ROCN thread

[darth sidious]

so far the ROCN has manage to maintain a sizeable fleet ccapable to cambating even the south korean navy and repelling most invasion attempts

although it has no ageis warships the new kidds still has a strong airdefence
its also has serviceable weapons such as Sm-1, harpoon etc

modify gearing are not to be taken lightly either as they now most weapon systems found on the spurence class destroyer!!!

what do you think will be the future of the "provincial" armada

to start us off here ist a list of it equipment

13* modify Gearing class destroyer rearmed with sm-1 hf-2 ssm and bofors 40mm gun

4* kidd class destroyer

8* knox class asw frigate

8* modify perry class frigate

6*La Fayette class frigate ( note with down graded weapons)

2* outdated WWII sub

2*semi-modern dutch sub( with problemtic toperdos)

many updated WWII LST LSM etc

some missile armed FAC

[swimmerXC]

...
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/5678/roc9se.png
A warning to any immature members, if I see the words "If USN interfere, PLA can always nuke their @SS" or anything to do with nuclear war with the US; this thread will be closed.

[DPRKPTboat]

According to what Darth Sidious has posted, the ROCN seems to be mostly a surface navy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Taiwanese sub fleet is inferior to the Chinese sub fleet. The way for the PLAN to defeat the ROCN would be to simply use its Song, Yuan and Kilo submarine fleet to sink the enemy surface vessles and track down their subs. Or they could just bomb them in their ports if they wanted to do a Blitzkreig style invasion. Other than that, I think that the Taiwanese navy will pose few problems for the PLA invasion force.

[darth sidious]

well in asia only china has a very strong sub fleet all other nation either have no subs or a weak fleet

besides the taiwanese have some knox class asw frigates with asrocs anti-sub missile

unless fighting an enemy like china which will enploy ssm massive air bombardment etc

the taiwanese fleet can preety much hold its own aginst most other nation

[The_Zergling]

According to what Darth Sidious has posted, the ROCN seems to be mostly a surface navy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Taiwanese sub fleet is inferior to the Chinese sub fleet.

No, you're correct that the ROCN has only a few subs, and they are widely regarded to be inferior. A common joke is that the ROCN has 3 subs, one that can stay afloat but can't dive, one that can dive but can't stay afloat, and one that can stay afloat AND dive, but can't shoot. Now obviously this is an exaggeration, but it shows that the Taiwanese (generally) don't have much faith in the power of their sub fleet. Of course, the person who told me this wasn't part of the navy, he was army, but still.

The arms bill that was frozen for the past few months (years) would have included 8 diesel submarines, 300~ patriot missiles, and a handful of anti-submarine aircraft. They seem to be directly aimed at helping to ease the gap between the sub fleets, but the bill has not yet passed, for some obvious reasons. I'm interested in seeing the arms bill that the opposition will bring up sometimes this (or next) month, as they have (accurately) dismissed the bill as too expensive and unrealistic.

well in asia only china has a very strong sub fleet all other nation either have no subs or a weak fleet

the taiwanese fleet can preety much hold its own aginst most other nation

Well, for one thing the only country Taiwan considers an "enemy" is China, so it's pretty much designed to fight China. If you look at the types of ships and aircraft, you can easily tell that it's not designed for say, overseas deployments, on the whole it's a defensive oriented strategy. My guess is that none of the subs carry ICBMs aimed at China, only torps.

I'm not too sure about the rest of the Asian fleets, however.

[darth sidious]

No, you're correct that the ROCN has only a few subs, and they are widely regarded to be inferior. A common joke is that the ROCN has 3 subs, one that can stay afloat but can't dive, one that can dive but can't stay afloat, and one that can stay afloat AND dive, but can't shoot. Now obviously this is an exaggeration, but it shows that the Taiwanese (generally) don't have much faith in the power of their sub fleet. Of course, the person who told me this wasn't part of the navy, he was army, but still..

actualy there is abit of truce behind this in the 80s one of the guppy sub taiwan got divied in 左營 habour but cant surface due to faliure in high pressure air system.

later on when taiwan bought the dutch Zwaardvis it was discovered that the sut torperds they were armed with was defective



Well, for one thing the only country Taiwan considers an "enemy" is China, so it's pretty much designed to fight China. If you look at the types of ships and aircraft, you can easily tell that it's not designed for say, overseas deployments, on the whole it's a defensive oriented strategy. My guess is that none of the subs carry ICBMs aimed at China, only torps.

I'm not too sure about the rest of the Asian fleets, however.

lets just a japanese or korean invasion would fear far worse then the chinese as either of them as strong sub fleet and most taiwanese ships have ssm

ship commissioned during the KMT/chaing er are usuely named after location in china or famous chinese generals especialy those that defeated forgeiners
reflect the nature of poltics at the time

currently they got changed by online votes

[adeptitus]

13* modify Gearing class destroyer rearmed with sm-1 hf-2 ssm and bofors 40mm gun


The Gearing (Chao Yang) class destroyers were updated Wu Chin I-III program. Currently the ship is armed with:

4x Hsiung Feng II SSM
10x box launcher for SM-1MR
1x 8 cel ASROC rocket launcher
1x 20mm Phalanx CIWS
1x 76mm gun
2x triple 12.75" torpedo launchers
2x 40mm/70 AA guns
1x Helicopter landing pad

Currently there are 7 Chao Yang class destroyers in operational status. The other 7 have been scrapped.

Keep in mind that these ships are built in 1945-1946. They're pretty old, but is also a testiment to US shipbuilder's quality. If they had came from Russian shipyards, I think they'd have fell apart by now.

IMO the ROCN should upgrade their Kang Deng (La Fayette) class Frigates first, with better air-defense missiles and ASW capability. As is the platform is a sitting duck if war breaks out.

[adeptitus]

Well, for one thing the only country Taiwan considers an "enemy" is China, so it's pretty much designed to fight China. If you look at the types of ships and aircraft, you can easily tell that it's not designed for say, overseas deployments, on the whole it's a defensive oriented strategy. My guess is that none of the subs carry ICBMs aimed at China, only torps.
I'm not too sure about the rest of the Asian fleets, however.

Let's not forget about the Daoyutai conflict with Japan. =p

With exception to the little island in South China Sea, Taiwan's only local security concern is being sandwitched between Japan, China, and Philippines. It's impossible for the ROCN to match up against PLAN or Japanese Navy in budget or ships. But then the Philippine Navy probably feels the same way about ROCN. hehehe.

[darth sidious]

The Gearing (Chao Yang) class destroyers were updated Wu Chin I-III program. Currently the ship is armed with:

4x Hsiung Feng II SSM
10x box launcher for SM-1MR
1x 8 cel ASROC rocket launcher
1x 20mm Phalanx CIWS
1x 76mm gun
2x triple 12.75" torpedo launchers
2x 40mm/70 AA guns
1x Helicopter landing pad

Currently there are 7 Chao Yang class destroyers in operational status. The other 7 have been scrapped.

Keep in midn that these ships are built in 1945-1946. They're pretty old, but is also a testiment to US shipbuilder's quality. If they had came from Russian shipyards, I think they'd have fell apart by now.

IMO the ROCN should upgrade their Kang Deng (La Fayette) class Frigates first, with better air-defense missiles and ASW capability. As is the platform is a sitting duck if war breaks out.

the extra 6 are not scarped but put on "reduce crewing" to save money

the ROCN manage to add so much weapon( and mordern ones !) on to a old hull this its self deserves credit

old ship do have some disvantage they cant steam faster the 25 knots without risk of boiler explosion

also some dont have ASROC but insted have and extra 4 cell Hf-2 launcher( comparbel to early harpon block1C)

BUt for Russian ships I think you are wrong the PLAN operated 3 1930s vintage soviet type o7 destroyer untiled the early 90s ( upgraded off course)

[The_Zergling]

lets just a japanese or korean invasion would fear far worse then the chinese as either of them as strong sub fleet and most taiwanese ships have ssm

ship commissioned during the KMT/chaing er are usuely named after location in china or famous chinese generals especialy those that defeated forgeiners
reflect the nature of poltics at the time

currently they got changed by online votes

Um... I have a hard time interpreting your English, sorry about that, but I'm guessing what you're trying to say is that Taiwan should fear a Japanese or Korean invasion more than a Chinese one, at least navy wise.

Political workings that would make this absurd aside, does anyone have detailed information regarding the undersea power of Japan and South Korea?

Let's not forget about the Daoyutai conflict with Japan. =p

With exception to the little island in South China Sea, Taiwan's only local security concern is being sandwitched between Japan, China, and Philippines. It's impossible for the ROCN to match up against PLAN or Japanese Navy in budget or ships. But then the Philippine Navy probably feels the same way about ROCN. hehehe.

Well, I'm pretty sure that conflict with Japan is definitely not desirable from a Taiwanese standpoint. True, there were unpleasantries exchanged about the Daoyutai, but nothing very serious. Yes, there was a certain pan-blue lawmaker who made a publicity stunt aboard one of Taiwan's cruisers/destroyers (can't remember what class) but seriously, all that military posture was simply to garner votes. There are people who think that Taiwan should "show resolve" against Japan, so this kind of action does have some effect towards winning over voters, especially the fishermen that felt threatened.

Of course, there's no way Taiwan would be able to take on Japan anyway, and even if the ROC could or actually wanted to it's simply pointless. I'm not sure about the stance regarding the Phillipines, but as far as press coverage goes you'll find more articles considering China to be the hostile one as opposed to Japan or the Phillipines. Mind you, there actually aren't as many hostile articles towards China as you might expect.

I believe that the military strategy is also geared towards China, but this is just my guess, as I'm not in the military.

[FriedRiceNSpice]

well in asia only china has a very strong sub fleet all other nation either have no subs or a weak fleet


Japan has a modern, albeit small sub fleet that can still pose a credible threat to most modern navies.

[FuManChu]

Japan has a modern, albeit small sub fleet that can still pose a credible threat to most modern navies.

Absolutely. They're operating about 8 Oyashios (1 more should be commissioned this month), 6 Harushios and 2 Yushios. What the JMSDF's sub fleet lacks in numbers it makes up for in quality. I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of those guys if I was an Asian nation.

Zergling's right, the ROCN is primarily geared up to fighting the PLAN. The chances of coming into conflict with Japan are exceedingly unlikely. The issue of the Diaoyutais/Senkakus is small fry overall.

[The_Zergling]

Not to beat a dead horse or anything...

But generally another thing that reinforced my belief that Taiwan only sees China as its enemy is the mindset of the people that I know and have talked to. Most of the exercises that aren't drill related have something to do with a hypothetical invasion, for example how tanks would deploy should Chinese paratroopers land in Taipei, and how to deter an amphibious landing, or the takeover of ports.

In addition, the other countries that are "more dangerous" than China according to the opinion of some on this board, i.e. Japan, Korea (I assume they mean South), Phillipines generally come off as okay/good according to the Taiwanese people.

Japanese pop culture (music, anime, manga, fashion) is pretty popular in Taiwan, especially among the youth. In addition, you'll find older people will remember the Japanese occupation era objectively, with its pros and cons, as opposed to "JAPAN IS TEH EVAL!11!".

South Korean pop culture is also pretty popular in Taiwan, namely the pop stars, and the movies that come from there, mostly comedy or horror, at least those are easiest to find in Taiwan's version of "Blockbuster".

Taiwan has many migrant workers from the Phillipines that are an integral part of the lives of the wealthy, and I don't see them relinquishing that easily for some petty conflict between the governments.

So basically China's the only "enemy" Taiwan fears and is prepared to fight against. The missiles and the saber-rattling don't help much either.

[DPRKUnderground]

I really think we should hand it to the ROCN. They have a modern navy, but because of politics they cannot get submarines. Let's imagine China and Taiwan are homies, they're cool with each other. Taiwan could most likely get any submarine on the market. Plus the foreign ships they're getting are being built at home. I really give a hand out to the ROCN. I think China and Taiwan should form a strategic partnership. Japan wants islands they both claim. They can share the resources and all. Taiwan wouldn't need as much, so China should get the greater amount. But anyways, Taiwan has a great navy, but politics has held them back.

[Vlad Plasmius]

The more and more I look into this situation the more I'm convinced Taiwan is incapable of really defending itself. The navy is just one more area. Assuming they get the P-3C, they'll still have to be able to avoid other factors like air defenses and be able to effectively locate and terminate any submarine posing a threat. Hard to imagine how they'll protect their seas with just 12 of them.

Their destroyers aren't much more impressive. In comparison to China's navy, Taiwan is at a clear disadvantage.

[cabbageman]

ROCN sucks because of the weak ASW capability.

All ROCN Gearing class ships are retired.

And actually, Kidd destroyers are the only impressive thing in ROCN.

[darth sidious]

ROCN sucks because of the weak ASW capability.

All ROCN Gearing class ships are retired.

And actually, Kidd destroyers are the only impressive thing in ROCN.

the Gearing are put on reduce crewing to save money they can be called back into active survice quickly

copies of perry are also not bad the Knox is also a good asw platform so I dont see whats weak about the ROCAN

[Finn McCool]

Vlad, your missing the point with ASW. Yes, the ROCN could use more of it. But they don't have much area to defend, just immediatly around Taiwan.

Also, all this talk about war with Japan is absurd. We all know that the ROCN exsists to protect the island from Chinese invasion. So that is why I think that the ROCN would be far better served by a large fleet of missle armed FACs that can fire lots of missles quickly and speed away. Rather than purchasing 1 or 2 new, advanced DDGs, why not go with an asymmetric strategy and get 6 or 8 misssle armed FACs? The Chinese may hav a couple of Sovremmenys, but can they handle 37 missles coming at them, especially when they have to protect vunerable landing ships? All of this without Aegis? Also, if the ROCN loses a Kidd, it loses a very expensive investment. Besides, Taiwan will never be able to build/buy more DDGs than China, or even convincingly match them, so why try? Get enough to do some damage and provide air defence and ASW. Use the saved money to buy a bunch of cheaper craft that can launch a barrage of missles, targeting landing craft. They would be relatively expendable. They would also have a much better chance of surviving an initial missle/ air strike.

[netspider]

Vlad, your missing the point with ASW. Yes, the ROCN could use more of it. But they don't have much area to defend, just immediatly around Taiwan.

Also, all this talk about war with Japan is absurd. We all know that the ROCN exsists to protect the island from Chinese invasion. So that is why I think that the ROCN would be far better served by a large fleet of missle armed FACs that can fire lots of missles quickly and speed away. Rather than purchasing 1 or 2 new, advanced DDGs, why not go with an asymmetric strategy and get 6 or 8 misssle armed FACs? The Chinese may hav a couple of Sovremmenys, but can they handle 37 missles coming at them, especially when they have to protect vunerable landing ships? All of this without Aegis? Also, if the ROCN loses a Kidd, it loses a very expensive investment. Besides, Taiwan will never be able to build/buy more DDGs than China, or even convincingly match them, so why try? Get enough to do some damage and provide air defence and ASW. Use the saved money to buy a bunch of cheaper craft that can launch a barrage of missles, targeting landing craft. They would be relatively expendable. They would also have a much better chance of surviving an initial missle/ air strike.

Finn, I agree with you, I always thought ROCN should go mostly defensive, such as ASW or even mine warfare. Mine warfare is even cheaper but still dangerous. ROCN two submarine taks should be laying mines instead of torpedo attack.

They may probably want to deploy more land-based anti-ship missiles instead investing on destroyers as well.

FAC as you said, is indeed a good idea. It does not have to match China's FAC in terms of technology or range, since ROCN's FAC does not have to go far and operate in severe water condition. Build a massive number of FAC should only cost a fraction of four expensive Kidd classes.

Overall, I think spend much on large surface combat warships is not wise at all for ROCN's limited budget, unless they can get a hand on US AEGIS type of ship, although that will cost even more.

However, all these depend on whether or not US will intevent in case of China's unification action. ROCN's primary task should only be delay PLA's progress to earn enough time for US intevention. I don't expect ROCN's surface combat warships will do much damage to PLAN at first place. After all, PLAN has offensive advantage, he can choose when to attack and where to attack. In the first round missile attack and subsequent anti-ship missle attack, ROCN's primary major surface ship and main ports could just vanished.

[MIGleader]

Also, all this talk about war with Japan is absurd. We all know that the ROCN exsists to protect the island from Chinese invasion. So that is why I think that the ROCN would be far better served by a large fleet of missle armed FACs that can fire lots of missles quickly and speed away. Rather than purchasing 1 or 2 new, advanced DDGs, why not go with an asymmetric strategy and get 6 or 8 misssle armed FACs? The Chinese may hav a couple of Sovremmenys, but can they handle 37 missles coming at them, especially when they have to protect vunerable landing ships? All of this without Aegis? Also, if the ROCN loses a Kidd, it loses a very expensive investment. Besides, Taiwan will never be able to build/buy more DDGs than China, or even convincingly match them, so why try? Get enough to do some damage and provide air defence and ASW. Use the saved money to buy a bunch of cheaper craft that can launch a barrage of missles, targeting landing craft. They would be relatively expendable. They would also have a much better chance of surviving an initial missle/ air strike.

Yes, the problem is that China is building FACs too. When asymetrical hits asymetrical...im not sure whats going to happen. Asymetrical is only good when your the only guy using it...

And in the end, both sides just end up pumping missles at eachother. Really boring. When the taiwanese FACs run out of missles, a Sov can come and blow them out of the water.

A FAC lacks air defence, so it cannot protect itself or other ships from Aircraft attacks.

A FAC lacks ASW, which the ROCN really needs.

[Gollevainen]

Well few remarks on the modern FAC warfare. They come at best in rugged coastlines whit lots of narrow straits and archipegaloes like in Fenno-Scandia and in north-east mediterenian. but still, the best weapon against them are helicopters whit SSMs, a tactic that proven devastating in Gulf war. To combine this new element to the never solved issue of small hull's capapility to provide stable ennough platform for modern missiles and sensors have generally mented growing size of modern FACs. In fact the whole ship-class has becoming to its end as modern nations prefer more of corvette size ships as primary coastal defence units.
And thats the main new feature that I would like to see in Taiwans inventory after sizeble subfleet. A fleet of 6-10 ships whit 65-90m hull of 700-to 1,800 tons enough to field armament and sensors of missile FAC packed whit good self defence AAW system and some ASW (maybe a helicopter for anti-fac, ASW or mid course targeting). And off course the mentioned helicopter+ssm combination, as PLAN still rely on rather 60'ish desing philoshohpyes in its own FACs.

[MIGleader]

Huh? The 22's are very stealthy, i dont see how that is 60s design philosiphy. Also, an ak-630 on eack of the 22's shall be very effective against helicopters.

[adeptitus]

During the 1991 Gulf War, the British deployed Lynx Helicopters armed with Sea Skua missiles. A total of 12 Sea Skua missiles (25km range) were used with 100% success rate against Iraqi FAC's.

A decade earlier, during the Falklands War, the British also fired the Sea Skua 8 times with 100% hit ratio against Argentine ships Alférez Sobral (800 ton), Río Carcarañá (8,500 ton) and a patrol boat Río Iguazú.

The Sea Skua only weights 145 kg and carries small 20 kg warhead, which is sufficient to kill or disable most FAC's. It has a published effective range of 25km.

The AK-630 CIWS gun would shred any helicopter, but only has published effective range of 4,000 meters. If you pit a FAC armed with anti-ship missiles + AK-630 CIWS, it's going to get killed by an enemy helicopter w/anti-ship missiles. The CIWS gun is more useful in intercepting missiles, but lack the range to engage aircraft.

To defend against helicopters and aircraft, you need SAM's. The only recent recorded kill on a helicopter by ship dates back to the Falklands, when the Royal Navy had 8 confirmed kills with the Sea Dart missile, of which 1 was friendly fire on a British Gazelle helicopter.

[renmin]

The US might supply Taiwan with alot of stuff, but for some reason, America never gives Taiwan any up to date technology, by that I mean high tech stuff. The ROCN to my impression isnt so big; though like the PLAN, is large enough to at least protect the area.

[MIGleader]

Why cant the FAC use its ak-630 to shred the sea skua then?
Besides, all taiwan has are army cobras, no threat at all to FACs.

Anyhow, thats why i feel big destroyers are still very important. If you have a DDG loaded with SAMs, no helicopter will dare go near.

[Finn McCool]

Anyhow, thats why i feel big destroyers are still very important. If you have a DDG loaded with SAMs, no helicopter will dare go near.

Yes, I agree. DDGs are important, for air defence and to follow up on the confusion and casualties caused by dozens of FACs firing even more missles at the Chinese invasion fleet.

However, I was saying that Taiwan cannot compete with China in the area of DDGs. Besides, DDGs can be killed in a single strike relatively easily. A large number of expendable FACs spread out can be a major problem for an invasion that has to protect a large numbers vunerable amphibious craft.

Basically this is how I think the ROC should hit a Chinese invasion fleet.

-First, send a lot of fighters into the area to make sure you have at least a small amount of time to operate without interference from the PLAAF.

-Then have FACs come in at full speed, firing all of their missles, some at the escorts, some at the amphibious craft.

-Attack aircraft (F-5s and ADIC FCK-1s I suppose) and later helicopters come into to prevent the PLAN ships from having any time to regroup. They fire AGM Mavericks, Harpoons, etc, at the fleet, and/or hit them bombs directly, especially if several escorts have been taken out.

-To deliver the finishing blow, Taiwan's larger ships, (Kidds, Perrys, Lafayettes, and even Knoxes), which up until now had been providing SAM cover, hit the remaining force (which would probably still be quite large) with everything they have.

-A screening force of F-16s and Mirages would attempt to prevent PLAAF interference, and take out vunerable enemy aircraft, like helicopters.

Essentially the plan is to not give the PLAN time to regroup and focus on the fact that they don't have Aegis or very good command and control.
The ROC would probably take heavy casualties, but the idea would be to overwhelm the PLAN and escape with minimum casualties, because the ships and planes would flee as soon as they had discharged their weapons. Combined with land based missles, I think this would do a lot of damage. It might even kill enough landing craft to postpone or prevent an invasion.

[SteelBird]

Basically this is how I think the ROC should hit a Chinese invasion fleet.

-First, send a lot of fighters into the area to make sure you have at least a small amount of time to operate without interference from the PLAAF.

-Then have FACs come in at full speed, firing all of their missles, some at the escorts, some at the amphibious craft.

-Attack aircraft (F-5s and ADIC FCK-1s I suppose) and later helicopters come into to prevent the PLAN ships from having any time to regroup. They fire AGM Mavericks, Harpoons, etc, at the fleet, and/or hit them bombs directly, especially if several escorts have been taken out.

-To deliver the finishing blow, Taiwan's larger ships, (Kidds, Perrys, Lafayettes, and even Knoxes), which up until now had been providing SAM cover, hit the remaining force (which would probably still be quite large) with everything they have.

-A screening force of F-16s and Mirages would attempt to prevent PLAAF interference, and take out vunerable enemy aircraft, like helicopters.


When we play chess, we say a joke like this "after you, it's my turn", so you won't play chess with both hands. The above assumption is just like that the PLA go there just for being your target. It's not movie, and you aren't Rambo. Have you ever seen how US troops strike? That's the way!

[Gollevainen]

Huh? The 22's are very stealthy, i dont see how that is 60s design philosiphy. Also, an ak-630 on eack of the 22's shall be very effective against helicopters.

yes they are sthelthy and quite avanced in their hydrodynamical performance, but still suprisingly inflexible desing that makes them no use out side the Kuznetsov-era of soviet coastal defence tactics. They are fast and guite invisible but thats all they are. The small desing and catamaran hull makes them unsuitable for long periods of sea voyages and as in all small and fast boats, I doupt that the systems onboard can work in rough seas. All defensive armament onboard all almoust like joke...no real thread to any air opponent as we all remember that AK-630 cannot even move while shooting.

So I would say that Taiwan should invest in either Penguin, Gabriel, Sea SKua or AS-15 armed ten ton size helicopters whit radars and other required systems.

[MIGleader]

I dont think so. If you notice the turret of the ak-630, you will notice it has a revised, stealthier design. Now, this might not have been the only design change...this might be a new model ak-630.

For some reason finn, I dont think the PLAN would send in the invasion fleet without achieving a good degree of air superiority over taiwan, and without siezing control of the strait. Doing so would be plain stupid, as the taiwanese would almost certainly do some major damage to undprotected transports. Once again, to do this, china needs its DDGs.

and soon, china will have its ka-29s to attack any taiwanese FACs.

[renmin]

Yes, I agree. DDGs are important, for air defence and to follow up on the confusion and casualties caused by dozens of FACs firing even more missles at the Chinese invasion fleet.

However, I was saying that Taiwan cannot compete with China in the area of DDGs. Besides, DDGs can be killed in a single strike relatively easily. A large number of expendable FACs spread out can be a major problem for an invasion that has to protect a large numbers vunerable amphibious craft.

Basically this is how I think the ROC should hit a Chinese invasion fleet.

-First, send a lot of fighters into the area to make sure you have at least a small amount of time to operate without interference from the PLAAF.

-Then have FACs come in at full speed, firing all of their missles, some at the escorts, some at the amphibious craft.

-Attack aircraft (F-5s and ADIC FCK-1s I suppose) and later helicopters come into to prevent the PLAN ships from having any time to regroup. They fire AGM Mavericks, Harpoons, etc, at the fleet, and/or hit them bombs directly, especially if several escorts have been taken out.

-To deliver the finishing blow, Taiwan's larger ships, (Kidds, Perrys, Lafayettes, and even Knoxes), which up until now had been providing SAM cover, hit the remaining force (which would probably still be quite large) with everything they have.

-A screening force of F-16s and Mirages would attempt to prevent PLAAF interference, and take out vunerable enemy aircraft, like helicopters.

Essentially the plan is to not give the PLAN time to regroup and focus on the fact that they don't have Aegis or very good command and control.
The ROC would probably take heavy casualties, but the idea would be to overwhelm the PLAN and escape with minimum casualties, because the ships and planes would flee as soon as they had discharged their weapons. Combined with land based missles, I think this would do a lot of damage. It might even kill enough landing craft to postpone or prevent an invasion.This attempt will not work. There is no way that the PLAN would send out their navy without air support. With the stike navy there will be flankers and j-10s. Next there is no way some puny gun boats could stand up to the subs and destroyers not to mention naval helicopters. As for the big ships, taiwan only has a few. China is sending in a huge fleet filled with subs and large destroyers. Those f16s and mirages will just as equally be eleminated by the DDGs and fighters. This is not command and conquer and China is deffinantly not the computer.

[SampanViking]

When we play chess, we say a joke like this "after you, it's my turn", so you won't play chess with both hands. The above assumption is just like that the PLA go there just for being your target. It's not movie, and you aren't Rambo. Have you ever seen how US troops strike? That's the way!

I quite agree on this. The idea that an Invasion fleet would simply go charging across the Straits without any major softening up is risable. Looking at the two comparable campaigns of the Battle of Britain and the Normandy Landings, illustrates this perfectly (and how not adheering to the formula can send you seriously off course!).

The Air War would have to be largely over before the Landing Fleet moved across the water.

[Gollevainen]

I dont think so. If you notice the turret of the ak-630, you will notice it has a revised, stealthier design. Now, this might not have been the only design change...this might be a new model ak-630.


and isent that just wishfull thinking? And even if it can move and shoot simuoloutesly, it doesent sufficent a good AA defence. It would require atleast some guided missile system to have adequate defenses against oncoming missile salvoes.


and soon, china will have its ka-29s to attack any taiwanese FACs.

according to....??

[MIGleader]

and isent that just wishfull thinking? And even if it can move and shoot simuoloutesly, it doesent sufficent a good AA defence. It would require atleast some guided missile system to have adequate defenses against oncoming missile salvoes.

Thats why I still feel the PLAN needs DDG's to provide superior air defence. The ak-630 is only a last-minute defence. Besides, i doubt a sea skua could use its full 25km range against a low RCS, low IRS ship.

according to....??
kommersant. I posted it in the "lack of helicopter" thread.

[Gollevainen]

Thats why I still feel the PLAN needs DDG's to provide superior air defence. The ak-630 is only a last-minute defence. Besides, i doubt a sea skua could use its full 25km range against a low RCS, low IRS ship.

well fine direction enough, would be going on whit the Houjan desing, just add good medium caliber main gun and Kashtan type of gun/missile CIWS. Im not sure why the production of that class was cutt of, but surely it dimension and displacement sufficent a lot beter sea boat.

kommersant?? refress my memory, I have heard that word before, just cant recall where and in what context...

[MIGleader]

Kommersant is russia's premier news site.
http://www.kommersant.com/

http://www.kommersant.com/search-result.asp
You can find my article here. Btw, this is not the only source which claims this, there is also one in chiense and another one in english(which i posted in the "lack of helicopters" thread.

[Finn McCool]

I quite agree on this. The idea that an Invasion fleet would simply go charging across the Straits without any major softening up is risable. Looking at the two comparable campaigns of the Battle of Britain and the Normandy Landings, illustrates this perfectly (and how not adheering to the formula can send you seriously off course!).

The Air War would have to be largely over before the Landing Fleet moved across the water.

Hmmm...That isn't possible. China has to land enough troops on Taiwan to take the island before the USN and USAF assemble enough forces to destroy any invasion fleet. I'm not saying that the USN is invincible, but I am saying that with several CBGs in the area, large numbers of planes on Guam and Okinawa, and SSNs everywhere, the chances of sucessfully attacking the attacking the island go way down. Thus, the Chinese would have to attack before the ROCs Air Force and Navy was totally destroyed. The Normandy Landings and Operation Sealion did not have a deadline, but the Chinese would have to pull it off in 2 weeks or less. So the invasion fleet woudl have to attack into an enviroment that was still very threatening. Obviously there would be days, or even a week or more of air warfare, naval attacks and constatn missle barrage, but it is impossible to tell how effective it would be. All I wrote was a rough outline. I don't even think it would be all that sucessful, when executed with the forces the ROC is likely to have after a "softening up" period. That is why it is so uncomplicated-Basically the idea is to fire as many missles as you can as the vunerable ships and a few at the escorts to distract them, and run away.

Btw, I am operating on the basis of a US intervention. And don't turn this into another useless discussion of an invasion of Taiwan. DON'T.

[sumdud]

In fact, we should be talking about ROCN only. Talking about an invasion is flamming and talking about an AK which Taiwan doesn't have at all, that's just absurd, so stay on topic!!!

What sort of FACs and torpedo boats does Taiwan have anyway? I know they have <50 Israeli Dvora (Hai Ou, seagull) boats armed with HF-1 SSMs, which might be hard to detect but is also hard to use in bad weather. They also have 4 "F"ACs armed with HF-2s running at 25 knots. Is that it?

[Gollevainen]

there are 46 Dworas according to Weyers.
Their main FACs are the one new FACG 60 boat and two Lung Chiang class boats and one Chiang Choiang class patrol boat armed whit missiles (but I think that most of that class could be armed whit missiles so it would make 12 ship in total. But these are only 25 knots whit top speed)

But most importantly, Both nations lack good modern MCM vessels thougth (at least in theory) both have good minelaying capapility. Mines are still one of the basic stuff in martime warfare and would play important role in possiple conflict. Either Taiwan or PLAN hasen't even fielded modern minesweepers, not to mention minehunters that forms the main body of other modern navyes.

[Su-34]

Guys, do you think that ROCN will acquire any AEGIS ships? ROCN needs AEGIS ships to be able to defeat the PLAN.

[FuManChu]

Guys, do you think that ROCN will acquire any AEGIS ships? ROCN needs AEGIS ships to be able to defeat the PLAN.

I'm not sure that the ROCN needs AEGIS-equipped ships - there are other platforms that can fulfill their needs. Also AEGIS is bloody expensive - the ROCN would do better to get more, cheaper vessels than a few very expensive ones.

In any case, the US has made it clear that it won't sell any Burkes to Taiwan.

[MIGleader]

there are 46 Dworas according to Weyers.
Their main FACs are the one new FACG 60 boat and two Lung Chiang class boats and one Chiang Choiang class patrol boat armed whit missiles (but I think that most of that class could be armed whit missiles so it would make 12 ship in total. But these are only 25 knots whit top speed)

But most importantly, Both nations lack good modern MCM vessels thougth (at least in theory) both have good minelaying capapility. Mines are still one of the basic stuff in martime warfare and would play important role in possiple conflict. Either Taiwan or PLAN hasen't even fielded modern minesweepers, not to mention minehunters that forms the main body of other modern navyes.

No modern minesweepers eh?
http://www.anyboard.net/gov/mil/anyboard/uploads/minesweeper060515220200__1_p111.jpg
This new mine sweeper of the PLAN was launched a few days ago. It appears to be a new design. Since the PLAN does make new designs of outdated stuff, we can safely assume this ship is decent in its capabilities.

the PLAN also recieved these new minesweepers in early 2005
http://www.anyboard.net/gov/mil/anyboard/uploads/cdfblogoo32.jpg

http://www.anyboard.net/gov/mil/anyboard/uploads/cdfblogoo33.jpg
this ship might show a refit of 814 which was commisioned in the lated 80s.

Besides, the Song and yuan class SSK can lay mines, and so can the sovremenny. And if taiwan doesnt have many minelayers, why does china need many minesweepers?

[Finn McCool]

Does the Hsiung Feng or any other Taiwanese ASM have truck launched capability? That would be an excellent thing for Taiwan to have. Moblility would greatly increase their survivability and threat level (if the missle can be fired from anywhere, it is harder to defend against.)

[adeptitus]

Does the Hsiung Feng or any other Taiwanese ASM have truck launched capability? That would be an excellent thing for Taiwan to have. Moblility would greatly increase their survivability and threat level (if the missle can be fired from anywhere, it is harder to defend against.)

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htart/articles/20060113.aspx

Taiwan's Truck Mounted Cruise Missile

January 13, 2006: Taiwan has developed yet another version of its Hsiung Feng II anti-ship missile. This one is launched from trucks or fixed launchers, has a range of at least 600 kilometers and is intended to go after targets on the Chinese mainland. Only if China attempts to invade Taiwan, of course. Three prototypes have been built, and production may have already begun. Current plans are for 500 of these one ton Hsiung Feng IIE cruise missiles to be put in service. They will probably use GPS guidance and some stealth features, to make them less liable to getting shot down. Using a more efficient engine, range could be extended to 1,000 kilometers or more. The Hsiung Feng IIE is pretty cheap, about $300,000 each, and carries a 500 pound warhead. The Hsiung Feng IIE project has been kept quiet, with few details released officially. Apparently this was done so as to not alarm the Chinese, at least in public.

[Finn McCool]

I don't know if this would scare the Chinese that much. A truck based cruise missles is obviously used for defensive purposes because if you were planning to attack you would never sacrifice the increased effectiveness of a silo/launcher based missle for the survivability of a truck based missle. But yes, China would not like it for the same reason it doesn't like any sort of arms-related thing Taiwan does.

[The_Zergling]

Well, as I thought of recently, the "sore loser" mentality actually might be a very important factor in this stand-off. It's not so much to scare the Chinese as it is to provide a "we're hitting them back" mindset. It's not necessarily for the leaders of a country, both political and military, but mainly for the civilian population. Since as a rule regular citizens will be the ones who suffer the most from China's Ballistic Missiles, knowing that they're hitting back and not just being curb-stomped makes the suffering from bearable, and least psychologically.

And that's actually a point that is often missed. This psychological effect should not be overlooked since the number one danger in Taiwan's defense is the population's will to fight. (Or at least, sustain the fight)

[Finn McCool]

Intersting point. I was thinking that the only reason to have truck based missles is to have a second-strike capability. Their mobility allows them to live through a Chinese first strike. Quite a few launcher based missles would also probably survive, but they could be used to hit apartment blocks in Nanjing or whatever before they were knocked out. If you want to use them against the most vunerable Chinese targets in all of the possible war, the ships of the invasion fleet and the beachead, they would have to be survivable. Thus the mobility of a truck launcher or the armour of a hardened launcher. I was thinking from a military point of view. Through my thinking, I would not fire any missles at the mainland, because their effect would be minimal annd their chance of success relatively small, except for at high value targets like a bunch of Zubyrs at dock. I would fire them at ships and beachead targets, where the Chinese would be most vunerable and the effect of the missles would be greatest.

You would fire at mainland targets, including civillian ones, to try to show the PRC that it is in a real war, where people die, including its own civillians. You also would fire at military targets to try to do the same to the PRC that it could do to Taiwan.

I think a prudent commander would go with a mix of both, saving as many missles as possible for the actual invasion but firing enough at the mainland for propaganda purposes.

[The_Zergling]

Well putting aside discussions of what I would do if I was Taiwan Missile Command...

Ballistic missiles aren't very accurate, as we all know. Hitting civilian targets may not actually be a choice, Taiwan may not even have the ability to hit the targets that they are aiming for (military targets).

In all honesty all of my hypothesis was based on the current scenario, so I really hadn't thought of the plausibility of Taiwanese commanders actually using the missiles should conflict arise. In the current situation it's generally a psychological boost for the average citizen (albeit a lose-lose one) although they might actually be a more effective deterrent if the missile are actually better than we give them credit for.

Hell, in fact maybe a smart commander would just pretend to launch missiles at the mainland via propoganda shows, conserving them all to repel the actual invasion, because in truth it would probably be impossible to break the will of the PRC to invade Taiwan even if several coastal cities were hit with Taiwanese Ballistic Missiles.

[Gollevainen]

No modern minesweepers eh?
http://www.anyboard.net/gov/mil/anyboard/uploads/minesweeper060515220200__1_p111.jpg
This new mine sweeper of the PLAN was launched a few days ago. It appears to be a new design. Since the PLAN does make new designs of outdated stuff, we can safely assume this ship is decent in its capabilities.

the PLAN also recieved these new minesweepers in early 2005
http://www.anyboard.net/gov/mil/anyboard/uploads/cdfblogoo32.jpg

http://www.anyboard.net/gov/mil/anyboard/uploads/cdfblogoo33.jpg
this ship might show a refit of 814 which was commisioned in the lated 80s.

Besides, the Song and yuan class SSK can lay mines, and so can the sovremenny. And if taiwan doesnt have many minelayers, why does china need many minesweepers?


well all do respect, minesweepers arent counted for their hulls, but their sweeping gear. And in modern minewarfare, mine hunters are the key players. the Old T-43's are adequote enough to do the labour, but both chinas need good modern hunters whit remotely controlled drone sweeping boats and diving devices as well as modern explosive sweeps. I havent seen any of them in chinese service. And Taiwan has good number of old US landing ships, all of them capaple of minelaying.

One minesweeper is pretty useless against even small minefield, but one minelayer can lay several of them in only single sortie....

And a constructive example of the effectivenes of minelaying:
In 1939-44 finland had two minelayers whit 100 mine capacity and mine rails in our four sloops whit some 50-40 mine capacity and some smaller crafts and boats whit minor minelaying capacity. We managed to mine the whole Gulf of Finland so well that KBF was completely tied in Kronstads harbour to be easy meal for Luftwaffe. only in 1944 Soviets had some changes of operationality whit smaller boats when our truce came intact. After the war, we had to bear the burden of minesweeping and it took some 200 vessels, all tugs of any sort and size and most of the fisshing fleet effectively moothpalling all other nautical activityes. It took ten years to complete and we were considered as experts of minesweeping.
So you can just count on how much PLAN needs minesweepers as Taiwan has better minelaying volume than we ever have had.

In all do respect, perhaps everyone taking part in naval discussion should pay LITTLE more attention to general naval warfare than just gazing around fancy sthealth destroyers and counting their missiles.

[MIGleader]

I know minesweepers arnt counted by hulls, but a new hull should mean new equipment. Would the PLAN put old equipment on a new hull? I dont think so.

China has a large number(30-40) t-43s. As you say, they arnt counted for hull, so the PLAN could easily retrofit them with more modern sweep gear. Plus, the t-43 can lay mines as well as hunt them.

[Gollevainen]

minesweepers sweeps mines similar manner than trollers fish salmons from the sea. Minehunters hunt mines whit remotly controlled sonars and controll drone minesweepers. Their equipment is rather different and generally the two can be reconise from each others by that hunters tend to have big deckhouses to support the sonarsystems and other fancy eletronics as when sweepers have big sweeping reel and lots of cranes and stuff to lift the sweeps into water.
Sweepers offcourse are more cheaper as their basic methods havent changed much since the end of the WWII. Thougth all new MCM vessels are build in GRP hulls to reduce the effect of magnetic mines.

So far only one of the new chinese desings have seemed quite promising to be hunter, but to my knowlidge, only one has been build.

[isthvan]

Does anybody have some information about SAM installed on Kang Ding class frigate? If I remember correctly they have/had Sea Chaparral installed but I remember some article from late 1990 that they plan to install Mk41 VLS for ESSM…
Did they realize that deal or they still have Sea Chaparral?

[Finn McCool]

It says on global security that they are armed with 1x8 Crotale SAM. So there you go.

[Gollevainen]

If you are talking about Lafayettes, then there is still seachapparals fitted...Dont always believe all that Globaldefence try to feed you.

[isthvan]

If you are talking about Lafayettes, then there is still seachapparals fitted...Dont always believe all that Globaldefence try to feed you.

Thanks Golly! I had been reading about crotale ng since first ship was delivered and then find pictures whit sea chaparral… They joust assumed that they would use crotale because it’s French…
So they still use Chaparrals… They need to replace that s… fast as possible… I hope that Mk-41 VLS is still a option… ESSM would be ideal missile for those frigates.

[Gollevainen]

To my knowlidge, chapparals were orginally only intermin solution in waiting of some better deal.

The desing surely allows some growth.

[adeptitus]

Taiwan's La Fayette Frigate use RIM-72C/RIM-92C Sea Chaparral system for air defense.

The Ford MIM-72 Chaparral land-based air defense system used AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles and was in service until 1998, when it was replaced by the Avenger air defense system with FIM-92 Stingers.

The Naval version of the Chaparral (Sea Chaparral) was never used by the US Navy, but was exported to Taiwan. I think Taiwan is prolly one the last users for the Sea Chaparral system.

I've never seen an La Fayette equipped with Mk 41 VLS system, but the newest model can use A43 SYLVER VLS launchers for Aster-15 missiles. Note that there are 2 basic SYLVER variants, the A43 can hold missiles up to 4.3 meters in length, and the A70 can hold missiles up to 7 meters in length. There's also the enlarged A50 for land-attack cruise missiles.

I'm not sure what the length requirement for the Mk 41 VLS system is, but the La Fayette frigate might not have the space for it. This is speculation on my part and should not be considered a fact.

[FuManChu]

To my knowlidge, chapparals were orginally only intermin solution in waiting of some better deal.

Yes, but up until now they haven't been able to replace it with anything else. Only the US will sell Taiwan arms now, or at least they're the only people that will actually sell them anything high-tech. As to whether Taiwan has asked them for something to replace it, I don't know. No upgrades have been announced so far, just rumours from a year or two ago.

[sino52C]

Probably the only missiles that the US will be willing to place aboard the Kang Dings will be the Sea Sparrow or ESSM placed on an octuple launcher, similiar to those placed on Nimtz aircraft carriers.

I just don't see the point of refurbishing Kang Dings with VLS.

[isthvan]

Probably the only missiles that the US will be willing to place aboard the Kang Dings will be the Sea Sparrow or ESSM placed on an octuple launcher, similiar to those placed on Nimtz aircraft carriers.

I just don't see the point of refurbishing Kang Dings with VLS.

You really don’t see the point? Having 32 ESSM ready for launch rather then few obsolete weary low ranges Sidewinder derivates?
Kang Dings are among most modern ships today so I don’t see the point of leaving them without VLS; currently they could not defend themselves even from low level dumb bombing run(SAMs, CIWS is quite capable )…

[FuManChu]

If you are talking about Lafayettes, then there is still seachapparals fitted...Dont always believe all that Globaldefence try to feed you.

Actually Global Defence does say that the Kang Dings are equipped with Sea Chaparrels in the main description - it's just that the specification page is incorrect. That's the one down-side with Global Defence. There's a lot of info on many topics, but they don't update all the pages that often.

On a side-note, does anyone know of a website that updates its information on navies (or armed forces more generally) more often than GD? Haze Gray is even worse!

[Gollevainen]

well unfortuanetly, no. There are good books, like the Janes all the world fighting ships and Weyers book, that annually or atleast twice a year print new edition whit updates....thougth they tend to cost big penny....

[chakos]

Golly.... BIG pennies,

$2800 AU for Janes All the worlds aircraft

$3100 AU for Janes All the worlds Fighting Ships

enough to make a grown man cry...

oh... $1AU = around $0.75US