PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

I

ismellcopium

Junior Member
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
There's like 14 operational Su-57 no?

That's not a lot.
Click to expand...
The question is why do you think the PLA can operationally field a sixth gen fighter that just flew days ago in only 2 years?

Discussing a 2027 timeframe scenario is quite valid but at least maintain realism about the scale that many of these recently revealed systems are likely to be available at (and then go from there), which is to say in many cases quite limited or (in this case) not at all. Being limited in number doesn't necessarily mean something will only have no or even small impact but at least keep that in mind.

As specific examples: the KJ-3000 will likely be available on a small scale by then yet have a large impact, and the Y-20B/DF-27s on a small to medium scale and have an even larger impact. Same goes for J-35 and J-20A.
 
Last edited:
B

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
ismellcopium said:
The question is why do you think the PLA can operationally field a sixth gen fighter that just flew days ago in only 2 years?

Discussing a 2027 timeframe scenario is quite valid but at least maintain realism about the scale that many of these recently revealed systems are likely to be available at (and then go from there), which is to say in many cases quite limited or (in this case) not at all. Being limited in number doesn't necessarily mean something will only have no or even small impact but at least keep that in mind.

As specific examples: the KJ-3000 will likely be available on a small scale by then yet have a large impact, and the Y-20B/DF-27s on a small to medium scale and have an even larger impact. Same goes for J-35 and J-20A.
Click to expand...
First combat unit J-20 formed in 2018 and iirc 011 prototype flew in 2016.

I don't know where you get it from that I'm not discussing the PLA as a whole and only the new platforms. It's the whole package.
 
Z

zbb

Junior Member
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
First combat unit J-20 formed in 2018 and iirc 011 prototype flew in 2016.

I don't know where you get it from that I'm not discussing the PLA as a whole and only the new platforms. It's the whole package.
Click to expand...

For the J-20, prototype "2011" first flew in March 2014, first LRIP plane "2101" was first seen in December 2015, and state media announced mass production and combat readiness of J-20 in October 2017.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
zbb said:
For the J-20, prototype "2011" first flew in March 2014, first LRIP plane "2101" was first seen in December 2015, and state media announced mass production and combat readiness of J-20 in October 2017.
Click to expand...

As they say in investment, past performance does not indicate future results.

China has been advancing technologically at a rapid pace. What took 4 years to achieve 10 years ago, could very well take only 2 years now. I don't think that's an unrealistic expectation given how far China as progressed in the past decade.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
solarz said:
As they say in investment, past performance does not indicate future results.

China has been advancing technologically at a rapid pace. What took 4 years to achieve 10 years ago, could very well take only 2 years now. I don't think that's an unrealistic expectation given how far China as progressed in the past decade.
Click to expand...

It's still broadly the same steps.

Remember that the J-10 was the first modern fighter development programme.
Then the J-20 followed, and presumably they improved on the development cycle.

I expect all the easy development cycle gains have been obtained.

So I doubt they could halve the time from 4 years to 2 years in the next aircraft.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
SCS is not distant to China by any means, they can swarm that area with assets and munitions with ease.

I don't think China is going to drive hard into enemy territory then pull back. Their military buildup means that they plan to stay wherever they go. At this point they have 50%+ USN in VLS count, and that's all focused in Asia. And China's greatest investment is likely in air/missile power, not ships.

Taiwan is just a convinient fig leaf for China to reshape Asia by force. It's a sort of canary. If your country is pro-annexing Taiwan from China, you proved that your country is an irredeemable remnant of ww2 anti-Chinese aggression. On the other hand, countries who help China defend itself will get preferential alliance treatment.

The real crux of the conflict boils down to that US is the setting sun and China is the rising sun. If a declining power has colonies that it can't realistically defend, a rising power will take them away. To best maintain economic supremacy, China will want preferential treaties with its neighbors, captive markets and resource extraction flows. And also if they can open the US market, it's a great boon that will solve all of China's problems for decades in the future.
Click to expand...

Remember that it would be better to reshape the region without a war
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
Imo many US policymakers have already been guessing that they need to stop trying to take Taiwan, even during Zhuhai 2024.

I think very soon, US will officially give up on threatening Taiwan. Especially because China did some intel agency magic against warmongers in SK and Japan, softcouping them with new leaders that explicitly say they will never participate in a Taiwan invasion.
Click to expand...

It's more accurate to say that the US is using Taiwan as a pawn or casus belli.

And I don't think we can attribute the change in leadership in SK and Japan to the Chinese intel services.
The right-wing South Korean President tried a coup, but remember Trump tried something similar against Congress when he lost previously.
And in Japan, Trump's return means everyone wants better relations with China now.

And in the background, it's finally getting through that China is building a bigger military than the US, if you look at Chinese procurement of major air and naval platforms.


Biscuits said:
But this doesn't fix their fundamental problem of being a large empire that is falling behind in arms. By 2027, China will field at least Su-57 numbers of both 6th gen types, it will have the quality advantage in and under the water, with a fleet likely approaching 70% VLS count of 2024 US navy.

I would think that if 2027s China went to war with 2024s America, the result would not be an even struggle like the ww2 Soviet front, but a rather one sided rout like the first Sino Japanese war. And if China sees that the power balance is like that, they will absolutely initiate conflict with US just to steal colonies from the American empire.

Remember China too is an empire that needs to maintain high living standards and consistent growth, and Trump explicitly says he will close off the world's 2nd largest economy to China. By offering an unequal treaty to US and thereby opening up the Latin/south American nations, not to mention the 2nd largest world market, China will solve every single one of its potential economic woes for 50 years at least.

So my point is that US faces a challenge that in the 3 upcoming years, they need to reinvent/reform their armed forces into something that will deter China from knocking on the door.

As for Taiwan invasion plan, that's always be dead, the dead horse is beaten so much that it's not recognizable anymore. Even at China's nadir and US' apex in the 1990s, there was always a huge risk of China just nuking US if they successfully separated Taiwan by force.

It's a testament to extreme US hubris that they even talk about it up until 2024, but also a testament to the fact they're not total madmen, because they didn't attempt it.
Click to expand...

Again, it's better for China to avoid a war if possible.
And if there must be one, it's better to postpone this as much as possible.

For example, you mention the Chinese Navy will have a VLS count 70% of the US Navy in 2027. But by 2037, at current construction rates, it be 125%

Or in 2027, China would only have 3 aircraft carriers, which is not enough to win a blue-water naval battle in the Western Pacific against the US Navy

But by 2037, it's conceivable for China to have 9 aircraft carriers, which should be enough to win.

Such a change would inevitably reshape the Western Pacific, even without a war.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
AndrewS said:
Or in 2027, China would only have 3 aircraft carriers, which is not enough to win a blue-water naval battle in the Western Pacific against the US Navy
Click to expand...

Really, I have to question this idea that China and the US is going to have a WW2-style naval battle in the Pacific. I don't believe two nuclear powers will ever risk going to war with each other like that. Too much to lose and nothing to gain. I think Ukraine will be the script for China and the US in the foreseeable future, where each tries to bleed the other in some kind of proxy war.

The calculus for the US over Taiwan is simply how much they can bleed China over the island using TW and possibly Japan and Philippines as proxies, and the calculus for China is how well the PLA can contain the conflict to the island and avoid escalating into a regional war, which would play right into American hands.

At no point do I believe either side will risk directly attacking each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top