Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

FairAndUnbiased · Mar 22, 2023

siegecrossbow said:
All of your technical points are valid but your social political analysis is off the mark.

No his technical points aren't valid because when I turn the tables and ask how can the US beat a much higher tech version of this exact same strategy by China, there's no answer. And there very well might not be. Yet others have already answered him on how this strategy by Taiwan would fail.

FairAndUnbiased · Mar 22, 2023

tabu said:
You are unrighteous and prove it if you are truthful.

China has unresolved territorial disputes with Russia. China has a huge enclave that the Russians have alienated from the Celestial Empire. And this rejection has never been acknowledged by China. Proceed from this. And to meet this condition it is necessary for the Russian Federation to break up. And that, in fact, is what Beijing is interested in. And then the rest of Russia will be treated the way you showed.
So there is no contradiction.

Facts, facts, facts.

What's the celestial empire? Chinese have never recognized this foreign name.

China has indeed resolved those issues. We gave up that land. We don't give up any other land, just that land. What are you gonna do about it, bite us?

BoraTas · Mar 22, 2023

FairAndUnbiased said:
What's the celestial empire? Chinese have never recognized this foreign name.

China has indeed resolved those issues. We gave up that land. We don't give up any other land, just that land. What are you gonna do about it, bite us?

Calling China celestial empire is like calling Greece Mount Olympus. Both are mythological names. It is a partner of "mandate of heaven" in my eyes. Both phrases are very useful in identifying Western China watchers and their followers.

siegecrossbow · Mar 22, 2023

BoraTas said:
Calling China celestial empire is like calling Greece Mount Olympus. Both are mythological names. It is a partner of "mandate of heaven" in my eyes. Both phrases are very useful in identifying Western China watchers and their followers.

Mandate of heaven does refer to a ruler’s legitimacy but celestial empire, like you said, refers to the mythological Chinese heaven with its host of gods and goddesses and bureaucracy.

BoraTas · Mar 22, 2023

siegecrossbow said:
Mandate of heaven does refer to a ruler’s legitimacy but celestial empire, like you said, refers to the mythological Chinese heaven with its host of gods and goddesses and bureaucracy.

AFAIK mandate of heaven was a concept Chinese leaders came up with to prevent religious leadership from taking over the country. They made themselves sacred to make religious leaders redundant. Religion-state conflict happened in Europe too and religion won in Europe. Pope was practically the king of kings in Europe for almost a thousand years. China watchers keep talking about it as if anyone in modern China believes the rulers are chosen by the gods.

tphuang · Mar 22, 2023

tabu said:
You are unrighteous and prove it if you are truthful.

China has unresolved territorial disputes with Russia. China has a huge enclave that the Russians have alienated from the Celestial Empire. And this rejection has never been acknowledged by China. Proceed from this. And to meet this condition it is necessary for the Russian Federation to break up. And that, in fact, is what Beijing is interested in. And then the rest of Russia will be treated the way you showed.
So there is no contradiction.

Facts, facts, facts.

Do you realize what the topic is? You seem to be intent on talking anything but lessons to apply for Taiwan scenario.

d3dx9 · Mar 22, 2023

tamsen_ikard said:
Taiwan maybe small but its also highly urbanized one side, so lots of dense urban jungles to hide these missiles and also a huge mountain range which are basically woodlands, again highly suitable for concealment.

Also, no matter how good the training of Chinese Air Force is, this does not solve the fundamental problem of dense Air Defense Networks. Missiles are super fast and much faster than planes and its much easier to hit something with a missile than it is to evade. So, Taiwan could manage to have HUNDREDS to Thousands of Patriot missile systems, which can be easily donated by the US, So Taiwan will not have to pay for it.

So, how would a PLA Air Force with Just 2000 combat planes of which maybe 5-600 maybe used in a Taiwan Scenario to keep a good reserve for other contingencies, deal with a dense network of Air Defense Systems? Good Training is simply not a good enough answer to this challenge. There has to be some kind of fundamental strategy that can comprehensively defeat this scenario.

Is there any technology that can comprehensively defeat a dense network of Air Defense Missiles? Even Stealth can be detected by Low Frequency Radars.

So far, it seems there is no easy answer for this for China. They have to take huge losses in planes in order to beat these air defense missiles using SEAD, assuming they are very good at SEAD also, but still they will take losses due to the fact that missiles are faster than planes and sensors are very good these days in missiles.

Does China have the numbers to beat an Air Defense Network with 1000+ patriots? I don't think so with Just 2000 planes. They need to increase their number of planes to 6000+ maybe. Or they have to do what Russia did which is to give up on Air Superiority and simply rely on missiles to do strikes.

Moreover, relying on the Army for Taiwan war is a complete non-starter. If China is not able to destroy the Anti-Ship Missiles or Intercept them, then the Army cannot even land on Taiwan without getting sunk by those missiles. China needs to have a huge fleet of Air Defense to intercept these missiles while transporting the invasion force. Again, it becomes a numbers game if Taiwan gets Supersonic or Hypersonic Missiles. China will lose many ships unless they find a good technology to intercept these missiles.

So far, it seems no one has been able to provide a convincing strategy to beat the Porcupine Strategy. Just some wishful thinking that Taiwan is too small or PLA too good in training.

"1000+patriots"? I think Taiwan only has 9 Patriot missile systems. On the Air Force side, you've been thinking about how to ensure air supremacy and completely eliminate anti-aircraft missiles. You think that the Chinese Army needs a lot of support from the Air Force, so the Chinese Air Force needs to ensure air supremacy to perform more dangerous front-line support or deep strike missions. But the Chinese Air Force's mission may simply be to ensure that enemy air forces do not interfere with Army operations. The Chinese Army has its own comprehensive fire support system. And some of them have pretty good range. Even the supporting firepower deployed in mainland China can cover western Taiwan. If the Chinese Air Force does not go too deep into the air above Taiwan, then the range of the Patriot missile may not be enough to attack at a safe distance, and these ground support firepower can also hinder the air defense missile from performing its mission. Even the Chinese Air Force can quickly use anti-radiation missiles after the opponent's air defense missiles are turned on, which can force the enemy's radar to shut down, making the radar unable to effectively search for targets or guide them.
As for the navy. The Chinese Navy has many excellent anti-aircraft destroyers, which can intercept anti-ship missiles to protect the fleet. China's landing operation was carried out with the support of PLARF. I doubt how many anti-ship missile units in Taiwan have time to attack the landing fleet under fire. Moreover, the quantity and quality of Taiwan's anti-ship missiles are doubtful. There is no doubt that Taiwan's weapons will cause some problems for the PLA, but it is not as troublesome as you might think.

Heliox · Mar 23, 2023

theorlonator said:
What are people's thoughts on this? I feel @Patchwork_Chimera would argue about these calculations:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Besides what has already been mentioned, these fanboy rants are very typical in that they often conflate capabilities from various platforms into one ginormous-orgasmic-super-uber-package

In no particular order;
1) AGM-158C LRASM has anti-ship capabilities but current inventory level is only about 200 with another 108 budgeted for Y2024. Not quite even enough for the alpha strike he has wet dreams about. Range of LRASM is about 360km? Nowhere near the standoff distance he needs either.
2) JASSM range of AGM-158B (900km) and AGM-158B2 (1,900km) are PGMs, not AShM. ToF from launch at max range is between 1 to 2 hours. If the point is to attack the ships of the PLAN, those have long moved on past the capabilities of non-LRASM strikes.
3) The 1,900km range 158B2 models are only just entering LRIP with 50 slated for this year. So again, nowhere near capable of arming his fantasy alpha strike.
4) Sub-sonic cruise missiles can be shot down, relatively easily vis-a-vis super/hypersonic ones. If his gambit is a max-range lob of JASSMs, it means he has nothing else to add to the mix in ECM/SEAD. Those missiles will be shot down.

In short, there is no JASSM available in numbers, range or capabilities for the scenario he envisioned.

Anytime you see a post extolling a silver bullet that no one else has thought of, just ignore. They're a waste of time.

supersnoop · Mar 23, 2023

Patriots aren’t mobile!
You aren’t hiding and firing 1000 in the mountains

zhangjim · Mar 23, 2023

siegecrossbow said:
Mandate of heaven does refer to a ruler’s legitimacy but celestial empire, like you said, refers to the mythological Chinese heaven with its host of gods and goddesses and bureaucracy.

In fact, it must be pointed out that "celestial empire/天朝" has become a term used by Chinese networks to satirize the conservative style of the government.
Therefore, it is ridiculous to use this term to describe China. We are not interested in restoring the outdated order of the past, at least for now, all we care about is when the New Roman Empire will fall.

tamsen_ikard said:
Even if US does not intervene directly, that doesn't solve China's problem of Taiwan becoming a porcupine and becoming too costly to takeover. If Taiwanese become radicalized and start believing the anti-China zeal, they can make huge sacrifices and come up with a Israel like conscript army. What is China's strategy to beat that with acceptable cost?

Currently, Taiwan still has a serious speculative mentality - because their security is based on the protection of the United States.
The management costs after the war will be high, but you cannot expect those who lack training and dislike hardship to resist resolutely.

And even worse, the social status of Taiwanese soldiers is very low.
The "Ukrainian model" is very attractive, but there are two prerequisites:
1. Having a fanatical social foundation;
2. The enemy is very weak

Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

BoraTas

Captain

siegecrossbow

General

BoraTas

Captain

tphuang

Lieutenant General

d3dx9

New Member

Heliox

Junior Member

supersnoop

Major

zhangjim

Junior Member