 |
| |
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Two points.
The Chinese do have a centralized government. They have been carefully fanning a nationalistic feeling over the last decade. Look at the orchestrated demonstrations over the accidental bombing of the Embassy in I believe it was Belgrade. They might not lose control if they played their cards correctly.
However, what happens if they start to lose control before hand? There are stong indications that is a primary concern of the Communist Party leader in Beijing. Jingoism and a war have helped distract the general population in many times and places. Who is to say the PRC government could not successfully play that card?
The United States will be hurt by any Chinese actions, but it will not be crippling. Except. The except is in the case that it starts world-wide dumping on US Dollars, and then the bad scenarios described earlier would be quite possible. Even worse, they could start a world-wide depression, something that is not as unplausible as many finance and stock types would have you believe.
The Taiwanese military (we had a thread on this last year, or early this year) could be saturated by the assets the PRC has. However, it would require the PRC to admit to it's deficiencies and commit everything at once for one big push, before US resupply could occur. We are probably looking at losses of at least 70% of Chinese naval (which is largely coastal or smaller ocean-going vessels) and aviation assets. Russian arms sales over the next several years could substantially reduce this, as they have some aircraft definitely superior to anything Taiwan has, especially if the Chinese can purchase some combat systems (as in electronics and radar) from the EU (did anybody else notice they are pushing for ending the arms embargo by the EU over Tianeman Square).
There is no way to predict the outcome in this kind of conflict. The Chinese military commanders getting cold feet in the middle of the saturation battle would lose it. Who can predict commodities, if you can I doubt you are spending time on Apolyton instead you are making millions. The conflict would as a minimum be an earthquake that would send out tsunamis drowning a lot of economic activity. At it's worst it could be another Krakatoa.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by shawnmmcc The Taiwanese military (we had a thread on this last year, or early this year) could be saturated by the assets the PRC has. However, it would require the PRC to admit to it's deficiencies and commit everything at once for one big push, before US resupply could occur. We are probably looking at losses of at least 70% of Chinese naval (which is largely coastal or smaller ocean-going vessels) and aviation assets. Russian arms sales over the next several years could substantially reduce this, as they have some aircraft definitely superior to anything Taiwan has, especially if the Chinese can purchase some combat systems (as in electronics and radar) from the EU (did anybody else notice they are pushing for ending the arms embargo by the EU over Tianeman Square).
There is no way to predict the outcome in this kind of conflict. The Chinese military commanders getting cold feet in the middle of the saturation battle would lose it. Who can predict commodities, if you can I doubt you are spending time on Apolyton instead you are making millions. The conflict would as a minimum be an earthquake that would send out tsunamis drowning a lot of economic activity. At it's worst it could be another Krakatoa. |
If the scenario specifically involves a blockade and just air and missile attacks, I wouldn't be so sure about China being able to sucessfully saturate Taiwan's defenses right now. (I thought I covered some of the issues in a previous thread, but I've summerize them here for starters.) Basicly in this scenario Taiwan doesn't have to worry about stopping a naval invasion of Taiwan immediately, so they have the luxury of hanging back and only defending against attacks that actually reach Taiwan or are going by it to the seas to Taiwan's east. Taiwan's navy can also deploy itself east of Taiwan to protect the ships from Chinese aerial attack.
China's only has so many medium range conventional missiles, and many of them have limitations when used in a tactical role. Air attacks are going to expose themselves to Taiwan's impressive air defense network which outside of possibly Israel is the densest in the world. To compound the complications, in this scenario most of the planes would base themselves on the eastern side of Taiwan, forcing the planes with a lower combat range to expose themselves to a larger number of Taiwanese SAMs as they try to reach their targets. Finally, two of Taiwan's eastern airbases are actually inside of mountains with only a small portion of the runway exposed. The interior is basicly immune to damage from any conventional weapon. While China can with some difficulty crater the runway, Taiwan has some runway repair kits which should allow them to rapidly repair the damage. Keeping these runways out of commission on a prolonged basis as required for a blockade is not likely to be possible. This means that around 200 fighters could safely operate inside these bases, including Taiwan's F-16s and Mirage 2000s. This would compromise a Chinese surface fleet east of Taiwan. A Chinese submarine blockade with be a different story, but this scenario creates a high political probability of actually rather rapid US intervention which would decisively break such a blockade.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Mordoch, when I first posted in the other thread my estimate was over 90% casualties (for PRC aircraft). I cut the numbers down since I figured someone who doesn't understand what it means to saturate that kind of defensive network would consider my guestimate extreme. The problem with that scenario is that any military commander is going to be loathe to voluntarily order that kind of bloodletting for an irreplacable asset built up laboriously over decades. It would only happen if the political leaders ordered it.
The consequences of ordering it and finding out that you are 5% short of the necessary aircraft would be catastrophic for whoever ordered it (and the generals forced to comply with that order). Thus for all the posturing, I would assume it will only be ordered if the leader feels boxed in, i.e. maybe this can be used to distract domestic unrest spiraling out of control, or I don't want to be the leader who "lost" Taiwan.
However, if the PRC gets access to European combat electronics systems and Soviet Airframes/Engines, this dynamic could be radically changed. Yes I know the integrated approach is better, i.e. standard NATO and US military aircraft, but the combination could make Taiwanese air superiority problematic. If the US lets that happen, due to pressure from the PRC, then the point at which the PRC military planners feel thatTaiwan can be conquered without unacceptable loss could become very dangerous with the wrong Taiwanese leadership. I don't think any of this is going to happen, everyone involved has too much to lose. That's also what they thought about Hitler and the Czechs after the Czechs got sold out, everybody figured Hitler wouldn't invade further because he had gotten what people thought he wanted. They hadn't read "Mein Kampf," and we aren't privy to the high level meetings of the PRC's leaders.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
You don't think the Chinese will be using missiles against SAM sites and radar facilities as the first wave of attack? |
I'm sure they will. However China still has only so many medium range missiles, and Taiwan has a very impressive number of SAM systems. Almost all of Taiwan's SAM Missiles systems are either in fortified concrete bunkers that will take a perfect hit to take out, or in mobile positions that can choose to frequently move in order to severely complicate targetting them. You also have the complicate that some of the these sytems can serve both an anti-air and anti-missile role, so the Patriot Missile batteries Taiwan already has may shoot down some of these missiles. You also have the issue that especially some of the less accurate missiles may outright simply miss their targets.
Here's some coverage of what sort of systems Taiwan has.
quote:
The Improved HAWK (I-HAWK) SAM system remains a mainstay of Taiwan's air defense. It is a medium-range, low- to medium-altitude system, designed to defend fixed and mobile assets from high speed aircraft. The standard I-HAWK site consists of a pulse acquisition radar, a continuous wave acquisition radar, a high power illuminating target tracking radar, a range-only radar, and six three-missile launchers. In 2000 the US Department of Defense announced the possible sale to Taiwan of 162 HAWK Intercept Aerial guided missiles and peripheral equipment at an estimated cost of US$106 million. Under the Missile Reliability Restoration program, Taiwan's operational inventory of HAWK missiles was also modified to HAWK Intercept Aerial guided missile specifications.
Taipei also has deployed an indigenously-produced SAM--the Tien Kung or Sky Bow-- designed to replace the recently retired NIKE-HERCULES system. The Tien Kung is a medium-to-long range system, reportedly based on early versions of the U.S. PATRIOT. The Tien Kung-I is a single-stage, solid-propellant missile. It is deployed in two configurations: as a mobile, containerized system employing a quad-box launcher similar in appearance to the M901 PATRIOT missile launcher and as a fixed, silo-launched SAM.
A follow-on variant, the Tien Kung-II, is configured as a fixed, two-stage, single-rail or silo-launched system. For target acquisition, tracking, and mid-course missile guidance requirements, the Tien Kung employs a multifunction, phased-array radar with associated fire-control computer system and a continuous wave dish antenna illuminator which are tied into the radar in order to allow multiple target engagement.
As an initial response to the emerging missile threat, Taiwan has purchased the Modified Air Defense System (MADS), an improved variant of the PATRIOT surface-to-air missile (SAM) system which was used during DESERT STORM. The MADS, which began arriving on Taiwan in 1997, is deployed around heavily populated Taipei. These batteries are mobile with the intent of surviving an attack from the mainland...
Short-range air defense coverage is provided primarily by the CHAPARRAL and the SKYGUARD systems. The CHAPARRAL consists of four modified AIM-9C SIDEWINDER missiles mounted on a tracked vehicle. The SKYGUARD is an integrated air defense system consisting of a modified AIM-7M/SPARROW AAM and a 35 mm AAA gun. Taiwan has procured the STINGER SAM system. The Dual-Mounted Stinger (DMS) missile system was delivered to Taiwan in mid-2001.
Taiwan has established an air defense early warning network which, when used in conjunction with its ground-based SAMs and fourth-generation tactical aircraft, appears to pose a credible deterrent against an air attack from the mainland. Taiwan has replaced its old SKY NET air defense network with a new network called STRONG NET to provide a comprehensive picture of the surrounding airspace.
Taiwan's Chung Shan Institute of Science and Technology (CSIST) has developed and publicly displayed a new tactical air defense which it has dubbed the ANTELOPE. According to promotional brochures, work on the ANTELOPE began in July 1995 as a direct by-product of the Tien Chien-I IR AAM. According to CSIST, the ANTELOPE consists of a target acquisition system, communication components, an operational control system, a carrier, and four 18-km maximum range Tien Chien-I missiles. It can be used to intercept low-flying helicopters, fighter aircraft, attack aircraft, and bombers and can be installed on a midsize truck or HMMWV. |
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milit...efense-over.htm
On top of all these, Taiwan has also purchased some Avenger air defense systems, which has vehicle mounted stinger missiles.
Just to give you an idea of the number of SAM systems we are talking about here, Taiwan currently has 20 I-HAWK SAM batteries. Each battery consists of 48 missiles that have a range of at least 40 kiliometers each, so they can cover along of Taiwan's territory. Their mobility allows them relatively quickly deploy to new strategic positions and severely complicate Chinese missiles attacks against them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Exactly, Shi. That's what they would do if they were planning to dump US dollars, probably just after they finished unless it was economic warfare, then just before (remove the peg).
20 x 48 equals 960. That's what I mean about saturating their defenses. The PRC can currently deploy over 2000 aircraft. It would be HIDEOUSLY expensive, and they might lose the gamble. Then again, they might not and if they didn't they might be able to pull off an invasion. Still terrible losses on that too. Look at PRC tactics in Korea. What we find acceptable has no resemblence to what the PRC would find acceptable.
That's why I used the Hitler analogy. He was driven by motivators that the old, staid "great game" politicians didn't comprehend (FDR had read Mein Kampf and did understand, interestingly enough from what I understand). The PRC is considerably more opaque, and that's the only reason I have any concern over this scenario at all. I am much more concerned over dealing with the spread of Saudi funded Wahabi madrasses than I am about this, this is only inside the realm of possibility.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Exactly what she means, it's wrong that this could be happening, even though it's true. Like when I sing a Cthulu lullaby to my little girl - "That's just wrong."
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Not at all. You don't have to destroy an entire SAM system to disable it - all you need to do is to take out its radar. They can keep the radar off, sure, but then the systems would be useless.
The Patriot system was only tested against the Scud, which is a modified version of the Soviet's SS-1. I doubt it has any effect on modern SS or AS missiles.
Blimey, that's 20 radars to take out. So a few anti-radiation missiles go a long way. |
You're somehow assuming that the system can't use radar data from other Taiwanese systems.
At a minimum, many of these radar systems can turn themselves off and only go back on once other radar lets them know that enemy planes are now in range.
Its definately not just Scuds for Patriot Missiles.
quote:
Patriot Advanced Capability-2 (PAC-2) is a surface-to-air guided missile defense system designed to detect, target, and destroy incoming ballistic missiles flying three to five times the speed of sound. PAC-2 was first deployed by the U.S. during the 1991 Persian Gulf War and successfully shot down Iraqi Scud missiles. In doing so, it became the first anti-missile system to eliminate hostile warheads in combat.
The original Patriot Air Defense Missile System, dating back to the 1970s, was designed to shoot down enemy aircraft. During the mid-1980s, however, the U.S. Army decided to expand Patriot to deal with the growing threat of tactical ballistic missiles, in particular the Soviet SS-21A (Scarab A, OTR-21, Tochka), SS-21B (Scarab B, OTR-21, Tochka-U), and SS-23 (Spider, OTR-23, Oka). Initial modifications to the system were dubbed Patriot Anti-tactical Missile Capability-1 (PAC-1) and involved software, radar, and missile trajectory upgrades.
The second expansion phase, known as Patriot Advanced Capability-2 (PAC-2), occurred between 1986 and 1988. It included a superior interceptor missile as well as upgrades to its software and guidance algorithms. The enhanced PAC-2 system had the ability to shoot down longer range ballistic missiles. In particular, it was capable of destroying the hardened metal shell that surrounded most enemy warheads. |
http://www.missilethreat.com/system..._pac-2_usa.html
Here's an example of successful testing against a more advanced adversary.
quote:
September 86 PATRIOT's inherent antitactical missile (ATM) capability was demonstrated with an off-the-shelf standard production missile. Accomplished by ground equipment software changes only, PATRIOT intercepted a LANCE missile simulating an SS-21 and deflected it from its objective. |
http://www.redstone.army.mil/histor...ms/PATRIOT.html
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaShi
|
 |
The Taste of Japan
Sep 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Why would the PRC want to blockade Taiwan? It serves no purpose at all. I don't see they are looking at seige warfare. |
So China will just bomb them into submission. What if the Taiwainese refuse to surrender? Will they just kill everyone on the island? Is the rest of the world just going to sit back and watch?
I've said before: If Taiwain declares independence, China loses. The status quo is beneficial for everyone. Taiwan is only a problem for China because China makes it one. On that note:
quote:
The creation of an anti-secession law is based on "doing the utmost for a scenario of peaceful reunification," Foreign Ministry spokesperson Liu Jianchao said on Tuesday.
It "aims to curb separatist activities, which is favorable for maintaining the peace, stability and prosperity of the Taiwan Straits and the Asia-Pacific region as well," Liu told a regular news briefing.
The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) will deliberate on a draft of the law at their coming session between December 25 and 29 in Beijing.
Many lawmakers and senior government advisers have said over the past year that a law on national reunification should be promulgated as soon as possible.
"The legislature is expressing the common will of the Chinese people by making the law, that is peaceful reunification and 'one country, two systems'," said Liu.
Responding to reports that some US State Department officials have alleged that the proposed anti-secession code is a threat to regional peace, Liu said the comment indicates ignorance of China's stance on the question.
He urged the US to abide by its one-China commitment, and to support and understand the legislative actions of the NPC instead of sending wrong signals to forces for "Taiwan independence."
Liu reiterated opposition to any military ties between the US and Taiwan. Jane's Defense Weekly said that over the next year the US will assign military officers to its liaison agency in Taiwan for the first time in 25 years.
"The US developing military relations with Taiwan, for any reason and by any means, is against the principles of the three Sino-US joint communiqués," Liu said. "It will encourage separatist moves by 'Taiwan independence' forces, and harm peace across the Taiwan Straits as well as Sino-US ties."
Taiwan's authorities are currently trying to clinch an US$18 billion US weapons deal. |
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-12-2004 05:33
|