The need and will of improving HR record must come from chinese population themselves. We cannot go and think say what they should feel bad and what not. No regime can be fundamentally stronger than the people, and if Chinese people are fed up with their govrenment, they are the sole ones that has the rigth to uppset it.

So we others shouldn’t do anything, if we want to be honest and non hegemonical. If we want to have chinese people in our own leach, then there are plenty of ways we can do it, but personally I believe that it wont be anyway better situation for Chinese than the current regime would be.

Taiwan Straigths are wide and even if we are speaking of crossing that distance the time spend in sea comes significant. But we are talking about constant prensence that naval units needs to do during Amphibious operation. The PLAN forces needs to have total sea controll in the area where they are trasferring their amphibious fleet and to maintain that, You cannot lurk behind Island and suddenly dash against something you see on radar and then return into port, and be able to do the same only when you are refilled again, leaving too wide windov of opportunity to enemy naval units to attack the landing fleet.

Endurance comes to play in when you need to remain in the sea for prolonged periods. If you are expecting it to keep up with the amphibious operation, You need to have it on the water as long as the rest of the units of the surface support fleet, not returning constantly back to shore for resupplying.
By that you allow your enemy to take advantage of such huge defiency.
Thats why bigger surface combatants are lot more handy in the work as they can stay in the sea for prolonged periods and keep constant pressure against ROCN forces.

Type022 with its limited single purpose weaponry can only do single task in there, and there isen’t anything that makes it delivering it better than FFG or DDG. The advantages of FAC comes when operated in near shore line, near minefields and other areas where the enemy mobility is hampered thus allowing the FACs hit and hide. In open waters that feature is rather useless. In coastal areas the defiencies in Type022 storages are inrelevant as the ships launch their attack from their support area and hide quickly back into it.

The sea keeping of Type022 is usually misinterupted to mean good open ocean boat. Sea keeping comes to question even in calmest water, its all to do how such tiny vessel remains stable weapon platform at the same time travelling in fast speed. Thus the catamaran desing wich allows high speed to be maintained even in bit rougher seas, but also to keep the vessel stable missile platform in higher speeds than monohull FACs would do.

In rougher seas, if you want stable catamaran that could still do high speed, you would need SWATH desing, which by all means Type022 isent.

The sea keeping for open seas is not only how the boat rolls in the waves, its about how much the vessel carries stores and how big crew it has for operation sfits. As PLAN chosed Catamaran desing they deliberatly sacrificed lot of monohulls capacity to store the heavy bungerage bellow water, but in catamarans that capacity is more limited, as the two hull blocks are mented to skim rather near the surface eq shallower draugth….good feature BTW in shallow coastal regions, another strong feature for coastal defence platform.

As For plawolf, Same thing applies. We seem to agree what the Type022 is allbout, but yet the word coastal defence seems to raise hairs in your back.
Keep in mind that as part of Coastal defence, FACs operates by attacking and with offensive nature, Im not stating that they would sit in some defended bastion and wait something to come to missile range.

So not going to repeat all over again my arguments and then see you reply by explaining how exactly the coastal defence that Im advocating here works;)

As for PLANs current strength, the force of modern FFGs and DDGs is good for training and in limited conflicts but in all out war, even against ROCN it would have hard time, and noway can assure seacontroll easily. And all ways of PLAN modernisation indicates that they arent going on for mass-producing this generation of major combatants, but build them in odd numbers, train and evaluate and incorporate those learnings into the next generation that will propaply form the first base of the “Grand PLAN”.

So then we go to Taiwan…

And who says the navy can only land an single Armoured division with no support troops? Just because the navy only owns so many landing craft does not mean that that is all the ships it can use. It is a well documented fact that the PLA has detailed plans to requisition civilian shipping to transport men and material across the strait if it is deemed necessary.

Yeas, but you cannot use civilian ships in beaching operations, which at the moment is the sole offensive amphibious method that China posses. Also if you wish to use civilian transport ships, you need to have well esthabilised bridgehead, and a proper harbour in your total controll in order to unload the troops and equipments.
They come handy when the intial phase has succeed, but the overal operation is determed how the intial landing phase is conducted, and in that PLA hits its most defencies.

After a beachhead has been established, all you need are ships that can cross 200 miles of water to transport men and materials. You don’t need to be able to do everything with LCACs and LDPs you know. Taiwan is on China’s doorstep after all.

Yeas but before that you need to have the bridge head esthabilisied. And with less that full strenght divisions you cannot succesfully attain it. The division isent just bunch of men and tanks in the foremost battalions, its the echelon and umbrella of under which the manouvring battalions operate.

Besides, with the quality difference in tanks, a division of PLA Type 99Gs might just be able to take on the entire ROC’s armoured forces and win, especially if the ROCA response is fragmented by bombing of transportation nodes and the tanks are backup up by air support. Even then that is a meaningless restriction as it is definately beyound the ability of the ROCA to destroy an entire PLA armoured division within a day. If they cannot kill the division, then the next division to land the day after will only make the invasion force stronger and so on.

Thats just fanboyism:rolleyes: Land war is not about tanks, its about logistics and artillery. Tanks belong into same category as infantry, eq the units that manouvres. Thougth they get usually all the credit and glory, it is the artillery, eq the organic firesupport that I allready mentioned that destroys the enemy and it is the support and logistics that in first place allows the manouvring units to…well manouvre.

And what makes you think the PLA lacks any of that? Please don’t tell me you expect the PLA to only land tanks one day, and only troops the next, and then only the artillary the day after that, all the while not being able to call down its own fighters to give them air support…:rolleyes

:

Offcourse Im not saying that PLA would land only tanks;) That was an example of what the capacity of PLAN has to give you idea of how small units PLA can deliver at one time.

They are ideal for clearning a beach before your troops hit it. And precision strike can be handled by fighters dropping LGBs and other smart bombs with dedicated shore bombardment ships providing indirect fire support until the troops can land artillary and set them up.

Nope. The air support has its own place, but it can never replace the organic fire support of battalions or divisions. Thats why USMC artillery are all heliborne and its divisions have organic air units with Combat helicopters to achive the fire support in the crucial intial phase. But USMC is the sole organisation in the world that can bring reasonable forces into shore, that would have even local change for predominance in the seccond phase….

In PLAs case it can bring only fraction of operational echelon into shore at one time, and this by using all of its assets, which leads into prolonged period for reinforcments to come. Modern combat is fougth in minutes and hours, a day long intervals for even getting seccond battalion to shore is simply too much.
You cannot attack without superior forces.

Hell, the PLA has enough self propelled howitzers and MLRS that can easily drive off a landing ship and start laying down artillary fire then and there. What more, they are very mobile and can keep up with an armoured spearhead to quickly break out and extend a beachhead.

And before you start, you can be sure that the PLA is no stranger to the potential of artillary. The PLA’s artillary caused the greatest losses on Vietnamese troops during the sino-veitnam boarder war, and the PLA also suffer the greatest loss to vietnamese artillary. They know how artillary works and how to counter it.

I’m not saying that it isen’t (tough that majority of PLA artillery is desperetly outdated) but that they cannot bring the needed ammount of them in reasonable time to the shores to make any difference in the battle.

That is a totally baseless claim and is clearly wrong, since we have seen pictures of PLA artillary spotting radars brochures that can give instant co-ordinates for counter barrage fire against incoming artillary fire. It doesn’t take a lot to pass those co-ordiates to a nearby fighter or warship to bombard that area.

Yeas, china has counter-battery radars. But in order to achive my mentioned you need to have digitalized computerised firecontrol onboard your guns that is linked to the battery’s commandpost and up to the battalion command posts. PLA has no artillerysystems in service (PZL05 might have it, but its only introduced, not in full service yet) that fields such capability.

You forget that artillary batteries are large and have relatively poor mobility. I would not be suprised if most of Taiwan’s artillary was taken out by air strikes and SF units before the invasion fleet even left port.

I never forget what artillery batteries are like:D :D, remember that I’ve actually served in one. But I hardly consider them being large and relatively poor mobility. Even the most acient towed howitsers that ROCA might have are quite mobile and more importantly, easy to camoflage and hide from enemy airforces. Even dump non APU-fitted towed artillery batteries can deploy and redeploy from fire positions in mere minutes. Artillery doesen’t work in staying all the time in one open fire positions, the batteries even inside the battalion constantly moves and manuvres and changes the fire postions. And you can bet your ass that ROCA has surveyed all the possiple fire postions and routes to them million time.

Like I said before, China has been watching and planning an invasion for decades. It likely knows the exact whereabouts of all of Taiwan’s major military units like tanks and artillary units at all times, and even if they did loose track of some, Taiwan is a small place. It will not be that hard to find them again. Lack of strategic depth is a real killer.

And ROCA knows this and knows all the possiple locations where PLA can physically land…Taiwan isen’t that small, and it troops can move and camoflage. You should rememeber Serbia in 1999 when NATO military migth managed to destroy only small fraction of actual yugoslavian army and never make it loose its figthing ability if land war would have emerged.
And that was air power with lot better and numerous AWACS and ground controll aircrafts that PLAAF has.

I think you are just about the only person left who actually thinks that artillary is king. Everyone else believes that air power is key to victory, and no amount of artillary is going to save you from defeat if your opponent has control of the skies.

Air power is the key in strategical level. When it comes to unit vs. unit figthing in tactical level, Artillery triumphs as it is mented for completely different thing. Artillery has never been charge of destoying rear area enemy installations or attack enemy unit collons or wage attacks against enemy’s strategical installations.
Artillery is the one that gives company commander direct fire response in mere secconds if he ask it to be delivered into certain location. Its completely different from air forces field responsibility, even from CAS and attack helicopters field of operations.
If you lack the ability to understand how land war functions and what role each of its elements have, thats your proplem.

Even if the ROCA artillary does keep firing somehow, the massive difference in quality of the tanks and men, its hard to see how the ROCA is going to keep the PLA bottle up long enough for the artillary to make such of a difference. Unless the ROCA can somehow blunt the armoured charge, the PLA can push the front line far enough back to be outside of artillary range within hours of the first landings by heading for the artillary themselves

.

The artillery comes at play in those three or five days what takes PLAN to bring sizeble land units onshore that can realisticly engage ROCA field units and win the land battle. With constant artillery hammering packed with ROCAF own CAS fligths exhaust those frictions that PLAN can land at one time into extinsions, so PLA will lose the change to fullfill its units into workable echelons.

Follow on troops can do the mopping up, and air strikes against transport nodes and supply depotes would likely mean that the ROC’s artillary will be facing major supply problems even if they avoid destruction.

Offcourse. PLAAF would have huge task to conduct all that it can in the scenario as it comes the sole branch that has the ability to do so. Thats why I said In my orginal response that PLAAF isent sufficent in size to conduct it yet.
Those duration times required to smash both the ROCAF, ROCN, strategical targets, suply depots, suply lines…not to mention the actual figthing units are just too huge for the current fleet.

Basically, as soon as the PLA get ashore in numbers, the game is up. Everyone knows this and that is why Taiwan is not even bothering to buy new tanks for its army. I trust their findings more to be honest.

Yeas…. But currently PLA lacks the means to even get there with troops that would have changes against the ROCA. Once it has created formidable marine arm with ships and airpower face to match the requirments that the Taiwanese invasion impose to it, Then the game actually just starts. Only Then the situation will be determed, which is better PLA or ROCAs land units…

Population controll would be one thing, but In reality, all western and prosperious nations population is srhinking….So if we want to solve the proplem in that way, it would be like saying,
“We can have all the luxury, but as for the third world…sorry guys, there’s nothing to spare”
Even if we bypass the unquality issue of that, we still have to face the anger and fustration issue it generates.

And generetic “engineered” people, sort of super-race raises as much my back hair as it does for you.

Defence modernisation is not just about doing everything someone else has done, its about what is needed and what the long-term goals are.

The PLAN’s long-term goal is to become a credible world class blue water navy with global reach and power projection capabilities. Its more immediate goal is to move from a brown water force to a green water one. A purely coastal defence platform would be a major step backwards when the PLAN is trying to move away from coastal defence.

Have I stated otherwise? Did you read what I wrote? Well, A quick regap
PLAN has huge and stiff organisation structured around its old coastal defence emphasiss. Now You and I agree that Blue water is the way to go, but you cannot go Blue water whit brown water navy. And you simply cannot re-adapt those organisations into Blue water use or atleast PLAN hasen’t not went on that path.
Instead it has begun to forming completely new strategies and echelons for its Blue water units, and so the coastal defence organisation remains.

Now, that Blue water capacity is still a goal, a thing of future, and there are current defence concerns needing to be delt. A Navy cannot be only evolping center for new strategies or visionary board for future. It has to live in the moment too. And thats why PLAN has retained its Coastal defence force, but at the same time knowing it would soon come useless….soon, but not yet. Therefore there is absolutely no need of going on for lengthy transformation of that obsolete structure into a modern coastal defence fleet, becouse the Will-be-PLAN blue water fleet would replace it.
So most logical way for PLAN was to retain it, and build a vessel that suites its requirments most properly.

There is also the matter of opperational need. What has suddenly changed about China’s defence requirements that they suddenly need a dedicated stealthy missile boat for coastal defence? No one is going to try to invade China so what is the point in needing a dedicated coastal defence FAC? The only thing China needs to worry about on its coast is pirates and smuggling, but thats not the kind of mission you need YJ83s fo

Becouse PLAN as a credible Blue water fleet compared to USN in late march of 2008 is a joke. Non existing. If a conflict with USN would now come, PLAN needs to defend its shores. It cannot raise its hand and shout: “Thats unfair, our fleet isent ready yet”
No one is going to invade china yeas, but do you know why? Becouse it has navy to defend it. Its not a blue water navy that has the luxury to dictate the dimensions of the engagement, but a fleet that will still give even a major navy a hell of a time trying to get pass it.

The only likely flashpoint that may lead to war in the forseeable future was Taiwan. But the USN is not going to be closing to within a few hundred miles of the Chinese coast, so the only way 2208s are ever going to be useful is if they were used in an offensive role, and that is exactly what I think that are intended for. They are to be sent out in packs, guided by off-board platforms to attack USN carrier battlegroups in concert with air and subsurface elements to totally saturate the fleet’s defences. You might call that ‘coastal defence’, but that is offensive operations in my book.

Nope. You seem to have great ability to ignore the physical limitations of the Craft.
It will attack enemy ships, no need to loose your nigth-time sleep after that, but Under shore based network of C4 and other assets, minefields and coastal artillery all under shore based Fighter umbrella.

You simply cannot create imaginary offshore task into ship that cannot sustain long patrols and long periods spend in open seas, what You will need if you want to operate them offensively against Taiwan.

I remember similar things being said about the PLAAF when it was first starting to modernise. The PLAN has very specific details of where it wants to be, just look at the lastest Chinese defence white paper, and that certainly does not fit with your timeline. As with most things in China, if there is a will, then a way will be found

But not by me. Changing organisation is huge task. And Im not saying that it wouldn’t happen, Only that there is not any point in it. Again, PLAN blue water fleet will make coastal defence usesless so the effort would be wasted.

2208s are not meant to be frigates or destroyers. They are meant to be a cheap long range missile strike platform. They are not meant to go on extended patrols. You send them out against a target you have found and want killed. That reduces the fuel needs considerably. The small crew also helps to reduce the amount of provisions the ships need to carry.

Im not saying they are frigates or destroyer. Actually it is you who’s doing it by imaging task of those ships.
Otherwise you are descriping how ships works in coastal defense. Use the home field advantage and strike from suprise and then vannish into protected waters again.

Reading your post makes me wonder that basicly you know what coastal defence works, but you fail to fit into its context in general naval strategies.
You seem to understand that these ships are for fast dashes against enemy and done so, that the craft defencesie in endurance and long patrol periods are inrelevant.

But Taiwan is still 200km away…thats huge ammount of water even to get into areas where the operations takes place, not to mention that you have to spend time in there. The way Type022 is used on combat simply comes out of question in situation like that and they present no capacity that would make them better than ship that has the durability to stay long periods in the area and thus allowing PLAN to dictate when and where the naval engagements takes place.
Taiwan is not going to invade PRC so PLAN doesent need FACs against it. If it would base all of its surface assets against Taiwan as form of FACs, that would mean that it allows ROCN to operate freely when ever it wants, retreat yourself only defending against it, occasionally harrash it….after all, PLAN should be the invading fleet in this scennario?;)

And as recap is the mother of learning:

If there is no threat to China from the seas, what is the purpose of such a pure ‘defensive’ weapon? All China needs to defend its coast is the coast guard. The PLAN is developing itself into a blue water force, and the only use it can have for FACs is attack.

Yeas, thats what Im trying to say all the time….with the expection that the Blue water is thing to come, emrging and forming one, while the Shipyards are pouring Type022 more than western man could imagine. The Type022 aren’t part of that grand goal that Type052B/C presents, but something for today, operational core of this generaion of PLAN force.

The PLA does not need dedicated amphibious forces to get to Taiwan. There is no question that China has enough shipping the PLA can requisition to get troops and equipment across. As for CAS, well the entire PLAAF Q5 fleet is dedicated to CAS, and every jet the PLAAF operates has a secondary ground attack ability. The PLAAF also has a huge JH7 and Su30 fleet for precision strike as well as its QW2 MLRS that can reach Taiwan from the mainland, and we have seen pics of dedicated fire support ships as well as MLRS firing from converted ships.

PLAAF isent that huge, when you take out planes that are networked into modern joint operation command. Its ability to duration attacs with these planes is not in the level what you need to effectively moothball the Taiwanese navy, army and air force at the same time keeping total Air superiority.

If you cannot grasp the very basic idea and concept of basic land warfare, what units are mented to do what, Its not going to help to throw video-game reality in place of it.
Sure chinese tanks are good and impressive, but what that helps when the tank units aren’t? Weapons dont figth the battles, units does and the men in those units.
What does it help when if you have good tanks and better quality of troops, when your navy can (if all amphibious ships are aviable for concentration into single landing) land only the tanks of single Armoured division…without no support units and no troops? And is able to repeat it in only once a day?

And to those units to figth without support or organicfire-support (meaning the indirect fire that is completely subsider to one units commander and thus at anypoint ready to answer the commanders call) against army that has none of these defencies?

WS2 MRLS isen’t helping your squat as A) It isent in PLA service
B) it range is sufficent to barely reach the beaches of Taiwan when fired from farmost peak of the mainland into farmost peak of Taiwan.
and C) MRLS are mass consentration weapons. They are mented to use against large dispersered but tigthly and heavily conentrated enemy. Their insufficent CEP makes them useless in tactical situation where you need mortar or howitzer fire.

ROCAs own artillery isen’t going to be whiped out, becouse PLA simply doesent have the needed C4 network and command system allowing its counter battery fire to operate in heart-beat speed, onlyway the overall hype of counterbattery fire comes into effect.
And how will you destroy ROCA artillery when you dont have your own artillery shore?

My overall stance to all of this isen’t anyway biased by my service time, Its directly result of it. I have been thougth these things, they aren’t something I made up in my mind to explain some patriotic fantasies.

I gota love it, in this one short reply you have basically summed up EXACTLY what the environmental movement is……..Just another form or extension of Socialism perverting this country.

Yes, yes i said perverting. Did I mean it, yes I did, as it pretains to the US. What you do in Europe is fine, but it isnt gong fly here with a helluva lota people. Believe me, this has been a long time coming, but after 100 years of so called “good government” there still are many, many disbelievers.

You talk of the denying mentality………so is anyone who doesnt believe in whatever you, or lets say the government believes in, they are automatically in denial?

Yes, yes it is a Brave New World and I quite frankly dont want any parts of it.

By the way, this Earth Day crap http://www12.earthhourus.org/ , im not turning my lights off, im turning every single one on, and pulling out every work light I can find and plugging it in.

Finally, Socialism is based on trading one god for another. Difference is one is a diety based on faith, the other sits in a house, is of this world, and pulls the strings directly.

A socialist doesent belive anything, he Knows;) Youv’ slept your dialectism classes…

But you are offcourse entitled to worship your own pantheon of money, No one is forcing you to change your gods into others, not even giving them up completely. 🙂
But while giving its sacraments, stop at once thinking how you come straigth with equation where economical structure based on continual growth works in planet with limited resources;) 😉

But offcourse, dont bother your mind too much about it…it migth, by your own words, lead you into pervertions:diablo:

Well there is difference in numbers, I agree and PRC isent saint in this issue. However, the issue is about posturing a morale superiority, and against that pose, the Guantanamo Bay and Water torture simply dont fit in.
Relatively if you look, US is lot better place for man to live than PRC, Im not denying that, but In order for US to boast of PRC HR reccord, it needs to clear its own back yard first. Otherwise you have douple standards.

Human rigths are newer “drop on the ocean”. Its either you brake them or you dont. You cant go on for braking them and yet claim you are better than others who brake them. Its a door that needs to keep closed, even if its let chink, its still open