One of the issues with the Russian bombardment in these early reports is accuracy. They are partially hamstrung because they are trying to avoid mass casualties, and this is being interpreted as "holding back"
I'm seeing quite a few threads here about how the PLA cannot hold back. However, I think the more apt comparison should be the US rather than Russia.
Would anyone say the US is holding back against their Middle East adversaries? The difference is that the US has so many different guided munitions at their disposal, it does not appear that Russia has this same level.
If we are looking at the recent Zhuhai airshows, we can see that there is a similar push for guided munitions, right down to the platoon level (mortars). So even if there is a dug in enemy, you can call for fire without waiting for aircraft (assuming heavy artillery is not available). This is something that Americans used very often in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I think this capability is also why there is such a rush to build out the Beidou constellation. I remember early in the PLA watching days, there were early PGMs using civilian derived GPS guidance. There used to be some debate about how useful these could be in light of the US jamming GPS signals and whether or not it would be degrading their own (owing to the nature of satellite communications). However, with Beidou there is no need to rely on GPS or GLONASS.
I remember in the previous Taiwan threads there was some talk of how a landing should be approached, which port is vulnerable, etc. Looking at the battle over Antonov airfield, I wonder if PLA Special Operations would be capable of holding something like a port and enabling something like a fast ferry to transport heavy vehicles quickly. Of course there is a threat from anti aircraft assets, but Americans are seemingly able to fly in helicopters to anywhere they want even in contested airspace, so I think the key is develop special operations Z-20, and Y-7.
