PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

C

Cyclist

Junior Member
tamsen_ikard said:
...
I have a problem with Submarines being magic weapons in the Navy. I don't think they are. I think surface ships are much more powerful and useful than submarines.
....
Click to expand...

IMHO, I do think submarines is one where China needs to have more, the other one is space based weapons by disguising them as satellites, rain down the satellites to mainland USA if total war can not be avoided between China and USA, which will cause panic and damages in the cities, fire in the forests/farms, etc. Need to put maybe hundred thousands satellites in the space, disguise the satellites just like SpaceX Starlink satellites.

If war happens with USA, I believe China needs to be able to bring the war to mainland USA and avoid as much as possible to make the battlefield in mainland China. That's why I believe China needs to invest maybe around 100 submarines or maybe at least some factories with capabilities to build/launch them in short time and hide them in the submarine caves around coastal area of China, launch them only when war happens so China can keep the maintenance costs down.

With 100 submarines, China will have around 1200 SLBM that can attack mainland USA. Let the submarines patrol around Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. China can use ports in Peru and Cuba/Africa for replenishing ships disguised as containers ships and replenish the submarine needs in the vast ocean. Surface ships when patrolling can not hide without exposing much in the peace time but submarines can hide and patrol in peace time without exposing much and can have the element of surprise. The way I see it, the price to build a surface ship (type 055 destroyer) and submarine (type 074) is not much different, US$888 million VS US$750 million, and probably more expensive for nuclear submarines.

In the peace time, at least USA will be very mindful to consider that China has many submarines that can attack it, so it will make USA to divide the resources. If we think a mobile land ICBM launcher which is already a hard target to attack but now submarines with missiles in the vast ocean, I think it will become much more harder as they are essentially act like mobile ocean ICBM launchers.
 
P

Pepper

Banned Idiot
Registered Member
plawolf said:
Exactly. This is, I believe, the primary reason for China to continue to delay moving on Taiwan. Essentially any AR will become a broader Sino-American war.

In such a war, even assuming the wildest best case scenario for China of total victory in the pacific and even conquering the whole of the Japanese home islands, that’s only taking out America’s local henchmen. Even taking Hawaii is an almost impossible ask.

That means at present, the best possible dream scenario is still basically a sub-WWI armistice level victory for China where the American homeland is effectively untouched and its government unchanged. And we all know what happened last time such a half-victory was accepted.

Rather than rush into a major war in which your very best possible outcome is a half victory and a prelude to an even bigger war shortly after against a rejuvenated enemy seeking to redress their earlier losses, is it better to wait longer and just fight one war and be able to achieve total, uncompromising victory?

If I am right, expect China to invest crazy amounts of resources into ABM in the coming years and decades. As there is zero change of America not using nukes if it looks like it’s about to loose, and loose completely.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine the commoditization of space tech will change this quite a bit. If it becomes cheap (and it will) to haul things into low orbit, then stationing missiles capable of striking anywhere will reduce the need of a navy for both sides. You cannot neglect the importance of Starship actually becoming useful.
 
I

Index

Senior Member
Registered Member
drowingfish said:
I find this the confidence in US submarines to be misplaced. a submarine vs a surface combatant would be dangerous yes, but to perform a blockade is really stretching it. the danger of a submarine is that it can be anywhere in the ocean, to perform a blockade requires the submarine to be present in a specific area.

also a submarine can carry only a limited number of ordinance to engage surface combatants, once it is out, it has to return to base for replenishment. even if we are assuming that the PLA does not go after those bases/ships, it still takes time for a submarine to travel between them and the area of operation.

lastly, submarines still need ISR support from other platforms to be effective, so if those platforms are neutralized a few submarines cannot do as much damage as one would like. the amount of conventional firepower a submarine can deliver is also very small compared to what it is purported to destroy.
Click to expand...
China also has straight up better submarines except in speed. So US only really wins the submarine fight far in the Pacific where SSNs can reposition faster than SSKs, but what's China gonna be doing there before they've neutralized all the US forces in Asia?

Subs are such a non issue because the PLAN surface fleet also has incredible ASW, and China is fighting a defensive war. US subs would be scary if China were fighting an offensive war towards Australia/Midway/Hawaii.
 
T

tamsen_ikard

Junior Member
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
Yikes the Filipinos put up a better fight. Didn’t Lai claim that they are gonna open fire if something like this occurred?
Click to expand...

PH is still quite far from China and thus can hope to utilize US naval power to beat China. What can Taiwan do in Kinmen which has been explicitly excluded from Taiwan relations Act. There has been even presidential debate about whether to defend Kinmen back in the 60s when US was a treaty ally of ROC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top