Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

tphuang said:

They are not going to use many ballistic/cruise missiles on Taiwan. They have PCL191, PGMs and stand off missiles that can do plenty of damage. There are several hundred targets in Taiwan that they will need to hit and that doesn't even include all the gas stations. That will require a couple of thousand rockets, guided missiles and ground attack missiles to degrade. Not something you can do in a couple of days. Taiwanese artilleries will be waiting for PLA the moment they try to land. I'm not really sure the rush to do this? China's great advantage right now is in its EW capabilities and its drones. Militarized drones can do a lot of damage over Taiwan once they establish complete air dominance. I'm not sure why you are so eager to land when defending force has high morale and committed to fighting vs when they are exhausted and deflated.



Anyhow, another post from Lyle Goldstein

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562215066925154304

China understands the need to attack/disable command centers, reconnaissance and early warning system. Expect them to have enough missiles to take all of this out. Russia has been fight at a disadvantage because it hasn't destroyed enough Ukrainian command centers and also unwilling to attack American ISR targets that are giving precious intel to Ukraine. China will go after these assets very early on.

Click to expand...

Minm said:

The rush is to try to take the island before any outside force can intervene.

Click to expand...

Minm said:

Do we have any information on how many rockets, missiles, suicide drones etc China can launch in a single day? Because if it's possible to kill all fixed targets in a single day, that's what I would do. If the entire defence infrastructure on the island goes up in smoke in a single day and the PLA has already landed on the beaches, the defending force won't have very high morale. That's the principle of shock and awe. But maybe my assumption that China has many hundreds of missile launchers is wrong. If you add up PCL191 launchers, DF15 ballistic missiles and all the missiles on the PLAN ships close enough to Taiwan, shouldn't it be possible to launch 1000 or more on the first day? On top of that you'll have PGMs from the air force. Only 10 Type 052D destroyers by themselves should have a theoretical maximum capacity of 640 missiles if they only stored land attack missiles. So I don't understand why you'd need two months.

Click to expand...

Minm said:

So I don't understand why you'd need two months.

Click to expand...

Patchwork_Chimera said:

Just as a quick note, the """counterforce""" portion is a fraction of the total ETF (Electronic Target Folder - which is just where we store that crap) we currently keep for Taiwan. Prosecuting them could feasibly be done in a matter of hours, with expanded target set prosecution being viable with much "lower end" hardware (a DF-17 is great for kicking in the door, but any fixed wing platform with FT pattern direct attack or unpowered glide munition can send a building back to the architect's imagination). Smaller targets (especially tactical-level ones) are well suited to the rotary-wing and UAS force that the PLA has been putting together over the years, since frankly, a DF-16 isn't a favorable effector if you're just slapping a handful of tanks lined up on a ridge a-la Han Kuang.

In all, while yes there's a sizable number of aimpoints and systems that need to be prosecuted in order to operationally "dunk on" the ROC Armed Forces, many of them are very well suited to low-capability, high-volume weapons systems (aforementioned DAM/Glide PGMs, Rotary-wing and UAS employed A(T)GMs, etc.), as opposed to requiring high-capability, low-volume systems like DF-17s or PHL-16 370mm GMLRs. As a result, it's very doable to exhaust all Taiwanese deliberate targets within a matter of days, easily within a week.

Click to expand...

Patchwork_Chimera said:

Meh, I don't think that's especially comparable. They were trying to wage a tactical war with operational airpower, which doesn't really work. Airpower is - fundamentally - a versatile, capable, and long-reaching mechanism by which a "small to medium" volume of fires can be employed (when compared to, say, indirect fires, or straight up maneuver formations). That is all. As a result of this, airpower can perform *exceptionally* well in the role of systemically degrading and destroying an enemy ***system*** of combat power. Even for as overblown as '91 airpower effectiveness may be in popular memory, we still effectively deleted the entire Iraqi air force within the first 6-12 hours (generously), and had utterly shattered the ability for Iraqi Army forces to execute meaningful, high intensity combat operations within the first few days to a week. Everything after that was pretty much "well, we've got free reign, we may as well attrit them as much as possible prior to ODS's land component kicking off," and saw almost exclusively BAI, interdiction, and other "tactical" strike missions executed from then on, which yes, due to the aforementioned low (comparative) volume of fires that airpower brings to the table, it takes a decent chunk of time to degrade an enemy's tactical forces.

Click to expand...

tphuang said:

I guess the question is whether or not it makes sense to just keep dunking on the defenders until they give in? Isn't that what happened in 97? Basically, NATO just kept bombing until Serbia threw up the white flag? If they destroy all the targets in a week, should they attempt landing at that point? Is there much to be gained by longer blockade and chasing after taiwanese army before they attempt landing?

Click to expand...

Patchwork_Chimera said:

Should the PRC initiate the land component of the campaign, and if by that point the US has not been able to degrade the PLA counter-air/shipping complex sufficiently to interdict amphibious shipping and debarked forces, then thousands upon thousands more Taiwanese youth will be killed and injured in a bloody, costly campaign of resistance against the PLA advance. The island will be without running water, without sewage treatment, without power, without communications, and will soon be without food, all the while. ... Despite all of this bloodletting, the PLA land component force *will* still be able to force Taiwan to bend the knee, unless the US can turn the tide.

It's far better to procure a military that is at least able to assist, in any capacity at all, an effort to defend the island conventionally. Should that prove insufficient when combined with the US and JP intervention forces in theater at the outset of hostilities, and should the PLA make it to the beach, and establish debarkation points, it is far better to just throw in the towel and spare the 23 million citizens of Taiwan from such a horrific, fruitless, national self-immolation.

Click to expand...

tch1972 said:

I think China will likely want to get the job done in the shortest time. Diplomatic pressure will start to pile up as blockage of the straits affect regional economy and will inturn pressure US to act.

Moreover i have my doubts on the fighting ability of Taiwanese soldiers nowadays. Once air and sea dominance are established and Penghu falls, there will be not much morale left.

Click to expand...