PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

I don't think anyone sane can talk about an air operation using bases in Japan or even Guam against China. These bases would be destroyed by missiles of the DF-17 type. The person is making senseless hypotheses for an enemy armed with missiles of this type.

Paulo R Siqueira said:

I don't think anyone sane can talk about an air operation using bases in Japan or even Guam against China. These bases would be destroyed by missiles of the DF-17 type. The person is making senseless hypotheses for an enemy armed with missiles of this type.

Click to expand...

No. There simply aren't enough missiles for a protracted campaign against Japanese airbases.

Taiwanese soldiers are not called "strawberry soldiers" for nothing. these are soldiers without a goal, cannot take hardship, and have next to zero morale. They would likely surrender the moment they are deprived of electricity, air conditioning, toilet paper, and flushing toilets.
and Japan better stays out of it, otherwise, the battlefield will extend to Japan proper, with devastating consequences. After all most Chinese citizens still want vengeance for atrocities suffered at the hands of the imperial Japanese troops at WW2. the call for retribution is palpable, so don't tempt China, for goodness' sake.

plawolf said:

If you want to slip through somewhere quiet and bomb some random fixed targets, maybe. But trying to send B2s into a crowded, complex battlespace saturated with sensors of all sorts including integrated naval and air defence networks, AWACS, AESA fighter radars, enemy stealth fighters and possibly sensor fused drone based radar networks. One would be hard pressed to come up with scenarios more likely to get B2s killed.



So the PLAAF is totally passive and cannot scramble to meet the new threat?

Click to expand...

How well do the new anti-stealth radars like those on the 052DG work? I heard they are meter-wave but produce the accuracy/resolution of higher-frequency microwave radars. Would bombers be harder to detect than fighter-sized targets?

clockwork said:

How well do the new anti-stealth radars like those on the 052DG work? I heard they are meter-wave but produce the accuracy/resolution of higher-frequency microwave radars. Would bombers be harder to detect than fighter-sized targets?

Click to expand...

They're VHF radars, so I don't see how they can have a higher accuracy/resolution than a higher frequency radar.

Aircraft with tails or canards can be detected with long-wavelength radars.
But bombers don't need to have these control surfaces, so it's a lot more difficult.

I wonder if the PLA would use helicopters for mass transport of equipment across the straits. Would certainly be a very fast way to land equipment though they'd be extremely vulnerable to sams

sndef888 said:

I wonder if the PLA would use helicopters for mass transport of equipment across the straits. Would certainly be a very fast way to land equipment though they'd be extremely vulnerable to sams

Click to expand...

use of helicopters is likely combined with deployment of a FOB in penghu. so in the early stages of the attack PLA will have to take penghu then dispatch helicopters from there.

For an analysis of how events may transpire over Taiwan, see:
This is the second of so far a three-part briefing.

AndrewS said:

No. There simply aren't enough missiles for a protracted campaign against Japanese airbases.

Click to expand...

Do you really know how many missiles China has ? or do you just believe Western media calculation ?

nugroho said:

Do you really know how many missiles China has ? or do you just believe Western media calculation ?

Click to expand...

It's not the media doing the calculation. It looks like roughly 3000 in total.

By definition, these missiles are big and expensive. Even the US only has 8000-9000 cruise missiles, which is not enough for a protracted campaign.