How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet border?

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

Once the troops are on the Plateau, the implications of a damaged railway are reduced as the troops can move on road or across ground and disperse very quickly. The really vulnerable point is the ascent and this is deep in Qinghai. Actual Bridges account for a small percentage of the track length and any really critical structures are going to be heavily defended.

Knocking out a rail section does not knock out the entire line and other parts can keep operating, especially true when on the Plateau.

Tibet is largely unsurveyed for its Mineral potential although the PRC has important Uranium and other Heavy Metal mines in the region.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

SampanViking is right; normally it would make little difference to the troops on the ground if the railway is temporarily cut, especially if their depots are already full with supplies brought in earlier. As to the bridges, that would depend upon the gap to be bridged; bridges over short gaps could probably be replaced within a few days at most. Needless to say, long gaps would be a big problem, but I suspect that the Railway planners made a point of mimimizing them. As far as I can tell, it s a very-well planned out railroad. And as SampanViking has said, the parts of the line in Qinghai are the most problematic, and they're deep inside China anyway, and would likely be quite well defended in wartime.

I can't say anything about "reinforced railroads" other than to say whatever materials that would probably be used for such would also probably deteriorate in the harsh climate, and be more expensive and difficult to repair anyway. The railway would be used in wartime; it's just that it would be disrupted by enemy attacks - it can be worked around.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

Thanks Norfolk for jogging my memory, with your talk about reinforced railways.

I must state first, that my knowledge of railways outside of the UK is very limited and that much of the Physical Infrastructure of UK Railways goes back to the Victorian Age. This typically means an earth and stone embankment on which a layer of aggregate and then the rails will sit.

When I travelled on the Railway in Guangdong, I noticed a number of large concrete troughs lying on ground close by. I quickly realised that these were in fact trestles: some flat some with legs, that were used to form the lay of the line.

I saw the same Trestles in photos of the Quinghai-Tibet line and so I guess that means that much of the actual rail itself is largely prefabricated and that bomb damaged sections can be pretty much lifted away and replaced. With modern Railway Engineering Plant, such a process would only take an hour or so and even a embankment repair is potentially an overnight job. These trestles were a revelation to me when I saw them, although I have no idea is these are common construction practises in other parts of the world.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

In general keeping a railway opened is a nightmare against an opponent with some sort of wherewithal to keep it closed. The worry is not so much from airstrikes but rather from commando forces. Disabling sections of the track is one thing, but disabling them at night just before train is about to go over them, causing a huge wreck is quite another if it can be repeated a few times.

Defending miles of track from airstrikes is easy given the range of missiles these days. Stealth aircraft might be able to do locomotive busting at night but there are better targets for such expensive weapons. However defending such a rail line from small commando teams well-trained to hide within terrain infested with superior enemy enemy ground troop formations is quite a task. Even the technologically and militarily unsophisticated Tibetans were able to briefly close down a few rail lines during the early resistance to Chinese initial invasion. Now consider what happens when you have a small team of Russian, American, or Indian forces flown in by bush plane (well below radar) to cause disruption.

You may only need a laser rangefinder and something similar for a Tomahawk land attack missile launched from a submarine to keep the repair crews extremely busy patching up the track. With satellite data you can almost always have the train schedules down pat and thus insure that any track destroyed takes a train with it and a few cars too. Then simply use a follow-up missile launched a bit later to destroy the locomotive completely. (As said before there may be more efficient means of destroying locomotive beyond repair or salvage)

While it's easy to patch a new track, you only have so many locomotives on hand at any given time. When the United States created its first transcontinental railroad with heavy government subsidies, the relatively minor train robberies of outlaws and bandits was enough to cause severe disruption... The otherwise defunct pony express soldiered on for a few more years because the trains were such an inviting target for looting. Now think about people who are motivated to simply destroy the infrastructure and make it as unusable as possible, with much better funding than those outlaws had back in the old West.

The real question is how much flat on unbroken terrain is near the tracks? If there's a great deal of such terrain then the track should be easy to keep open because no small group would be able to escape detection after they performed their deed. On the other hand if the terrain is similar to say Afghanistan near and around those tracks, than keeping a railway open is going to be difficult to say the least. Defending very long rail lines is like defending a very long coastline, in other words there will be gaps in the protection least against ground forces.

Closing down resupply rail would not be crippling it would just slow things down. You can still resupply quite well by air, even if your capacity is fairly bad, so long as you protect your transports extremely well.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

Just because it easy to attack in war time, doesn't mean it can't be repaired. The huge advantage it gives is quick buildup/mobilization before hostilities start.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

ray of truth said:

Just because it easy to attack in war time, doesn't mean it can't be repaired. The huge advantage it gives is quick buildup/mobilization before hostilities start.

Click to expand...

The key is if repairs can be conducted faster then the destruction takes place at the hands of a commando group(s). This would in turn depend upon how well the Commando group can prevent capture after doing damage.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

I am rather skeptical about feasibility of commando raid. How will the commandos get there and be supplied?

Air insertion is not really feasible -- because airspace is covered by long range missiles, fighters, and AWACS. I really doubt a transport aircraft can survive without air superiority or a strong SEAD capability.

Infiltration is not feasible due to distance and terrain. By the time the commandos get there, it's probably too late.

Preposition is feasible, but if you get caught, it's causa belli.

Keeping your commando supplied is also a big problem. There is only so much a man can carry, and explosives that a team can carry can only do
so much damage. So for your commando to be a steady nuisance, you need to
keep it supplied. If you have problem send in the team in the first place,
keeping it supplied will be even worse.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

nemo said:

I am rather skeptical about feasibility of commando raid. How will the commandos get there and be supplied?

Click to expand...

Two words "survival training". If pygmies can live in sub-Saharan Africa than highly trained Army Rangers or the equivalent can be taught to live off the land and some of the most challenging environments on earth. Supplying the mines and other ordnance however that they use to destroy rail sections is another issue but food and water is not the biggest concern to the well trained. If worse comes to worse they could pry out the rail heads and cause wreaks right in front of a train, assuming that couldn't be supplied with additional high explosive by air drop.

Air insertion is not really feasible -- because airspace is covered by long range missiles, fighters, and AWACS. I really doubt a transport aircraft can survive without air superiority or a strong SEAD capability.

Click to expand...

I have my doubts that radar could pick up a small bush plane made of fiberglass, which would hug every terrain feature that it could to avoid detection. Let alone something civilians could use, now imagine a dedicated stealth aircraft inserting troops hither and yon.

Hell you take the commandos of the equation and use stealth bombers if you get unlimited amounts of money available to ensure the operation was a success.

Infiltration is not feasible due to distance and terrain. By the time the commandos get there, it's probably too late.

Preposition is feasible, but if you get caught, it's causa belli.

Click to expand...

The Tibetans would be sympathetic to any group that would be willing to arrest the operation of the Chinese infrastructure. Thus prepositioning troops well in advance of any low intensity conflict, would likely succeed. The Chinese would be able to keep a wraps on any military operation from its own population, but American Indian and Russian satellite assets would see any rail movements or troop concentrations toward the rail lines long before they started loading the cars themselves.

Keeping your commando supplied is also a big problem. There is only so much a man can carry, and explosives that a team can carry can only do
so much damage. So for your commando to be a steady nuisance, you need to
keep it supplied. If you have problem send in the team in the first place,
keeping it supplied will be even worse.

Click to expand...

As alluded to before, stealth technology tends to avoid many of the troubles, that could take place if your aircraft involved in resupply is noticed on enemy radar sets. The only hard part would be finding numerous places to hide. For that you'll need a local guide intimately familiar with the terrain and loyal in the face of continually more generous rewards for the capture of whoever is interdicting their rail infrastructure.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

I really don't see the point.

Commando raid works best when the other side is unprepared--
in another word, surprise attack by India. If this is the case, then diplomatic cost is alone may not worth it. The effect of the commando raids cannot possibly shut down the supply route. In the end, China still going have more troops and supplies in Tibet, and that means a higher likelihood of victory.

Let's assume either China initiated the action or simultaneous buildup.

Raptoreyes said:

Two words "survival training". If pygmies can live in sub-Saharan Africa than highly trained Army Rangers or the equivalent can be taught to live off the land and some of the most challenging environments on earth. Supplying the mines and other ordnance however that they use to destroy rail sections is another issue but food and water is not the biggest concern to the well trained. If worse comes to worse they could pry out the rail heads and cause wreaks right in front of a train, assuming that couldn't be supplied with additional high explosive by air drop.

Click to expand...

Don't you think it's rather glib? Sending commando inside enemy territory this deep without a means of extraction is asking them to die. At very minimum, you have to abandon the dead and wounded.

Tibet is tundra, so there are not that much natural cover. The defender will have access to helicopter, so they have more mobility. Since there is no natural cover, your commando will be
vulnerable to thermo sensor.

If you want to do supply drop, you may have to use radio to
arrange it. So that may be vulnerable to signal interception/
triangulation. Although communication via satellite may get
around the issue.

Far from me to besmirch the capability of the India SF, but
they are not superhuman enough to break steel and concrete with bare hand.

Raptoreyes said:

I have my doubts that radar could pick up a small bush plane made of fiberglass, which would hug every terrain feature that it could to avoid detection. Let alone something civilians could use, now imagine a dedicated stealth aircraft inserting troops hither and yon.

Click to expand...

Presume the availability of AWACS, which will be more effected by ground clutter rather than radar horizon. Flying nap of earth without terrain following radar is rather tiring and dangerous (i.e. cannot do it the whole way). If you use radar, then you are vulnerable to detection. Flying nap of earth is also fuel inefficient, so you may not have the range.

Raptoreyes said:

Hell you take the commandos of the equation and use stealth bombers if you get unlimited amounts of money available to ensure the operation was a success.

Click to expand...

So do India have stealth bomber or transport, even in
the near future?

Raptoreyes said:

The Tibetans would be sympathetic to any group that would be willing to arrest the operation of the Chinese infrastructure. Thus prepositioning troops well in advance of any low intensity conflict, would likely succeed. The Chinese would be able to keep a wraps on any military operation from its own population, but American Indian and Russian satellite assets would see any rail movements or troop concentrations toward the rail lines long before they started loading the cars themselves.

Click to expand...

Any Tibetan who got caught will be dead, and you cannot presume the sympathy of all Tibetans (there are enough Tibetans who are the descendants of freed peasants that were freed by PLA). And there are enough securities and intelligence watching the usual suspect that make this risky.

The worst part of this is this is causa belli -- legitimate reason for war. PLA may regard this as prelude to a surprise attack by India, and immediately activate the war zone campaign.
Since India will not be forewarned, PLA will have strategic surprise while India may lose diplomatic leverage. In another word, the worst of all world for a contingency of limited effectiveness.

Raptoreyes said:

As alluded to before, stealth technology tends to avoid many of the troubles, that could take place if your aircraft involved in resupply is noticed on enemy radar sets. The only hard part would be finding numerous places to hide. For that you'll need a local guide intimately familiar with the terrain and loyal in the face of continually more generous rewards for the capture of whoever is interdicting their rail infrastructure.

Click to expand...

India doesn't have marked advantage (if any) in technology in comparison to China.

Frankly, any way I look at this, the cost exceeds any potential benefit.

Re: How significant is the qinghai-tibet railway to China's military on the Tibet bor

anyone worried about commandos have not seen the railway opening day. there were PAP soldiers standing 100 meters apart much of the way.

commandos have no chance to operate in any strategic place in china at war time. there is the PAP and also the 20 million militia. they will be standing all over the country. there was indeed the problem with tibetan guerrillas who were supplied by cia in the 60's. but at the time china could not protect its own airspace, had little infrastructure in tibet or mobility for its own troops. today tibet has much more roads, and china motorizes even the militia. china has also been using helicopters for it's PAP in xinjiang.