleep at the wheel and that our current diplomatic position indicates that we are not easily intimidated (unless you're a Labor politician).
To be clear, the likely scenario under which I see actual armed conflict happening is isolated long-range clashes.
Australia does or does not do something to which a hegemonic and aggressive China objects - and they take physical revenge at distance.
There was a very interesting line or two in the policy that seemed to allude to developing some sort of Australian SOSUS type capability.
Also that the eastern arc of JINDALEE would be expanded.
That spoke volumes in terms of the proximity of the threat to the Australian coast, and new directions it might come from.
EDIT - there's already quite a bit of hardware on the seafloor further north...
https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/20...se-submarines/
Last edited by tartare; 9th Jul 2020 at 01:45.
The Chinese are not immune to the basic logistic challenges other nations have, nuclear powered or not.
Although some quarters are suggesting Australia arm itself heavily in area denial capabilities, to "rip the arm off" a potential aggressor in the South West Pacific, I think this is more a firm and reliable commitment to the US alliance.
Australia did not feature in War Plan Orange. Though once the US bloodied, in the opening months of WW2, Australia became important strategically in the Battle of the Pacific. The Japanese addressed this, although did not have the capabilities to interdict US operations over the vast distances required. US submarine operations for instance, based out of Fremantle WA, operated into the no-less significant today ( to the Chinese if the Malacca blockaded ) maritime choke points of Sunda/Lombok/Bali straits. With advancing technologies and the vulnerabilities of US bases further north, Australia is slowly featuring heavily in US planning. Stockpiling of munitions and fuel is a clear indicator. No different to WW2 except that this time around, Australia should be far better equipped for the types of conflicts envisaged. With a Fifth Generation air force and a naval build up underway ( though oddly lagging sub-surface ) the Australian military is being well positioned to integrate with the US in countering China militarily. As well as adding to the efforts of deeper developing alliances with regional countries at varying levels.
Australia did not feature in War Plan Orange. Though once the US bloodied, in the opening months of WW2, Australia became important strategically in the Battle of the Pacific. The Japanese addressed this, although did not have the capabilities to interdict US operations over the vast distances required. US submarine operations for instance, based out of Fremantle WA, operated into the no-less significant today ( to the Chinese if the Malacca blockaded ) maritime choke points of Sunda/Lombok/Bali straits. With advancing technologies and the vulnerabilities of US bases further north, Australia is slowly featuring heavily in US planning. Stockpiling of munitions and fuel is a clear indicator. No different to WW2 except that this time around, Australia should be far better equipped for the types of conflicts envisaged. With a Fifth Generation air force and a naval build up underway ( though oddly lagging sub-surface ) the Australian military is being well positioned to integrate with the US in countering China militarily. As well as adding to the efforts of deeper developing alliances with regional countries at varying levels.
You make a good point. Other than an initial skirmish, I don’t anticipate any one nation will militarily oppose China. If the Chinese carrier sails towards Australia with ill intent, there will be a number of nations involved.
I read that Kings Bay cost the US taxpayer over $ 5Bn dollars in 2017 cash terms for the base alone. You'd have to buy the boats from the Americans (doubtful), the Brits (impossible) as they can't build fast enough) or of course the French . Interestingly the Brazilians are building their own SSN with French help but it was laid down in 2017 and isn't expected to be launched until maybe 2030.... notional cost for the vessel alone is $ 7.4 Bn
Ironically, we are already in effect procuring nuclear boats.
The attack class sub or Short-Fin Barracuda, is a diesel-electric modification of the French nuclear Barracuda class boat.
It's European, and a significant modification to an existing design, creating one of the largest diesel-electric boats in existence.
What could possibly go wrong...?
The attack class sub or Short-Fin Barracuda, is a diesel-electric modification of the French nuclear Barracuda class boat.
It's European, and a significant modification to an existing design, creating one of the largest diesel-electric boats in existence.
What could possibly go wrong...?
The RAAF will be able to deploy many dozens of F35's and Super Hornets in the north ( Darwin-Tindal ). Integrated with all the add-ons of expanded Jindalee, early warning aircraft, tankers and ISR and electronic warfare aircraft. SAM's and ABM's are sort capabilities ( as China will develop longer range missiles ) . Anti-surface and anti-submarine capabilities are being modernised- so with battles further north sending surface assets to the Arafura and Timor Sea unlikely and sub-surface will not be without risk too. So the US will have bases in Australia ably defended locally. Long range US aircraft have secure bases with the expected loss of Guam.
The lone-ranger scenarios of the RAAF operating over vast distances fill some scenarios but not all.
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 12th Jul 2020 at 03:46.
