Iraq is mostly desert, sparsely populated, and not very urbanized at all. Taiwan is mostly urban and densely populated. Huge difference, because SAM launchers and ground combat units can move and hide and multiple highways can be used to launch fighters. There will definitely be alot more potential targets per sq km in Taiwan than in Iraq. 12x the surface area doesn't translate into 12x the effort required. Chinese air and missile forces also don't need to be in a rush. The rate limiting factor is the ground invasion.
Sparsely populated and large makes it much more difficult to cover. Concentrated targets in a small area is much easier. Once again, they are 100 miles from Chinese artillery, not limited to what the Chinese or US navy can bring. That is a difference in magnitudes for the firepower China can aim at them. And once they're put through that, they'll have no fight left in them in hours. Every organization, military branch, everything that could fight will already be dead or in disarray. Even those who want to fight will not know where to report to or whose command to follow. The ground invasion will be quite easy in this situation.
Yeah I think it will end up being far more difficult than you imagine. I think the Chinese military agrees as well, judging by their development of those landing barges.
Like I said, those barges are meant to allow for a successful invasion with reduced violence to their overall structure. If that is damned, any ship, any plane will do.
That's like asking for the secret recipe of Coca Cola. People can make estimates, but the manufacturer and the US military is not going to tell you these things. I suspect it will be less than Mach 25, but how much less? Nobody really knows.
OK, but I'm saying that to intercept something, you have to either predict its course or you have to chase it down. Neither seem likely for a mach 9 HGV.
Simulation in a desert is a VERY poor substitute for a noncooperative target. Even simulation against a moving target is a poor substitute, which BTW the PLARF has accomplished against straight line moving desert targets and against live ship targets. OTOH it is not known whether the ship target was maneuvering and whether EW defense was allowed. And additionally in the real world, every stage of the kill chain will be contested, unlike the tests. How effective will they be? Unknown. How effective will Chinese HGVs be in the face of a non-cooperative target maneuvering violently and throwing up EW and kinetic defenses? Unknown. How willing is a USN carrier willing to risk ASBM attack in the 2IC? Unknown. You seem to suggest a likely outcome, that the target will not want to 'risk' being shot at by the shooter. I suggest that you don't know this and don't even have the basic ability to guess the risk. Admittedly, I don't either.
I'm guessing PLA advantage based on:
1. PLA has everything it needs to simulate a maneuvering target with EW defense. The US does not have what it needs to even simulate a Chinese HGV to test its missile defense on.
2. When the PLARF launches a missile at a US carrier, let's call it a game. If the missile hits, the PLARF wins; if it doesn't the USN wins. The PLARF, assuming they engage at long enough distance, and has a large missile stockpile, can afford to lose many many games before the carrier even becomes useful to the USN. They can play again and again and again until they win. The carrier can afford to lose absolutely 0 games before it is sunk or neutralized.
3. According to the US defense secretary, the US always loses this game and its carriers quickly.
I'm not so sure it's "easy". We simply don't know the Chinese wartime manufacturing capacity of ballistic missiles. I know it is definitely easy to imagine that China can produce whatever it wants as fast as it wants, but that's basically the same thing as saying China will win any war against anyone just because it's a manufacturing superpowa. We just don't know.
If they're building landing barges, they better be building a nice stockpile of missiles. Not doing so is just irresponsible and stupid.
Oh I think China could easily defeat Taiwan RIGHT NOW if it was absolutely sure the US/Japan would not intervene.
Really not the question. Too easy to ask.
The real question is can China take Taiwan with US/Japanese intervention. I say in a few years, you say now. Who's right? Nobody knows. Certainly nobody on this forum.
Just to gauge where you are on this. You think that literally without regard to preservation of the island, China could not do this now? That the US does not ask the ROC to declare independence to start this war seeing China's military grow the way it is, tells me they think it's already too late. You're conservative on these estimates from a Chinese perspective and that's fine.
