PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

[Neurosmith]

I think this discussion does bring to light one important point, which is that submarines with cruise-missile-carrying capabilities would be strategically useful in a Pacific conflict. With both sides being able to target each other's airbases and staging areas in the region, SSNs would offer essentially the only capability to bring firepower to another country's bases and infrastructure without risk of reprisal on that platform.

This is probably why the Chinese are churning out their 09IIIB SSGNs and looking to produce their next 09V boats. They would be their only somewhat-plausible way to attack opposing bases, vessels, and even their homeland, without risking being destroyed in the process.

 

[latenlazy]

I think this discussion does bring to light one important point, which is that submarines with cruise-missile-carrying capabilities would be strategically useful in a Pacific conflict. With both sides being able to target each other's airbases and staging areas in the region, SSNs would offer essentially the only capability to bring firepower to another country's bases and infrastructure without risk of reprisal on that platform.

This is probably why the Chinese are churning out their 09IIIB SSGNs and looking to produce their next 09V boats. They would be their only somewhat-plausible way to attack opposing bases, vessels, and even their homeland, without risking being destroyed in the process.

Subs are fine for high leverage surgical strikes but they’re not really an answer for the high intensity side of the picture. Ultimately you still have to be able to answer mass questions if you want to win a war.

 

[plawolf]

Subs are fine for high leverage surgical strikes but they’re not really an answer for the high intensity side of the picture. Ultimately you still have to be able to answer mass questions if you want to win a war.

Counterpoint is the abysmal infrastructure redevelopment capability of the U.S.

How long is it going to take them to repair the Baltimore bridge again? It matters less if you can only generate a small number of fires per month if opfor needs years to repair the damage from each such strikes.

The obvious argument that this is peacetime speed is actually worse news for the US, since in wartime against China, it won’t be able to get any supplies of critical materials and machinery it needs to repair major infrastructure from China. Remember all those made in China cranes they slapped American flags over their Chinese names when doing photo ops for US presidential visits? How long do you think it will take them to magic a replacement once China stops supplying replacements? Indeed, how long can those cranes remain operational without Chinese parts even if they are not directly attacked in wartime?

 

[latenlazy]

Counterpoint is the abysmal infrastructure redevelopment capability of the U.S.

How long is it going to take them to repair the Baltimore bridge again? It matters less if you can only generate a small number of fires per month if opfor needs years to repair the damage from each such strikes.

The obvious argument that this is peacetime speed is actually worse news for the US, since in wartime against China, it won’t be able to get any supplies of critical materials and machinery it needs to repair major infrastructure from China. Remember all those made in China cranes they slapped American flags over their Chinese names when doing photo ops for US presidential visits? How long do you think it will take them to magic a replacement once China stops supplying replacements? Indeed, how long can those cranes remain operational without Chinese parts even if they are not directly attacked in wartime?

The US ironically is uniquely vulnerable to high leverage surgical attacks.

 

[Neurosmith]

Subs are fine for high leverage surgical strikes but they’re not really an answer for the high intensity side of the picture. Ultimately you still have to be able to answer mass questions if you want to win a war.

Yeah but subs would actually be survivable against opposing anti-surface and anti-air fires, unlike fixed or sea/airborne platforms. Take the 09IIIB for example...one sub could load 24 land attack cruise missiles, meaning that the PLAN's current fleet of 8 boats could theoretically bring 192 missiles to bear, which is not at all a trivial number considering how difficult it is to track them.

 

[latenlazy]

Yeah but subs would actually be survivable against opposing anti-surface and anti-air fires, unlike fixed or sea/airborne platforms. Take the 09IIIB for example...one sub could load 24 land attack cruise missiles, meaning that the PLAN's current fleet of 8 boats could theoretically bring 192 missiles to bear, which is not at all a trivial number considering how difficult it is to track them.

It depends on the mass on the other side.

 

[Tomboy]

which is not at all a trivial number considering how difficult it is to track them.

Are they? 093Bs are still only as good as 688is in most speed regime and the US has extensive sensor networks all around from their coasts to continental shelf and even in open ocean.

Also, I somehow doubt 093Bs have 24 VLS. The most we've seen is 12 in the open, there isn't really enough space forward of that section to contain another 12 without being right against the sail and the panel aft isn't long enough to fit another 12 VLS unit. IMO, at most It's 12+9 and worst It's 12.

 

[AndrewS]

US may run out of missile and ship quick but the huge problem is : US shipyard and production facility still perfectly safe back home , no countries include china have balls to put missile on cuba to threaten them
(no some sneaky tiny drones raid from hidden containe aren't gonna cut it and do any significal damage)
meanwhile US have no problem putting missile all over philipines and south korea....putting all china east coast at risk

well i hope when shooting war start china will finally have the will to threaten US mainland

it gonna be fucking hilarious if war start : china ship sunk by US missile , china shipyard hit by tomahawk from philipines , US submarine attack china's cargo around malacca straits

and china's missile still nowhere to be seen on cuba ...or atleast venezuela soil

As per Patch, the US isn't able to generate enough fires to hit targets in Mainland China.

You mention Tomahawks, but they are non-stealthy subsonic missiles.
And as the Pentagon has previously said, these sorts of missiles are easy targets for any medium-range SAM system.

---
And I've pointed out that due to rare earth restrictions, Raytheon was only 3 weeks away from stopping missile production

 

[CMP]

As per Patch, the US isn't able to generate enough fires to hit targets in Mainland China.

You mention Tomahawks, but they are non-stealthy subsonic missiles.
And as the Pentagon has previously said, these sorts of missiles are easy targets for any medium-range SAM system.

---
And I've pointed out that due to rare earth restrictions, Raytheon was only 3 weeks away from stopping missile production

100%. Furthermore, given it's nearly 2026, it's wild to me that anyone would still talk about tomahawks as if they're some kind of silver bullet against China.

 

[AndrewS]

I also said "master", not just "learn". And you realize there is a large gap between what taught in university courses and what practice in reality, right?

We're talking about TIG welding here, in submarines and civilian nuclear reactors.

Call it 60 hours of actual practice to gain "proficiency". A lesiurely formal course lasts 6+ months.
Hence I'm happy to go with a 6month figure.

Note that China has an extensive civilian nuclear industry (with associated TIG welders) who I also expect to be security-cleared.

No. In a wartime scenario, security clearance processes will only become more stingent.

But at the same time, security clearances cannot become a major impediment to increased wartime production...

The flaw in this assumption is that everyone goes back to business as usual after a bunch of people got killed. That's not going to happen. War is like cancer, you want to prevent it rather than get it then treat it.

I agree, but I don't see much else that China can be doing.

The path has already been set to:

1. Secure the 1IC ~2030
2. Secure the 2IC ~2035

The next step (2040s onwards) would be a pre-eminent blue-water Navy, which becomes a nice-to-have, if the 1IC and 2IC can be secured.