PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

[Derpy]

Think tankie wargames set in 2026, doesn't really go into any detail how it was modeled or what kind of tactics they played for the pla. They did say pla amphibious force suffered big loses from u.s air launched antiship missiles, im assuming it is the same old nonsense of PLA jumping into the boats on day one and hoping for the best.

 

[vincent]

This is nigh impossible considering the supplies would be too many to count and track individually, not to mention a waste of PGMs (dumb bombs will be useless).

You also have to consider collateral involved, say islanders are desperately going after supplies only to have a missile dropped on them by chance.

There is no way for the PLA to allow it. PLA can’t tell if there are weapons drop along with the food

 

[daifo]

Think tankie wargames set in 2026, doesn't really go into any detail how it was modeled or what kind of tactics they played for the pla. They did say pla amphibious force suffered big loses from u.s air launched antiship missiles, im assuming it is the same old nonsense of PLA jumping into the boats on day one and hoping for the best.

The written report

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Didn't read it, but China loses unrealistically baaaaad according to the reddit comments. I think it is likely just a MIC advertisement

 

[Biscuits]

Kudos to those thinking out-of-the-box with regards to a potential blockade. Though widely regarded as an act of war, I'm willing to bet both sides would be hesitant to escalate into a shooting war so rules of engagement would still be tame. However, two issues would arise from implementing such:

1) Naval blockade running
2) Two types of Airlifts (with or without workable air fields)

Naval blockades are enforceable imo when augmented by fast surface vessels like Type 56 corvettes/Type 22 missile boats to run intercept so they're not as obsolete as many would think, particularly when dealing with opposing fast crafts e.g. RHIBs. The second however, is a cause for concern - remember how the allies ran through the Berlin blockade by parachuting supplies into Berlin and frustrating Stalin?

Airfields can be disabled relatively easily but how does PLAAF intend to stop C-130s from parachuting supplies? Or even helo runs in and out of the island? They could

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I suppose but I'm very sceptical this is sustainable in the long run, not to mention highly controversial. Perhaps PAP could be deployed to key landing zones identified but this scenario is predicated on a pacified local environment which again, I doubt is going to happen that soon after a blockade is formed.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(think "I'm not touching you bro/Go on, hit me!")

They might not shoot down the US planes in this scenario, because they can just follow them and bomb where the drops land.

 

[Jason_]

I just skimmed through it.

IMO an awful report even by US standards.

The argument boils down to this:
The US has 3650 JASSM-ER which in this report magically acquired anti-ship capability. Each missile has a 5% chance of destroying a ship once fired. 3650*0.05=182 which is enough to sink all PLA amphibious ships. Therefore the invasion fails.

Problems:

• There is absolutely no indication that JASSM-ER can attack moving ships. If it has this capability, there would be no point in developing LRASM.
• By far the most effective way to engage sea skimming AShM is with aircraft. But in this report CAP on cruise missile defense mission simply doesn't exist on the PLA side.
• Most of the numbers (e.g. the 5% hit chance) is pulled from "historic records", which makes no sense when applied to fundamentally different offensive and defensive systems.

 

[vincent]

I just skimmed through it.

IMO an awful report even by US standards.

The argument boils down to this:
The US has 3650 JASSM-ER which in this report magically acquired anti-ship capability. Each missile has a 5% chance of destroying a ship once fired. 3650*0.05=182 which is enough to sink all PLA amphibious ships. Therefore the invasion fails.

Problems:

• There is absolutely no indication that JASSM-ER can attack moving ships. If it has this capability, there would be no point in developing LRASM.
• By far the most effective way to engage sea skimming AShM is with aircraft. But in this report CAP on cruise missile defense mission simply doesn't exist on the PLA side.
• Most of the numbers (e.g. the 5% hit chance) is pulled from "historic records", which makes no sense when applied to fundamentally different offensive and defensive systems.

Plus their assumption is PLA launches an amphibious assault right away which is retarded

 

[discspinner]

The written report

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Didn't read it, but China loses unrealistically baaaaad according to the reddit comments. I think it is likely just a MIC advertisement

CSIS gives away the purpose of this report in the opening summary (tongue in cheek - they know the end result hypothesized is political) "There is one major assumption here: Taiwan must resist and not capitulate. If Taiwan surrenders before U.S. forces can be brought to bear, the rest is futile"
The report is aimed at shoring up Taiwan's will to fight.

 

[Bellum_Romanum]

The written report

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Didn't read it, but China loses unrealistically baaaaad according to the reddit comments. I think it is likely just a MIC advertisement

So the prior War simulations before this newest U.S. win had the U.S. forces always fairing pretty badly i.e. LOSING, and yet now, somehow the American forces have managed to beat the snot out of the commie forces? What gives? Are the American forces used on this recent simulation being given some wunderweapons that were not available to be used on prior and past war simulations? Have the Chinese PLA forces this recent simulation modeled have somehow atrophied, training and military hardware become third rate that's why the result have finally produced the result American leadership desired to see from the very beginning.

I am not only skeptical, but I have a feeling that this stunt will be written so much about to the point of absurdity. And would not put it past these stenographers and narrative pushers the new propaganda scenario where this supposed fantasy setback is the cause of Xi Jinping actually making the PLA regress due to his cult of personality, retarding the command effectiveness of the PLA training in replace for Xi Jinping thought or something like that.....My last cent on this topic. I am just going to read more on this topic and read up on what you guys or gals that are far more knowledgeable on this topic than I ever could.

 

[discspinner]

So the prior War simulations before this newest U.S. win had the U.S. forces always fairing pretty badly i.e. LOSING, and yet now, somehow the American forces have managed to beat the snot out of the commie forces? What gives? Are the American forces used on this recent simulation being given some wunderweapons that were not available to be used on prior and past war simulations? Have the Chinese PLA forces this recent simulation modeled have somehow atrophied, training and military hardware become third rate that's why the result have finally produced the result American leadership desired to see from the very beginning.

I am not only skeptical, but I have a feeling that this stunt will be written so much about to the point of absurdity. And would not put it past these stenographers and narrative pushers the new propaganda scenario where this supposed fantasy setback is the cause of Xi Jinping actually making the PLA regress due to his cult of personality, retarding the command effectiveness of the PLA training in replace for Xi Jinping thought or something like that.....My last cent on this topic. I am just going to read more on this topic and read up on what you guys or gals that are far more knowledgeable on this topic than I ever could.

most likely the US may assess that prior reporting on likely US defeat had a negative impact on the DPP's performance in recent Taiwan's local elections, and they are trying to reverse that

 

[bebops]

I just skimmed through it.

IMO an awful report even by US standards.

The argument boils down to this:
The US has 3650 JASSM-ER which in this report magically acquired anti-ship capability. Each missile has a 5% chance of destroying a ship once fired. 3650*0.05=182 which is enough to sink all PLA amphibious ships. Therefore the invasion fails.

Problems:

• There is absolutely no indication that JASSM-ER can attack moving ships. If it has this capability, there would be no point in developing LRASM.
• By far the most effective way to engage sea skimming AShM is with aircraft. But in this report CAP on cruise missile defense mission simply doesn't exist on the PLA side.
• Most of the numbers (e.g. the 5% hit chance) is pulled from "historic records", which makes no sense when applied to fundamentally different offensive and defensive systems.

How would you detect and shoot it down for something like JASSM-ER and LRASM. Some experts say those missiles can get so close to the target that the enemies cannot react to it or have enough time to shoot it down.