Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Lack of united combat management system on Slava is a conceptual flaw. It's basically an early 1970s design.
Designing a CMS for Slava was possible - it just wasn't done. Partially because her class was a cheaper substitute to the Kirov class, and CMS was anything but cheap.

And conceptual flaws are arguably more important than technological advantage per se - if your system works, of course.
Other Soviet ships of her age already started getting CMS, too(more or less in parallel to Tico class) - Slava was just unlucky to be one of the last "older" designs. Moreover, Moskva in particular was never really upgraded.

About chips - application matters. On a plane, 1980s Soviet radar weighed several times as much as a comparable American one, and still worked both worse and less reliably because of constrained design. It, however, could be to some degree compensated by a witty concept(adding IRST and very narrow search patterns, for example).
On ships - provided conceptual design was of similar vintage, worse chips mostly mean just a few more tons of electronics, maybe more need to pay attention to code optimization. Unlucky, but still acceptable for a ship that weighs 12000 tons.

My point stands, that comparing the Slava class -- including Moskva -- with USN Ticonderoga class simultaneously unreasonably elevates the capability of the Slava, while also greatly denigrates the capability of the Ticos.

I think your overall post in 1036 would've been much stronger if the comparison with the Ticos had been omitted (as well as the aforementioned "Chinese ships have Russian/Soviet roots" thing)
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
My point stands, that comparing the Slava class -- including Moskva -- with USN Ticonderoga class simultaneously unreasonably elevates the capability of the Slava, while also greatly denigrates the capability of the Ticos.
IMHO you really overestimate early Ticos...but whatever.
Any elevations and denigrations completely miss the "lessons to learn" part.

Lessons are:
-relevant training with more attention to substance and less to shiny photoops,
-independent verification of maintenance of ship subsystems,
-ensuring timely upgrades,
-attention to combat survivability
-lessons for future design
etc

One class of 1980s cruisers better/worse than another class of 1980s cruisers(which isn't even in service for almost two decades) isn't really a lesson.
 
Last edited:

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
Alternatively. They could just knock out all the power stations. Vast majority of people don’t have backup power.

Don’t necessarily have to stop information getting in and out of Taiwan. They could just slow the speed of communication among the people.
Also could they give their ground troops a signal sniffer and a secondary objective to shoot at Starlink satellite dishes? It doesn't have to be loitering munitions.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Question is, is the value of all the western owned factories and assets in China going to cover the cost of all Chinese investment in the US?
Highly doubtful. And unless you want US "investment" of the kind that is asset price bubbles in education or health or financial services. I do not think you could get US "investment" on the necessary volume into China anyway. Perhaps China should just get those broken Boeing 737MAX and 787 the US has sitting on vehicle parking lots on massive bulk discount. At least they would be useful for something. It is a shame China can't buy GE now that it the company is in the dumps. The French did manage to claw their Arabelle nuclear steam turbine facilities back from GE though. Civilian aviation related companies in general and tourism are distressed right now.

The Slava class emerged originally in the same era as the first Ticos yes, however, they were also a reflection of Soviet shipbuilding and subsystems of the time (and far less capable and technologically sophisticated than contemporary US equivalents)... and the Slavas that the RuN continue to run today have not received anywhere near the same extent of upgrades that remaining USN Ticos have enjoyed.
You can have the most kinematically impressive large missiles and the most impressive CIWS guns as you want, on a large formidable 10k+ ton hull.... but if your radars, and sensors are unable to discriminate the target and observe a multi-axis battlespace environment and to guide and cue your missiles, and if your missiles themselves are obsolescent, and if your combat management system is too old and to slow to observe and react, then all of your weapons mean nothing because you've already been defeated in the electromagnetic spectrum.
Designing a CMS for Slava was possible - it just wasn't done. Partially because her class was a cheaper substitute to the Kirov class, and CMS was anything but cheap.
About chips - application matters. On a plane, 1980s Soviet radar weighed several times as much as a comparable American one, and still worked both worse and less reliably because of constrained design.
On ships - provided conceptual design was of similar vintage, worse chips mostly mean just a few more tons of electronics, maybe more need to pay attention to code optimization. Unlucky, but still acceptable for a ship that weighs 12000 tons.
I agree with what you guys are saying. In general. But the thing is. The Soviet industry, in particular, did have more advanced radar tech than that. The MiG-31 had a PESA radar and came out in 1982. It is harder to make a compact radar for an aircraft than something you can put on a cruiser. The Soviet Daryal AESA ground based early-warning radar was first operational in 1977.
The first Ticos also had a similar issue in that they had the twin-arm missile launchers and not the VLS. The VLS came out in 1984. So was this worse with its revolver launchers and side mounts? Not really.
The Slava classes were huge because they were supposed to be multi-role but the weapons themselves were not miniaturized enough to make them smaller. And just consider the much older Alfa class submarines they had way higher amounts of crew automation than anything the US had. Then you have to consider it seems to have been, like you said, a massive cost cutting exercise and they reused as much existing technology as they could in these ships. It simply was not as much of a priority for their MIC. The Soviet Union was a mostly autharchic continental empire, it did not need to focus on the navy necessary to sustain a huge mercantile empire.
And even the Soviets did have ICs in the early 1980s. At worst they might have been like 5 years behind in ICs. Most often like 3 years.
The problem was they never produced these things in quantity and there was lack of cross use of technology across different projects and bureaus to a large degree.

And while the latest upgrades to the Slava are modest. You can't say they make no difference. I mean just look at this.

Marshal Ustinov
9chmOMz.png


Moskva
AfPccFA.png


As you can see the main radars are totally different. And I doubt the command and control were not upgraded to some degree. Since the upgrades are contemporary with the Admiral Grigorovich. The Marshal Ustinov came out of modernization in 2018.
 

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
Several pages ago in this thread I said the soft handed approach that Russia is using in Ukraine is the right way to go for China in a war to reunify with Taiwan.
After seeing the many recent fk ups I realize how wrong I was.
The main fk up that Russia did was holding back and putting massive constraints on it's own military to avoid civilian casualties, in the end this will cause increased casualties not only on the Russian military side but even on the Ukrainian civilians because when they see themselves winning they become less likely to surrender thus lengthening the fight and increasing the bloodshed.

Hopefully China has learned from this, use your full military force. do not hold back just because you are afraid you will kill civilians,

When you see Taiwanese soldiers on top of a building do not go street fighting them from one room to another, instead just bomb the entire building and raze it to the ground and move on, the civilians will run away from cities once they see how fierce the fighting is, and when the Taiwanese soldiers see how merciless the PLA is this will make them more likely to surrender, and if they don't surrender well that's fine too, they will be bombed to oblivion any way.

The only exception to that will be the skyscrapers, the Taiwanese military will probably turn the skyscrapers into castles, in this case China cannot raze these skyscrapers because the civilian casualties will be too much and will instead have to liberate them one by one and that will be the most difficult part.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
I think you cannot compare both countries. Ukraine has been fighting a civil war for 8 years. Which is a de facto proxy war between the US and Russia. Ukraine have not only had NATO training and funding. They also had a constant live fire training ground for such a kind of conflict in the Donbass. Taiwan is not in the same situation at all.
 

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member
Registered Member
Several pages ago in this thread I said the soft handed approach that Russia is using in Ukraine is the right way to go for China in a war to reunify with Taiwan.
After seeing the many recent fk ups I realize how wrong I was.
The main fk up that Russia did was holding back and putting massive constraints on it's own military to avoid civilian casualties, in the end this will cause increased casualties not only on the Russian military side but even on the Ukrainian civilians because when they see themselves winning they become less likely to surrender thus lengthening the fight and increasing the bloodshed.

Hopefully China has learned from this, use your full military force. do not hold back just because you are afraid you will kill civilians,

When you see Taiwanese soldiers on top of a building do not go street fighting them from one room to another, instead just bomb the entire building and raze it to the ground and move on, the civilians will run away from cities once they see how fierce the fighting is, and when the Taiwanese soldiers see how merciless the PLA is this will make them more likely to surrender, and if they don't surrender well that's fine too, they will be bombed to oblivion any way.

The only exception to that will be the skyscrapers, the Taiwanese military will probably turn the skyscrapers into castles, in this case China cannot raze these skyscrapers because the civilian casualties will be too much and will instead have to liberate them one by one and that will be the most difficult part.
I don't think the PLA should assume it comes to that (they should have plans for it though), but even if it does come to that, I do wonder if the PLA has prepared weapons/tactics to counter/deal with it while still somewhat being careful about harming civilians, although in the end if civilians are taken hostage, better to just shoot/attack than spending too much time in trying to save civilians.
 

FriedButter

Colonel
Registered Member
The only exception to that will be the skyscrapers, the Taiwanese military will probably turn the skyscrapers into castles, in this case China cannot raze these skyscrapers because the civilian casualties will be too much and will instead have to liberate them one by one and that will be the most difficult part.

Not necessarily. The only thing the PLA needs to do is destroy organized resistance. Then the mop up can continue at whatever pace needed. There won’t be a shortage of ground troops for the PLA unlike how Russia is fighting. So they can afford to leave some on guard/watch duty.

Then they can turn off the power and water, seal off the first couple floors, and have some PLA camp on those floors with motion detectors on the exits. Can’t exactly discount the possibility they rigged the basement with explosives. They may try creative ways to hide it.
 

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
I think you cannot compare both countries. Ukraine has been fighting a civil war for 8 years. Which is a de facto proxy war between the US and Russia. Ukraine have not only had NATO training and funding. They also had a constant live fire training ground for such a kind of conflict in the Donbass. Taiwan is not in the same situation at all.
When has NATO training actually helped anyone? Didn't do much in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc. In fact, I can't think of a situation where NATO trained soldiers were deemed competent. It seems to be a hindrance more than help.

Fighting a militia army and killing civilians is very different to fighting a professional army. Again, that didn't help the Iraqi army when America turned up. They both will know how to fire and reload a gun, but that's it.

Although we joke about the various follies of the Taiwanese army, they still are a first world army with professional standards. The Ukrainian army are a corrupt, barely literate bunch of nazi meth heads.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top