OpWar: CVSG vs HQ-9 (Taiwan Invasion Scenario)

Take command of air and naval assets from post-WW2 to the near future in tactical and operational scale, complete with historical and hypothetical scenarios and an integrated scenario editor.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
User avatar
Nemo121
Posts: 5838
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:15 am
Contact:

OpWar: CVSG vs HQ-9 (Taiwan Invasion Scenario)

Post by Nemo121 »

Just posting this as I thought people here might be interested in an examination of SEAD/DEAD vs a possible Chinese IADS complex post-Taiwan invasion. Features an examination of various attack modalities albeit somewhat contrived to justify the scenario. Happy to hear feedback.

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Faceplate
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2022 3:05 pm

Re: OpWar: CVSG vs HQ-9 (Taiwan Invasion Scenario)

Post by Faceplate »

An excellent presentation, and good humour. Very much looking foward to more.

Perhaps a shorter-ranged WRA on the PLAAF’s missiles would have helped the PL-10s, though to negligible effect? I sometimes use the editor to put cruise missiles into blobs, rather than staggered columns, to give SAMs less time between the first and last targets (a nearly impossible task with only waypoints, and no editor). This has a big effect, and seems a reasonable effort for real planners. PLAAF standardization to the PL-15 is worrying. The presence of J-20s seems like the primary simple choice that could have had a notable effect.

Although it entails needless complication of scope, I imagine PLAN radar pickets discovering the US 4.5 Gen. main effort in advance, only for the PLAAF response to be intercepted by F-35s from another axis, opening the way to Taiwan.

Clicking the blue upward arrow above the ‘Plot Course’ button moves that bar of coloured buttons, giving more screen space, which may be good. The volume increases at 15:40, decreases at 16:23, increasing again at 25:34.

For the counterblow video, I am interested in Chinese use of supersonic drone scouts (WZ-8) to find the CVSG. If any PLA SATCOM works to let WZ-8s phone home, this might reveal, give midcourse—and maybe almost terminal—updates on the CVSG to ballistic missiles. Over-the-horizon radar, too, unless knocked out before the scenario.
User avatar
Nemo121
Posts: 5838
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:15 am
Contact:

Re: OpWar: CVSG vs HQ-9 (Taiwan Invasion Scenario)

Post by Nemo121 »

Yes, I didn’t think to use the editor to move the cruise missiles into blobs. I’m sure that would have helped. We tried to do it with waypoints but it didn’t work out well.

I agree J-20s would have helped but I reasoned that with their range and rarity they wouldn’t be forward-based in Taiwan but would be based on the coast of West Taiwan. You can expect to see the J-20s come into play in the counter-attack. Their range should be very helpful.

I hadn’t known that about removing those buttons. I’ll do that, it’ll help a lot. Thanks.

As re: the sound. Yeah, I missed that. This is my first self-edited YouTube video so still. Very much learning the editor and learning how to equalise audio.

WZ-8. Yes, you can expect to see the 10th Air Division’s affiliated WZ-8 drone unit play a part. The Chinese do love redundancy in their kill chains.

Thanks for the feedback.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
kahta
Posts: 542
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2019 6:42 pm
Location: Arkansas

Re: OpWar: CVSG vs HQ-9 (Taiwan Invasion Scenario)

Post by kahta »

This is incredible. Great work!
coh7res
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 2:36 am

Re: OpWar: CVSG vs HQ-9 (Taiwan Invasion Scenario)

Post by coh7res »

Great video!

CHiP
Post Reply

Return to “Command: Modern Operations series”