GollevainenOne is down many more to go.
…unfortuanetly there will be many more to come before this thing is over 🙁
GollevainenNicolas10 = trolling
…says the fish who’s couth in the web :diablo:
You cannot “end” something that never really began… CAS has never been a large part of PLA’s past war experience.
As for artillery, I only talked about what PLA seems to be aiming for. I make no claim about the effectiveness of those possible actions.
I cannot engage in detailed discussion of PLA artillery because this is not my area. I only know that rockets / missiles is one of the few areas PLA spent heavy resources in. PLA apparently has many rocket weapons in the 50 km range, but I cannot speak for their accuracy or effectiveness in area suppression
So then we come to the very crucial elements of succes in that operation. PLAAF have never mastered by posessing considerable CAS assets, and this isent “chinese way of thinking” issue but serious default. And that default lays in the field that most likely predict the outcome of that conflict. If PLA cannot whipe out ROCAs assets and support its own manouvring units, it cannot succeed in invading Taiwan, even if it can somehow disable ROCNs fleet assets and have clear enterance to the shores. Rockets and missiles (ballistic) are one thing whrere PLA succees, but they havent got anything to do whit the issue of imidiate fire support to the PLAN marines. And like I said before, it is the fire support that destroyes the enemy, infantry only advances in the battle field and gains the fruits.
GollevainenCut the bull**** golleveinen.
You provoke them in your very first post and then you act suprised that the thing turns into a flamefest?
Hypocrite
Nic
I made preduction in bit provocative ways….and Now Im just laughing when the kids are touching the hot stove despite their supposed not to. In which Point im acting suprising or being taken as such? I knew what the responses would have been, I only suprised that they actually took it
and its gollevainen by the way 😉 😎 😀
GollevainenMines are so selfevident issue in martime warfare as are artillery in land warfare…I cannot say 100% about Taiwanese mining capapility, but I assume that there would be one. Otherwise, They are…how you say, in world of ****…
But I think PLAN analysist will know it better and the main treat in the mines are that you dont know that they are there, before you hit one. And hitting into minefield migth disable only one ship, but it will slow the whole colon and stalls the operation. And the stuckded ships needs to be escorted away from the area and specialised ships send to do clear the line…all that costs time and it will give the Taiwanese change to determ where they want their enemies to be…a key element in military succes.
You answered your own question: Artillery. You could consider airpower a kind of flying artillery, but that isn’t necessarily the kind PLA will use. Second Artillery and surface ship fire supports are probably more relevant.
but in order to get chinese marine troops artillery shore comes after the beach head is cleared. Bringing artillery battery shore means that most of the landing ships would be required to carry them. Artillery battalion is lot more than the tubes, and sadly the all are needed to make it ready to beging firing. Air support wont come handy as substitute in other cases than in first wave amphibious assault, but we all know that PLAs hasent got the rigth equipment for it. Also it lacks the crucial elements to bring the depth into the attack by helicopter assaults.
And still, the surface ship support (like I mentioned) presents just too small punch and even in the most optimate situation, you can get one regiment strength under the marine forces commanders consentration.
I think there are at least two regiments of JH-7s. There are some H-6s and Q-5s for attacks as well.
I’m not saying PLA will win the war for sure without CAS. All I’m saying is that CAS isn’t necessarily part of PLAAF’s doctrine in the future.
Why?? Why would PLAAF end giving Close air support?? What do you mean by that?
This is why I said Penghu is crucial. If PLA takes over Penghu, land based artillery could be used to attack Taiwan.
It’s true some sea control is required for ship’s fire support. But you need that anyway for amphibious landing. So that’s a general problem, not specific to fire support.
You still think too much like US military, when you compare DF-21 to US airpower on call. This is not how PLA thinks
From the closest ranges that one can get from Penghu islands to Taiwanese soil is some 50km. Unfortuanetly PLA doesent got ammunition nor artillery to hit from that distance. Only some super charged denelin or bofors basebleed ‘piggyes’ can hit there, but even If china would have those, there would be too little of them to couse any effect. MRLS can reach from those distance, but their accuracity isent sufficent enough to replace the tube artillery.
And I talk about DF-21, I talk as a gunner would talk, one that have operated with same sort of artillery that forms the basis of the basic divisional and regimental artillery in PLA units. You were the one suggesting strategical weapon to use in tactical level. Ballistic missiles whitout WMDs are political weapons, good to indimitate civilians but hardly sufficent to crible ROCAs line of defences
And then the unfortunate side….(the jedi struggle)
Darth Wader says:
You were the FIRST to attack AND drift off topic, do you know why you were right?. BECAUSE YOU STARTED IT
.
but Obi Wan said only what my stance for this topic was and after that I predicted how some known chinese kids will turn this depate. So far I have been rigth…
ANd what has happened? Chinese sector has turned this into nonsense. I provocated you kids, yeas, but does it mean that you need to get provocated? You could have easily ignore my comment and let it fall into my face, but you decided to do exactly as I predicted you to do….and all it affects to me is that i get some good sunday afternoon laughs on yuor behalv
The topic is completely baseless and anything “concluded” is not worth the paper its written on.
This is an armchair general topic which armchair generals like to command, do you know why, because NO ONE here has experience
??? This isent baseless topic and yeas, its fun for us armchair majors and colonels. But thats the sole purpose of militaryforums aside old grunts changing experiences and boast to the kids who are too afraid to join in the military….
Let us armchair soldier continue our war and you civilians can take your offtopic comments to some other forums…weren’t you directing one of yourself :diablo: :diablo:
GollevainenAnd do all that without being tracked by vessels from the other side?
Now tell me how many mines and minelaying vessels the ROCN has? Don’t tell me about commercial vessels laying mines. Anyone who has the will to invest in a large inventory of mines and a mine laying strategy is going to have minelayers as a sign of it.
In WWII we (finns, if somebody doesent yet know) had no minelayer whit over 100 mine capacity, only normal warships whit minerails…no dedicated mine decs….and back then the mining based mostly on the quantativity of mining, more the mines, more the marryer….and we bodle-necked the entire Soviet baltic fleet to Kronstad.
Modern mines and their effectivity lays in their qualitity, not in ammount so dedicated minelayers arent that needed thing when the naval budget calls for more important usage of the hulls.
GollevainenI always wondered why the Soviets didn’t make Kuznetsov and Varyag longer than they are. They always wanted the biggest of everything, why not the biggest carrier? The additional length would most likely have increased the take-off weight for the aircraft too by using a longer runway. The hangar would have been lengthened too that way and probably an increased number of aircraft.
Lengthening it wouldn’t have cost that much more or were they really that constrained by money? All in all I think the lengthening would have given a lot more advantages than extra cost
Well you see the desicion to build Kuznetsov and her sister were compromise between the full size Orel and building additional Kievs. There were other compromises with the Kuzentsov itself (mainly in it’s airassets) and she and her sister are sad example of politicis affecting too much to military developments. The resepy of failed ships is to take unfamilar politics, give them some premilary figures, make sure that they stick to them by death and then realise that you can make much better ship, whit little expenses to overside those figures…and then you have things like CVA-01, our panzerships or Israeli Eilat class…
Gollevainenand then the not so point taking one :diablo: :diablo:
Ill quote someone (surprisingly a chinese member )
“Quite point less thread that will invite nothing but more point less flaming.”No point arguing with no goal or agreeable end result
Suprise it migth be to you, but all topics can be discussed reasonably, if the will is strong enough. Even Taiwanese invasion, which is actually rather intresting topic if the sentiments are left aside. I only pointed out the outcome of this thread with this base of members, and unfortuanetly I was rigth…By saying it same post where I didn’t agree whit chinese way of seeing things…that is flaming??
Hats of to the few good pro-chinese members that have focused solely on the military side of this topic, despite what they migth feel of my crusade against BS….
But sadly we have you, Darth Vader and co. 😡 😡 Lets see what your sibling wrote…
He starts off by insulting a group of people so they would reply strongly and when they do reply, he claims “See? Flamewar.”
Gee, if you get offended when I solely predicted the outcome of this thread…what can I do to make you feel better??
The feeling’s mutual, Gollevainen. There are those who are very critical but whose opinion I respect such as Arthur and Rick. They’ve taken the time to learn and understand and then base their opinions on what they know. Then there are those like Strevitel and you who neither know or even attempt to learn about China (and its military, economy or culture) but like throwing terms around to troll for reactions.
Well we all listen and respect those who we whis. I don’t feel incompetent anyway when lacking your respect. …And by what do you basis that I dont know nothing about china, its military, its culture or economy??
BTW, the so-called “anti-nationalist” stance is idiocy in military forums. Armies, navies and air forces are created to protect nations and nationalities. It is pure stupidity to say you are against “nationalists” when the whole subject of militaries would simply not exist were it not for national differences.
Well I have served my country’s army and it haven’t changed my feelings towards nationalism. Defending someones nation has nothing to do with nationalism, which is an ideology, and not so pleasent one. It’s usually filled with national biggetry and chauvisnism. When discussing of military stuff, the nationalism is the last thing to be required, becouse discussion is about beeing objective and nationalism has nothing to do with objectivity.
Calling a Chinese person who responds to you in an opinion formed from his Chinese perspective a “nationalist” is just a veiled insult from a person who has no idea of the Chinese view of things. To you any answer where the Chinese person does not agree with you on your uneducated view of China is a “nationalist”
When you claim that there is chinese way of seeing things, you admitt your nationalism. Nationalism is basicly that one feels its nation as emmotional but yet functional motive to basis its view of world and then act driven by that motive. When some good chinese poster disagree whit me in the actual issues, I tend to counter his arguments or agree whit them. If chinese kids trhows out their prejudgitive suspections of my motives and same time success to creating fantasy visions of grandious migth of their homeland….I migth call it nationalism…by all rigths. Or do you have examples to proove I use the nationalism as some sort of stamp to mark those whos ideas I dont like???
In this thread, you’ve taken that idiotic and self-righteous stance even before a single Chinese person had answered. Actually probably less of a self-righteous stance than a deliberate attempt to troll for a response from the Chinese community at AFM.
I only predicted what would happen. And you then declear that you dont like me and yet still act like I predicted and make me feel self-righteous… Wouldn’t it been better way to slap my face an act totally opposite by Joining the converstion and overhelm me whit your mature wievs and analysist?
Seems like you and your fellow havent got anything to give to the actual topic, but to rant over big bad golly…
GollevainenMan should I have learned not to stickt the antnest :p
But in this post to the military issues…
PLA won’t use airpower as main instrument for annihilation of ROCA.
So what It would use then? If PLA cannot crible ROCAs counterstrike ability before the marines gets shore, then we should ask which on would win, the defender defending their own soil, having the advntage to dictate the place of engagement, fielding real land force formations with full firesupport and logistic back ups, or the marines that are comming from the sea whit only APCs and tanks of tank destroyer level? Land wars are won by the artillery and by the strength of the supply and logistic support.
PLAAF will probably not conduct CAS, and it wouldn’t be the first air force not doing it.
Look at PLANAF instead….
So how many JH-7 are there in PLANAF inventory? and how many Mig-19 derivates?? what is their surviability or effective means to conduct harm to the Taiwanese forces. You are rigth, many havent used CAS…many havent won full scale war either….
That’s PLANAF and surface fleet’s job. I believe land based missiles and rockets would play some roles here. PLA may skip other small islands controlled by Taiwan, but Penghu would still be a critical point
Fire support is the fact that destroyes the enemy. Infantry only manouvres and in this scennario when the first wave of PLAN marines cannot bring their own artillery to shore, the Air support comes into crucial point. Ships can be there only if ROCN is completely anhilated and there is no mines left. Still the whole luda arsenal presents only force of one artillery regiment, sufficent to support one divisions manouvres. If the marine platoon leader orders fire, how long it takes to DF-21 to be aimed there and how much difference some few hundred kilograms of TNT makes when it hits roughly 400meter area? In artillery battery, that sort of dispersion is unacceptable and present considerable danger and threat to the own troops in the battle.
The problem of mines, is that you have to lay them ahead in anticipation of war. The problem is, how do you anticipate war? You want to lay mines and it turns out you don’t have a war at all? Mines is a weapon that cuts both ways; laying mines in the seas around Taiwan also means putting them in one of the most traffic sea lanes around the world, which means it will not only hurt their own merchant shipping—their own lifeline—but the collateral effects of the minelaying would spill to the shipping of other countries like S. Korea, Japan, and South East Asia.
Well mining are those things that are done by nations defending the sealanes when the time is rigth. If Taiwan is commited to defend themselves, they will take the risk and mines the sea lanes. They will offcourse inform it internationally, but expecially in Taiwan’s case when the sea borne invasion is the most likely threat, these sort of decission will just be made. All navies have (or atleast should have) specially charted coastal passages and waterways and they know exactly what places are mined, and what not. Thats the basic (thougth unappealing) work of martime defences. The other is to escort friendly shipping.
GollevainenWell chinese shouldn’t follow the russian/soviet way of thinking, becouse they hardly were no expert in aircrat carrier operations and their solutions and methods are too much stained with mistakes in almoust every possiple sectors concerning aircrafts getting to the sea…
But unfortunetly there isen’t much choise for china. It took soviets 50 years to build a carrier force from the scratch, so if china wishes to bee anyway faster they must rely on the elements they already have. Which are the both Varyag and few older generation soviet carriers are with in their posession. So thus I perdict that the future chinese domestically made carrier will be someways related to the soviet methods.
But how to make the best of the soviet oddnes? Well firstly you need to select the best of them, which is the Varyag, orginally toughted to be a conventional carrier so it has the potential to be the basepoint for future chinese carrier. As the Varyag should be the starting point to the indegenious carrier, the ship herself should be taken to operational use to train the PLAN to operate carriers in the first place. Its not perfect carrier, but it will sufficient enough in the intermediate period and saves lots of time compared to the alternative solution to go straight to own designied ship with noob experiences how to use it.
Designing aircraft carriers is huge task as they presents the most complex applycation of surface ships. If the chinese wish to lay down one in the next 20 years, they should use the Varyag to providing the basic meassures to the hull. But only with the hull. The flightdeck and other aviation assets should be rethinked entirely. Firstly the flightdeck should be bit larger, so the overhang should be bit increased (and this should be taken to notice in the hull design phase naturally). The ski-jumping should be left to us northerners with real pairs of skis. A CATOBAR is the only meaningfull way to operate effective conventional airwing.
As the carrier is still (regardless of the bit enlargement to the orginal design) so small, only two Catabults is sufficient. One in the angled deck and one in the port side of the bow where once was a ski-rump. The elevators can remain where they are. The small hangar of the Varyag (153 x 26) needs to be enlarged which is possiple only if the entire ship is designed to have bigger hangar right form the begining. Perhaps roughly 160m x 30 m could be achived.
The selfdefence system really doesen’t need the soviet style anti-air regiment onboard but four CIWS and if this HHQ-16 is to be a new close-in missile system, then two VLS of those can be fitted. I leave the airwing speculations to someone else, I just stick to ships…
Gollevainen“…and suddenly as Gollevainen has set his feet on the land, he spots his old rival popping out of bushess…”
Trust me, Golly knows chinese way of missbehaving in internet forums. Its not the typical flaming and trolling (well there migth be few expections :rolleyes: 😎 :diablo: ) But weirdly similar of Indian side of missbehaving, seeing things trough way too blue eyes….with the difference that Indian blue-eyenes only irritades chinese (pakistanise would get pissed of by simply beeing indian), where as Chinese blue eyeness bugs those who sees things in wider perspective and understands it.
…Funny it is but How you always seems to pop out from the bushes to smart-ass commenting someones detailed slippery. Why not we hear your comments of the actual issues….it has been too long that I could recall you having anything actuall to say, or was it that you focused on the irrelevant?
Those who set flame baits migth be mean :dev2: , those who trap them presents just blame stubidity….but those who sees them when there isent none :confused: :confused: What are those??
I have tryed to educate chinese kids to not to fall in those traps and not seeing them where there are none…
You see you are like the stuborn Anakin Skywalker that failed to follow the right path set by his tutor Obi-Wan-Kenobi…and now you have entered to the dark path and everytime in some thread where hot discussion about something remotely related to china, those who are in the non-chinese side hear this “choohchchhhh…” 😉 :p
“the circle has closed..” How would chinawhite invade Taiwan?
GollevainenIf that is the way you think about the Chinese then why should any of us bother replying?
Any Chinese reply and it will turn into a flame war since Gollevainen has already threatened to turn it into one with his first post
But that is what you always do, Gollevainen.
Every post you contributed in a Chinese related thread at AFM is a flamebait. Very strange to have such an anti-Chinese person moderating a Chinese forum, the main reason I stay away from the Sino-Defense forum.
:confused: :confused:
I threaten to turn it to a flamewar? I just stated that it will most likely turn out to be one…and here we go…isen’t this exactly what I predicted? So you should propaply take a few toughts about who is turning what in to flamewar…
My postings in this forums chinese threads are 90% of corrections and little notes over some ridicilous statements, sadly comming mainly form the chinese side. Does that make me being anti-china? Then like you mentioned why should I waste so much of my free time to be a mod in chinese related internet forum if I hate chinese so much?
You see I’m anti-BS, anti-nationalism, anti-wishfull thinking and anti-if-it-could-be-this-it-could-be-that thinking…and it’s not anyway country related…
I’ve been fan of chinese military longer than any of these forums been active and remain to do so. The reason why i became a mod in one of them is that the keeper of that site (a chinese man) tought a outsider without any nationalist burden could be a good man to moderate the place so that his orginal goal of setting up a mature and professional discussion forum wouldn’t be jeopardised.
So you keeping away from SDF isen’t any suprise…many of those who cannot handle displine and reasonable discussion often do…so perhaps you should keep avoiding us, becouse frankly we haven’t lost that much… :diablo:
but then to the point…
If everyone envisoned a Taiwan invasion force on the behalf of the USMC model when applied via PLA, then I see no point in continuing the disscussion. When has PLA engaged in any war using anything similar to western tactics? Most, if not all current analysis of PLA is still based on western view of how PLA would fight the war had it been the US armed forces, and yet we forget that PLA thinks differently and act according to what tactical solution it can achieve and not what PLA hopes to gain if it was the US army.
Did I say China has the habbit of using western tactics? I mentioned USMC as it is currently the sole force that can invade Taiwan. PRC doesent posses that sort of expertice, neither it does field that sort of capapility… ANd I dont mean that PRC should jump into direct copying the US military, but adjust their own militaries in the demands of this day. Fortuanetly PLAN is beging to change and the mentioned new focus on EW and battle field surveilance as well as the rumoured 071 class Dock landing ships speaks about changes…
But then again. I agree PLAN, PLAAF and PLA enjoys numerical advantage and even technological superiority in some parts of the comprasion tables, but war isent poker where the better hand wins and the worse has no affect at all.
Everyone who advocates the chinese succes in this creme de la creme of all what if scenarios, use to think that Somehow the better detail capapility of chinese weapons and numerocial advantage automatically means that PLAAF can whipe out all Taiwanese defences, and then the superior capapility of Type 99 MBTs means that Taiwanese ground forces hasent got any change at all…
I would like to ask few questions to everyone to answer so that we can get better picture of this scenario.
1) If PLANs minewarfare forces are from WWII era of thinking (mechanical sweeps) presented by the good old T-43, How their landng force using WWII era assault landing concept can avoid Taiwanese mining of possiple modern aqustic and magnetic mines on the landing ships passage way???
2) If NATO led Serbian hammering campaing managed to destroy suprisingly a brigade strong force of serbian military, How would PLAN whitout the fmature AEW and ECM forces manages to do anything better to whipe out Taiwanese forces?
3) How can the 76 Su-30MKKs manage the close airsupport missions to support PLAN marines advancing in the immidiate beach head advance when they similar time need to support the JH-7 forces in the anti-shipping and conduct the inderdiction strikes to strategical installations?
4) Who gives the immidiate fire support to the PLAN marines? The PLAN side needs to have its artillery in shore in minutes to face the Taiwanese counter attacks and destroying those advance? When WZ-10 still in devolpment and no ships to bring it on the stage, is the first wave solely tied to surface ship fire support in its critical point of manouvring?
We all know what sort of gizmoes both armyes field, but the main issue should be that how these two armies figth. If PLA cannot whipe out completely Taiwanses capapilty to conduct centrally lead defences and counter attacks, It cannot succes invading Taiwan, if it wants to keep something waiting for possiple consequences from Taiwanese allies. Lot bigger technoligical and numerical advantages have prooven out to be eyefooling when biggers have tryed to march over the little ones 😉 ….and those havent been even near of the difficulties that possesing an island makes…
Gollevainenwell first it would require US marine -type seaborne invasion force with amphibious tecnics little bit better than WWII era LST. Also it would require combined arms capapilityes and strategical innovative and experience to use it order to overhelm Taiwanese defences. This doesent mean Yj-83 SSMs that can reach 200 kms and fly…or J-10 that can fly…it means people that can use them in smooth co-operation with all other attack forces as well as vast eletronical warfare factor to keep the attacker 24/7 awareness of the battlefield and manage it at the same time. Also this Eletronical and communicational backline needs to be immune and invunerable to the Taiwanes or their allies own jamming and counter methods and it needs to have also active element to prevent Taiwanese forces to use their own similar systems.
Or basicly it would be modern warfare and the attacker needs to be the most modern one. And china isent up to it for atleast decade or so…
But somehow I got the feeling that the chinese sector would turn this into meaningless penny detail comprasion thread that will lose it point in the someway middle of the next page… :rolleyes: :rolleyes: they always tends to do that 😎
GollevainenWell after the few intial snowfall that supposed to be just the old winter testing the ground….it propaply decided that it was ok and we had this non-stop blizzard for the whole week and now there is up to three feet layer of snow and all the traffic and logistics got serious hits. My mother drove her car out of the road…my car ceased to co-operate with me just as I was about to leave the parking lot…broke my bakc by pulling it out of the way… 😡 😡 😡
We have lived here for 9000 years and seems like every year the winter gets us whit our pants on the knees!
GollevainenWell after the few intial snowfall that supposed to be just the old winter testing the ground….it propaply decided that it was ok and we had this non-stop blizzard for the whole week and now there is up to three feet layer of snow and all the traffic and logistics got serious hits. My mother drove her car out of the road…my car ceased to co-operate with me just as I was about to leave the parking lot…broke my bakc by pulling it out of the way… 😡 😡 😡
We have lived here for 9000 years and seems like every year the winter gets us whit our pants on the knees!
GollevainenWell thanks, the link provided by krasny oktabar had succificent enough pics, but if you want to post them, I wont mind…
Sign In
