Taiwan, China & America

SMAWs and LAWs/AT4s are practically worthless today against MBTs. Its (*)(*)(*)(*) hard for Infantry to go toe to toe with tanks without prepared defensive positions or proper terrain. Besides all the fancy air/arty support (which Chinese forces would be seriously lacking in) all straight leg units really have are TOWs (have to be vehicle mounted in the assault) and Javelins. In the type of high kinetic ground/air/naval enviornment such an invasion would take place in, I wouldn't like to be a Chinese Infantryman landing on beaches that had armored units waiting behind them.

Also, in all fairness, each Division also has an LAR BN attached to it. While these aren't tanks, they can certainly pack a big punch and are just faster, more lightly armored versions that fill the Bradley's role....with a bit more emphasis on reconissance. With their AT and mortar variants they have a hell of a lot more firepower than victor units. Each MEU also includes a platoon of LAVs.

 

Taiwan's main tanks are M48 variants and M60, both are basically Korea-Vietnam era tanks, they've made modifications mostly to the the rangefinding mechnisms and onboard electronics. but the basic armours / engines are the same, which is the most worrisome aspect, afterall, if a Tank can't be driven properly and can't withstand any sort of anti-armour fire, what's the point of it? (and because the engines are so freaken old there's very legimitate concerns of it's reliability in war times)

The newly developing Armoured Vehicle in Taiwan is the CM-32, though that's more or less a buffed up APC and not a real tank, though being light / wheeled and self produced it has a much high chance of being reliable and functioning.

If the PRC somehow gets their MBT onto the island we'rd screwed, it's at least one whole generation better than ours and presumablly better maintained, of course that is very unlikely in most logical assumptions.

 

No, they are not effective against real modern tanks. But a large percentage of the world still uses MBTs right out of the 1960's and before that they are effective against.

Heck, the primary tank in North Korea is still the Type 55 and Type 59 tanks that they had during the Korean War for goodness sakes! And even the venerable LAW was able to penetrate the armour on that antique.

But even against a modern foe, those lighter weapons would do the job it was designed for, chewing up the APCs. And also getting lucky track hits, and keeping the drivers and gunners to nervous to stay in one place for very long.

 

I would presume that America has advanced technology such as the Stuxnet by Israel, which has improved immensely, or even better.

 

if prc allow US navy near the cross strait its already over. in order to keep/delay US navy away from taiwan strait, they build alot anti-access weapon.
if a conflict start suddenly, its unlikely US will have CVBG sail to right away. this give PRC time to attack taiwan.
if PRC has air superioity and establish a foothold on taiwan, it will be very tough for taiwan. the conflict could be over within few weeks, depends how taiwan can hold on before US arrive. if this war start 10-20yrs from now, its gonna be even tougher for both taiwan and US.

PRC has the ability to keep logistic and supply intact for taiwan because the shorter distance between the two.


on another note. PRC currently have several type of MLRS has range upto 200-300km, this with other attack platform could devastated taiwan airforce.

http://www.military-today.com/artillery/a100.htm
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/ws2.htm
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/mrl/phl03.asp
http://www.9abc.net/index.php/archives/13912

 

The US has counters for anything they could deploy.

The PRC does not have significant air power for that. While they might technically have a larger airforce, it is not larger enough to take Taiwan without a fight. It would not be as quick and easy as you seem to believe.

LOL, in a few weeks the area will be crawling with USN and US aircraft. A few weeks is way too long.

You have no way of predicting what will happen in 20 years. The US is hardly standing still. Technology advances constantly. There is no reason at all to believe that the situation will not be similar to what it is today.

Thats the downside of relying on other nations to develop your technology for you...it makes you dependent on them. China will never be cutting edge in anything as long as it is relying to buying or stealing to get it's technology. They will always be playing catch up.

 

the problem is most, if not all chinese division are already station near taiwan in SW chinese province. this give them very short time to moblize and invade. its not like taiwan is 500miles away.

 

copy/steal use less resource/time compare to re-invent the wheel. after WWII US acquire many german tech and scentist to develope US rocket technology. without them US could potentially lag behind soviet rocket development. if someone has technology that US don't have, i gurantee we will do anything we can to acquire that technology.

 

The M60A3s that Taiwan has were updated in the late 70s. They're by no means cutting edge, but they can still get the job done, especially against Infantry.

It's an amphbious invasion, China won't be able to bring any kind of significant number of tanks onto the shore as Mushroom and I were saying. It won't be Kursk 2.0.

 

Except that the U.S. had been doing some pretty cutting edge rocket work of their own. In fact, some of the German designs were based on earlier American work. Certainly Germany was more advanced at the time, but the U.S. definitely had the Scientific infrastructure and capabilites to develop their own stuff. They didn't have to buy all their top tier equipment from Russia and try to reverse engineer it.

 

i know my point is, if one country want to acquire latest technology as fast as possible, given the opportunity they won't spend the extra resource to develope existing technology when they can just buy/copy it. its faster and use less resource. china is not the first country that steal/copy technology from others, it won't be the last.

 

quick link on PRC AMP ability. judge the the numbers they can field least 2 division.

http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/amphib.htm

http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/index.htm

 

Just a mental exercise- did any of you read Tom Clancy's novel that included an invasion of Saipan? In that case, there was a surprise attack, with the armor delivered by Ro-Ro ships.

Just assuming- the best I could see China doing is trying a similar attack, using perhaps a pair of Ro-Ro vessels disguised as car or heavy equipment carrying civilian ships- securing one or two ports as a beachhead. With armor on the ground- Taiwan would be in trouble- for a while.

But as others pointed out before- the straits would quickly get shut down. And landing armor in a heavily urban area puts them in the worst possible terrain versus infantry.

This is just a thought exercise. I don't think China will ever militarily invade Taiwan- it runs counter to their whole campaign around the world to legitimize their government, and establish economic superiority. An attack on Taiwan would threaten their entire economy, as imports and exports with China would halt almost immediately. Even steamship lines who had no interest in the issue would immediately divert vessels for fear of being sunk or detained.

 

I am not sure where you got the idea that diesel subs are magic...their quietness does not make them immune to active sonar. They can still be targeted and destroyed.

The PRC has no stealth aircraft, which means they will be vulnerable to ground anti-air defenses.

US planes can be there in less than a day.

Thats only because the PRC's technology is so crappy to start with.

That is assuming they maintain advancement at the same rate indefinitely, which is highly unlikely.

...and means you will always be playing catch up to your enemies. They will always have better hardware than you.

The US invests TONS of money into military R&D. More than any other nation by an order of magnitude. We rarely buy or steal technology...mostly because we develop it first. So buying or stealing it isnt even an option.

The best rocket engines are no longer German.

This.

 

yes US invest tons into R&D, however it doesn't mean someone will never catch up. if we look at higher education in US today, only 5% enroll in engineer. goto any university's grad school you notice most engineer grads are chinese or indians. even alot engineering professor are asian. to keep the lead, US need to keep the research $$$ and acquire alot talent scientist and engineer. however, most american kids these days rather not goto engineering school. on the other hand asia countries tend to be academic driven. its long term process but will pay off eventually.

 

The fact that so many Asian and Indian students leave their own countries to study in America is very telling. Many of these students try and stay in the U.S. Also, 5% as engineers is a very nice chunk. Finally, while engineering is quite important, there are many other fields that contribute significantly to innovation. The U.S. financial system does a hell of a lot to push innovation. VCs and Corporate investors have had a tremendous impact on the U.S. leading the world in technological innovation.

 

That was Debt Of Honor. And yes, I remember it very well. But you have to remember one very key componant for that to have worked.

The invasion would have to be entirely by surprise. The would have to be absolutely no warning at all of an invasion even happening until it had already started.

Also, Saipain is nothing like Taiwan. Saipan is less then 45 square miles, Taiwan is almost 14,000 square miles. One is a Commonwealth of the United States, the other is an Independent Nation. One has almost no military presence at all, the other has a large military. One has a population of 48,000, the other a population of over 23 million.

Nope, would not happen. Because it would not take a single Ro-Ro, but a fleet of them. And the mobalization of these and their organized departure would set off every red flag in the US and Taiwan intelligence communities.

Ro-Ro's could not make any kind of an attack. These ships are not designed for military actions, and would be sitting ducks to any kind of counter offense.

You would get a few vehicles off the first one, maybe. After that they all sit at the bottom of the harbor.

China would immediately find itself shunned by almost every nation, and also economic sanctions from groups such as ASAN, WTO, UN, and others. This would truely wreck their economy, as every nation that has built factories there pull out.

 

Just a thought exercise like I said- assuming a car carrier or large Ro-Ro could carry between 200-300 MBT, and again assuming surprise sufficient to the point of the vessel being docked at a facility with a ramp, depending on the response time of the Taiwanese, they might be able to get two vessels at two different ports unloaded. I could easily see two hours of confusion before Taiwanese command realized exactly what was happening and authorizing strikes inside their own ports. Even if they were sunk at their moorings they might be able to continue to offload.


Mind you- this is about best case scenario- and the only way I could see China getting any armor onto Taiwan. And without armor the invasion would fail.

I really don't see how China could pull it off without tremendous losses- and even then it would be iffy. And why would China attempt any such invasion, especially if they thought there was a very good chance of failure?

 

I'd be utterly amazed if they could fit an entire armored regiment with all their equipment and personnel on one ship......it'd also probably take a day to unload it all.

 

you need engineer/scientist for scientific innovation & $$resource . alot asian and indian leave US afterward, some do stay, but most of them do not work in defense industry. 5% is very little compare to other countries such as japan, singpore, china etc. even less american enroll in advance degree such as PHD. the fact almost all engineering school in US are fill with asian and indian are worrying.

 

see post #137.

 

talked with someone who have some inside knowledge on these issues, some points of interest.

A. from what our intelligence are aware of, the vast majority of DF-11s are stationed well outside of range of hitting Taiwan.

B. the DF missiles, while mobile, perform much better when fired from fixed bases, if they simply move to random ponits and fire their accuarcy would be greatly comprimised.

C. We know of test the PLA conducted where volley missiles carried with them a missile on the front that is loaded with chafts instead of warheads, Mushroom, the Patriot's not a heat seeking missile right? so wouldn't massive chafts significantly comprimise their accuarcy?

D. purely from a counter patriot POV, the PLA could simply utilize MLRS systems to overwhelm them, assuming that they have control of most of the Taiwan strait anyway.


E. my relative, a defense researcher in Taiwan, talked of the potential in the future of developing ramjet artillery rounds, which could theoretically be the ultimate solution against any non-ICBM missile (or airplanes). since they are in theory able to break the current limit on artillery round's range and velocity by several times over, making them fast enough and far hitting enough to have a very realistic change of hitting even ballistic missiles, and also cheap enough to simply reivive the ole fashion mass 50mm guns anti-air strategy. What do you think of the viability? I took a look at some of the papers and it seem to be realistic enough in theory at least, and technically doesn't look THAT unachievable. (he says there are rumor that the Swedes already have them.)

 

True. Mobile is only really sueable on a battlefield, where the distances are very short. Ot when you are shooting at a target where pin-point accuracy is not important.

The fixed operational areas are all outide of the arc that would incorporate Taiwan. Accuracy would be degraded. So hitting a city would not be an issue, but hitting a runway on an air base would be.

I assume you mean Chaff. And that has limited effect on the PATRIOT system.

PATRIOT is not a heat seeking system. And chaff warheads would be totally worthless. PATRIOT is designed to work with a Phased Array Radar system, whichi is pretty good at ignoring chaff. Chaff is highly effective at defeating active radar reactive warheads, but much less so on warheads which operate by remote guidence.

And since the standard procedure is to shoot 2 missiles at each target, that is significantly reduced anyways. After all, if you are going to launch a ballistic missile, why launch one full of questionable chaff? Just shoot a second one with a warhead.

Nope. Because MLRS systems are of a very short range. Normally within 20 miles or less.

If China set up a thousand MLRS launchers along their coast, that will only result in tens of thousands of rockets landing in the water. Either that, or all over the landscape like a shotgun.

For while an MLRS rocket can reach distances up to 400 miles, their accuracy is greatly reduced if used beyond around 40 miles.

OK, you are mixing up things that are totally different here.

Artillery is an indirect fire weapon, which is launched from a cannon, and once leaving the tube has no means of movement.

Ramjet is a technology for missiles. You are trying to combine a missile with artillery, and that just does not work.

And an interceptor weapon does not rely on being fast. In fact, to fast is a detriment in an ABM system. What you need is accuracy, and an entire system that can predict exactly where the target and interceptor are, so they can plot where they will collide.

And there are only 2 types of missiles. Ballistic, and flat trajectory. Ballistic means it follows a Ballistic trajectory, that is a high arc. These are launched, burn their propellant within a short amount of time, then coast the rest of the way up and then fall back to hit their target. This covers almost all missiles from the V-2 and SCUD to the Minuteman and most others.

The other is the flat-trajectory. In other words, it flys like an airplane. V-1, Tomahawk, and all other cruise missiles use this system. Most of them are in the business refered to ABT threats (Air Breathing Target). And ABT refers to everything from a conventional airplane or helicopter, to 98% of cruise missiles.

And the issue with any interception is simply getting the weaponn to hit the target. Both the CIWS and PATRIOT work in the same way. So yes, you could get a traditional 50mm gun to do it. That is basically the idea behind SHORAD.

But do you really want to wait until the last minute to try an intercept? Because you are talking about attempting interception seconds before impact. That gives you absolutely no room for error. And you would have to have those instillations everywhere, to give enough coverage. Because a 50mm round (not that there is such a thing in the first place) would have a very short range. So you would need these things everywhare to give any kind of protection.

And they could only engage one incomming target at a time (how many places can a gun shoot at once?). While a missile system like PATRIOT can engage hundreds of targets at the same time.

You could even have an entire PATRIOT battery fire one missile at each target at the same time (that is a minimum of 56 missiles), and the system could guide each individual missile to a different target. You can't do that with conventional guns.

 

china currently operate several 100km+ to 200km+ MLRS.
these weapon has decent accuracy, cheaper to make, and lunch. china can potentially lunch thousands of these at taiwan(mix with SRBM, MRBM to confuse PAC3 radar system). not sure these can be intercept by PAC3, even if it can, taiwan will run out of patriot missile sooner than chinese MLRS. china can use their ballistic missile/cruise missile to attack taiwan after taiwan use up all their patriot missiles


http://www.military-today.com/artillery/a100.htm
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/ws2.htm
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/mrl/phl03.asp
http://www.9abc.net/index.php/archives/13912

for leveling airfield, larege area, buildings etc these are prefect weapon vs SRBM.