PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

[4Tran]

The funny thing is that the exact opposite is true. Once upon a time, Taiwan (yes, just Taiwan) was strong enough that the PLAN did not dare to navigate the Taiwan Strait. And then it was that China didn't have the naval capability to invade Taiwan. After that, Taiwan with US help would be able to fight off an invasion. Then it was Taiwan could hold out long enough to be reinforced by the US. Next was Taiwan could make an invasion costly enough that China would be unwilling to attack. Nowadays, the story is that the US and its allies would appear strong enough that China would be deterred from attacking.

Just by looking at how the narrative has shifted, it's clear that the US itself feels that its position in the Western Pacific is eroding, and eroding quickly at that. American allies and would be allies have sensed this shift as well and they've become increasingly less supportive of helping out in a US-China fight. Vietnam is the most pragmatic of these countries and they've signed agreements with China to de-escalate conflict. Korea was already unlikely to fight anywhere outside of the Korean peninsula but their new president is explicitly non-interventionist. Japan is still very worried by China but they've become visibly less confrontational in the last year or so. Philippines' Marcos is an American lapdog but even he's been less enthusiastic fighting China, and his main political rival is using warmer relations with China as an important poilitical issue. Only India is particularly interested in a confrontation with China, but they've shown themselves to be far weaker militarily than they appear to be, and it's the Americans that don't trust them much anymore.

And if you look at the US itself, trying to project power so far from home is super hard. What makes it even harder is that China is almost as strong as the US itself militarily and that the Western Pacific is its home waters. The only two services that can really play a role in the region are the USAF and the USN, and it's here that the differences look ugly, and it's ugly for the Americans. The USAF has far more aircraft and more combat aircraft than the PLAAF. The problem is that the only airbases that can really be used are the ones in Japan, Philippines, and Korea, and these bases simply don't support very many planes. It ends up being a couple hundred planes facing off against almost all of PLAAF, and none of these planes are 5th gens! Even worse, even disregarding the generational difference, a lot of the combat aircraft and force multipliers are getting very old and are less capable than their Chinese equivalents. Just compare how sad an E-3 looks compared to a KJ-500, and remember that the USAF doesn't even have two dozen of the former!

On paper, the USN has 11 supercarriers so it's heads and shoulders stronger than the PLAN. These supercarriers can carry F-35s and these represent the 5th gen fighters that the US can bring to the Western Pacific. The problem is that each supercarrier only carries a single squadron of 14 F-35s with the rest of its fighter complement being three squadrons of 12 F/A-18s each. And not all supercarriers even have F-35 squadrons at all - Ford for example, just has four squadrons of F/A-18s. The USN can complement this with LHDs and LHAs but each of these can only carry 6 F-35s apiece normally. Supposedly you can cram 20 fighters on each of them, but it would be extremely impractical to do so. Overall, this is just not going to be enough when the PLAAF probably has some 400 J-20s by now, and is getting more and more of these every year.

The Americans can see the writing on the wall but their attempts to Pivot to Asia have all failed. Right now, they're starting to move troops out of the first island chain. They'll never admit it publically, but I don't think that the Pentagon has any confidence in a war in the Western Pacific and they're already weighing alternative strategies. All the trend lines look terrible for them, and by 2035 the conversation would be about whether it's possible for the US to hold Guam.

Indeed, in all honesty I can say that from this point on even if the US were to attempt a full scale preemptive strike against China with every available asset at their disposal, China would still have sufficient industrial power to basically steamroll them across the Pacific back to the Continental US itself, and this will become even more apparent by next year's time. The only people kidding themselves are the folks too blinded by western propaganda to recognize the conditions on the ground.

Also note that the US would be in huge trouble within weeks. They don't have a very large stockpile of advanced munitions and they don't have the manufacturing capability to make it in large quantity. And even if they start converting civilian facilities to produce these munitions, they'll immediately run out of rare earths and other critical materials. As most of these materials have to come from China, they'll have to do without.

 

[AndrewS]

Indeed, in all honesty I can say that from this point on even if the US were to attempt a full scale preemptive strike against China with every available asset at their disposal, China would still have sufficient industrial power to basically steamroll them across the Pacific back to the Continental US itself, and this will become even more apparent by next year's time. The only people kidding themselves are the folks too blinded by western propaganda to recognize the conditions on the ground.

Remember that it would take some years for China's industrial machine to build a Navy that could steamroll across the Pacific.

 

[Sinnavuuty]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1937469961418490276

Someone needs to tell Airpower that China, unlike Iran, has vast ISR capabilities and real-time surveillance. China’s ballistic missile strikes will be much more precise and surgical, hitting critical and strategic targets of its enemies.

 

[tamsen_ikard]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1937469961418490276

Someone needs to tell Airpower that China, unlike Iran, has vast ISR capabilities and real-time surveillance. China’s ballistic missile strikes will be much more precise and surgical, hitting critical and strategic targets of its enemies.

The kind of AD that Israel has is unmatched in the world due to how small it is. You had countless US AD plus ships plus planes defending it including Israeli ones as well. Even Chinese missile will struggle to penetrate this. But China will likely penetrate with maybe 40% interception rate.

Of course US will never have that level of AD. But still China needs to invest more to have a bigger and more advanced and maneuverable missile arsenal.

But the biggest lesson for China is that, Not even that level of AD is enough to stop missile penetration. So, China is not secure with its own current AD.

Chinese opponents like Taiwan or Japan will likely follow the Iran route of ballistic missile arsenal and give up on the air force just like Iran. So, China needs to heavily invest in its own AD plus base hardening with more underground facilities so that critical military and research structure can be protected from saturated missile attacks.

 

[Brainsuker]

The scenario you mentioned was true at any point before 2015, and has only gotten better (for China) since. If China can hit anything the US puts in the Philippines, the territory value of PH drops. If this is repeated for the whole 1CS, the utility and cost/benefit for US fortifying those areas drops. In fact, this is exactly what has been happening (e.g. SCS islands), with weapons sales morphing from actual weapons sales to money grabbing activities selling outdated weaponry at high prices (e.g. Taiwan, Philippines).
Only competent countries get real support (e.g. Japan, SK), but even then they are intended as expendable front line cannon fodder if anything does happen.

You should look at Israel - Iran missile exchange. Even with incredible missile defense, Israel still has to suffer, because there is no Air Defense that enough to protect your country from a missile barrage.

So yes, China can hit anything that US put into Philippine, but not all of them. The lesson of US vs Houthi in middle east also teach us. Even after bombarded by incredible US air strike, Houthi still can launch missiles and harass US element on the Red Sea. So, as long as Philippine and Japan with US, China have to fight against them first, before they can even touch Guam and Hawaii in a meaningful damage. At the same time, when it happen, US can target China industrial centers, shipyards, and even Chinese weapon industries. Without have to afraid that China can do a missile strike to Lockhead Martin, Northtop and Boeing at the same time.

When China no longer has the infrastructure to produce more missiles, US can send more and more missiles from their untouched industrial base in their mainland.

This is the same as the concept of Wei Qi chess. You should learn to play it, so you will understand how China and US battleground look like. Because they use the same concept. And that chess was created by our Chinese ancestor.

That's why I said that China must disturb this US formation. In Wei Qi, China pawn should find another liberty, to build a territory and to reduce US territory. If you see the situation in the Westpac with Wei Qi chess in the mind, you can see that the east of Japan and Philippine now controlled by US. They can do many things in those area relatively undisturbed. While SCS is a contested area. That's why China goes west with their BRI. Because they seek "liberty" (a term in Wei Qi chess). Now US strike Iran, to kill that China's "liberty". So China needs to do something, to reduce US liberty, or to gain another liberty or even to secured a territory.

In the west pac, China need to find a foothold, to reduce US liberty and make US military operation become more complex. Thus, make the "Secured" territory to become a "contested" territory.

If you Chinese, You should learn to play Wei Qi. it was created by ancient Chinese ancestor. And it played by so many famous Chinese strategists in the past. Because it can reflected the geopolitics perfectly.

So after you understand my argument and how I see the situation, please tell me, how China can find a foothold to the area east of Japan and Philippine. So US "Territory" will become a contested area and China can play at the same foothold with US. I don't know, maybe Chinese should put a (Wei Qi) stone in the latin and South America? Who know they can get an ally, and thus the ally can disturb the US operation in the Pacific, thus change the "Territory" to a contested one. But please tell me how China need to put their (Wei QI) stone.

 

[Brainsuker]

its the opposite. A forward deployment strategy is risky because its basically geographically spreading your forces in a thin shell and you have to push logistics to the edge of the shell. You don't have geographic force concentration and your logistics lines are long and easy to disrupt. Yet because you have a limited number of bases, you don't have tactical force dispersion.

Pushing long distance logistics to so few points of failure is risky. Count the number of airbases that US+allies have near China, then count the number of airbases that China has on the east coast. It's not even close. Example: if Guam gets struck, its air power projection capability weakens. But once local supplies run out, repair/resupply becomes harder too, since damaging the air base in itself, a tactical objective, also results in it being harder to repair, a strategic objective. It snowballs. China doesn't have this problem; the PLA can push logistics to anywhere inside China easily and doesn't cross contested territory to do so.

But F-35B can fly from anywhere with their unique take off capability. US can just build a secret F-35B base in a Japanese forest that hidden from China. They can also use street and road as a temporary forward base. And they can always build F-35B when it is destroyed, because nobody bombarded Lockhead Martin factory.

Plus, how China disturb their logistic route from US to their forward bases. If China's submarines must go through into US security web around Miyako Straight and the sea south of Philippine. With Japan, Taiwan and Philippine with US side, moving to Pacific ocean become very dangerous to any Chinese element. Just like how Houthi disturb the shipping line at the red sea. But now with anti submarine element too.

 

[montyp165]

Remember that it would take some years for China's industrial machine to build a Navy that could steamroll across the Pacific.

The existing fleet itself is already at a level able to contest the USN in direct combat, and the industrial base is capable enough of generating new ships for a continuous advance across the Pacific even in a one-for-one loss exchange rate, especially with rapid advances in automated systems for ships and manufacturing.

You should look at Israel - Iran missile exchange. Even with incredible missile defense, Israel still has to suffer, because there is no Air Defense that enough to protect your country from a missile barrage.

So yes, China can hit anything that US put into Philippine, but not all of them. The lesson of US vs Houthi in middle east also teach us. Even after bombarded by incredible US air strike, Houthi still can launch missiles and harass US element on the Red Sea. So, as long as Philippine and Japan with US, China have to fight against them first, before they can even touch Guam and Hawaii in a meaningful damage. At the same time, when it happen, US can target China industrial centers, shipyards, and even Chinese weapon industries. Without have to afraid that China can do a missile strike to Lockhead Martin, Northtop and Boeing at the same time.

When China no longer has the infrastructure to produce more missiles, US can send more and more missiles from their untouched industrial base in their mainland.

This is the same as the concept of Wei Qi chess. You should learn to play it, so you will understand how China and US battleground look like. Because they use the same concept. And that chess was created by our Chinese ancestor.

That's why I said that China must disturb this US formation. In Wei Qi, China pawn should find another liberty, to build a territory and to reduce US territory. If you see the situation in the Westpac with Wei Qi chess in the mind, you can see that the east of Japan and Philippine now controlled by US. They can do many things in those area relatively undisturbed. While SCS is a contested area. That's why China goes west with their BRI. Because they seek "liberty" (a term in Wei Qi chess). Now US strike Iran, to kill that China's "liberty". So China needs to do something, to reduce US liberty, or to gain another liberty or even to secured a territory.

In the west pac, China need to find a foothold, to reduce US liberty and make US military operation become more complex. Thus, make the "Secured" territory to become a "contested" territory.

If you Chinese, You should learn to play Wei Qi. it was created by ancient Chinese ancestor. And it played by so many famous Chinese strategists in the past. Because it can reflected the geopolitics perfectly.

So after you understand my argument and how I see the situation, please tell me, how China can find a foothold to the area east of Japan and Philippine. So US "Territory" will become a contested area and China can play at the same foothold with US. I don't know, maybe Chinese should put a (Wei Qi) stone in the latin and South America? Who know they can get an ally, and thus the ally can disturb the US operation in the Pacific, thus change the "Territory" to a contested one. But please tell me how China need to put their (Wei QI) stone.

This I have to say would be a very superficial argument, for if you've ever tested any strategic wargame scenarios similar to the current strategic situation in the Pacific there are a number of parameters that are consistent regardless of the type of wargame model utilized. In every scenario where the US forces could achieve victory required both superior capability in hardware and greater force concentration of at least 2:1 or greater over the course of conflict. In any scenario where Chinese (and possible allied) combined forces are within 90% of technical capability and numerical parity the US forces drops below Vietnam War level success rates, and any situation where Chinese forces have technical superiority and/or numerical superiority they can effectively dictate the flow of battle even if you threw the Quad forces into the equation. In addition, successful breakout superiority over the First Island Chain would enable a Second Battle of the Pacific to be conducted (which would overlap the old battlefields of WWII incidently), plus the Chinese equivalent of Prompt Global Strike would be able to target US MIC facilities and airbases, so that wouldn't be a one sided affair either.

The thing is that the old estimate of 2027 that the US bandied about regarding a possible war over Taiwan really had a different meaning than what they assumed, as that would be the timeframe that Chinese conventional superiority would be sufficient in scale to take on the full Quad and win in any event.

 

[Brainsuker]

The existing fleet itself is already at a level able to contest the USN in direct combat, and the industrial base is capable enough of generating new ships for a continuous advance across the Pacific even in a one-for-one loss exchange rate, especially with rapid advances in automated systems for ships and manufacturing.


This I have to say would be a very superficial argument, for if you've ever tested any strategic wargame scenarios similar to the current strategic situation in the Pacific there are a number of parameters that are consistent regardless of the type of wargame model utilized. In every scenario where the US forces could achieve victory required both superior capability in hardware and greater force concentration of at least 2:1 or greater over the course of conflict. In any scenario where Chinese (and possible allied) combined forces are within 90% of technical capability and numerical parity the US forces drops below Vietnam War level success rates, and any situation where Chinese forces have technical superiority and/or numerical superiority they can effectively dictate the flow of battle even if you threw the Quad forces into the equation. In addition, successful breakout superiority over the First Island Chain would enable a Second Battle of the Pacific to be conducted (which would overlap the old battlefields of WWII incidently), plus the Chinese equivalent of Prompt Global Strike would be able to target US MIC facilities and airbases, so that wouldn't be a one sided affair either.

The thing is that the old estimate of 2027 that the US bandied about regarding a possible war over Taiwan really had a different meaning than what they assumed, as that would be the timeframe that Chinese conventional superiority would be sufficient in scale to take on the full Quad and win in any event.

Please tell us about the detail of these wargame scenarios that you're talking about. Maybe it can open my mind further. I don't mind read a long post.

 

[4Tran]

You should look at Israel - Iran missile exchange. Even with incredible missile defense, Israel still has to suffer, because there is no Air Defense that enough to protect your country from a missile barrage.

So yes, China can hit anything that US put into Philippine, but not all of them. The lesson of US vs Houthi in middle east also teach us. Even after bombarded by incredible US air strike, Houthi still can launch missiles and harass US element on the Red Sea. So, as long as Philippine and Japan with US, China have to fight against them first, before they can even touch Guam and Hawaii in a meaningful damage. At the same time, when it happen, US can target China industrial centers, shipyards, and even Chinese weapon industries. Without have to afraid that China can do a missile strike to Lockhead Martin, Northtop and Boeing at the same time.

When China no longer has the infrastructure to produce more missiles, US can send more and more missiles from their untouched industrial base in their mainland.

What the Israel-Iran missile exchange shows is that a limited conventional attack is unable to do significant damage to large scale infrastructure. The larger Chinese factory sites are tens of kilometers square in size, and you'd need thousands of tons of munitions to knock all of it out. China has hundreds of industrial groupings like this all over the country, and the ability to build hundreds more. Besides, even if the Americans were able to put down a thousand ballistic missiles in Philippines, what do they do after firing all of them off? And how do they protect them from Chinese attack in the first place? And how do they replenish these missile stocks in the first place once they run out? Are they going to be able to order more rare earths from Chinese companies? The fact of the matter is that a protracted war heavily favors the side with greater industry and more robust supply chains. The US is not the favored side.

But F-35B can fly from anywhere with their unique take off capability. US can just build a secret F-35B base in a Japanese forest that hidden from China. They can also use street and road as a temporary forward base. And they can always build F-35B when it is destroyed, because nobody bombarded Lockhead Martin factory.

Plus, how China disturb their logistic route from US to their forward bases. If China's submarines must go through into US security web around Miyako Straight and the sea south of Philippine. With Japan, Taiwan and Philippine with US side, moving to Pacific ocean become very dangerous to any Chinese element. Just like how Houthi disturb the shipping line at the red sea. But now with anti submarine element too.

F-35Bs can theoretically be plopped anywhere. But as a practical measure, they need to have special environmentally controlled hangars to maintain its RAM coating. Without such facilities, it's impractical to field F-35s. Right now, the Americans feel that placing such planes in the First Island Chain makes them too vulnerable to Chinese missiles so Guam is as close as any of their bases get. And China doesn't have to attack any American factories to disrupt military production: they already have a stranglehold on all sorts of critical materials and without these materials, it's impossible to build any advanced equipment.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

But F-35B can fly from anywhere with their unique take off capability. US can just build a secret F-35B base in a Japanese forest that hidden from China. They can also use street and road as a temporary forward base. And they can always build F-35B when it is destroyed, because nobody bombarded Lockhead Martin factory.

Plus, how China disturb their logistic route from US to their forward bases. If China's submarines must go through into US security web around Miyako Straight and the sea south of Philippine. With Japan, Taiwan and Philippine with US side, moving to Pacific ocean become very dangerous to any Chinese element. Just like how Houthi disturb the shipping line at the red sea. But now with anti submarine element too.

The runway is just part of an airbase. The reason that airbases exist isn't just for the runway, it is also because they need a central location to manage fuel, weapons and command.

Are you going to store 500 AIM-120s in an apartment block, roll them around with shopping carts, fuel up 10000 L tanks from little plastic gas cans, etc? Or deliver them to the middle of a forest - how? The middle of the forest doesn't tend to have roads, and you don't want tanker and munition trucks driving off road.

You can hit their logistics with ballistic missiles. Nobody unloads anything by hand. Hit the dock cranes, and you not only disable the logistics, they can't even repair the cranes if they don't already have another crane on the island. Dock cranes don't move. You can gather AD around it, but then you can hit the transports with ballistic missiles. They gonna escort a carrier or they gonna escort a transport?