中國爆出新銳系統︰WU-14

中國爆出新銳系統︰WU-14

作者︰Dasein

二零一四年一月﹐美國媒體引述美國國防部﹐指中國在上周四成功試驗音速10倍飛行器（美國給予代號WU-14）。對此﹐中國國防部指「中方在境內進行科研試驗是正常，強調有關試驗不針對任何國家。」[1]當然﹐中國國防部說的只是官腔話﹐任何有軍事素養的人都應該明白建軍的方針就是針對潛在交戰國﹐基於對手的強弱和自己的能力﹐建軍的內容和強度都會有所不同。南非的潛在對手是相對弱的安哥拉﹐資源投放自然和全球性霸權美國不同。中國國內軍事研究會不針對他國？那只有中國和全世界為敵才可能沒有針對性。中國成功研究超高速打擊系統﹐不論她葫蘆內賣的是甚麼藥﹐她針對的對手不外乎是台灣（以一千枝以上的彈導飛彈瞄準絕對是明目張膽的針對吧！）、美國、日本、南韓、俄羅斯。

[Pic 1: American PGS]

 

據各方的報導﹐我們暫時知道WU-14在100公里（100000米﹐330000尺）的高度成功以10倍音速飛行。相比起美國的超音速飛行器（如X-51[2]﹐70000尺高飛行）﹐WU-14更像以彈導飛彈的模式飛行（飛行高度150公里以上[3]）。事實上﹐在100公里的高度上﹐在空氣中已經沒有氧[4]﹐因此WU-14將使用和火箭一樣的推進方式﹐內置燃料和氧化物飛行。而美國的X-51在21公里高飛行﹐空氣有5%的氧﹐因此X-51可使用JP-7美軍標準燃料或乙烯。

由此可見﹐與其說WU-14是彷美國X-51、HSSW[5]、DARPA[6]計劃﹐它飛行的性質比較像中程彈導飛彈採用高空高速彈道。如此一來﹐WU-14只是另一版本的彈導科技。雖然它仍然十分令人在意﹐卻不是和X-51同一層次。當然﹐真相有可能是傳媒資料出錯﹐或是美方有故意誤導以保護情報源。

[Pic 2]

回歸事情最重要的核心︰WU-14的用途。參看在新聞中被比較的美國科技﹐除了實驗機就是偵察機和飛彈。例如﹐美國的Prompt Global Strike (PGS)[7]就走約50000尺上飛行。如果WU-14是以運輸為主要目的﹐我們不禁要問中國究竟在甚麼地方有快速戰略補運的需要？考慮到成本和WU-14的高彈度模式﹐筆者認為WU-14基本上不可能有運輸功能。如果WU-14是偵察機﹐它自然不會採用高彈度令畫面效果變差。事實上﹐如果勉強把WU-14用作偵察機﹐它照相的效果甚至不會比衛星好﹐畢竟衛星有極優良的穩定性和放置儀器的體積。因此﹐WU-14主要的功能應該是作為飛彈﹐特別是傳統武力飛彈。事實上﹐PGS在美國亦是以傳統武力載具自居。

WU-14作為傳統武力載具明確地說明兩件事︰就算WU-14有足夠射程﹐它基本上不針對核國家的本土（因為核國家為防止WU-14載有核武﹐可能會在WU-14著地前展開真正的核反擊）﹐因此基本上排除了美國本土和俄國。另一方面﹐WU-14作為傳統武力載具﹐意味中國和被攻擊者應該有一定戰術層面的接觸﹐因此被攻擊者和中國的距離很短。考慮中國的潛在對手﹐WU-14只需具備1000公里內的射程即可。

說到這裡﹐我想大家都會問︰既然WU-14不是走美國一棣相對低軌道路線﹐那WU-14和中、短程彈導飛彈不就一樣嗎？我認為WU-14和中、短程彈導飛彈的分別在於控制權和發射方式。

據<<漢和防務評論>>111號<<中國繼續威脅台灣>>一文所提到﹐中國第24集團軍在行動使命2013B中出現對台作戰地圖﹐作戰室有一名陸軍少將和一名空軍少將﹐但沒有出現海軍和二炮主官。這個影像多少意味中方彈導飛彈沒有在戰術支援攻台的意思。由於WU-14理應由空軍節制而非二炮（二炮手執陸基彈導飛彈的控制權）﹐所以WU-14就成了少數可以戰術上對台、日快速反應的空軍系統。另一點要留意的是﹐WU-14未來可能會具備空射能力﹐令WU-14戰術彈性和生存性提升。

總括而言﹐WU-14還在測試中﹐不論是高度、速度、作戰距離等都不為世人所肯定（大概只有美國和中國官員例外）﹐要在今天對它大加評論還是有點早。但無可否認的是﹐WU-14是衝著台、日和駐日美軍而來。WU-14可能令台、日空軍基地大幅地下化和補強﹐亦可能令美國的NMD系統在日本快速成長。THAAD會在台灣落地生根嗎？WU-14亦將是其中一個因素。另一方面看﹐WU-14的存在將可能令有STOVL能力的F-35B在東亞更好賣。

 

 

Picture Source:

[Pic 1]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://news.malaysianreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/supersonic-china-delivery-vehicle.WU-14.jpg

[Pic 2]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014 4http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/PLA_ballistic_missiles_range.jpg

 

 

Reference:

[1]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://news.now.com/home/international/player?newsId=90578

[2]: Boeing X-51, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-51

[3]: ICBM, Viewed 16th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercontinental_ballistic_missile

[4]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://www.altitude.org/air_pressure.php

[5]: HSSW, Lockheed Martin, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/high-speed-strike-weapon--hssw--.html

[6]: DARPA Falcon Project, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Falcon_Project

[7]: Prompt Global Strike, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prompt_Global_Strike

 

 

China New Hypersonic Vehicle: WU-14

China New Hypersonic Vehicle: WU-14

Author: Dasein

                In 2014, some of the US media said China successfully tested a Mach 10 hypersonic vehicle, named WU-14 by the US government. The media said WU-14 worked in 100km above the sea level. 100km is an abnormal altitude for hypersonic vehicle because the US hypersonic transport vehicle (HTV) worked in a much lower altitude, let say 70000ft for X-51 [1]. It seems that WU-14 was flying as ballistic missiles (Altitude: 150km up [3]). In the sky 100km above the sea, there is no oxygen [4], therefore WU-41 is a rocket powered vehicle. For 70000ft sky level, X-51 can enjoy 5% oxygen in the sky, therefore X-51 is powered by JP-7 (the US military fuel) or ethylene.

[Pic 1: American PGS]

Regards to the altitude, WU-14 is not very much alike with X-51, HSSW [5] or DARPA [6] programme. I would say WU-14 is some kind of ballistic technology. WU-14 can be very sophisticated, but it may not as complicated as the cutting edge HTV technology.

[Pic 2]

                It would be important for us to understand more about what WU-14 can do. Regard to the US HTVs, they are usually experimental planes, reconnaissance planes or missile vehicles. For example, Prompt Global Strike (PGS) [7] is a conventional missile system operating 50000ft above the sea level. It seems that China has no demand in using HTV as transportation vehicles. Also, the very high altitude of WU-14 makes it unlikely to be reconnaissance planes because WU-14 may not provide images better than satellite images. Eventually, it is more likely for WU-14 to be developed as weapon vehicle.

                If WU-14 is designed to carry conventional weapons, we can implied 2 facts: WU-14 is not designed to fight against nuclear states, such as the US and Russia, because a real nuclear strike back will be fired before WU-14 lands on enemy soil. Also, WU-14 can provide a strategical support. Taking the potential war zones into account, WU-14 should have range about 1000km in order to cover South Korea, some part of Japan and Taiwan.

                Some people would think WU-14 is just a short range ballistic missile. However, I believe that there are some differences between WU-14 system and ballistic missile.

                With reference to Kanwa Defence Review (KDR) (No.111), KDR did not noticed any Naval nor Second Artillery Corps officer in a military drill against Taiwan. In other words, there could be no ballistic missiles for supporting military action strategically. WU-14 can be the one option that the Air Force in hand for rapid air support.

                To sum up, WU-14 is a vehicle filled with many unknowns. However, it is almost certain that WU-14 is designed to fight against Taiwan and Japan. WU-14 could become the best advertisement for F-35B (STOVL plane), THAAD and NMD system in the Far East.

 

Picture Source:

[Pic 1]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://news.malaysianreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/supersonic-china-delivery-vehicle.WU-14.jpg

[Pic 2]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014 4http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/PLA_ballistic_missiles_range.jpg

 

 

Reference:

[1]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://news.now.com/home/international/player?newsId=90578

[2]: Boeing X-51, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-51

[3]: ICBM, Viewed 16th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercontinental_ballistic_missile

[4]: Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://www.altitude.org/air_pressure.php

[5]: HSSW, Lockheed Martin, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/high-speed-strike-weapon--hssw--.html

[6]: DARPA Falcon Project, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Falcon_Project

[7]: Prompt Global Strike, Viewed 16^th Jan, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prompt_Global_Strike

 

Occupy Central and Taiwan Military Sales

Occupy Central and Taiwan Military Sales

The Glocal: The Glocal
My Facebook Page: FB Page

Author: Dasein

                In 1989, Tiananmen massacre happened in Beijing, the mainland China was embargoed because the PLA was responsible for the death of the protestors in Tiananmen Square. Taiwan had the first opportunity in purchasing modern weapons after August 17 communiqué. For years of military development after 1989, Taiwan’s Air Force and Navy had been significantly strengthened by the U.S. and France modern weapons, such as F-16, Mirage 2000-5 and E-2T.

                In 2013, Hong Kong government claimed that we were developing our own universal suffrage. However, people in Hong Kong believed that we were going to have a Chinese-style universal suffrage only, instead of a fair and equal election. Therefore, Occupy Central, led by Prof. Benny Tai from Hong Kong University, planned to paralyses Central ( Financial and political hub of Hong Kong) in order to give pressure to Hong Kong government for a better universal suffrage plan in late 2014. Hopefully, Hong Kong will have real democracy.

 

    

 [Pic 1]

                However, not everyone in Hong Kong are optimistic about Occupy Central. Some people believe that Occupy Central will come with a bloody end. Tiananmen massacre may have a twins brothers in Central in 2014. Regardless of who will be in charge of handling Occupy Central (Hong Kong Police or PLA), no one can rule out the possibility of bloody end.

 

 

[Pic 2]

 

 

[Pic 3]

                If Hong Kong police or PLA turns Central into bloody red for clearing Occupy Central, China will be embargoed once again after 1989. If so, Taiwan will have opportunity to import better weapons again. In fact, Occupy Central induces volatility to regional political situation. Military sales to Taiwan has been less costly for every forward steps that Occupy Central moves because expected cost = P(embargo)Cost(embargo) + [1-P(embargo)]Cost( no embargo).

                Nowadays, Dassault Rafale fighter planes are now looking for a new customer so badly. The French government and Dassault would like to produce more Rafales in order to reduce its unit cost. In fact, Taiwan and France had a secret talk about exporting Rafale to Taiwan in 2008 [1]. Also, Taiwan has experience in using Dassault Mirage 2000-5, it makes Taiwan to be a good potential clients for Rafale.

[Pic 4]

                On the other hand, Pacific region is being more concerned by France [2], it would be logical for France exporting Rafale to Taiwan for more regional influence.

                It is not hard to deduce that Taiwan will be more attractive to Dassault if Occupy Central is turning from plan to reality. However, Dassault and France can only gain the highest profit if they make a deal with Taiwan before Occupy Central happens. Dassault will face a huge competition from the U.S, Europe and Sweden if they try to sell Rafale to Taiwan after the second China embargo. However, France will face political and financial pressure from China alone if she makes a wrong bet, such as peaceful end of Occupy Central. Therefore, France have to bet if Occupy Central will turn into a bloody end or not.

                However, Taiwan does not have a good experience in using Mirage 2000-5, it is expensive but hard to maintain. Rafale may not be the best option for Taiwan if Taiwan can select any fighter planes she wants. Also, France does not have a clean record in La Fayette Class sales to Taiwan. I do not think Rafale would be relatively more attractive than its counterparts (F-16, Gripen, EF-2000) when the second China embargo comes true. Therefore, making a deal before Occupy Central happens could be the only option for France if France want to export Rafale to Taiwan.

                Of course, my theory is not only work for France but any other countries. However, not every countries are so urgently looking for a new clients. Therefore, France could be the only gambler here. The political future of little Hong Kong could be one of the biggest casino in the world once again.

 

Picture Source:

[Pic 1]: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Occupy_Central_Press_Con.jpg/300px-Occupy_Central_Press_Con.jpg

[Pic 2]: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEdiHSMD6pDVz9Z2NfD534d05hFl6nx38NznKqgE6WIN_ljxJzjyI6zZnX_3F7EUct1SqmTlNUk-7xq4C4GdxQPl9hNMQXozkZWdhXX5ESDK6RHLX50UekX6X_NemBh_eMCUnYg2mdLeDE/s1600/tiananmen.jpg

[Pic 3]: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/zh-yue/0/07/250px-JUNE4-0P.jpg

[Pic 4]: http://defense-update.com/images_new/rafale.jpg

 

Reference:

[1]: http://www.stnn.cc:82/hk_taiwan/200802/t20080223_736393.html

 

[2]: Reissa Su, France President to Visit New Zealand for the First Time, PM John Key Seeks EU Free Trade Agreement, International Business Times, viewed 4^th Jan, 2014, http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/509089/20130926/new-zealand-france-hollande-south-pacific-g20.htm#.UsfPbZWIpjo

 

 

 

佔領中環與台灣軍售

佔領中環與台灣軍售

The Glocal: The Glocal
Facebook Page: FB Page

作者︰Dasein

                在八一七公報後﹐美國對台售武的質和量均持續下降。在五零、六零年代雄霸遠東海空的台灣海空二軍﹐在八十年代初竟走到戰力青黃不接的境地。在六四事件前﹐台方軍事採購進度一直未如理想﹐當時台灣海軍除了老舊的陽字級驅逐艦（最老的陽字艦為瀋陽艦﹐1945年由美國製造﹐2006年在台除役﹐作戰近61年）就沒有可靠的海上武力﹐成功艦的製造亦因八一七公報受阻。當時﹐台灣空軍亦只剩下F-104和F-5而未能購得F-20﹐台灣自然不可能獲得更先進的F-16。

                這個重中輕台的歷史潮流輕易地被中共一個決策所改變。1989年6月4日﹐中國發生了天安門事件。以美國為首的西方國家對中國展開禁運﹐在中國形象和影響力下跌到谷底的時候﹐台灣軍購出現重大轉機。台灣空軍在多年間獲F-16、E-2T和幻象2000﹐相比起八十年代時連F-20也買不到的處境﹐實在是非常不同。至於台灣海軍﹐他們亦順利新建和租借多艦﹐戰力躍升。

                二零一三年﹐香港政府指香港已經走到普選的「大直路」。可是﹐中央似乎有意將「中國式民主」在香港體現出來。眼看香港未來的選舉未必「普及而平等」﹐以戴耀廷教授為首的佔中運動很大可能會在二零一四年佔領中環﹐逼政府讓步。

[Pic 1]

                對於佔中的結局各派都有不同的想法︰和平與不和平、流血與不流血、成功與不成功。究竟哪一派的預言較合理﹐這已經不是筆者專長﹐大家可自行問一下Google神。但無可否認的是﹐不論港府、中央（別給我說警務是香港內政﹐中央不會參與這種天真話）誰出面應付佔中（指一般人潮管理﹐亦指「清場」）﹐誰都無法排除流血的可能性。

[Pic 2]

[Pic 3]

                只要佔中出現紅色的句號﹐中國再被世界拋棄就絕非不可能。中國持有美國大量的債務﹐美國絕對樂意以人道理由不還錢、世界廉價工廠正由中國轉到東南亞令中國的重要性下降、歐洲亦不時在貿易上看中方不順眼。雖然西方在中國有好處﹐但中方亦有依賴外國的地方﹐誰都不單方面需要誰。在佔中的迷霧下﹐中西關係是一個未知數。

                對於台灣和西方軍火商而言﹐佔中是一個排除中國影響力的契機。在香港未來充滿未知數的今天﹐想必已經有商機出現。正如股市一樣﹐只要未來不穩就可以用衍生工具平衡風險﹐在佔中未出現的時候﹐軍火商對台交易的成本已經下降﹐因為Expected Cost = P(embargo)Cost(embargo) + [1-P(embargo)]Cost( no embargo) 。

                綜觀國際各大軍售情況﹐法國Dassault公司的Rafale戰機外銷最為不濟。在西方多種戰機（美國F-35、瑞典JAS 39 Gripen、歐洲Typhoon EF-2000）當中﹐Rafale最渴求外銷以降單機成本。台灣就曾在二零零八年爆出台法洽談Rafale的事件[1]﹐加上台軍一直有使用Dassault Mirage 2000-5的經驗﹐台法未來再次合作不無可能。

 

 

[Pic 4]

                事實上﹐法國對太平洋局勢將會更加重視[2]﹐而法國在太平洋事務上的舉動和言論甚至被解放軍注意到。法國會否以軍售台灣來增加在遠東的影響力？我看絕非不可能。

                如果把上述情況串連起來﹐不難想像在佔中步近的同時﹐台灣對於法國Dassault公司的吸引力將愈來愈大。只要有公司願意在佔中前對台軍售﹐將可避免可能出現的軍售壓價戰而以高價獨攬生意（當然﹐如果佔中和平結束﹐該國將會面對來自中國的外交、經濟壓力）。當Dassault公司和法國面對Rafale外銷困境的同時﹐法國會否「挺而走險」再和台灣接洽則不得而知。

                另外﹐值得留意的是﹐台灣操作幻象機的經驗不好﹐成本高但妥善率卻不高。因此﹐Rafale未必有條件和F-16C/D等戰機硬拼。法國和台灣的交易更有拉法葉案這不良紀錄。如果法國不先行訂好合約交易﹐當港版六四出現時﹐法國就不一定能賣到戰機﹐就算賣到價格亦因競爭而更低。所以﹐如果法國不先發制人提早找台灣下單﹐當香港出現不幸的同時法國亦會相同地哀號。

                當然﹐我這個說法不是針對法國﹐只是其他國家較不用冒險犯禁。小小的香港﹐她未來一年的民主前途又出奇地成為一個國際博奕的地方。

Picture Source:

[Pic 1]: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Occupy_Central_Press_Con.jpg/300px-Occupy_Central_Press_Con.jpg

[Pic 2]: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEdiHSMD6pDVz9Z2NfD534d05hFl6nx38NznKqgE6WIN_ljxJzjyI6zZnX_3F7EUct1SqmTlNUk-7xq4C4GdxQPl9hNMQXozkZWdhXX5ESDK6RHLX50UekX6X_NemBh_eMCUnYg2mdLeDE/s1600/tiananmen.jpg

[Pic 3]: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/zh-yue/0/07/250px-JUNE4-0P.jpg

[Pic 4]: http://defense-update.com/images_new/rafale.jpg

 

Reference:

[1]: http://www.stnn.cc:82/hk_taiwan/200802/t20080223_736393.html

 

[2]: Reissa Su, France President to Visit New Zealand for the First Time, PM John Key Seeks EU Free Trade Agreement, International Business Times, viewed 4^th Jan, 2014, http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/509089/20130926/new-zealand-france-hollande-south-pacific-g20.htm#.UsfPbZWIpjo