PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

FairAndUnbiased · May 21, 2022

I think Desert Storm made people overestimate what the US can do solely from the air, forgetting about the other major conventional war the US was involved in that had extensive use of air power: Vietnam.

In fact, Iraq had an air force and air defense system weaker than Vietnam with

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Early on, North Vietnamese SAM operators had connected the dots (energized radar equals missile exploding through the roof) and learned to keep their radar powered down until the last moment before launch.“ The Iraqis hadn’t yet figured out that it wasn’t a good idea to have the sites up,” says Schreiner. “So they had them all turned on.” The result was a “target-rich environment,” says Schreiner. “Lots of things to look at and shoot at.”

But even if the Iraqis trained exactly like the Vietnamese, they still wouldn't have been as effective (though far more than they actually were), since they didn't have cover in the desert.

However, now the question is this:

Does China geographically look more like Vietnam, or Iraq, in terms of cover?

Is PLA closer to PAVN (which it trained) or to the Iraqi Army in terms of doctrine?

Is PLA will to fight closer to PAVN, or to Iraq?

But, there is 1 crucial difference. PAVN only did air defense, because they only had SAMs and fighters. They could only shoot down incoming planes, they could not shoot back or take out the USAF airfields as they had no ballistic or cruise missiles, they could not sink USN carriers because they had no navy, not even speedboats. If USAF failed to bomb a PAVN target, no problem, they'll come back next time and refuel at base or carrier.

If they fail to take out PLARF TELs, they might find their airbase a smoldering ruin when they return or their carrier replaced by a bunch of guys in lifeboats. They don't get a second chance.

ougoah · May 21, 2022

FairAndUnbiased said:
I think Desert Storm made people overestimate what the US can do solely from the air, forgetting about the other major conventional war the US was involved in that had extensive use of air power: Vietnam.

In fact, Iraq had an air force and air defense system weaker than Vietnam with
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But even if the Iraqis trained exactly like the Vietnamese, they still wouldn't have been as effective (though far more than they actually were), since they didn't have cover in the desert.

However, now the question is this:

Does China geographically look more like Vietnam, or Iraq, in terms of cover?

Is PLA closer to PAVN (which it trained) or to the Iraqi Army in terms of doctrine?

Is PLA will to fight closer to PAVN, or to Iraq?

But, there is 1 crucial difference. PAVN only did air defense, because they only had SAMs and fighters. They could only shoot down incoming planes, they could not shoot back or take out the USAF airfields as they had no ballistic or cruise missiles, they could not sink USN carriers because they had no navy, not even speedboats. If USAF failed to bomb a PAVN target, no problem, they'll come back next time and refuel at base or carrier.

If they fail to take out PLARF TELs, they might find their airbase a smoldering ruin when they return or their carrier replaced by a bunch of guys in lifeboats. They don't get a second chance.

Accurate but China shouldn't settle for good enough, 差不多.

It can still do considerably better. Mass producing the varieties and ranges of hypersonic glide and propelled weapons is a great start. Conventional equivalence is one medium term goal to prevent the Americans from even considering such a thing. Nuclear annihilation secured many times over is the bare minimum. Long range PLARF using conventional only attacks on US based MIC and bases is a new capability (HGV HCM and "FOBS") that should be built up more.

Only when China can strike at CONUS conventionally just as hard without sacrificing nuclear delivery systems as part of conventional attacks can sort of compensate for not having the same level of conventional naval capability as the USN. The goal is always all that and the rest. There's no reason to even really stop there. The American ruling class and elites have proven to be absolutely intolerable of China and will stop at nothing to attack China. Why would China settle for conventional parity in naval forces if it has the industrial and economic means to do more. Of course this is decades from now and decades in the making but it is because China has not got the means for a conventional naval retaliation on the CONUS that allows American leaders to consider starting a war and striking first. Whatever long range capability China can afford to use conventionally only against US MIC targets and navy positioned around CONUS is at the moment minimal without sacrificing delivery platforms that should be reserved for nuclear delivery just in case.

gelgoog · May 21, 2022

I think the danger of a first strike will be the largest once the US has ship based hypersonic missiles and the B21 in service towards the later part of this decade. Right now I think a first strike, for them, would prove really expensive to achieve.
No, I think the most likely event would be a naval blockade of China.

And with regards to China being able to strike CONUS conventionally, I think that would require hypersonic intercontinental bombers. A technology which currently does not exist. The fact the US has airbases close to China while China does not have airbases close to the US limits China's capabilities to do a conventional strike.

Sincho · May 21, 2022

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The scenario is this. As the China invasion fleet heads towards Taiwan, suddenly massive drone swarms appear out of the blue to sink the Chinese ships. What do you guys think of this strategy and what are the counter strategies China can use to deal with this ?

Michaelsinodef · May 21, 2022

Sincho said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The scenario is this. As the China invasion fleet heads towards Taiwan, suddenly massive drone swarms appear out of the blue to sink the Chinese ships. What do you guys think of this strategy and what are the counter strategies China can use to deal with this ?

The PLA knows, and are currently working on it (Xi Yazhou did a video on it, and was also talked about guanqi or chahuahui).

And well, the PLA themselves can most likely themselves also release a massive drone swarm on Taiwan, so they will be able to test their drone swarm defenses against their own drones.

Hendrik_2000 · May 21, 2022

Sincho said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The scenario is this. As the China invasion fleet heads towards Taiwan, suddenly massive drone swarms appear out of the blue to sink the Chinese ships. What do you guys think of this strategy and what are the counter strategies China can use to deal with this ?

I though China is well prepared for this in Last Zhuhai show there are 3 or 4 model of mobile laser weapon shown on the floor . And just last week Saudi bought one of the system and actually use it in real war condition with success

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

use auto translate

Check the Chinese weapon export thread plenty of posting about Chinese recent success with Saudi purchase

Chinese military exports to other countries

The Saudis are very satisfied about the performance of Silent Hunter, achieving a first actual combat for a laser cannon. From swoosh of China Military Forum Not long ago, the domestic "Silent Hunter" launched the first actual combat of a laser interceptor in Saudi Arabia and achieved the news...

www.sinodefenceforum.com

tphuang · May 21, 2022

Sincho said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The scenario is this. As the China invasion fleet heads towards Taiwan, suddenly massive drone swarms appear out of the blue to sink the Chinese ships. What do you guys think of this strategy and what are the counter strategies China can use to deal with this ?

I watched the original video. The only important thing I got out of it is that they have done enough work to verify that even under strongest ew environment, the drones can still communicate with each other. It didn't address the basic issue of how you can get drones to fly that far and keeping it cheap enough to be attritable. And how do you make it be stealthy as f35 and keep the cost down? Seems like a lot of these ideas are wishful thinking. Like how they talked about creating unmanned teaming ucavs for b21 and the cost came out to be $300 million each.

Fundamentally, the biggest question for me is how far out the us carriers will be. If they are 1500 km out, then they can't do that much damage. If usn decide to park carriers 500km out from Taiwan while china is conducting large scale exercises, I think we are going to have big problems brewing.

FairAndUnbiased · May 21, 2022

ougoah said:
Accurate but China shouldn't settle for good enough, 差不多.

It can still do considerably better. Mass producing the varieties and ranges of hypersonic glide and propelled weapons is a great start. Conventional equivalence is one medium term goal to prevent the Americans from even considering such a thing. Nuclear annihilation secured many times over is the bare minimum. Long range PLARF using conventional only attacks on US based MIC and bases is a new capability (HGV HCM and "FOBS") that should be built up more.

Only when China can strike at CONUS conventionally just as hard without sacrificing nuclear delivery systems as part of conventional attacks can sort of compensate for not having the same level of conventional naval capability as the USN. The goal is always all that and the rest. There's no reason to even really stop there. The American ruling class and elites have proven to be absolutely intolerable of China and will stop at nothing to attack China. Why would China settle for conventional parity in naval forces if it has the industrial and economic means to do more. Of course this is decades from now and decades in the making but it is because China has not got the means for a conventional naval retaliation on the CONUS that allows American leaders to consider starting a war and striking first. Whatever long range capability China can afford to use conventionally only against US MIC targets and navy positioned around CONUS is at the moment minimal without sacrificing delivery platforms that should be reserved for nuclear delivery just in case.

true. but those are ambitious goals. in management it is good to set intermediate, specific goals that work towards the final goal. Here is my proposed list of goals:

1. ability to withstand enemy surprise 1st strike on land based forces and intercept the attackers - this is achieved and is what Vietnam had.

2. ability to counterstrike enemy forward bases using land based forces to prevent a followup wave after enemy first strike - this is mostly achieved already. Enemy forces are unlikely to find or destroy TELs, airbases and command centers capable of coordinating retaliation against their forward bases within the 1st and 2nd island chains.

3. ability to withstand enemy surprise 1st strike on naval forces while maintaining >70% combat effectiveness - this is not yet achieved but is getting close, maybe 2025-2030 to finally achieve this goal. what will be needed to achieve this will be more SSNs and SSKs, militarizing more SCS islands, more hydrophones, and a continuous patrol presence.

4. ability to counterstrike enemy rear and supply chains in distant waters using naval forces - this is an ambitious goal for the medium term, 2030-2040. this requires much more carriers, a bigger naval tracking network, etc.

5. ability to threaten enemy homeland - this is the ultimate goal but is mostly an ambition to work towards. it is unlikely to be achieved in the short or medium term.

FairAndUnbiased · May 21, 2022

Sincho said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The scenario is this. As the China invasion fleet heads towards Taiwan, suddenly massive drone swarms appear out of the blue to sink the Chinese ships. What do you guys think of this strategy and what are the counter strategies China can use to deal with this ?

this is bullshit. something as stealthy as the F-35 and with the range, endurance and sensor capabilities to approach and track a warship is not cheap or disposable. let alone something that can carry an antiship munition.

also, let's talk about things that actually exist. otherwise I can say PLAN has Godzilla. has Taiwan ever demonstrated a single example of this sort of long range, stealthy naval recon drone working? Or the US for that matter? PLA has: WZ-8. But it's not disposable. It's actually extremely expensive.

Why is it expensive? Because to survive being close to enemies with 200+ km range missiles and 400+ km long radars, you need to fly low, fast or stealthy. but if you fly low you reduce your own radar horizon which reduces your coverage area. So you need to fly higher - so fast and stealthy. But that doesn't come cheap. Speed means more expensive engines, more fuel, more exotic materials to withstand aerodynamic stress. Stealth means expensive surface treatments and odd shaping.

TK3600 · May 21, 2022

ZeEa5KPul said:
I have my suspicions that this isn't your first jaunt in this forum and about what your intentions here are, but I have to say that I could not agree more with this statement.

The idea crystalized with me recently that the PLA doesn't intend to undertake any military action whatsoever against Taiwan. No amphibious landings, no air and missile strikes, nothing. Think about it, Taiwan has next to no capability to project force against the Chinese mainland, and it's going to have even less of an ability if it "learns" from Ukraine. Add to that that Taiwan is territory that China claims as its own - why would you want to harm your own property if you can help it?

That the PRC doesn't control Taiwan isn't the problem, it's a symptom of the problem. The problem is the US presence in the western Pacific enabled by its alliance with Japan. The war is against the US-Japan alliance, not Taiwan. Should China win that war, everything in its region will fall into place, including Taiwan immediately reunifying with the PRC on the PRC's terms.

Dont you think an occupation of Taiwan helps winning this conflict to solve American presence?

PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

ougoah

Brigadier

gelgoog

Lieutenant General

Sincho

Junior Member

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General

Chinese military exports to other countries

tphuang

Lieutenant General

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

TK3600

Major