Interesting video simulations here of war - marginal Chinese victory against India in Himalayas but not much territory gained. US would not be able to capture Chinese mainland territory in case of U.S. - China War.
I’m a couple minutes into the Sino-US war video and I can’t watch it anymore. By depicting a 2020 war in a WW1 fashion, it’s nothing more than a money grab from people who wants to masturbate and feel good. I would advise anyone who are genuinely interested in understanding how a potential conflict would play out to refrain from watching his videos.
He describes 2020 air combat as if it’s one-on-one every time. So China has j20s and since the US has more of them that is no longer worth addressing? No, that is totally wrong, it’s not trench attrition warfare. Fifth-gen fighters aren’t never designed to engage each other, they’re meant to move in undetected with their stealth and high speed and assassinate critical junctures of combat systems. What if the j20s shoot down the AWACS and refuelling air tankers? How many of them can you field at the same time? 2-3 at most. When you take them down the whole flotilla becomes blind from around 200km onwards and the j20s will take down a whole squadron of fourth-gen planes and leave before the F-22 can reinforce. Of course he doesn’t talk about that tactic as if that’s impossible to happen. Btw no one knows how many j20s are in service, there’s no reason to believe a random YouTube guy that there are only 40 of them. Plus the F-22 only has a paltry combat radius of 500 miles, and so if the Chinese ambushes the operation outside its range the mission is likely busted.
Then he suddenly states that aircraft carriers should be fielded to contest air superiority, without taking into account the danger anti-ship ballistic missiles poses. The Chinese test launched two AShBMs (one DF-21 and the other a DF-26, both of which have been commissioned for at least 5 years) last month and successfully hit a decommissioned supply ship. And this binkov guy thinks the US can drive aircraft carriers into the East China Sea without mentioning it would be one-way suicide mission. The shitty F-35B only has a combat radius of 520 miles and an LHD will have to get suicidally close to the Chinese mainland to utilise them
He has next to no knowledge to missiles and interception systems. He simply “forgets” to mention the DF-17, the only supersonic missile in the world, and the fact that the US currently do not have any assets capable of intercepting it. Then he says the PAC-3 is enough already. That is absolutely incorrect when those can’t even intercept a DF-15. Expect to lose at least half of the japanese air bases once a war starts, and there is no way the US can deploy thousands of aircraft to Japan as he suggests. Japan may have 60 commercial airports but that doesn’t mean all of them can be appropriated and converted for military use at the same time. Are the fuel storages reinforced and hardened against blasts? If there is not enough equipment to quickly repair damage done to a runway from missile strikes there is no reason to appropriate 60 commercial airports at once. And surely there is not.
I stopped watching 6 minutes into the video.
so in 6 minutes he:
1. Makes up numbers of Chinese fifth-gen fighters.
2. Imagines one-on-one plane duels are going to be a thing.
3. Neglects to mention the critical roles support planes play in modern warfare and their vulnerability.
4. Thinks aircraft carriers can be used to contest air superiority with a real opponent like China.
5. Doesn’t know AShBMs are a thing and they work.
6. Doesn’t acknowledge supersonic missiles are unstoppable with what we have currently.
7. Dismisses China’s most powerful arm, the Rocket Force as “mostly focused on Taiwan”.
8. Doesn’t know PACs are inadequate.
9. Thinks the US has an infinite amount of supplies, equipment and most importantly, ground and engineering personnel to convert 60 commercial airports into military ones in a short time.
Overall he would make a good WW1 general.