Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

We do not know how much is the armyis really getting for its actual share.Also the deal does cover support package including training rounds and simulators so it is actually quite comprehensive and depending on the negotiations the payment schedule can be potentially flexible. More ever other equipments like communication equipments and the likes aren't really expensive as one might think, attack helicopters are definitely a big ticket items but that can be covered in future purchases.
And since Taiwan is procuring most other ifvs indigenously it can afford to make this purchase depending on what Taipei decided in the future. Considering their defense budget to gdp they can certainly push the number up a bit higher.
In all consideration the M1A2 is a definitely upgrade over its existing MBT fleet. We can go around how they might actually function in a real life setting but given the nature of the forum let's not get into that shall we?
As for manpower issues I really don't see a problem, if they can maintain a 1000 tank fleet now they can assurely maintain a similar number in the future unless they face a suddenly population drop. And depending on how they go about it they might take the opportunity to reorganize the fleet into a smaller and leaner one in the process

In the end it is all depended on how well Taiwan can source its other weapon system, which seeing it's choice in the Abrams is to them at acceptable levels.

Skywatcher said:

100 or so M1A2 at the start of the war would be whittled down to 20-30 tanks after a couple week of bombardment (assuming an 80% readiness rate). Now those 20-30 tanks have to engage a PLANMC force armed with every kind of ATGM, and dodge naval artillery, attack helicopters, fixed wing aviation, drones (including flocks of one way attack drones). And that's assuming their are no PLA MBTs in the neighborhood.

Click to expand...

how long do you think, in a Taiwan situation, the initial air battle would last before the PLA start their amphibious operation? i saw different estimation, ranging from weeks to days

I think the emphasis on amphibious landings is very outdated and misleading now, and seems to stem principally from the PLAN’s perceived lack of ‘adequate’ sea lift capabilities.

Even back during Desert Storm, air strikes broke the back of the Iraqi army long before the ground war started. The situation would be far worse for the defending side these days.

If you view the PLA massed amphibious assault landings as the opening stage of the most decisive part of the campaign, with the PLA planning to win through ground action primarily, then weeks would seem too long, with days being better.

However, if the PLA’s strategy is to obliterate Taiwan’s defences through air and missile strikes, with ground forces moving in as mop up and occupational forces, then days would be too short.

I see the PLA’s strategy as leaning towards the latter, with massive emphasis on special forces directed precision stand-off attack to start with, followed up with massed drone missions.

The recent production of 075 LHDs could indicate the PLA moving towards air assault as the spearhead, with amphibious landings taking place after air assault has already secured the beachheads.

That would certainly bypass the bulk of Taiwan’s counter-invasion planning and investments while minimising PLA likely losses.

manqiangrexue said:

@Viktor Jav @abc123 There is no nation or country of Taiwan; no such place is recognized by the UN or any relevant nation in the world. It is the Chinese territory called Republic of China.

Click to expand...

I understand the users here obviously have different feelings regarding the political status of Taiwan.

People may argue about whatever its de facto status is or whether inclusion or exclusion in certain international bodies deem it to be a "country" or not.


But this is sinodefence forum and the political status of Taiwan is naturally something that people will hold strong views about.


I will be discussing this matter with the moderators, however for now I will kindly request our members to avoid terms that either suggest Taiwan is a country or that Taiwan is a province please.

plawolf said:

Even back during Desert Storm, air strikes broke the back of the Iraqi army long before the ground war started. The situation would be far worse for the defending side these days.

Click to expand...

i think the priorities for US military in desert storm and that of PLA in TW situation are quite different, which would result in very different strategies. PLA does not really have weeks to wait before the opponent's back is broken.

plawolf said:

If you view the PLA massed amphibious assault landings as the opening stage of the most decisive part of the campaign, with the PLA planning to win through ground action primarily, then weeks would seem too long, with days being better.
However, if the PLA’s strategy is to obliterate Taiwan’s defences through air and missile strikes, with ground forces moving in as mop up and occupational forces, then days would be too short.
I see the PLA’s strategy as leaning towards the latter, with massive emphasis on special forces directed precision stand-off attack to start with, followed up with massed drone missions.

Click to expand...

I think PLA would probably choose something in between, but leaning towards the former.
The key for a successful operation against Taiwan is to achieve decisive victory before the US can maneuver bulk of it force to the theatre(assuming a US intervention is happening), otherwise it could end up in a stalemate and eventually result in higher loss for the PLA.
Which is why i think after an intensive but quick air strike (mainly against c2, radar network, runways, ROCN ships, AShM sites and high-end AA such as patriot & skybow), amphibious operation can be started. Of course air battle does not end there but continues in parallel against other mobile, no-so-easy-to-track targets.

plawolf said:

The recent production of 075 LHDs could indicate the PLA moving towards air assault as the spearhead, with amphibious landings taking place after air assault has already secured the beachheads.
That would certainly bypass the bulk of Taiwan’s counter-invasion planning and investments while minimising PLA likely losses.

Click to expand...

I think the goal of amphibious air assault here is to deliver a small spearhead to an unexpected location where the defensive force is not present. That spearhead is supposed to hold the beachhead for a few hours with the support of naval/air artillery, which will in turn buy time for the larger and heavier forces to land, relatively undisturbed. Air assault or LHD does help reduce casualties but does not change the fact that eventually the island needs to be taken by infantry sent in by amphibious operations.

@siegecrossbow
@Bltizo

this is to ask if Taiwan invasion strategy and tactics can be discussed (see this page)? I don't mind, in fact I'd like to weigh in case if it wasn't a problem

Jura said:

@siegecrossbow
@Bltizo

this is to ask if Taiwan invasion strategy and tactics can be discussed (see this page)? I don't mind, in fact I'd like to weigh in case if it wasn't a problem

Click to expand...

the absence of ruling here means what? can the discussion proceed?

caohailiang said:

the absence of ruling here means what? can the discussion proceed?

Click to expand...

I second that question

Jura said:

I second that question

Click to expand...

I suggest to continue the discussion, we have done our due diligence, haven't we?
I would love to hear your opinion on this @Jura