PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC
- Thread starter SEAD
- Start date
That’s what I meant. I don’t think people understand the logistics involved in operating that many jets even under optimal conditions. This is not WWII when we still used simple prop planes.
As i wrote earlier, i was addressing parking space, as i thought that was the argument.
I think trying to quantify logistics needs in terms of how much space, percentage wise, would it take is a much tougher job.
But on the other hand it's essential. So I don't think we can just wave a hand at it and say "logistics and other needs would take way most of it" but what's needed is to say "logistics and other needs would take away exact XY percent of the said parking spaces". Then we could get somewhere in this discussion. Without it, it's just trust me bro level of conversation. Sadly, I don't think anyone is prepared to even attempt such an in depth analysis as it'd take a lot of time to do it.
I think trying to quantify logistics needs in terms of how much space, percentage wise, would it take is a much tougher job.
But on the other hand it's essential. So I don't think we can just wave a hand at it and say "logistics and other needs would take way most of it" but what's needed is to say "logistics and other needs would take away exact XY percent of the said parking spaces". Then we could get somewhere in this discussion. Without it, it's just trust me bro level of conversation. Sadly, I don't think anyone is prepared to even attempt such an in depth analysis as it'd take a lot of time to do it.
I think logistic is a hard cap rather than a % of total parking space. If there is logistic for 5 plane in a 10 plane airport, expanding the airport to 100 will not enable logistic for 50.
one thing i noticed on weibo today. Shilao commented on a photo showing Israeli F-16I carrying M-117 dumb bombs after using up much of MK-83/MK-64 with 6000 bombs in several days
If IAF can use up that much munitions in less than a week, PLA really needs to build up a much larger stock of long range rockets, PGMs & ground attack missiles for a high intensity warfare. If there is one thing these recent warfares have shown, your stock of ammunitions can get used up really quickly
If IAF can use up that much munitions in less than a week, PLA really needs to build up a much larger stock of long range rockets, PGMs & ground attack missiles for a high intensity warfare. If there is one thing these recent warfares have shown, your stock of ammunitions can get used up really quickly
Last edited:
Munitions have shelf lives.
Last edited:
Well, I suspected the conversation was probably one of partial imprecision, and that Siege probably meant logistics rather than physical parking space only.
As for the difficulty of quantifying logistics/support -- I think recognizing that as a hard limit is more useful to us than assuming that every square meter of parking apron can be used to operate an equivalent number of military aircraft as a normal regular military airbase.
We don't necessarily need to handwave a percentage number of a hard limit/ceiling to make one up, but recognizing that it is a meaningful unknown is important.
==========
On the one hand, munitions has a shelf life, on the other hand, that shelf life can be mitigated through live fire exercises. For the PLA of yesteryear or yester-decade, they may have been unable to buy significant munitions in quantities due to insufficiently sophisticated performance or due to outright limited support/storage facilities and/or limited ability to expend them in training.
However I think for the PLA of today, I think it should be fairly well within their means to get more serious about having the munitions they project they need and to have a larger multiple of that for maintaining better readiness and munitions reserves.
Shelf life (which is basically a matter of money) is no longer as much of an excuse these days.
(For example, 30,000 JDAM tailkits were produced in 2019, currently over 500 LRASM/JASSMs are produced a year with a goal to expand that to over 1000 combined LRASM/JASSM a year in the near future -- I'm not suggesting the PLA needs 30,000 direct attack PGM kits a year obviously, but it is worth being aware of the kind of scales that can be achievable even within a year)
Last edited:
Munitions also require temperature control storage facilities. Those aren’t cheap. The fact the munitions may become outdated also increase the opportunity cost.
My point is having a large enough stock is needed, but not a massive stock. The definition of a “large enough” stock depends on how much munitions PLA needs in an unplanned war.
i think it makes more sense to expand automated production facilities (with low rate of production just to maintain the number of skilled workers) and stock up the components for the munitions plus ingredients for explosives based on the projected amount needed in the opening phase instead. MIC can ramp up production some time before the planned hostilities so PLA can have a truly massive stock when Civil War II starts.
My point is having a large enough stock is needed, but not a massive stock. The definition of a “large enough” stock depends on how much munitions PLA needs in an unplanned war.
i think it makes more sense to expand automated production facilities (with low rate of production just to maintain the number of skilled workers) and stock up the components for the munitions plus ingredients for explosives based on the projected amount needed in the opening phase instead. MIC can ramp up production some time before the planned hostilities so PLA can have a truly massive stock when Civil War II starts.
"It isn't cheap" -- IMO that is the stickler.
If money was not an object, then having the ability to massively frontload an initial alpha strike, followed by the ability to continue production pace with munitions expenditure (or even exceeding munitions expenditure) would naturally be the best case for any military.
I am not sure how large is "large enough," but I have a sneaking suspicion that the genuine assessments of munitions size requirements by most military forces probably underestimate how many munitions they need when conflict is ultimately joined, especially if accounting for things like adversary actions to target one's munitions depots, or enemy jamming and defenses that degrade munitions performance etc.
The above all has to be weighed up against the opportunity cost of other essential capabilities, platforms and logistics, but I certainly do not think we are in a position to know whether the PLA's current stocks of munitions are truly "enough" for whatever conflict they are preparing for, and it's useful to always remember that a nation goes with war with the military that they have (and the munitions capacity that they have), and the ability to produce additional munitions takes time, money and also the ability of production facilities to operate during wartime effectively. So having a reminder from other ongoing contemporary conflicts is always worthwhile.
I think we should be careful not to cargo cult the Current Conflict(tm). Disabling an advanced military is paradoxically much easier than completely destroying a ragtag militia like Hamas. The strikes Israel is conducting in Gaza are performative and venting rage, they aren't going after military infrastructure because there is no military infrastructure in Gaza worth going after. That's very different from Chinese munitions going after high value targets like American IADS and BMD sites or command centers or ISR nodes, without which America can't fight. Chinese strikes with 6,000 bombs would do incalculably more damage to America's ability to fight than Israel's strikes do to Hamas's ability to fight because the latter has very little capability anyway.
Taking an enemy's fighting ability from 100 to 1 is much easier than taking it from 1 to 0.
The fact that America can outproduce China in anything should be a mark of shame. There are cases where China doesn't have the technology yet and more worked is needed to bring it to sufficient maturity, but that isn't the case here. There's no excuse for China not to procure PGMs and missiles at this rate.