Taiwan's Reaction to PLA Force Modernization

Vlad Plasmius said:

I think it would be a more worth-wile purchase than more F-16s regardless.

Click to expand...

The thing with the F-16s is that they're needed to fill the gaps left by the F-5 dropping out of service. Also there's the problem that it's impossible to say when the F-35 would be made available for Taiwan.

The problem with harriers is that they're no longer in production and there may not even be the parts for them after they leave service with the UK and US.

would free up money for more missiles, which is badly needed.

Click to expand...

Taiwan seems to be buying AIM-120s in batches, as can be seen by the recent order placed with the US. The F-16 deal also comes with a number.

What Taiwan need to counter mainland strike, IMHO, are

1. a tremendous amount of mobile launched land based AShW missiles
2. Mobile C3I systems, in large amount as well
3. smart mines, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaany of them
4. mobile engineering equipments

They have the ability to develop and mass produce these, this is very important.

FuManChu said:

I'm not sure where it says in your reply that because the Mirages have a low availability it means the PLAAF will achieve air superiority. However, more importantly, any current problems in numbers appear to be temporary from the said article I came across. So unless China's going to be off to invade Taiwan before the year is out, Mirage availability isn't that much of an issue.

Click to expand...

Umm...PRC has way more missles then the ROC, and its defence system is more advance and capable then the ROC. Once again PLA enjoys a bigger military budget and tends to go more indigenous, ROC has smaller budget and most of its equipment are purchased.

Yes it is a problem if less Mirage are available as it is one of the most capable fighters in the ROCAF. And an of course anyone would know that the PRC wouldnt strike the ROC, cause of the 2008 olympics and growing reputation. They aren't stupid. As far as SAM's go they number ROC have arent that huge, the PLAAF would send UCAV as decoys then the J-7/8 and then the elite units, or etc. Something like that. But the PLAAF wouldn't hastly send its elites units.

Also the PLAAF would strike first so it would first destroy most landing strips and airbases before striking. So this will disable a large amount of ROCAF air assets.

F-35B no way will the PRC hold to kindly in letting the ROC acquire these since it isn't an defensive aircraft it has pure offensive capabilities. Harriers maybe the most viable. Since the US rejected the sales of F-15 due to PRC strong objection.

PRC will beat the ROC in one on one. But the only issue that PRC wouldnt rush into battle is the issue of US involvement.

Skywatcher said:

Wouldn't the tankers draw off some ROCAF fighters for escort duty if the SAM network gets too degraded/depleted by continued SSM saturation?

The Harriers seem to be getting a bit long in the tooth. And I'm not sure of their desirability for anything other than interdiction of amphibious PLA forces (A Harrier fighting with a J-10 sounds rather one sided), which could be done with MRLS or attack helicopters.

Click to expand...

Harrier is a big big mistake.

It is a logistical and a maintenance hog.

It has a very high attrition rate---at least 45 Marine aviators have died on it and many more maimed from it.

It has poor flight performance. For a plane with an enormous thrust to weight ratio (every big as good as an F-16), it cannot hit supersonic in a straight line.

It cannot VTOL with a significant load. Thus it still uses a runaway like everyone else.

VTOLing tends to cook the pavement, making tha section of the asphalt, unusable. Harriers would wreak havoc on highways.

Its enormous front intakes means BIG RCS for an early detection by the enemy followed by incoming radar missile.

The use of thrusters in the middle of body reduces its survivability against infrared missiles, since it puts the heat source right in the body center, as opposed to behind the aircraft.

It requires significant training to master. Your pilots need to master helicopter flying skills too. On VTOL mode, the jet is more dangerous and difficiult to handle than a helo.

If the ROCAF wants to help the PLAAF defeat itself faster, by all means, get Harriers.

szbd said:

What Taiwan need to counter mainland strike, IMHO, are

1. a tremendous amount of mobile launched land based AShW missiles
2. Mobile C3I systems, in large amount as well
3. smart mines, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaany of them
4. mobile engineering equipments

They have the ability to develop and mass produce these, this is very important.

Click to expand...

Good points, probably. My shortlist would be like this:


1. A large number of anti-ship missiles, as you mentioned.
2. An integrated air defense network of minimum 1,500 missiles (TK-2 and other missiles)
3. A large fuel reserve, sufficient for 90 day's use
4. C4ISRT and communications....you can never have too many of this

Chengdu J-10 said:

Also the PLAAF would strike first so it would first destroy most landing strips and airbases before striking. So this will disable a large amount of ROCAF air assets.

Click to expand...

Taiwan has two large underground mountain bases on its east coast that cannot be hit by ballistic missiles (due to the steep angle of the surrounding mountains.) They can hold up to 250 fighter jets.

Clouded Leopard said:

Taiwan has two large underground mountain bases on its east coast that cannot be hit by ballistic missiles (due to the steep angle of the surrounding mountains.) They can hold up to 250 fighter jets.

Click to expand...

The jets may be protected, but the runways and taxiways will surely be targeted. Even preventing the aircraft from operating for 48 hours will throw the balance massively in the PLAAFs favour. By the time a base could be restored the air war maybe as good as lost.

f.hind said:

The jets may be protected, but the runways and taxiways will surely be targeted. Even preventing the aircraft from operating for 48 hours will throw the balance massively in the PLAAFs favour. By the time a base could be restored the air war maybe as good as lost.

Click to expand...

The best scenario for them is that the airplanes can take off from the cave but can't land. To take off you probably don't need much of runway outside the bunker, but you need that for landing.

Back a few years ago Taiwan negotiated with Japan and Philipine to see if they can transfer some of their airforce to their base in war, but that will be the one-way trip at the best for the birds.

crobato said:

Harrier is a big big mistake.
[...]
If the ROCAF wants to help the PLAAF defeat itself faster, by all means, get Harriers.

Click to expand...

While I see the relevance in several of your points, I also think some are not as important as you make them.
I think one reason to get Harriers would be to dislocate them form bases or even Highways. Just put them into a forrest or a mountain vallay. There they would only cook some earth.
Wich then leads to payload. I think for the role they could play in such a scenario, they don't need to be heavy loaded. Four to six AMRAAMS and perhaps even a half internal fuel load. If a PLAAF airraid is in progress, just pop out of the forrest or vallay, accelerate a bit and launch the missiles into the formations flank. Then immediatly hide again.

That's not a promissing tactic on itself to defend youself. But I think it could significantly jam PLAAF's mission flow and progress. It could decrease efficiency of raids and detach PLAAF fighters to search them instead of killing other assets. What in the end just might be enough to hold the island until strong reinforcements arrive. (If someone decides to help at all)
It would also require good situational awareness, and good tactics.
The Harriers design is suited for that kind of use I think, what then in turn denies high speeds, but wich are not really important here, IMO.

However, with the constraints the ROCAF faces and the difficulties that nonetheless come with the Harriers, probably it wouldn't be a big loss not to have them either.

Scratch, the Harrier apparently does not have good availability at the moment with the USMC. Given availability of spare parts would just get worse when it is taken out of active service, even if they were leased to Taiwan, I can't see them as a good investment.