JakeOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:13 pm

U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 pm

Quote:
TAIPEI - Bowing to Chinese pressure, the U.S. will deny Taiwan's request for 66 new F-16C/D fighter aircraft, a Taiwan Ministry of National Defense (MND) official said.

"We are so disappointed in the United States," he said.

A U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) delegation arrived here last week to deliver the news and offer instead a retrofit package for older F-16A/Bs that includes an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=7378123&c=AME&s=AIR

It boggles the mind of why China would care about this. To me, strong indicator of China wishing to acquire Taiwan.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
 
cosmofly
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:36 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:52 pm

With modern weapons, Taiwan is basically not defensible against the fast growing China. It will be a waste of money to buy the F16C/D anyway. The money may be better spent by Taiwan building more missiles for symbolic deterrence - some sort of MAD strategy.

As for the symbolic air defense, Taiwan can use the fund to build some next gen IDFs.

So IMO this is a good thing for Taiwan. The increasing ties between the people of Taiwan and China is making military options more and more senseless.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Aug 16, 2011 10:21 pm

Very disappointing.

Seems like we are turning our backs to an ever growing degree to the defense of Taiwan.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:48 am

After stuff like this and our economy over the past couple of years, I'm beginning to understand what President Obama says about being embarrassed for this country. No wonder he goes around the world apologizing to foreign nations about all of our perceived faults.  

Not even Pakistan was stupid enough to settle for their A model F-16's, and I'm only further embarrassed that we would offer to upgrade their A models even further, but still deny them the common sense of an upgraded power plant. If Taiwan does all that the US conceded, they will basically have C model Block 50's, just minus the thrust and reliability of a good GE F110 power plant.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article19.html

But what is all the more so ironic, is that we just all but told China to stick it not but three weeks ago now when they complained over our U-2 flights near their airspace. Apparently we had no problem offending China then.

Quote:

“We will continue to fly these missions in international airspace as a matter of freedom of navigation,” said Marine Col. Dave Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman.

China's Defense Ministry demanded an end to the U.S. military flights, according to a report Wednesday in the Global Times newspaper, part of the Communist Party-controlled news media.

“We demand that the U.S. respect China’s sovereignty and security interests, and take concrete measures to boost a healthy and stable development of military relations,” the ministry said.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...call-to-halt-spy-flights-near-chi/
 
B727LVR
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:54 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:19 am

I am going to take an educated guess here... I do not know the current relations between China and Taiwan, but if China is poised to aquire or takeover Taiwan, and with the recent possibility that China was able to get a sneek peek at the stealth 60 from Pakistan, the decision to not sell the them the newer F-16's makes sense.

Would we rather Taiwan not fall to China? Yes... However... If we were to sell them the new equipment, and China does get Taiwan, now they have free access to the aircraft. Now I know we wont sell them an exact copy of what we use, but even some of the building process' could be considered sensitive. The biggest problem to me, is the uncertainty of it all. So you would have to ask, right now even with economics the way they are, would this be an acceptable risk?
I'm like a kid in a candy store when it comes to planes!
 
fsnuffer
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:38 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 17, 2011 1:47 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):

Very disappointing.

Seems like we are turning our backs to an ever growing degree to the defense of Taiwan.


We are turning our backs to a lot of long time allies. There is still long term fallout from Obama turning over UK nuclear secrets to get the latest arms reduction treaty with the Russians signed.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3882
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:34 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
Very disappointing.

Seems like we are turning our backs to an ever growing degree to the defense of Taiwan.

At this point, I'm not quite sure what we would be defending Taiwan against? It is "China" in every respect, except the form of government. What would be the loss to us after 33 years of recognizing the PRC as the real China? If China were to take over Taiwan (let's assume peacefully), will life on the island change? Would the PRC dare make wholesale changes or shut down businesses on the island, which would represent it's most productive and profitable province?

I think on this one issue, the U.S. is mired in a Cold War mentality. Defending Taiwan for Taiwan's sake is not worth the effort. Now, if we're doing it as a way of making a stand against PRC military ambitions, I can understand that, but I think there are better ways to go about doing that.

Quoting B727LVR (Reply 4):
If we were to sell them the new equipment, and China does get Taiwan, now they have free access to the aircraft. Now I know we wont sell them an exact copy of what we use, but even some of the building process' could be considered sensitive.

If you're talking about the F-16, that is not considered "new" equipment. It is a 35+ year old design and everybody and their grandmother owns one. I'm sure the Chinese have already gotten their hands on a few out of service airframes and given them a good going-over.
My other home is in the sky inside my Piper Cherokee 180.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 18, 2011 1:20 pm

I'm no military strategist, but as current events have shown that the best defense against an overwhelmingly superior force is not to have high tech weapons but lots of low tech for use in insurgency.

Any major shooting war between China and Taiwan would be over relatively quickly and the Taiwanese would have to revert to and unconventional war (resistance).

The only thing the F-16 would do is provide the Taiwanese more time to enable the US forces to come and rescue.

If the US planners decide that the F-16 would not even provide sufficient time buffer, then what good would they do?

Like some one has already noted, the money might be better spent buying a bunch of mobile SAM's and SS missiles to protect from air and sea invasion. Besides, these missiles would be easier/cheaper to maintain than the F-16's.

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 19, 2011 2:24 am

Quoting redflyer (Reply 6):
At this point, I'm not quite sure what we would be defending Taiwan against? It is "China" in every respect, except the form of government. What would be the loss to us after 33 years of recognizing the PRC as the real China? If China were to take over Taiwan (let's assume peacefully), will life on the island change? Would the PRC dare make wholesale changes or shut down businesses on the island, which would represent it's most productive and profitable province?

I think on this one issue, the U.S. is mired in a Cold War mentality. Defending Taiwan for Taiwan's sake is not worth the effort. Now, if we're doing it as a way of making a stand against PRC military ambitions, I can understand that, but I think there are better ways to go about doing that.

Deciding to join up with China as a single state is decision for Taiwan to make. In the interim the defense of Taiwan and ensuring its freedom has long been a US policy. At the very least such a policy kept China at bay, and made them have to think twice before acting on any imperialistic motives such as they have displayed with other territories.

In addition and especially now with China growing aggressiveness in the South China Sea which has created concern from the Philippines to Vietnam all the way down to Singapore, the strong support of Taiwan acts as a defacto stance the US takes in the region. China sensing US weakness and lack of resolve with Taiwan surely then knows its unlikely we will do much of anything as Chine seeks to push its territorial rights into the South China Sea, and one day possibly into the broader Pacific.

What the US does not realize today is that by refusing the sale of modern equipment to Taiwan is simply one move in a large chess match which China is pursuing in the region. China is in no rush, matter of fact in typical fashion looks out decades in posturing its foreign policy.

Unfortunately, with this decision we are on the way to folding our cards and our broader might in the region.
As Lee Kuan Yew the elder statesman of Singapore said in his biography:
"The greatest danger East Asian nations face is not the awakening dragon, but a toothless American tiger. Without the existence of local balance of power, the emphasis of regional security, and creation of coalitions and alliances, the Asia Pacific region will loose the stability required to peacefully prosper. Without balance, the dragon will be left to roam as it desires while we all watch and worry that it does not happen to breathe on us.

[Edited 2011-08-18 20:25:42]
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 19, 2011 3:42 am

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7):

I'm no military strategist, but as current events have shown that the best defense against an overwhelmingly superior force is not to have high tech weapons but lots of low tech for use in insurgency.

bikerthai, I enjoy your comments, but there is several recent examples that counter your argument regarding the above statement.

Iraq, first and foremost suggests that the insurgents (homegrown or foreign) don't have the military capabilities to engage any well organized western military formation with any chance of success. The same goes for the Afghan theater.

As far as the Taiwan is concerned... I'm not so worried about mainland China? Sometimes, It appears that One country (or allied group or countries) has a specific military advantage over another? Like Libya... This should have been a slam dunk for western forces... But, without the logistical capability (US not fully committed) to move man and machine, It becomes a sizable task.

The main reason that China is really no immediate threat, is that they don't have the Expeditionary capabilities to cross the straight... For example, think back to WW2 and Germany's lack of maritime expeditionary assets to invade England. This is also China's problem.

Rgds,
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:51 am

Chinas problem is what happens to their global markets if they decided to strike out militarily? It's all fine and dandy to keep your Tienanmen's within ones borders but striking out at what the rest of the world sees as an independent country, would send the very important markets for a loop and would send anti Chinese sentiment through the roof.

China cares more about the dollars and euros it's taking in more than a unified China. There are lots of places in the world that can make cheap t shirts.
What the...?
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:23 pm

Quoting mffoda (Reply 9):

Iraq, first and foremost suggests that the insurgents (homegrown or foreign) don't have the military capabilities to engage any well organized western military formation with any chance of success.

This is true for a conventional fight. It is not true for a guerrilla war specially if the populace is with the guerrilla. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the conventional fight was won quickly, the unconventional fight only turned in area where the populace came over to our side. China will not have the second option in Taiwan

Quoting mffoda (Reply 9):
Like Libya... This should have been a slam dunk for western forces... But, without the logistical capability (US not fully committed) to move man and machine, It becomes a sizable task.

Letting the rebel fight the ground war has gone relatively well. They have isolated Tripoli with NATO's help in a span of 6 months. That's quite a feat when you are out gunned in most confrontation but made easier when you have knowledge of local terrain and have the backing of the local people.

Quoting mffoda (Reply 9):
The main reason that China is really no immediate threat, is that they don't have the Expeditionary capabilities to cross the straight...

I agree with this point 100%. Logistics would be China's major problem in conquering Taiwan. Not only from the initial invasion stand point but through the subsequent counter insurgency fight. From that standpoint, maybe some diesel submarine would be more beneficial to the Taiwanese than the F16s?

Remember, during WWII the Allied never really solved their logistic problem until they finally captured Amsterdam. The largest French port was held by the Germans till the end of the war and the next largest was way too far south.


Oh, and I'm surprised no one commented on the real reason why the F-16 (or diesel sub) will not be sold to Taiwan . . . ALL THE US BONDS THAT CHINA HOLDS. Or is this so much a given that we take it for granted?

bikerthai

[Edited 2011-08-19 06:27:03]
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5213
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 19, 2011 7:20 pm

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 1):
With modern weapons, Taiwan is basically not defensible against the fast growing China. It will be a waste of money to buy the F16C/D anyway

Those would at least give them a choice to defend themselves or surrender outright.

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 1):
As for the symbolic air defense, Taiwan can use the fund to build some next gen IDFs.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/asian-skies/2011/08/12/2011-08-11_10-14-00_217%20%281%29.jpg
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/as...1-08-11_10-14-00_217%20%281%29.jpg

The IDF could be relied on for CAP duties, but (if the thrust upgrades were not completed) really needed the F404 engine, and perhaps a downscaled AESA or at least a later version radar to be really useful.

Quoting B727LVR (Reply 4):
and with the recent possibility that China was able to get a sneek peek at the stealth 60 from Pakistan, the decision to not sell the them the newer F-16's makes sense.
.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...8/video-j-20-rocks-then-rolls.html

More likely that they received stealth technology from the Russians.....

http://www.military-today.com/aircraft/mikoyan_mig_mfi.htm

Quote:
"However in 2010 photos of the new Chinese J-20 stealthy multi-role fighter appeared, which is very similar to the MiG 1.42. It is speculated, that development of the J-20 was assisted by the MiG aviation company."

Quoting redflyer (Reply 6):
At this point, I'm not quite sure what we would be defending Taiwan against? It is "China" in every respect, except the form of government. What would be the loss to us after 33 years of recognizing the PRC as the real China?

Freedom of navigation in the Taiwan Strait and commercial exploration in the potentially oil-rich Spratlys?

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7):
but as current events have shown that the best defense against an overwhelmingly superior force is not to have high tech weapons but lots of low tech for use in insurgency.

Insurgents would also like to have a little of the good stuff...to level the playing field a bit, so to speak.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7):
Any major shooting war between China and Taiwan would be over relatively quickly and the Taiwanese would have to revert to and unconventional war (resistance). The only thing the F-16 would do is provide the Taiwanese more time to enable the US forces to come and rescue.

Maybe that's all they want?

Quoting mffoda (Reply 9):
Iraq, first and foremost suggests that the insurgents (homegrown or foreign) don't have the military capabilities to engage any well organized western military formation with any chance of success. The same goes for the Afghan theater.
Quoting mffoda (Reply 9):
The main reason that China is really no immediate threat, is that they don't have the Expeditionary capabilities to cross the straight...
.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...ALevNCTAQ&ved=0CE0Q9QEwCA&dur=6362

Minus outside help, 111+ miles are all that separate Taiwan from the mainland...it's not halfway around the world. I tend to think that China need only mobilize a small fraction of its vast tonnage of tanker, cargo and container fleet (with sea and air cover) plus the planes the West had been selling them, to launch a successful invasion (after softening the island's defenses, of course).

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 11):

This is true for a conventional fight. It is not true for a guerrilla war specially if the populace is with the guerrilla. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the conventional fight was won quickly, the unconventional fight only turned in area where the populace came over to our side. China will not have the second option in Taiwan

Let us not forget that the PLA are past masters at guerilla warfare...with the numbers to back them up.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
Chinas problem is what happens to their global markets if they decided to strike out militarily? It's all fine and dandy to keep your Tienanmen's within ones borders but striking out at what the rest of the world sees as an independent country, would send the very important markets for a loop and would send anti Chinese sentiment through the roof.

China cares more about the dollars and euros it's taking in more than a unified China. There are lots of places in the world that can make cheap t shirts.

I'm really hoping such is their mindset, and peaceful co-existence their ultimate goal. What would they do with a desolate, bombed out island other than use it as their Pacific outpost and launch pad?
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 19, 2011 8:10 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7):
The only thing the F-16 would do is provide the Taiwanese more time to enable the US forces to come and rescue.

So where exactly are all these forces that the US has allocated to the defense of Taiwan, we knew where and how they intended to defend Europe and South Korea.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Deciding to join up with China as a single state is decision for Taiwan to make.

I wonder why no one wants the Taiwan people to vote on that straight up, surely the reason cannot be what China would do if the outcome was independence and application to the UN for a new state.

Quoting mffoda (Reply 9):
Iraq, first and foremost suggests that the insurgents (homegrown or foreign) don't have the military capabilities to engage any well organized western military formation with any chance of success. The same goes for the Afghan theater.

So Iraq and Afghanistan are now pacified and the people united in building their nation?

Quoting mffoda (Reply 9):
The main reason that China is really no immediate threat, is that they don't have the Expeditionary capabilities to cross the straight... For example, think back to WW2 and Germany's lack of maritime expeditionary assets to invade England.

I thought Germany never invaded because Hitler was a "closet Englishman"

Crossing the strait is doable, anyone understand the strategy of all those SSM's pointed across the strait, soldiers can be flown across and ships will follow, how many submarines can / will the US deploy, would China use massive amphibious ships to carry troops over or hundreds of smaller ships / boats? Will submarines deploy multi-million torpedoes against small boats or wait for the bigger vessels?
In todays environment, boots on the ground can almost be a win, sure they may have difficulty re-supplying but by then the negotiators are involved and the desire for a long war on China's doorstep while the US logistic tail is thousands of miles long is not pratical in this day and age. The US is a net importer not exporter, its industrial base in terms of producing items for a sustained conflict is greatly diminished, not talking about precision weaponry.
 
cosmofly
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:36 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 19, 2011 8:55 pm

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 12):
Those would at least give them a choice to defend themselves or surrender outright.

I doubt how much time the F16s can buy. I would expect the Chinese will destroy the few airports before any air war can begin. A large number of mobile SAMs, plus a lot of SSMs against coastal bases and cross strait ships, will probably buy the more time.

Best symbolic deterrence, IMO are subs and UAVs which act as missile launch pads.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 12):
The IDF could be relied on for CAP duties, but (if the thrust upgrades were not completed) really needed the F404 engine, and perhaps a downscaled AESA or at least a later version radar to be really useful.

Taiwan will never get F404. However IDF's TFE1042-70 can be upgraded, may be up to 12000lb.

Bottom line, Taiwan, even with US help, is in a no-win situation if China decides to take over. Luckily China is more busy making money, buying properties in and sending tourists to Taiwan while many Taiwanese are living and making tonnes of money in China.
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:43 am

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7):
The only thing the F-16 would do is provide the Taiwanese more time to enable the US forces to come and rescue.

If the US planners decide that the F-16 would not even provide sufficient time buffer, then what good would they do?

Like some one has already noted, the money might be better spent buying a bunch of mobile SAM's and SS missiles to protect from air and sea invasion. Besides, these missiles would be easier/cheaper to maintain than the F-16's.

I don't get this arguement. The US did suggest them to buy missiles instead of the F-16s. They deny the sale of F-16. I really doubt the denial is based on strategic need of Taiwan. I have never heard US Government denying a foreign arms export based on what the country needs. It was always based on whether they are ally or human rights violations.

I don't think the US dictates Taiwanese defense policy, and I especially don't buy that the reason of this arms purchase denial is based on what the US thinks of the Taiwanese strategic "needs." It is one thing saying "sure you can buy these things, but you really need more missiles." But to outright ban the sale? come on..
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3694
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Aug 21, 2011 3:27 am

The problem with China taking over Taiwan is that there would be a lot of politcal prisoners in Taiwan. Other than that yes PRC would want to keep Taiwan successful.

For the rest of the world the bigger issue is PRC gaining a complete stranglehold on the South China Sea if they get Taiwan. That means no shipping through the strait without PRC permission (USA would protest but would no longer rish a carrier group in the process). Japan, Phillipeans, Vietnam, etc would all miss out on a lot of resources (as it is China is trying to bully them somewhat successfully).

Quite literally in this modern age there is no "need" for China to take over Taiwan (small countries are viable just look at Singapore etc). It is heading towards MAD just without the nukes on Taiwans side (I bet they have enough missiles aimed at Beijing to level the city though which is probably why China has not acted). If they got Taiwan then whats next? Mongolia? Vietnam etc?
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Aug 21, 2011 3:54 am

China is not stupid. China is spending money in Taiwan, making itself look more and more attractive. Give it 50 years, Taiwan will join China of its own free will. Maybe as a special independent state... but the time will come.

My oldest son is about to start Kindergarten in a few weeks, I think he would be better off learning Chinese than French in the coming years :/ The world is changing... people just refuse to see it.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:30 pm

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 16):
(I bet they have enough missiles aimed at Beijing to level the city though which is probably why China has not acted).

Since the US has some say on the military weaponery Taiwan has, if they have such missiles they must be home grown, as the US has not been supplying Taiwan with offensive weapons, missiles that could reach Beijing would fall in that category.
Besides, surface to surface missilies are not items the US military has much use for, it allows the US Army a longer reach on the battlefield thus removing some of their reliance on the Air Force, definately a no no. MRLS or long range arty to about 30 miles anything over that belongs to aircraft.
 
Shmertspionem
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 1:27 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 24, 2011 4:09 am

Quoting redflyer (Reply 6):
I think on this one issue, the U.S. is mired in a Cold War mentality. Defending Taiwan for Taiwan's sake is not worth the effort.
Quoting redflyer (Reply 6):

If you're talking about the F-16, that is not considered "new" equipment. It is a 35+ year old design and everybody and their grandmother owns one.

Unfortunately it is -

1) If the US fails to defend Taiwan it loses face and credibility with other Asian allies
2) If the US fails to supply Taiwan to defend itself it simply strengthens Taiwan's urge to go nuclear at some point
3) It also strengthens every other Asian country's urge to go nuclear ... we are already seeing signs of Vietnam having approached ROK and India on this. ... and Japan seems to have started the debate in earnest at the bureaucratic level.

Whatever the F-16 it is still vastly superior to the bulk of Chinese planes - electronically at least, and Taiwan's defence has always been about Quality over Quantity.


On the other side though - the KMT by its inconsistent politics and the string of security breaches it has sought to brush under the carpet - has lost US trust. If the US supplies Taiwan with weapons - they have no guarantees that some Idiot from the KMT wont decide to gift it to china as a good will measure.
Vi veri universum vivus vici
 
keesje
Posts: 8747
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:00 pm

Capitalism at it finest.

China currently owns $1.2 trillion of U.S. Treasury debt, the largest stake of any central bank.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...-blasts-us-over-cred_n_920094.html

Advises to stop spending so much were proudly dismissed for a decade. Reaganism spending while cutting tax.

Now it's pay back time.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:40 pm

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 12):
Let us not forget that the PLA are past masters at guerilla warfare...with the numbers to back them up.

That was what? 70 years ago? And all the veterans of that war was killed off during the cultural revolution.
The last campaign China had was with Vietnam with a border skirmish. China claimed victory by teaching Vietnam a lesson but had its nosed bloodied.

Wonder if any leaders from that campaign survived the "re-organization" after that?

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 15):
They deny the sale of F-16. I really doubt the denial is based on strategic need of Taiwan.

Just a theory . . .

US public debt was another.

Quoting Shmertspionem (Reply 19):
have no guarantees that some Idiot from the KMT wont decide to gift it to china as a good will measure.

No need to gift wrap, PLA intelligence has already penetrated the KMT.  

Anyone who thinks it's a breeze to stage a cross channel landing should read the official US Army reports on WWII battles (the Island campaign) and see what kind of logistics is involved.

All the commercial shipping that is coming out of China right now will not help with an invasion or occupation (wrong type of ships, wrong owners, wrong kind of logistics - Can't really send over a company of men or an APC in a container can they?).

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:59 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 21):
Anyone who thinks it's a breeze to stage a cross channel landing should read the official US Army reports on WWII battles (the Island campaign) and see what kind of logistics is involved.

I do not think it would be a breeze, but I also do not think that if China decides to invade Taiwan tomorrow they cannot do it because they do not have a fleet of amphibious ships, I see that as false comfort. The bulk of US combat vehicles delpoyed to Iraq did not arrive on military ships.

If a missile strike heralds the invasion, airborne forces are deployed, cargo ships with military escorts including submarines would be next to get supplies across. A submarine battle would ensue, depending on who controls the sky the submarines would be on their own.
Yes torpedoes and missiles can be used, China is aware of this, the US does not use wolfpack tactics, so if numbers are an issue how many can get through, how many would you need, how much anti-China is Taiwan actually?

During the Korean conflict, the US never expected overwhelming numbers to be thrown at them, China has numbers, and in any battle, numbers are a factor as well as quality.
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:31 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 22):
I do not think it would be a breeze, but I also do not think that if China decides to invade Taiwan tomorrow they cannot do it because they do not have a fleet of amphibious ships, I see that as false comfort. The bulk of US combat vehicles delpoyed to Iraq did not arrive on military ships.

You are right, that the bulk of US combat vehicles delpoyed to Iraq did not arrive on military ships.

However, You missed the point that they were delivered to friendly ports that were intact and manned by the host country. This would not be the case in Taiwan. As far as their military amphibious capability is concerned, they have the capability to sea-lift less then 25k troops on dedicated transport vessels.

Quoting par13del (Reply 22):
f a missile strike heralds the invasion, airborne forces are deployed, cargo ships with military escorts including submarines would be next to get supplies across. A submarine battle would ensue, depending on who controls the sky the submarines would be on their own.
Yes torpedoes and missiles can be used, China is aware of this, the US does not use wolfpack tactics, so if numbers are an issue how many can get through, how many would you need, how much anti-China is Taiwan actually?

China's Airborne forces face the same obstacles as their sea-lift capability. Dedicated paratroop capable airlift is also lacking, less then a division (US equivalent) total capability.

Before I go any further... We should understand that if any of these invasion scenario's were to take place, there would be a very large military build up prior to... that would Not go unnoticed. That would allow the US to move assets closer.

The Chinese submarine threat is probably their weakest link. There are rumors that every time a Chinese missile boat goes to sea, it has an escort. And from what I here, they are not impressive. One of the jokes I heard, was comparing them to a VW bug with a "just married" sign on the back dragging empty cans down a cobblestone street.  

Wolfpack? A single US Ohio class SSGN is a self contained wolfpack! With 154+ cruise missiles and a full complement of torpedo's to boot... You would not need a massive forward placed fleet.

Quoting par13del (Reply 22):
During the Korean conflict, the US never expected overwhelming numbers to be thrown at them, China has numbers, and in any battle, numbers are a factor as well as quality.

Again, those overwhelming numbers only count if you can get them to the battle! In your Korean example they walked...
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:31 am

Quoting mffoda (Reply 23):
Before I go any further... We should understand that if any of these invasion scenario's were to take place, there would be a very large military build up prior to... that would Not go unnoticed. That would allow the US to move assets closer

China sits across the straits, the US would have to move assets to friendly countries in the region who will attempt to use their influence to prevent the conflict, no different than what Turkey did during the build up for Gulf War II.
How fast can China get assets to its coast versus the US across thousands of miles of ocean.

Quoting mffoda (Reply 23):
Wolfpack? A single US Ohio class SSGN is a self contained wolfpack! With 154+ cruise missiles and a full complement of torpedo's to boot... You would not need a massive forward placed fleet.

Yes, but would a SSGN be deployed in the straits or attack subs, much less missiles and torpedos.
China would have to deply its subs with escorts, after all Taiwan also has older sub which must also be dealt with.

It a good idea for a war game simulation, I can think of a few scenarios to throw, so far the distance and the massive SSM's deployed seem to drive all my strategies toward a first strike being the best defense of Taiwan.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:36 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
How fast can China get assets to its coast versus the US across thousands of miles of ocean.

Not a fair comparison . . . but the Brits did relatively well during the Falklands Campaign.

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
How fast can China get assets to its coast versus the US across thousands of miles of ocean.

LOL . . . Moving a division by land in China may take longer than moving a division by boat on the Pacific Ocean.

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
Yes, but would a SSGN be deployed in the straits or attack subs, much less missiles and torpedos.

What are the range of the attack sub cruise missiles? Would they need to be deployed in straight to have an impact?

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
to friendly countries in the region who will attempt to use their influence to prevent the conflict,

True,

But once conflict starts, there will be countries willing to support US deployment:

Japan: China's Rival
Philippines: Historical allies.
Vietnam: If they can get over the fear of another Chinese invasion. (A complicated relationship)

All these countries fears China enormous capacity. Once conflict starts, that fear would turn into an opportunity to cut China down a couple of notch - with the US help of course  

And if it takes more than a month for the Chinese to pacify Taiwan, then the US would have Eastern Taiwan as a foot hold. Note Eastern Taiwan is mountainous and would be more readily defended. I don't see the Chinese moving across that mountain range in 1 or 2 months. It may be more beneficial to buy a whole bunch of guns (artillery) and missiles and defend the mountain range if you can't get your hands on the F-16.

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:05 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
China sits across the straits, the US would have to move assets to friendly countries in the region who will attempt to use their influence to prevent the conflict, no different than what Turkey did during the build up for Gulf War II.
How fast can China get assets to its coast versus the US across thousands of miles of ocean.

The US already has considerable assets in the region... Japan, Guam and South Korea

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
Yes, but would a SSGN be deployed in the straits or attack subs, much less missiles and torpedos.
China would have to deply its subs with escorts, after all Taiwan also has older sub which must also be dealt with.

Below is from a article dated last month...

http://www.thenorthwestnavigator.com...captain-michigan-blue/?partner=RSS

"Michigan and its sister SSGN, USS Ohio (SSGN 726), are homeported at Naval Base Kitsap, Bangor and forward deployed to Guam."

Guam is less then 1500 nm from Taiwan. Besides the 2 SSGN's presently attached, there are 3 SSN's stationed there as well. And let's not forget Japan and the 7th Fleet assets... Including a CBG with Aegis escorts and presumably a SSN or 2? Not to mention that there are plenty of Air assets within striking distance as well.
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5213
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 4:53 pm

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 14):

I doubt how much time the F16s can buy. I would expect the Chinese will destroy the few airports before any air war can begin.

The Chinese would also want to leave as much intact as possible for their later use. It's the Taiwanese who might sabotage those lest they fall into Chinese hands.


Quoting cosmofly (Reply 14):
A large number of mobile SAMs, plus a lot of SSMs against coastal bases and cross strait ships, will probably buy the more time.

Even the PAC-3, P-3 and E-2B upgrades are running into a lot of flak.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 16):
The problem with China taking over Taiwan is that there would be a lot of politcal prisoners in Taiwan.

Or a lot of young, highly skilled and educated work force in Chinese plants and reeducation camps.


Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 16):
Other than that yes PRC would want to keep Taiwan successful.

They could pattern it after the Hong Kong Autonomous Region model.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 21):

That was what? 70 years ago? And all the veterans of that war was killed off during the cultural revolution.

Then who put up the PROC.....republicans? It's not unthinkable that the lessons of that war were documented and studied.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 21):
The last campaign China had was with Vietnam with a border skirmish.

While the last major campaign of the KMT had them scurrying across the strait to Formosa. Admittedly, they now have imbibed immense, modern military doctrine.


Quoting bikerthai (Reply 21):

Wonder if any leaders from that campaign survived the "re-organization" after that?

Wonder too, who Taiwan would get to lead its resistance forces, just in case?

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 25):
It may be more beneficial to buy a whole bunch of guns (artillery) and missiles and defend the mountain range if you can't get your hands on the F-16.

It's still up in the air.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-on-taiwan-f-16-sale-dod-says.html

Quote:
"A senior US Department of Defense official suggested on 24 August that the proposed sale of 66 Lockheed Martin F-16C/Ds to Taiwan has not been ruled out, despite recent news reports to the contrary.

Asked to comment on the news reports about the F-16 deal, Michael Shiffler, deputy assistant secretary of defence for East Asia, stopped short of giving a direct answer.

'I will simply offer that there have been no decisions that have been made on arms sales to Taiwan,' Shiffler said. 'We work this question on a daily basis.'

Shiffler added that the US government continues to support a policy of providing Taiwan with the 'self-defence capabilities that it requires'."
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 6:38 pm

Quoting mffoda (Reply 23):
Wolfpack? A single US Ohio class SSGN is a self contained wolfpack! With 154+ cruise missiles and a full complement of torpedo's to boot... You would not need a massive forward placed fleet.

And two Ohio SSGNs would carry almost our entire inventory of anti-ship Tomahawks (unless they've built a bunch of TASMs in the last few years).
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:01 pm

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 27):
Or a lot of young, highly skilled and educated work force
Quoting Devilfish (Reply 27):

Wonder too, who Taiwan would get to lead its resistance forces, just in case?

  

LOL. As we have seen in Libya, a lot of young, highly skilled and educated work force will learn fast the ways or war and become an effective resistance force (given enough arms support). I wonder if the Taiwanese have the mandatory service for their citizens. If yes, then most of the populous would have a head start over the Libyans.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 27):

They could pattern it after the Hong Kong Autonomous Region model.

For one city, this may work. For a whole Island? Well, you just have to look at Tibet for an alternative example.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 27):
It's not unthinkable that the lessons of that war were documented and studied.

Ah, the question is was it documented with the same scholastic integrity of a non-partisan text or was it embellished too much to show the Great Chairman Mao in a good light that it would be useless for study? Besides, they probably already know the principle of guerrilla war is to co-op the populous. If they can do that with lots of money, then they would not need to invade. 

Finally, from my second hand information concerning the Taiwanese . . . historically the natives have a distinct culture and history from mainland China. The newcomer after 1945 are fervently anti communists. I do not know the current trends in Taiwan, but after so many years separated, I would wager that the cultural and psychology shift of the people will make merging with main land China through anything other than economic ties could be difficult.

How would Texan feel if they wake up tomorrow and find that they are now part of Mexico. O . K . bad example. Not Texas but maybe New Mexico? 



bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5213
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:44 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 29):
LOL. As we have seen in Libya, a lot of young, highly skilled and educated work force will learn fast the ways or war and become an effective resistance force (given enough arms support).

Doubtful the military establishment would readily cede leadership.


Quoting bikerthai (Reply 29):
I wonder if the Taiwanese have the mandatory service for their citizens. If yes, then most of the populous would have a head start over the Libyans.

They have.....

http://www.wri-irg.org/node/6311

Quote:
"Taiwan's Military Service Act, amended on 2 February 2000, stipulates that military service is mandatory for male citizens of Taiwan (Taiwan 2 Feb. 2000, Art. 1). Military conscription may begin on the first of January of the year following that in which a male turns eighteen years old and may be terminated on the thirty-first of December of the year in which he turns forty, known as the 'Male's Service Age'. There is no age restriction for termination of service for officers and junior officers."

This advisory may be closer to home.....

http://acs.ait.org.tw/military.html

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 29):
Ah, the question is was it documented with the same scholastic integrity of a non-partisan text or was it embellished too much to show the Great Chairman Mao in a good light that it would be useless for study?

They could then take a leaf from the Art of War by Sun Tzu for enlightenment.   

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 29):

For one city, this may work. For a whole Island? Well, you just have to look at Tibet for an alternative example.

Check out the part on Hong Kong in the link below.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 29):
Finally, from my second hand information concerning the Taiwanese . . . historically the natives have a distinct culture and history from mainland China. The newcomer after 1945 are fervently anti communists. I do not know the current trends in Taiwan, but after so many years separated, I would wager that the cultural and psychology shift of the people will make merging with main land China through anything other than economic ties could be difficult.

The following provide an interesting insight.....

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FC18Ad01.html
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:17 pm

Quoting rwessel (Reply 28):
Quoting mffoda (Reply 23):
Wolfpack? A single US Ohio class SSGN is a self contained wolfpack! With 154+ cruise missiles and a full complement of torpedo's to boot... You would not need a massive forward placed fleet.

And two Ohio SSGNs would carry almost our entire inventory of anti-ship Tomahawks (unless they've built a bunch of TASMs in the last few years).
"(unless they've built a bunch of TASMs in the last few years).'

As far as I know, all block 4 tomahawk missiles are capable of being used for anti-shipping... This would put there numbers in the K's.

rgds,
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:02 am

Quoting mffoda (Reply 31):
As far as I know, all block 4 tomahawk missiles are capable of being used for anti-shipping... This would put there numbers in the K's.

I wasn't aware that the standard block 4s had radars, and I can't imagine going optical for the ASM role.

I'm not sure why the USN would care to build many anti-shipping Tomahawks right now - there simply aren't enough targets to go around. And that can change only slowly - if and when the PLAN goes on a surface ship building spree, we'll have plenty of time to match that with 10x TASM builds.
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:30 am

Quoting rwessel (Reply 32):
I wasn't aware that the standard block 4s had radars, and I can't imagine going optical for the ASM role.

I'm not sure why the USN would care to build many anti-shipping Tomahawks right now - there simply aren't enough targets to go around. And that can change only slowly - if and when the PLAN goes on a surface ship building spree, we'll have plenty of time to match that with 10x TASM builds.

I didn't say they had radars. Only that the Tomahawk program has been updated and enhanced, as one would expect over all these years of front line service. I would hardly believe that the 28+ year old design RGM/UGM-109B (TASM) would still be the cutting edge... No?

Here is a press release from Raytheon a few years ago...

Raytheon Develops Anti-Surface Warfare Capability for Tomahawk Block IV Missile

May 4, 2009

TUCSON, Ariz., May 4, 2009 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon Company has developed a technology plan to enhance moving target capabilities for the combat-proven Tomahawk Block IV missile. The technology will enable naval forces to effectively engage moving maritime surface targets and conduct anti-surface warfare missions.

"This capability will allow the warfighter to attack a new tactical target set from more than 900 nautical miles (1035 statue miles)," said Harry Schulte, vice president of Raytheon Missile System's Air Warfare Systems' product line. "Raytheon's technology road map is the first step toward a rapid-development effort that will deliver a single, affordable, multi-mission missile capable of land attack and anti-surface warfare operations."
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 26, 2011 3:24 am

Quoting mffoda (Reply 33):
I didn't say they had radars. Only that the Tomahawk program has been updated and enhanced, as one would expect over all these years of front line service. I would hardly believe that the 28+ year old design RGM/UGM-109B (TASM) would still be the cutting edge... No?

Here is a press release from Raytheon a few years ago...

Raytheon Develops Anti-Surface Warfare Capability for Tomahawk Block IV Missile

May 4, 2009

TUCSON, Ariz., May 4, 2009 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon Company has developed a technology plan to enhance moving target capabilities for the combat-proven Tomahawk Block IV missile. The technology will enable naval forces to effectively engage moving maritime surface targets and conduct anti-surface warfare missions.

"This capability will allow the warfighter to attack a new tactical target set from more than 900 nautical miles (1035 statue miles)," said Harry Schulte, vice president of Raytheon Missile System's Air Warfare Systems' product line. "Raytheon's technology road map is the first step toward a rapid-development effort that will deliver a single, affordable, multi-mission missile capable of land attack and anti-surface warfare operations."

Which doesn't really sound like a current capability. Although I certainly think it’s reasonable (and desirable) to have multi-purpose missiles.

But the problem remains - how do you engage a surface force that can move at 30kts, after two hours of flight time, without radar? You could track externally, and feed updates to the missiles, but that's fraught with difficulties, not least having an accurate way to track a surface force from 900nm away. With a radar, the missile just needs to pop up high enough that the huge radar reflector that is most ships is not over the horizon (3000ft will get a clean view out to 60nm, and you'll be able to see the superstructure, at least of larger vessels, fair bit past that). An optical search from those distances would be much more problematic.

Hitting a stationary target is obviously vastly easier, and optical terminal guidance works well for that, but with a bit of coaxing, you could probably have convinced a block 1 Tomahawk to do that.

I'm not saying that the current inventory doesn't have a useful anti-ship capability, but I'm not familiar with it.

FWIW, I think some of the old TASMs were part of the stock that got upgrade to block 4, perhaps these kept their radars and anti-ship missions.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:56 pm

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 30):

The following provide an interesting insight.....

Thanks, sounds like a very passionate person. Perfect leader or a resistance movement.  
Quoting rwessel (Reply 34):
Quoting mffoda (Reply 33):

Didn't Raytheon won the SDB-II. From what I hear, that multi-purpose seeker is really good. Wouldn't be surprised if they use the same technology for the Tomahawk.

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Aug 28, 2011 12:14 am

Quoting mffoda (Reply 23):
Wolfpack? A single US Ohio class SSGN is a self contained wolfpack! With 154+ cruise missiles and a full complement of torpedo's to boot... You would not need a massive forward placed fleet.

In this scenario those are all first strike weapons, something which the US has been keeping out of the hands of Taiwan, anyone believe that the US would launch a pre-emptive strike on mainland China if they see forces being built up for a possible invasion, that would be an act of war ona nuclear capable nation no?

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 25):
Not a fair comparison . . . but the Brits did relatively well during the Falklands Campaign.

I am basing my responses on prevention or the invasion, but to follow your lead, if China does land forces and occupies some territory, do you expect the US to launch an invasion to remove Chinese troops from territory that was originally captured by rebel military forces back in 1945?

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 25):
What are the range of the attack sub cruise missiles? Would they need to be deployed in straight to have an impact?

In my line of thinking the attack subs would be there for their torpedoes and Harpoons to sink ships heading across the straits. Their inventory of such weapons is greater thant the SSGN's.

Quoting rwessel (Reply 32):
I'm not sure why the USN would care to build many anti-shipping Tomahawks right now - there simply aren't enough targets to go around. And that can change only slowly - if and when the PLAN goes on a surface ship building spree, we'll have plenty of time to match that with 10x TASM builds.

If China wants to go across the straits, what type of boats would they need to get troops across, not saying I expect something like the past Cuban boat lifts but if a mass of small boats start crossing with Migs flying cover, the US first option is to control the air, Navy ships may have to resort to guns, can current torpedoes target wooden hull ships?
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:16 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 36):
If China wants to go across the straits, what type of boats would they need to get troops across, not saying I expect something like the past Cuban boat lifts but if a mass of small boats start crossing with Migs flying cover, the US first option is to control the air, Navy ships may have to resort to guns, can current torpedoes target wooden hull ships?

They can, but if there are a couple of thousand wooden hull landing craft chugging across the Taiwan Strait, there aren't going to be enough torpedoes to go around. The entire U.S. inventory of Mk 48 torpedoes is around 1000. A Los Angeles will usually have fewer than 25 on board. And shooting a three million dollar torpedo at a wooden hulled landing craft seems inefficient.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5213
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Mon Aug 29, 2011 10:52 am

A glimpse at the PLAN's potential.....

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/default.asp
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Mon Aug 29, 2011 1:38 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 36):
Chinese troops from territory that was originally captured by rebel military forces back in 1945?

Well, at the time, the military force that "captured" Taiwan was recognized as the true government of China. The Red Chinese was not recognized as the "government" of China until much later.

Quoting par13del (Reply 36):

If China wants to go across the straits, what type of boats would they need to get troops across,

The "wooden" boat scenario would not help much in an invasion force. These boats may help in getting troops to the Taiwan, but that scenario would be too inefficient and is put the planner in to the whims weather condition. (Remember, at Dunkirk the British was able to evacuate their infantry with the small flotilla, but had to leave all their heavy equipment behind.)

What the Chinese need are roll-on roll-off "Car" transports to transport their mechanized equipment. (Don't know if those can handle tanks). Since the Chinese don't export many cars, I would assume they would not have many of these types of ships on hand. The container cargo ships may be use full, but they would not be efficient at transporting tanks either, at least not at the initial invasion stage.

These larger ships can be targeted. No need to target the smaller ships. What is good if you have infantry when you have no way to supply them or move them around the battle field?

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5213
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Mon Aug 29, 2011 8:41 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 36):
but if a mass of small boats start crossing with Migs flying cover, the US first option is to control the air, Navy ships may have to resort to guns, can current torpedoes target wooden hull ships?
Quoting rwessel (Reply 37):
And shooting a three million dollar torpedo at a wooden hulled landing craft seems inefficient.

This may be the future option.....

http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/C...26_tch_BAE_ship_laser.grid-6x2.jpg

Quote:
"Like peanut butter and chocolate, the U.S. Navy thinks machine guns and lasers are two great tastes that taste great together. They hope the combination of old school lead with new school 'pew' will better protect their ships from attack by smaller boats.

BAE Systems, a British defense firm, already makes the giant machine guns that protect warships from approaching watercraft. But yesterday, Boeing announced that they will team up with BAE Systems to develop a solid-state laser that would work in tandem with the already potent weapon."


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43902485...future_of_technology/#.Tlv1FGHSlc8
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2479
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:44 am

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 39):
The "wooden" boat scenario would not help much in an invasion force. These boats may help in getting troops to the Taiwan, but that scenario would be too inefficient and is put the planner in to the whims weather condition. (Remember, at Dunkirk the British was able to evacuate their infantry with the small flotilla, but had to leave all their heavy equipment behind.)

What the Chinese need are roll-on roll-off "Car" transports to transport their mechanized equipment. (Don't know if those can handle tanks). Since the Chinese don't export many cars, I would assume they would not have many of these types of ships on hand. The container cargo ships may be use full, but they would not be efficient at transporting tanks either, at least not at the initial invasion stage.

These larger ships can be targeted. No need to target the smaller ships. What is good if you have infantry when you have no way to supply them or move them around the battle field?

The Chinese will need modern amphibious assault assets, and in large quantities. The bulk of the Chinese amphibious assault force is made up of LST's, which need to beach themselves on a suitable landing zone to unload (that, or land using traditional landing craft). And since the suitable locations are well known, those locations will be heavily mined and defended. It is only until very recently have the Chinese switched to building LPD's (only 2 in existence, with one building). With the Chinese amphib fleet spread out across 3 separate fleets, it is highly unlikely that the Chinese will be able to muster enough assets to successfully land and reinforce an invasion, especially once you factor in expected losses, now, and well into the future.
 
wvsuperhornet
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:18 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:28 am

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 14):
I doubt how much time the F16s can buy. I would expect the Chinese will destroy the few airports before any air war can begin. A large number of mobile SAMs, plus a lot of SSMs against coastal bases and cross strait ships, will probably buy the more time.

Alot an updated F-16 block 52 or higher would be a handlefull for a chinese pilot in an SU-30

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 14):
Bottom line, Taiwan, even with US help, is in a no-win situation if China decides to take over. Luckily China is more busy making money, buying properties in and sending tourists to Taiwan while many Taiwanese are living and making tonnes of money in China.

I am not totally sure where everyone thinks that Taiwan would be an easy win for the Chinese their military is much better trained than their counter parts in the mainland while small in size they would put up a fight, realistically china would have to nuke it to take it, then what would be the point gaining a island that couldnt be inhabited for 20,000 years or so.
 
trex8
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:29 pm

Bush I approved the original Peace Fenghuang program at this very time in 92 when GD started mumbling about running down the production line in Ft Worth and he was looking like he might even lose his home state in the election. This from a person who spent his entire 2 terms as VP and 3/4 of his presidency doing every thing he could to prevent a sale- Reagan had actually promised a sale during his nominating convention. Obama will do the same when the chips are down for LM in an election year.

An upgraded block 20 with AESA will be awesome. In many ways we will have a rehash of the block 20 sale, where a "dumbed down" F16 is actually better than the latest production versions. The block 20s avionics- same as the NATO MLU - were only fitted to USAF F16s starting 10 years ago in the CCIP program.

The article is mistaken about the engine upgrade. The 220E is a 100/200 upgraded to -220 standard..ROCAF block 20s were delivered with the -220. Now Pratt did talk about developing a -220P which would incorporate some hardware from the -229 and have thrust somewhere between the -229 and -220. ROC did look at it a few years ago but couldn't decide if they wanted a cheaper upgrade-220P but be a unique customer with all the problems that entails - or pay more for getting new -229s and be part of a larger customer base. The block 20s were built with some structures from the 30/40/50 which allow higher TOW without the heavier empty weight of the stock 30/40/50. An engine upgrade will allow use of this unique feature though they will never have the payload range of a block 50.
 
trex8
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:37 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 39):
Quoting par13del (Reply 36):
Chinese troops from territory that was originally captured by rebel military forces back in 1945?

Well, at the time, the military force that "captured" Taiwan was recognized as the true government of China. The Red Chinese was not recognized as the "government" of China until much later.

Strictly no body captured anything . The Japanese surrendered in 45 to the Republic of China forces and handed back to "Chinese" authority Taiwan which had been a Japanese colony for the first half of the 20th century. The Peoples Republic was founded in 49 and has never controlled any territory ruled by the present ROC/Taiwan government.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:38 am

Quoting wvsuperhornet (Reply 42):
then what would be the point gaining a island that couldnt be inhabited for 20,000 years or so.

lol, tell that to the 1.17m people living in Hiroshima and the 446 000 in Nagasaki.
 
wvsuperhornet
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:18 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:09 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 45):
lol, tell that to the 1.17m people living in Hiroshima and the 446 000 in Nagasaki.

There is a huge difference beteween today nuclear weapons and yesterdays hydrogen and atoms bombs (not saying one way or another that it was right or wrong) just pointing out that the current day effects would be totally different.
 
trex8
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:12 pm

Has congress ever legislated a requirement to sell arms overseas before??
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...h-for-f_16c§d-sale-to-taiwan.html
 
Oroka
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:40 pm

If the Chinese were smart, then they would have developed low yield nuke that could destroy a large base, or even a city with as little radiation leftovers as possible. Im sure they are capable of making a old style A bomb.
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:03 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 48):

If the Chinese were smart, then they would have developed low yield nuke that could destroy a large base, or even a city with as little radiation leftovers as possible. Im sure they are capable of making a old style A bomb

You mean like a Reverse Neutron bomb? Smart? ... Maybe because they can't steal the plans off the Internet. 
harder than woodpecker lips...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot] and 8 guests