PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
plawolf said:
How can they contest the landings if they are all hunker down in the cities preparing for urban combat? If they are not contesting the landings, the PLA can land with giant inflatable rubber duckies for all the difference it would make.

Big ticket LHDs and LHAs are door kickers designed to smash open the beachheads as quickly and as effectively as possible. After the beachhead has been secured and breakout achieved, follow on forces can land via whatever means necessary while the LHDs and LHAs are free to return to port because it’s game over by that point.

If any die hards try to hold out in the cities, the PLA can send it as many troops as needed.

And Taiwan’s reservists will just be live target practice for the PLA if they are stupid enough to show up given how pathetically little training they get.
Click to expand...

Look at the distances. You've got urban areas a maximum of 15km from any beach.
The beaches will be within view of any defenders holed up in a city.
The would act as spotters for artillery, mortars and missiles to range the beaches.

But I don't see that being enough to stop the beach landings.
So yes, the PLA can send in as many troops as needed. But die hards holding out in cities will take time to clear out.
That is the biggest risk because if it drags on for weeks, it invites US intervention.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
AndrewS said:
Look at the distances. You've got urban areas a maximum of 15km from any beach.
The beaches will be within view of any defenders holed up in a city.
The would act as spotters for artillery, mortars and missiles to range the beaches.

But I don't see that being enough to stop the beach landings.
So yes, the PLA can send in as many troops as needed. But die hards holding out in cities will take time to clear out.
That is the biggest risk because if it drags on for weeks, it invites US intervention.
Click to expand...
You realise US marines can’t just magic themselves onto the battlefield so long as there is a single die hard left holding out in a basement right? They are not spawn beacons.

US intervention will depend entirely on the ability of US naval and air forces to actually get to the fight, which has nothing to do with urban combat.

Besides, a ground war would be the absolutely most stupid and unrealistic US intervention step.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
plawolf said:
You realise US marines can’t just magic themselves onto the battlefield so long as there is a single die hard left holding out in a basement right? They are not spawn beacons.

US intervention will depend entirely on the ability of US naval and air forces to actually get to the fight, which has nothing to do with urban combat.

Besides, a ground war would be the absolutely most stupid and unrealistic US intervention step.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about US soldiers.

It's US airstrikes over Taiwan every 12 hours of so.

Currently, US bombers and tanker aircraft can operate from relatively safely from Alaska, Hawaii, Midway and Wake Island.
The US could also organise a massed fighter raid from Japan with tanker support.
These would not have much persistence, but they would cause damage.

The rest of the time the Chinese Air Force would control the air over Taiwan.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
AndrewS said:
I'm not talking about US soldiers.

It's US airstrikes over Taiwan every 12 hours of so.

Currently, US bombers and tanker aircraft can operate from relatively safely from Alaska, Hawaii, Midway and Wake Island.
The US could also organise a massed fighter raid from Japan with tanker support.
These would not have much persistence, but they would cause damage.

The rest of the time the Chinese Air Force would control the air over Taiwan.
Click to expand...
Air raids from Alaska?! What time zone are you in? It’s a bit early in the day to be drinking already in my time zone at least!

Even ignoring the absurdity of the distances suggested, along with the ridiculous logistical burden needed to launch even one such raid, you do realised that modern warfare is a context between systems and networks rather than platforms right?!

For the US to send in fighters and bombers like that, when they could not possibly properly support them with associated supplementary assets and forces, against the full spectrum of the Chinese integrated military network of systems, and against a numerically superior PLAAF force, is to invite defeat and disaster. Frankly, the PLA could only dream the Americans would be so stupid and obliging.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
plawolf said:
Air raids from Alaska?! What time zone are you in? It’s a bit early in the day to be drinking already in my time zone at least!

Even ignoring the absurdity of the distances suggested, along with the ridiculous logistical burden needed to launch even one such raid, you do realised that modern warfare is a context between systems and networks rather than platforms right?!

For the US to send in fighters and bombers like that, when they could not possibly properly support them with associated supplementary assets and forces, against the full spectrum of the Chinese integrated military network of systems, and against a numerically superior PLAAF force, is to invite defeat and disaster. Frankly, the PLA could only dream the Americans would be so stupid and obliging.
Click to expand...

Look at the distances from Alaska to Taiwan.

From Anchorage Air Force Base, it's 6000km to Japan.
With an airborne refuelling over Japan, a B-2 would have a combat radius of another 5000km which easily reaches Taiwan.

With B-2s, it's not about integrated systems. It's about operating as lone wolves and slipping through.

---

If you look at how air operations actually work, let's say China can generate 600 aircraft sorties per day for Taiwan.
If a typical strike package comprises 40 aircraft (with a mix of fighter, strike, support aircraft), that would happen 15 times a day.

In comparison, the US can choose when it wants to concentrate its own sortie of 50 aircraft and send them to Taiwan.
So the US would have numerical superiority in this scenario.
 
Temstar

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
When people think holed up in cities they're probably thinking Stalingrad, with lots of dragon teeth and fighting room to room and things like that. But somehow the way ROC prepares for it strike me as not really that:

6ff86c2.jpg
ffd3f60.jpg
b4c4bad.jpg
0b21a41.jpg
228086d.jpg
Instead of fighting from inside the city, it seems more like they want to use the cities and civilians as cover to hide in.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Temstar said:
When people think holed up in cities they're probably thinking Stalingrad, with lots of dragon teeth and fighting room to room and things like that. But somehow the way ROC prepares for it strike me as not really that:

View attachment 81768
View attachment 81769
View attachment 81770
View attachment 81771
View attachment 81772
Instead of fighting from inside the city, it seems more like they want to use the cities and civilians as cover to hide in.
Click to expand...

That works for hiding vehicles yes.

But you can't get away from urban warfare being an infantry and small unit battle, even with small airborne drones and unmanned ground vehicles.
 
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
AndrewS said:
Look at the distances from Alaska to Taiwan.

From Anchorage Air Force Base, it's 6000km to Japan.
With an airborne refuelling over Japan, a B-2 would have a combat radius of another 5000km which easily reaches Taiwan.

With B-2s, it's not about integrated systems. It's about operating as lone wolves and slipping through.

---

If you look at how air operations actually work, let's say China can generate 600 aircraft sorties per day for Taiwan.
If a typical strike package comprises 40 aircraft (with a mix of fighter, strike, support aircraft), that would happen 15 times a day.

In comparison, the US can choose when it wants to concentrate its own sortie of 50 aircraft and send them to Taiwan.
So the US would have numerical superiority in this scenario.
Click to expand...
US air strikes would amount to an escalation of war zones from Taiwan to Japan, Guam, and possibily the Korean peninsular as well. PLA is not going to just concentrate their effect on the Taiwan alone. They are fully aware of the possibility of Japan and US intervention. With more than 100 stealth J20 (at end of 2021), and their capability to intercept enemy aircraft in areas thousands of km from Taiwan is very real.

PLA also has the capability to strike all US bases in Japan and South Korea with their land based missiles and cruise missiles from H6K/J bombers which would force US to pull their war machines further back to Guam.

So the big question is would US want to escalate the war of unification of Taiwan to a regional East Asia war. And don't forget Russia might get themselve involve as well.

US and Japan simply have to accept that the if Taiwan is unified with Mainland China, they just lost a castle or a horse in their chessboard game in containment of China that would not justify a full blown regional war with China. They probably would freeze all Chinese asset in US and Europe and throw in an economic sanction like what they did to Iran.
 
Bellum_Romanum

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
lcloo said:
US air strikes would amount to an escalation of war zones from Taiwan to Japan, Guam, and possibily the Korean peninsular as well. PLA is not going to just concentrate their effect on the Taiwan alone. They are fully aware of the possibility of Japan and US intervention. With more than 100 stealth J20 (at end of 2021), and their capability to intercept enemy aircraft in areas thousands of km from Taiwan is very real.

PLA also has the capability to strike all US bases in Japan and South Korea with their land based missiles and cruise missiles from H6K/J bombers which would force US to pull their war machines further back to Guam.

So the big question is would US want to escalate the war of unification of Taiwan to a regional East Asia war. And don't forget Russia might get themselve involve as well.

US and Japan simply have to accept that the if Taiwan is unified with Mainland China, they just lost a castle or a horse in their chessboard game in containment of China that would not justify a full blown regional war with China. They probably would freeze all Chinese asset in US and Europe and throw in an economic sanction like what they did to Iran.
Click to expand...
Strangelove said:
Even Ukraine is a bit far away, they have more pressing issues at home, like stealing fish from the Brits.

View attachment 81568
Click to expand...

lcloo said:
US and Japan simply have to accept that the if Taiwan is unified with Mainland China, they just lost a castle or a horse in their chessboard game in containment of China that would not justify a full blown regional war with China. They probably would freeze all Chinese asset in US and Europe and throw in an economic sanction like what they did to Iran.
Click to expand...
And if such measures were taken the U.S. and the west will also suffer economic devastation. China's economic integration in the global market is ginormous to say the least while Iran is negligible or non existent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top