Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

S

Skywatcher

Captain
weig2000 said:
It's funny that I wrote somewhere else today that one of the lessons that PLA can learn from the recent Armenia-Azerbaijan War is to employ drones to attack ROC's tanks supposedly gathered to expel the PLA landing forces. This was in response to a recent article by David Axe in Forbes (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
). So it's good Eric Chan has the same idea, even if it's for the opposing side. Great minds think alike, I suppose. The only problem is that PRC is one of the world's top drone producers and exporters, and clearly has superiority over ROC both quantitatively and qualitatively in its drone arsenal.

This is just one of many novel and bizarre ideas promoted by American military professionals, quasi-professionals or retired professionals, once the Trump administration opened the floodgate of arms sales to Taiwan. They also somewhat mirror the dozens of pro-Taiwan/poking-China bils that have passed or are waiting to be passed by Congress. I suppose all these have to run its course, before people start to realize how unrealistic and self-serving these ideas are. Meanwhile, PRC will invest heavily in the targeted systems and platforms for the Taiwan contingency, without much fanfare.
Click to expand...
Chan's assuming that Taiwan's UCAS and loitering munitions will remain reasonably intact by the time the amphibious landing comes around.
 
Mr T

Mr T

Senior Member
Skywatcher said:
Even if that's true by an act of God, what's to stop the at least numerically superior volume of PLA drones and loitering munitions from destroying Taiwanese loitering munition launchers and drone bases in the lead up to amphibious operations?
Click to expand...

Once again we're heading back to the old "Taiwan can do nothing about China's military, it should just disarm and surrender now" arguments.

A few pages ago you were saying Taiwan should invest in HIFVs. What can they do against an overwhelming number of PLA loitering munitions, especially if Taiwan has none of its own?
 
A

Arcgem

New Member
Registered Member
Mr T said:
So you want Taiwan to bomb Chinese cities with a couple of HF-IIEs, and you'd respect them then?
Click to expand...

Beijing would show the same respect the US showed Japan after Pearl Harbor.

Mr T said:
No, it really hasn't. Japan earned a lot of respect worldwide after WWII by spreading its culture and technology, whilst also donating to countries in need via foreign aid. Japanese people might have sweated in their places of work to do so, but they haven't shed any blood.

Same with countries like Germany. Germany hasn't really shed any blood since WWII, but it's highly respected.
Click to expand...

Japan and Germany were already respected during WWII and even before that. Japan was regarded as a peer by the West after winning the Russo-Japanese War, joining them in carving up China into spheres of influence. Germany's military buildup before and after WWI did the same.


Mr T said:
When was the last time you shed any blood? And I think you're very much alive right now.

Aren't you one of those people who shouts out about patriotism and nationalism, but then expects someone else to go die for you?
Click to expand...

But others have done so, in order to fight for our values.

Aren't you one of those people who spins inconsequential details into a grand anti-China (anti-CCP, whatever) narrative? Who also experiences a temporary stroke when presented with an argument refuting your points, conveniently recovering the moment the offending argument leaves your system?
 
S

Skywatcher

Captain
Mr T said:
Once again we're heading back to the old "Taiwan can do nothing about China's military, it should just disarm and surrender now" arguments.

A few pages ago you were saying Taiwan should invest in HIFVs. What can they do against an overwhelming number of PLA loitering munitions, especially if Taiwan has none of its own?
Click to expand...
Nice strawman.

I'm talking about Chan's ridiculous, and frankly, idiotic assertion that Taiwan can magically replicate anything close to Azerbaijan's success with loitering munitions and UAS against Armenia.

A HIFV can at least hid in an urban environment or anchor a line of defense against amphibious assault forces. UCAS/loitering munitions cannot do that.

Money spent on loitering munitions/small UCAS (like attack quadcopters) would frankly be better spent on manportable ATGMs/small UGVs (far less concerns about PLA EW with the latter, and they're also much more responsive to tactical operators).
 
vesicles

vesicles

Colonel
Mr T said:
Aren't you one of those people who shouts out about patriotism and nationalism, but then expects someone else to go die for you?
Click to expand...

Why do you think I expect someone else to die for me? I have never made any decision that involves anyone dying. Keep in mind that I’m not the one who wants Taiwan to be independent. I’m simply helping you understand and better accept the consequences of your own decisions. If you are afraid of dying, then live a peaceful and prosperous life and be happy to be Chinese. If you are willing to sacrifice your life to win freedom, then declare independence and face whatever happens next like a man.
 
Temstar

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Skywatcher said:
Claim #2) The ROCAF can use F-5 UAS as decoy to go over to the Mainland and smoke out HQ-9s and S-400/S-300s and pose as strike aircraft, since the PLAAF/PLANAF air patrols have all gone on extended leave (Shall I inform Mr. Chan about the J-6 UAS conversions, or would one of my fellow SDFers like to do the honors?)
Click to expand...

Sure thing:
lgQy-fxypunk6061268.jpg

It's quite amusing that Eric Chen has just realised independently why PLAAF has thousands of J-6 UCAVs sitting around, each capable of carrying a ton and half of iron bombs in times of war.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
PUFF_DRAGON said:
One of the great weaknesses of the PRC is it's inability to control the sea lanes that supply most of its fossil fuels. A colossal aero-naval buildup that gives the PLAN the capability to sink every Japanese and American submarine or ship within the first and second island chains with relative ease is necessary ASAP since we can't guarantee the USN won't pull the trigger on far blockading China's oil and gas supplies sometime in the next 50-70 years.

Being able to invade Taiwan is just a happy side-effect/necessary pre-requisite to defeating a US/JP Far blockade. Haven't you noticed it's really strange that the PLA built long range stealth fighters and long range hyper sonic ballistic missiles before it started its amphibious warship capability (Type 075/076). It's almost as if the real goal of the PLAN isn't taking back Taiwan, just that reaching their real goal makes taking Taiwan easy.
Click to expand...

In case you did not notice that is what the PLAN has been doing over the past decade. Type 054, 052, 055, 071, 075, carriers, etc.
You don't need large carriers to invade Taiwan or have control over the SCS. It is close to land bases. The construction of carriers is clearly being done for power projection. The Middle East oil trade is the most likely candidate for why they are building the carriers. For escort.

China also has land based routes for hydrocarbons. Together with a vast high speed rail network and now an effort to convert their automobiles into electric power having already done this to buses to a large degree. Not to mention the huge construction boom in subways in China this century which are also electric. I think China is a lot less sensitive to an oil shock than most countries and this will continue to improve over the next decade.

Also, the PLAAF, has had a massive expansion in the amount of 4th and 5th generation fighters. You have to remember even two decades back the intercept of that US spy plane at Hainan was done with a J-8II aircraft. I doubt the same unit today isn't equipped with a 4th generation or higher plane.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top