They do have reload vehicles you know.
Plus what good is a fully loaded HQ-17 if the ship it is on is sunk?
PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency
- Thread starter pugachev_diver
- Start date
They do have reload vehicles you know.
Plus what good is a fully loaded HQ-17 if the ship it is on is sunk?
As mentioned by the preceding posters, the landing ship shouldn't be operating outside of fleet air cover and air support should clear out as many known anti-ship batteries as possible.
Initial spearhead should serve to maximize fighting defensive positions on the shore, that means marines and ground fighting vehicles.
Landing forces need to push forward and take over a port or airport to maximize the ability to land reinforcements.
HQ-17 is not reloading under these circumstances, and a reload vehicle has no fighting value.
Your costing is the final nail, if you are afraid of the landing ship being sunk by a cruise missile, stick the HQ-10 w/ datalink on. It's the same cost as an HQ-17. The fact that this is an additional cost should not be an issue because this is a matter of national survival.
AEW will detect cruise missile launch and if the ship is in danger, then HQ-10 will engage it.
HQ-17 can land and engage threats further inland in the way it was intended to and a slot on the landing ship in the initial assault would not be wasted on a vehicle with no fighting capability.
air defence of the landing fleet will likely fall on 052D and 054 + PLAAF, a few HQ17 wont make a difference. If those were to be deployed they are more likely to be deployed to Penghu to defend a forward helicopter base and MLRS base.
With America being stretched on all fronts right now, I wonder whether a Taiwan invasion becomes a realistic short term prospect.
Maybe North Korea can put some pressure against South Korea and/or Japan, and Russia can get Syria/Iran to start something with Israel. One at a time, and assess the American response. Maybe Argentina can get an express delivery of JF-17s too.
I don't think Biden can keep all these plates spinning at the same time and keep an eye on Taiwan.
Maybe North Korea can put some pressure against South Korea and/or Japan, and Russia can get Syria/Iran to start something with Israel. One at a time, and assess the American response. Maybe Argentina can get an express delivery of JF-17s too.
I don't think Biden can keep all these plates spinning at the same time and keep an eye on Taiwan.
US isn't going to defend Taiwan anyways. The consideration for China is whether it's economically beneficial to reduce Taiwan to rubble and endure Western sanctions in the process. If the world is already going to global WW3, perhaps we can all rebuild our society from rubble at the same time and Western economic retailiation will likely be less severe when distracted in global war, then China should take opportunity to reunify once and for all.
Perhaps China invading Taiwan when everyone is distracted and shit is already hitting the fan is optimal to deflect attention away instead of Russia's mistake, acting as the sole attention of international community, so Western sanctions we're amplified and more severe.
Last edited:
A Moorcockian question:
Is it possible for Taiwan to build a "sea maze" on their side of the strait using offshore wind turbines so that PLAN will have to either blow up wind turbines (potential war crime?) or spend time navigating the maze?
Is it possible for Taiwan to build a "sea maze" on their side of the strait using offshore wind turbines so that PLAN will have to either blow up wind turbines (potential war crime?) or spend time navigating the maze?
Sure it might take around 50k turbine. But the question is why not just use mine? it would be even harder to remove. Also, how are you going to get any supply/merchant ship past it in normal time? Taiwan is not exact self-sufficient.
And it wouldn't be war crime to demolish obstacles in a time of war.
That's my point. The Anglo empire is very distracted right now, throwing in more conflicts will make it even harder for them to support Taiwan, whether that be military, diplomatic or economic.
North Korea launches a few missiles near South Korea/Japan. They then do a nuclear test.
Hamas start firing missiles into Israel again, triggering an Israeli response. Syria does the same through Hezbollah.
Pakistan could start something with India.
There are lots of other conflict zones where China has friends on one side and America/NATO have interests on the other. Turkey, Argentina and the Falklands.
Each of these events would be significant geopolitical events in their own right that would require a US/NATO response, likely a surge in military where locally stationed forces are present.
Broccoli
Senior Member
And if they do? Putin thought that special operation was going to be fast and easy.
Here is uncomfy question: What if China moves on Taiwan and the operation ends up being an total failure with heavy casualties?
I didn't know US intervened and defended Ukraine? What does Putin's blitzkrieg miscalculation has to do with US defending Taiwan?
Okay, I see. It's okay, maybe China can regroup and try again in 10 or 50 years? Qin Shi Huang didn't reunify China in a single battle or campaign, took decades.
Is US going to park a zillion CATOBARs and 5th gens along China's coast to deter invasion for the next 10000 years? Becuz we Chinese will keep trying. It's just outside our coastline.
Last edited: