PLAN Amphibious assault capability

can we all become friends and stop the animosity please keep this forum clean. we are all humans so no more fighting and last but not least what we know we know what we don't know we don't know.

Mehdi

Yeas Yeas we all are friends...but among friends hese little scubbles are usual, but yet safe

Golly, I don't have enough time right now, so just one point. You get the system wrong. The double leader and comittee thing is not what like you thought. It's called "seperated responsibilities of leaders under the party comittee" (党委领导下的首长分工负责制), can somebody give a better translation of this? The key is seperated resoponsibility. the commander is in charge of action and the polictical leader is in charge of the morale. And you don't get the committee to make decision, you follow the orders given to you. The commander goes to command academies to get a rank and the political leader goes to political academies. The committee actually never exists, it's a mysterious communist party thing. Some people has the title of committee member, chief secretary etc. But there's no rule on who's who in this committee. You can regard it like some kind of discussion. So in all, ignore the committee, they usage of it is just something like when you wanna transfer somebody, the political leader tell him that's the decision of the committee, so don't blame anybody on this. And the dual system is one command the action, another take care of the morale and administration.

And don't look down PLA doctrines by assumptions. This is an army who survived through the most servere condition in the modern history and gained conspicuous victories.

szbd said:

And don't look down PLA doctrines by assumptions. This is an army who survived through the most servere condition in the modern history and gained conspicuous victories.

Click to expand...

What is "the most servere condition in the modern history"?

Also it's rather controversial to claim the PLA was victorious in any of the wars it fought in the 20th century - Korea was a draw and with Vietnam, both sides claimed victory.

Anyway, history does not indicate the ability of a military force in the current era. The wars fought against the UN in the 1950s and Vietnam in 1979 would be very different to a war with Taiwan/Taiwan & the US today.

FuManChu said:

What is "the most servere condition in the modern history"?

Click to expand...

When cultural revolution is raging and tearing up PLA and China. PLA still manage to stand up against Soviet Union and claim the Zhen Bao Tai in 1969 incident..

FuManChu said:

Also it's rather controversial to claim the PLA was victorious in any of the wars it fought in the 20th century - Korea was a draw and with Vietnam, both sides claimed victory.

Click to expand...

PLA against a highly organised and well supported joint air,sea and land US forces and manage to gain a draw. Don't you think is amazing consider PLA hardly had any heavy arms and air support provided?

FuManChu said:

Anyway, history does not indicate the ability of a military force in the current era. The wars fought against the UN in the 1950s and Vietnam in 1979 would be very different to a war with Taiwan/Taiwan & the US today.

Click to expand...

Something that never seems to come up is that there hasn't been an all-out war between major powers in the last 60 years. Most of the predictions that people make here are based on very sketchy assumptions.

You can say that China has no experience fighting an enemy like modern Taiwan (or the U.S., if you think they'll get involved), but the opposite is also true.

... Ami.

Kilo636 said:

PLA against a highly organised and well supported joint air,sea and land US forces and manage to gain a draw. Don't you think is amazing consider PLA hardly had any heavy arms and air support provided?

Click to expand...

Not that amazing, given the UN forces were made up of many different nationalities, of varying quality and were bloody exhausted after chasing the Norks all the way up the country and had over-extended supply lines.

But as I said, this is irrelevant when consider the situation today. We're also talking about the PLAN's amphibious capabilties, something the PLA had no experience of during the PRC's major wars of the 20th century.

Golly, I don't have enough time right now, so just one point. You get the system wrong. The double leader and comittee thing is not what like you thought. It's called "seperated responsibilities of leaders under the party comittee" (党委领导下的首长分工负责制), can somebody give a better translation of this? The key is seperated resoponsibility. the commander is in charge of action and the polictical leader is in charge of the morale. And you don't get the committee to make decision, you follow the orders given to you. The commander goes to command academies to get a rank and the political leader goes to political academies. The committee actually never exists, it's a mysterious communist party thing. Some people has the title of committee member, chief secretary etc. But there's no rule on who's who in this committee. You can regard it like some kind of discussion. So in all, ignore the committee, they usage of it is just something like when you wanna transfer somebody, the political leader tell him that's the decision of the committee, so don't blame anybody on this. And the dual system is one command the action, another take care of the morale and administration.

Click to expand...

Well what I've read from PLA organisations, the party commitee is resposible in all major decisions inside the military unit. And in those comitees the othervice co-equal political leader is the chairman and the unit military leader is the deputy leader. And all my experience and knowledge cries against this sort of system being anyhting else than a huge incranation of stagnacy. It has hardly any room for flexibility, innovatism and fast situation-awere decisions ranging from the lowest level to the high command. Its my assumption based on the facts that I've read and what i've learned. I haven't served in PLA nor any system that has this sort of dual-leadership but I've served in army that has comepletely different system and have fought and won an opposite army that created this system.

What you are saying is somewhat opposite and thus I wish to ask is this your own assumption, made via similar ways than mine or something more solid based on for example your own experience?

And don't look down PLA doctrines by assumptions. This is an army who survived through the most servere condition in the modern history and gained conspicuous victories.

Click to expand...

I don't but I'm also asking you, are your opposite claims based on assumptions as well or something else?

Please guys calm down and try to analyze any critical points in a rational way.

I can assure you that most taiwanese (including military people) are far more relaxed about the ´situation´than some guys in Finland! Actually many on the island are currently occupied by relocating their business to Shanghai or Guangzhou and investing in some real estate over there´guarded´by a hot mainland chick being of course ´top secret´for mommy and kids at home.

Interestingly the (daily ?) amphibious lift capacity of PLA is a relatively unknown factor (3 div ?, 10 div ? , one member thinks PLA will not have enough capacity even in 5 years) but nevertheless several ´experts´have already made assumptions that PLA can or cannot achieve nothing. We need more facts and in absence of better information continued speculation leads only to confusion.

The quite slow pace in building a capable amphibious force has indeed surprised many PLA watchers for years now. My humble personal opinion is that this a deliberate strategic decision since conventional landing forces will play only a limited role in PLA's new naval strategy and additionally a rapid expansion of amphibious ships years in advance would only serve to ring every alarm bell from Taipeh to Washington.

Today China is already the number three civilian ship building nation (for data just look in our civilian ship thread!) producing 12 million dwt in '06 alone. Probably in 2010 China will have replaced Japan and ROK as the global number one ship builder with an annual production of 18-22 million dwt and this is a yearly production double the record figure reached by US yards in 1943! Consequently China will be able to produce the necessary small and medium amphibious ships (LPD's would be different of course ...) during a comprehensive campaign employing all capabilties of her giant industries within 3 to 6 months. Although achieving this kind of feat would be difficult it is certainly possible. China's industrial progress has been very rapid and dynamic in recent years and this has to be included in every calculus regarding an amphibious campaign against Taiwan (2009-2012). :coffee:

Gollevainen said:

How have I personally attacked you? I asked a question in which you replyed in a matter which indicates that you know something but you wont reveal it becouse you happen to know something so valuable that it could be used against china?

Now pardon me if I think you are saying such only to try to avoid the orginal question (as you haven't showed any sighs of actually being a person that could have such information). Becouse my question doesen't ask any state secrecy, only basics of military tactics and the general understandment of how different size landforce units work and operate under such a enviroment. To awnser the question needs only the basic understandment of those issues, nothing more.

So why not quit making comments like madman and such (and in the same time accusing me of personal attacks) and awnser the question...or not, but then at least keep your cheap accusations to yourself, it improves greatly my respect to your decision. If you wish not to take part to the discussion, fine its your right, but in the otherhand the forum rules are quite clear on offtopic ranting...

Click to expand...

Well let's see here:

'But again you can twist the facts and figures as long as you wish," What facts and figures did I twist? I said 052C is one Gen of Tech ahead of Kidd class. The PLA T99 MBT is one Gen ahead of M60, KJ2000 is one Gen ahead of E2 hawkeye. these are the examples that you have asked, then when I give them to you, you dismiss them out of hand.

You asked a question and I told you where to find those answers. Some of those writers are very good ( based on reality. Other's are dreamers) as far as my answers to your question, I have nothing to say . As you may be well aware that a war between PRC and ROC are real possibility. Therefore, All I say and write here in this Forum are from public knowledges, news papers, other people's writings.