PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Neurosmith

Neurosmith

Junior Member
Registered Member
I think this discussion does bring to light one important point, which is that submarines with cruise-missile-carrying capabilities would be strategically useful in a Pacific conflict. With both sides being able to target each other's airbases and staging areas in the region, SSNs would offer essentially the only capability to bring firepower to another country's bases and infrastructure without risk of reprisal on that platform.

This is probably why the Chinese are churning out their 09IIIB SSGNs and looking to produce their next 09V boats. They would be their only somewhat-plausible way to attack opposing bases, vessels, and even their homeland, without risking being destroyed in the process.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Neurosmith said:
I think this discussion does bring to light one important point, which is that submarines with cruise-missile-carrying capabilities would be strategically useful in a Pacific conflict. With both sides being able to target each other's airbases and staging areas in the region, SSNs would offer essentially the only capability to bring firepower to another country's bases and infrastructure without risk of reprisal on that platform.

This is probably why the Chinese are churning out their 09IIIB SSGNs and looking to produce their next 09V boats. They would be their only somewhat-plausible way to attack opposing bases, vessels, and even their homeland, without risking being destroyed in the process.
Click to expand...
Subs are fine for high leverage surgical strikes but they’re not really an answer for the high intensity side of the picture. Ultimately you still have to be able to answer mass questions if you want to win a war.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
latenlazy said:
Subs are fine for high leverage surgical strikes but they’re not really an answer for the high intensity side of the picture. Ultimately you still have to be able to answer mass questions if you want to win a war.
Click to expand...

Counterpoint is the abysmal infrastructure redevelopment capability of the U.S.

How long is it going to take them to repair the Baltimore bridge again? It matters less if you can only generate a small number of fires per month if opfor needs years to repair the damage from each such strikes.

The obvious argument that this is peacetime speed is actually worse news for the US, since in wartime against China, it won’t be able to get any supplies of critical materials and machinery it needs to repair major infrastructure from China. Remember all those made in China cranes they slapped American flags over their Chinese names when doing photo ops for US presidential visits? How long do you think it will take them to magic a replacement once China stops supplying replacements? Indeed, how long can those cranes remain operational without Chinese parts even if they are not directly attacked in wartime?
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
plawolf said:
Counterpoint is the abysmal infrastructure redevelopment capability of the U.S.

How long is it going to take them to repair the Baltimore bridge again? It matters less if you can only generate a small number of fires per month if opfor needs years to repair the damage from each such strikes.

The obvious argument that this is peacetime speed is actually worse news for the US, since in wartime against China, it won’t be able to get any supplies of critical materials and machinery it needs to repair major infrastructure from China. Remember all those made in China cranes they slapped American flags over their Chinese names when doing photo ops for US presidential visits? How long do you think it will take them to magic a replacement once China stops supplying replacements? Indeed, how long can those cranes remain operational without Chinese parts even if they are not directly attacked in wartime?
Click to expand...
The US ironically is uniquely vulnerable to high leverage surgical attacks.
 
Neurosmith

Neurosmith

Junior Member
Registered Member
latenlazy said:
Subs are fine for high leverage surgical strikes but they’re not really an answer for the high intensity side of the picture. Ultimately you still have to be able to answer mass questions if you want to win a war.
Click to expand...
Yeah but subs would actually be survivable against opposing anti-surface and anti-air fires, unlike fixed or sea/airborne platforms. Take the 09IIIB for example...one sub could load 24 land attack cruise missiles, meaning that the PLAN's current fleet of 8 boats could theoretically bring 192 missiles to bear, which is not at all a trivial number considering how difficult it is to track them.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Neurosmith said:
Yeah but subs would actually be survivable against opposing anti-surface and anti-air fires, unlike fixed or sea/airborne platforms. Take the 09IIIB for example...one sub could load 24 land attack cruise missiles, meaning that the PLAN's current fleet of 8 boats could theoretically bring 192 missiles to bear, which is not at all a trivial number considering how difficult it is to track them.
Click to expand...
It depends on the mass on the other side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top