Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

Status
Not open for further replies.

MrCrazyBoyRavi

Junior Member
Registered Member
Just wondering, Ukraine Russia war has seen some of the most fierciest modern peer Infantry battles. What are the chances China hires these guys to provide training to troops? The experience of these battle hardned troops from both Russian/Ukranian side would be huge.
Are there Chinese observers who are studying modern warfare on the ground in Ukraine?
 

a0011

New Member
Registered Member
I just wondering, i am really curious to be honest, everybody talks about how the u.s, japan, australia and even possibly south korea is going to tag team China in taiwan armed reunification scenario, but nobody talks about how north korea might react in such a big war in east asia,

I wrote about this on breaking news thread, NK is the only country in which China has nato style article 2 defence treaty, so on paper NK is obliged to join the war on China side as taiwan is recognised by NK as China territory especially if the war is instigated by the u.s and japan, so staying neutral is not on option for NK if they follow The China-DPRK Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, to the letter. This war is also existential to NK i think, because if China is defeated, they will lose their only patron and economic lifeline, not to mention they will be next on the chopping block, so i would say neutrality is not on the table for them

So what do you guys think NK involvement in taiwan AR could be? If SK militarily involved, full armed reunification on korean peninsula? if SK stays neutral, harrasing japan with hwasong cruise missile attacks?
Personal I feel both Koreas will sit out this conflict pending something seriously unexpected.
 

a0011

New Member
Registered Member
Quite a few mistakes to unpick here.

When you say IR illuminator, you actually mean IR lasers. IR illustrators are basically high powered IR flashlights and can be laser based, but are more commonly LEDs. They can be very useful in very niche scenarios, such as punching through a photonic barrier like a street light between you and your target that would effectively obscure your target otherwise, and brightening the background to reduce the size of your aiming IR laser through your NODs (see video below for demonstrations). But you won’t need IR illuminators with even Gen2+ NODs unless you are literally fighting in an environment with zero ambient light.

IR lasers are primarily used for CQB engagements of less than 200m for quick reaction times. Beyond that range, your IR laser would bloom to such a huge size you are basically just doing suppression fire, especially without IR illuminator compensation as most IR illuminators won’t have the range to do anything beyond 100m (which is where laser based IR illuminators come into their own). Most military IR lasers and IR illuminators comes packaged in a single combined unit, but they can be sold and used separately.

Most red dot sights have night vision modes to allow you to do passive aiming with NODs, but most such setups are sub optimal to be honest, and you will struggle to accurately hit human sized targets beyond 150m, and you really need dual tube night vision and risers on your red dot to use it properly. Good for dedicated night fighting setups, but sub-optimal for general purposes rifle setup, and dual tuned NODs are obviously more expensive than single tubed.

Below is a good video to give you an idea of what night shooting looks like with lasers, illuminators and red dots.


All of the above applies mainly to how western militaries do night fighting.

I actually think China is way ahead of the game when it comes to night fighting against peer and near-peer opponents.

Unlike western militaries that prefer high end IIT NODs army wide with IR laser-illuminators and/or red dots for aiming; China has gone the route of issuing cheap digital NODs to most troopers for
night time navigation (why PLA soldiers jokingly call their digital units night time walking aids), with a few scouts per squad getting proper dedicated IIT NODs and thermals for better long ranged situational awareness and IIT and Thermal rifle scopes for their troops for actual aiming. You have worse general situational awareness just due to having fewer high end NODs for all round observation per squad, but far superior engagement range and aim once engaged.

You can also massively change that equation with thermals. Chinese thermal vision tech is right up there with the best the west has to offer. If you dual mount even a cheap gen2+ IIT NOD with a high end thermal, you have way better situational awareness than the best gen3+ IIT dual tube NODs (this is why combined IIT and thermal units are the future of night vision).

IITs are not magic, they just allow you to see almost as good in night as day, but if something is well camouflaged, you will have just as hard a time spotting it with NODs as you would during the day with your MK1 eyeball. It’s just most wildlife move around at night whereas they would stay still during the day, so that makes it much easier to spot them, but people are not so stupid. Thermals are ‘magic’ in that the best camouflage and fieldcraft won’t do you much good against thermals. So, throw in some helmet mounted thermals and your typical squad using mostly cheap digital night vision plus dedicated night scopes will have far superior situational awareness and combat effectiveness as an enemy squad all with the very best IIT dual tubes and IR lasers while coming in at the same if not lower cost overall.

Now, you might have some zero creep from uninstalling and reinstalling the night scope, but while you won’t be winning any shooting competitions due to this, it should still be perfectly useable for combat (the whole point of pict rail and QD mounts after all), and almost certainly more precise and longer ranged than either IR laser or red dot aiming.

Another problem with IR laser aiming is that it can get very distracting, even overwhelming, if you got dozens or even hundred of guys all waving their IR lasers around.
A great informative post. I can concur that the paq2 and paq4 (*SP*) NATO IR lasers I was issued in the army are completely useless past 150m. These things are essentially useless if both sides have NVG capabilities since you can see the source of the IR laser from miles away and can aim machine gun burst at it all night.

2 key takeaways: night fighting should generally be done by sof capable or elite units. Not your average grunt. It's extremely hazardous and lots of blue on blue WILL occur. Not can, WILL! I've been on live fire training ranges where fatal accident have occured while doing the most basic and simple infantry maneuvers. The only scenario that calls for it in a Taiwan AR is urban ops.

2nd and most importantly, it really doesn't matter how well equipped or how well trained your average infantry are. 80% of the casualties in Ukraine are caused by artillery alone (both long range and infantry operated motars). I hear vets say that less than 1% of death was caused by a rifleman shooting an enemy. And that 1% probably occurred in set pieces ambush in niche urban combat. Don't need to dwell much on infantry tactics and equipment. Their job is to hold ground, defend it and die. No different than any other conventional war. This segways into another point I want to make. Russia learned a hard lesson by not having enough infantryman to do the dying. China should rise a few more infantry heavy GAs to prepare for the worse case scenario during an AR. You experience and elites units would attrition away after a couple months of heavy fighting (worse case scenario here which I always advocate being prepared for). It's the quantity of your eserve cannon folders that will determine whether you can re-attempt another strategic offensives after the initial attack stalls.

(Forgive grammar and readability) typing this on my phone waiting at the grocery store.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
If your arty can hit them, theirs can also hit you. except you are a much easier target for massed arty due to being on a small island with constraints on how dispersed you can deploy your systems. Think snake island

although Penghu is much larger, I feel bad for the poor souls thatwill eventually be tasked to shell Taiwan from there.
not necessarily, artillery has different ranges.

Penghu is ~50 km from Taiwan proper and outside the reach of literally every single Taiwanese artillery piece, which maxes out at 45 km for the Thunderbolt 2000 MK45.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yet that distance allows for PLAGF 300 mm MRLS to establish fire control over the entirety of Taiwan.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
not necessarily, artillery has different ranges.

Penghu is ~50 km from Taiwan proper and outside the reach of literally every single Taiwanese artillery piece, which maxes out at 45 km for the Thunderbolt 2000 MK45.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yet that distance allows for PLAGF 300 mm MRLS to establish fire control over the entirety of Taiwan.
Sure, but it's time for the PLA to be prepared for any counterfire capabilities by the ROCA separatists.

The US just greenlit the sales of 29x HIMARS to the separatists, alongside 84x ATACMS and other rocket artillery rounds. With ATACMS, the strike range would be extended to 300 kilometers.

Whether those HIMARS will arrive in Taiwan when the AR begins or not, they will become a threat that the PLA certainly wouldn't disregard.
 
Last edited:

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
Just wondering, Ukraine Russia war has seen some of the most fierciest modern peer Infantry battles. What are the chances China hires these guys to provide training to troops? The experience of these battle hardned troops from both Russian/Ukranian side would be huge.
I believe they most likely will. There are 3 ways to do this:
1. The PLA (or through third-party organizations, PMCs included) will hire Russian/Ukrainian veterans to share their war experiences and lessons to the PLA commanders, and/or teach the PLA commanders and trainers; or
2. The PLA sends military attaches and trainers to Russia to inquire & learn from and train with the Russian veterans; or
3. Both.
For the 2nd option, I don't think Ukraine would allow the Chinese military attaches and trainers to do the same, as the Ukrainian military is definitely going to have more solid grip by NATO after the war is over.

Are there Chinese observers who are studying modern warfare on the ground in Ukraine?
On the ground in Ukraine, I don't think so. Observing the war from inside Russia, perhaps.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
A great informative post. I can concur that the paq2 and paq4 (*SP*) NATO IR lasers I was issued in the army are completely useless past 150m. These things are essentially useless if both sides have NVG capabilities since you can see the source of the IR laser from miles away and can aim machine gun burst at it all night.

2 key takeaways: night fighting should generally be done by sof capable or elite units. Not your average grunt. It's extremely hazardous and lots of blue on blue WILL occur. Not can, WILL! I've been on live fire training ranges where fatal accident have occured while doing the most basic and simple infantry maneuvers. The only scenario that calls for it in a Taiwan AR is urban ops.

2nd and most importantly, it really doesn't matter how well equipped or how well trained your average infantry are. 80% of the casualties in Ukraine are caused by artillery alone (both long range and infantry operated motars). I hear vets say that less than 1% of death was caused by a rifleman shooting an enemy. And that 1% probably occurred in set pieces ambush in niche urban combat. Don't need to dwell much on infantry tactics and equipment. Their job is to hold ground, defend it and die. No different than any other conventional war. This segways into another point I want to make. Russia learned a hard lesson by not having enough infantryman to do the dying. China should rise a few more infantry heavy GAs to prepare for the worse case scenario during an AR. You experience and elites units would attrition away after a couple months of heavy fighting (worse case scenario here which I always advocate being prepared for). It's the quantity of your eserve cannon folders that will determine whether you can re-attempt another strategic offensives after the initial attack stalls.

(Forgive grammar and readability) typing this on my phone waiting at the grocery store.

Great post, always worthwhile getting first hand experience from people who served!

In a peer or near-peer engagement, I think western militaries will very quickly copy the PLA’s approach to night fighting and have dedicated night sights rather than continuing using Ir lasers and illuminators primarily. Although they will probably achieve that by issuing all their troops with a second PVS14 with a pict rail mount to be forward mounted in front of their day optic for much better passive aiming capabilities. This may also be the direction the PLA moves into as they adopt the QZB191 more with the new prism sight. Just works much better than messing around with two weapon sights.

I agree that IFF is going to be a massive issue for both sides. Almost certainly a much bigger issue than aiming since there are no real good existinh olutions. The existing practice of using IR strobes is obviously a total no-go where opfor also has NODs, and both sides will look pretty much indistinguishable at most combat ranges.

I think the PLA is again ahead of the game in trying to address this issue with its digital NODs, which I believe have the ability to send and receive images. So they could potentially project live battlefield maps of where friendly units are to try to quickly work out if they are looking at friends or foes. Not ideal, but better than nothing.

In the future, if they can achieve a limited form of augmented reality by projecting icons above friendlies in real time in their digital NODs and thermals, that would basically solve the IFF issue. But I don’t think they are there yet, and this will very much be a capacity for future development. The point is they are obviously actively thinking and planning for this already.

But one area I disagree on is the expectation that artillery and air strikes will do the vast majority of the killing.

Just because this is the case in the current Russian-Ukraine war doesn’t mean it will also hold true in a future AR scenario.

Indeed, there are significant indicators to suggest it will be very different.

In Ukraine, artillery is king because both sides have it and neither can gain an overwhelming edge to effectively suppress the other. This allows Ukraine to fight conventionally in open field battles without it being a total Turkey shoot slaughter. That won’t be the case with AR.

Chinese firepower dominance is such that if the RoCA tries to fight the PLA in the open, they will absolutely get slaughtered by the PLAAF and PLARF, not to mention naval fires from the PLAN and the PLA’s own organic artillery and UCAVs.

If the RoCA are smart, they won’t even try to do that. If they are stupid, they will very quickly learn not to do that.

There is a high probability that the die hards will hole up in the cities and use civilians as human shields against the PLA’s overwhelming firepower dominance and force the PLA to commit troops into urban combat to root them out. So infantry may very well have to play a much bigger role. As such, infantry weapons, equipment and tactics could be much more relevant than in Ukraine.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Even with their gas card, Russia is choked off 9 ways to Sunday. Russian companies cannot conduct intl trade/business any more than a state owned North Korea company can. They are currently cut off from an overwhelming majority of the world's major economies. Sure China & India buys their gas, lets see if that's enough of a lifeline for them to even have a future.

Over 80% of the global population live in countries which have not sanctioned Russia.
These countries comprise 60% of global economic activity
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Just wondering, Ukraine Russia war has seen some of the most fierciest modern peer Infantry battles. What are the chances China hires these guys to provide training to troops? The experience of these battle hardned troops from both Russian/Ukranian side would be huge.
Are there Chinese observers who are studying modern warfare on the ground in Ukraine?

If the thing devolves into infantry grunts fighting then China might as well as give up and allow Taiwan to become independent.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
2nd and most importantly, it really doesn't matter how well equipped or how well trained your average infantry are. 80% of the casualties in Ukraine are caused by artillery alone (both long range and infantry operated motars). I hear vets say that less than 1% of death was caused by a rifleman shooting an enemy. And that 1% probably occurred in set pieces ambush in niche urban combat. Don't need to dwell much on infantry tactics and equipment. Their job is to hold ground, defend it and die. No different than any other conventional war. This segways into another point I want to make. Russia learned a hard lesson by not having enough infantryman to do the dying. China should rise a few more infantry heavy GAs to prepare for the worse case scenario during an AR. You experience and elites units would attrition away after a couple months of heavy fighting (worse case scenario here which I always advocate being prepared for). It's the quantity of your eserve cannon folders that will determine whether you can re-attempt another strategic offensives after the initial attack stalls.

(Forgive grammar and readability) typing this on my phone waiting at the grocery store.

A few comments:

1. You would need to add MLRS rockets, armed drones and loitering munitions to this mix - as they are functional equivalents to artillery and mortars

2. Given that the Chinese military will have air superiority over Taiwan and the air-defences will be destroyed or out of ammunition, then loitering munitions, armed drones and surveillance drones have free reign over Taiwan airspace. So Chinese Army units would have constant and comprehensive surveillance over the battlefield.

3. The US military treats air support as airborne on-call artillery.

Then look at how a Shaheed-136 loitering munition is functionally equivalent to a 500lb JDAM in terms of weight, cost and guidance system(s). It has 12hours/2000km of endurance and launches from a truck, so it doesn't require an expensive aircraft overhead which is vulnerable to SAMs. These can be launched deep inside Chinese territory.

Consider how the US military has a stockpile of 250,000 JDAMs.
Then the question becomes how many will the Chinese military acquire?
And how many thousands can they launch every day?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top