Expanding the Chinese Military size (Please Read and Reply) this is important

The PLA doesn't have unlimited budget, and must choose which areas to modernize carefully.

If I were setting the top 5 priorities, it'd look something like this:

1) Build an effective nuclear secondary (retailatory) strike capability. This can be done within 10 years, through a combination of improved road-mobile ICBM's and SSBN's. At minimum the PLAN should operate a fleet of 3-4 modern SSBN's. I'd prefer around 8.

Having an effective secondary strike capability would defend the PRC from nuclear blackmail. This is very important as more nations are becoming nuclear powers.

2) Fund R&D for better missile defense - combination of ballistic and direct-energy weapons. Better CIWS, better SAMs, and better tactical high-energy lasers than the THEL/MTHEL. Ask the Russians for joint-development for next-generation S-300/S-400 platform.

3) Develop and mass produce cruise missile capability, as well as delivery & guidance capability. This could be a combination of mass-production DH-10 and domestic GPS satellites. The cruise missile should be a "common platform" that can be used for anti-surface, anti-ship, and even nuclear warhead option. These "Chinese Tomahawks" should be produced by the thousands.

The PLA, PLAAF, and PLAN should all have delivery platforms, ranging from bombers to SSG/SSGN's. The US Ohio-class SSGN is a good model. The PLAN can builder smaller versions, carrying 64-96 LACM's each.

4) Pay $$ for joint-development with Russia and India for conventional weapons. Areas to concentrate on: PAK-FA, ASW (sonar and weapons), S-400, missile technology. 3 wallets is better than one. The PLAAF still has some to learn from the Russians, and the PLAN really needs better ASW weapons.

5) Fund UAV development. Armed and unarmed UAV's for the sky and under-water. The Israeli Harpy is a good concept.

The future battlefield - rather than tanks getting into shooting range, your trucks deploy Harpy-like UAV's with 500+ km range. A line of trucks launch dozens of attack UAV's, which flies toward the enemy armed column and perform saturated attack from the air. By the time that your tanks arrive, the enemy armor is a smoking heap.

===============

None of the above suggest rapid expansion of the PLA at this time. The PRC is in a good position today where it's not in danger of being invaded, and military conflicts would only occur by PRC's choosing 98% of the time (excluding Mr. Kim in North Korea). There is no need to expand the PLA by the millions. All 3 branches can be given funding for gradual upgrade of equipment, but more funding should be allocated to R&D areas specified above.

As for the PLAN, I'd say give them new ships, but at the same time demand them to retire and transfer older naval assets to a new unified coast guard service. Ships transferred to the coast guard should have its SSM's removed, and be equipped with modern CIWS and helicopter deck. Each of the 3 fleets's surface fleet should be given 8 DDG, 8 FFG, plus a few ships in reserve. In addition, the Navy should organize rapid reaction group cenetred around LHD's, and organize separate littoral combat group with smaller ships. Such a navy is conservative in size, affordable, and should not look overly threatening to PRC's neighbors.

China will have to set priorities since her financial resources though rapidly expanding are limited in comparison to the US. Until a certain economic parity between US and China is achieved (this will be around 2020) PLAN´s admirals dreams of creating a chinese version of Alfred Thayer Mahan´s oceanic fleet will have to be put off.

Supreme priority has to be given to the Second Artillery and her road/rail mobile ICBM/IRBM´s plus a robust mobile and air launched cruise missile component. Simultaneously PLAAF´s attack capabilities and her air defense have to be build up rapidly and effectively. In combination only these capabilities will pose essentially the kind of risk which will make US military planners actually think twice before trying to intimidate, threaten or even attack the PRC.

Only after these pivotal strategic aims have been realized China can go on with the task of building a ´true´navy with a strong SSBN fleet. (Unfourtunately a fleet of 12 SSBN will probably have to wait until 2025, but a true navalist in the tradition of Mahan, Tirpitz or Gorshkov needs patience as an essential trait of his character too.)

P.S. @adeptitus: generally I am d'accord with your analysis but China will have to concentrate on weapons systems where her current tech gap in comparison to the US is already small. SSBN´s and SSN´s which constitute no challenge to their USN counterparts will not serve China´s interests, whereas top notch ballistic/cruise missiles will improve her strategic power dramatically!

Yes, a significant increase in nuclear weapons, I agree (yoda talk). I have a slight question though: What good is it to build cruise missiles? They are only good in regional conflicts, and they do not have the range. Wouldn't a longer range weapon be better? ie the US FALCON?

The PLAN needs to start developing a naval air arm. I know the PLANAF exsists, but its a joke. China will probably start truly developing this capability when the Varyag comes online. But rather than just buying SU-33s from Russia, it would be far better for China to develop a navalized fighter of its own or a version of the J-10 for reasons I already wrote wayyyyyy back in the beginning of the thread.

Violet Oboe said:

P.S. @adeptitus: generally I am d'accord with your analysis but China will have to concentrate on weapons systems where her current tech gap in comparison to the US is already small. SSBN´s and SSN´s which constitute no challenge to their USN counterparts will not serve China´s interests, whereas top notch ballistic/cruise missiles will improve her strategic power dramatically!

Click to expand...

My opinion is that the PLAN would need 3-4 SSBN's to maintain at least one in deployment status at all times. Since SSBN's can travel around the world, it can bring most countries within striking range. This is an important deterrance weapon not aimed solely at the US, but to any other country or subnational group.

Building more ICBM's will provide some level of deterrance vs. US, EU, Russia, India, etc., but DF-31/DF-31A's cannot reach many parts of the globe. Given a hypothetical (hopefully unrealistic) scenario where a hostile organization based out of Africa or S. America detonate WMD's in a Chinese city, the PLAN's SSBN/SSGN can bring the country within retailatory range.

Having SSGN's would give the PLAN an option to strike with conventional weapons, instead of nuclear-armed SLBM's. IMO if you're going to build an effective deterrance, the big stick must have reach to strike almost anywhere on the planet.

DarkEminence said:

Yes, a significant increase in nuclear weapons, I agree (yoda talk). I have a slight question though: What good is it to build cruise missiles? They are only good in regional conflicts, and they do not have the range. Wouldn't a longer range weapon be better? ie the US FALCON?

Click to expand...

BGM-109 Tomahawks have range of 1,250 km - 2,500 km, depending on version. According to Global Security, the latest 2,200 Tomahawk order will cost approx. $1.6 billion, or ~$727,000 USD each.

I believe the PLA should develop such a weapon. It can be armed with various conventional payload or even nuclear payload, and have range to reach across East Asia. It can perform as SRBM replacement, and deployed on land, sea, and air.

Such a missile can be deployed on PLAN's fleet of SSN's. You could build hybrid SSN/SSGN like USN Los-Angeles class SSN with 12-cel VLS, or dedicated SSGN platforms. This would give the PLAN global surface strike capability from underwater, and a much cheaper method of power projection vs. carrier fleet.