How long can Taiwan stand an attack from China

[knightz33]

I was thinking, even with all the sale of weaponry to Taiwan...how long can Taiwan sustain a full scale invasion from China??? Does these missiles really help?? As we know, China is catching up really fast...with the development of new fighters like the j-10 and jf-17, and they have even started research on aircraft carriers.....will Taiwan be able to hold back this fire breathing dragon?

 

[ahussains]

Its all depend on the US and its intrest as long as they are on the Backing of Taiwan China will wait when US pushing them selfs backing form the Taiwan then it Starts i think if they are going for the Full scale invasion its just matter of the days.. But its really depend upon the comman peoples of the Taiwan if they stand against the Chinees then it takes time ... How long no one know ?

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

China might be building new shiny fighters and carriers, but untill they have the logistical, ISR and naval capability they dont have a chance. The PLAAF could do some real damage. However PLAN doesn't have anywere near the logistical assets to deploy and supply the forces needed to overcome the ROC. The defences are fearsome, the terrain is bad, the logistical assets are way to few, you cant hold the advantage of suprise because the ISR advantage is with ROC, the enemy is tough, well trained and determined, all the major landing points have pre targeted MLRS and artillary dug in around them, he has the supply advantage due to pre positioned supply dumps, you have to supply over the beaches which are within arty range and the enemy can concentrate on the beachead due to the geography of the theater. And thats without USN/USAF intervention which could crush an invasion attempt with hours. that kind of summs up the porblems PROC forces would face. The J10, J11 or Jf17 is not going to change any of these cold hard facts.

 

[USNavySEAL3310]

Taiwan is an island. It is always easy to defeat an island, especially when you have over 2 million troops at your disposal.

Taiwan doesn't have the resources or even the manpower to call up during a war compared to China.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Taiwan is an island. It is always easy to defeat an island, especially when you have over 2 million troops at your disposal.

Not when you only have the logistical capability to deploy and supply 5~10% of that number. The enemy has 600 000 troops when fully mobilised, a very capable IADS (including PAC2), and is well dug in.

 

[USNavySEAL3310]

I don't see any way Taiwan could withstand an all-out attack by the PLA and PLAN. I don't believe any force on an island that is vastly outnumbered in ships, aircraft, tanks, and people could hold out without outside support.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Numbers tell about 10% of the story. If you look at the actual capabilties of the two forces and you will see how imposible this would be for PLAN or PLA. Tacticaly, Strategicaly (and most important of all) Logistically ROC holds all of the cards. You might have a large population and a large army, but unless you can safely deploy and supply them they're useless, and thats before you can even engage the enemy. You have to get over the first hurdle before you can even fight a battle, and PLAN dont have the logistical capability to come close to achieving this.

Its the same argument as the Indonesians could invade Australia wothout US intervention because they have a "huge" army, which is rediculous. You have to have the naval capability to move them first, and more importantly supply them, especially with an airborne and submerged maritime strike capability as leathal as the ADF's.

Numbers are useless if you cant adequatly supply them.

 

[Grand Danois]

I don't see any way Taiwan could withstand an all-out attack by the PLA and PLAN. I don't believe any force on an island that is vastly outnumbered in ships, aircraft, tanks, and people could hold out without outside support.

That's because you look at numbers, when (cap)ability is what matters.

And the Taiwanese geographical advantage is a massive plus.

 

[USNavySEAL3310]

I understand that but to think that, in the long run, Taiwan would not lose is unimaginable to me.

 

[steve33]

The issue is not how many people China has and what equipment they have but what they can get onto Taiwan and if Taiwan has a strong arsonal of anti ship missiles things could get embarrassing for China they will be extremely vunerable crossing the straits with all there men crammed on ships.

 

[rrrtx]

I understand that but to think that, in the long run, Taiwan would not lose is unimaginable to me.

China doesn't have a sufficient capacity to transport the men and equipment to the beaches. It has a massive army with improving technology but no ability to project power. It's still a defensive force for all practical purposes.

Another way to think about it - picture Allied D-Day operations during WW2 but the Germans have large numbers of anti-ship missiles, have not completely lost air superiority, and has subs actively attacking the amphibious forces. Would the outcome have been the same? Taiwan would probably have these advantages.

 

[swerve]

I don't see any way Taiwan could withstand an all-out attack by the PLA and PLAN. I don't believe any force on an island that is vastly outnumbered in ships, aircraft, tanks, and people could hold out without outside support.

What matters is how many (& how good) troops & tanks are able to get to Taiwan, & be supplied, & how many aircraft are able to operate over Taiwan, & how good their weapons are, & their communications, & sensors, & pilots - and so on.

100 million troops & 100000 tanks are worth bugger-all if they can't get to the fight. It's too far to swim. The prime considerations are logistics, & naval & air capability. Would you like to address those issues? While doing so, please make an attempt to evaluate the cost to China of a naval & air war off its coasts, concentrated near its richest exporting regions. Remember that absolute abilities matter only when national survival is at stake. Your analysis would benefit from an attempt to evaluate who would have most at stake (whose survival is at stake here?), so be most committed to a favourable outcome. Take into account that when national survival is not threatened, there is always the option of negotiating an end to hostilities & implementing a damage limitation strategy, & that damage limitation strategies can include replacing a government that starts a costly war, & blaming the defeat on them, to save face. Political factors can not be ignored.

 

[USNavySEAL3310]

True. But couldn't all that be offset by the fact that the PLAN could land troops (not 100% sure, don't know China's naval capabilities as evident from above) 360 degrees all the way around the island? I realize the RoC probably has the ability to sink ships before they even get near (by air or land-based systems, not to mention of course its own navy) but, again, I would think just the sheer number of PLA forces rushing up would be enough.

 

[Waylander]

Not long ago we had a big thread about a possible invasion of Taiwan.
You should use the forum search. This thread includes nearly everything about such a scenario.

 

[Rich]

True. But couldn't all that be offset by the fact that the PLAN could land troops (not 100% sure, don't know China's naval capabilities as evident from above) 360 degrees all the way around the island? I realize the RoC probably has the ability to sink ships before they even get near (by air or land-based systems, not to mention of course its own navy) but, again, I would think just the sheer number of PLA forces rushing up would be enough.

We've had this exercise a dozen times in this forum. The PLAN is not even close to having the available platforms to move the required tonnage of troops, supplies, weapons. And not just that, in the near future "10 to 20 years" they will still not have the capability.

They have relatively few marines trained for such an OP as well. Overall a picture emerges of a China that is not seriously contemplating a seaborne invasion of Taiwan. Yes they are pointing a lot of missiles at the place, and they are upgrading some amphibious assets. But they just cant move enough material and men from A to B. I also doubt the PLA and PLAN have much enthusiasm for such an adventure as well. Such OPs are fraught with uncertainty.

I'm willing to entertain another scenario but do please post the nuts and bolts of the entire operation in a logical manner. Just saying,

Taiwan is an island. It is always easy to defeat an island, especially when you have over 2 million troops at your disposal.

Taiwan doesn't have the resources or even the manpower to call up during a war compared to China.

isn't going to cut it.

Research first and then introduce an operation rooted in reality in a post that has relevance.

 

[riksavage]

Taiwan parallels South Korea in some respects. Its military and Government has spent the last fifty years scenario planning and building the command structure to respond to an invasion by a numerically superior foe.

The countries infrastructure (airports, transport system etc) is designed to be very quickly transformed to support the military. All possible landing points are covered and contingencies in-place to mine all approaches. They have a system in-place to facilitate a very rapid call to arms, which will have more active units in defence in depth positions quicker than the mainland Chinese can bring troops to the beaches due to lack of adequate lift. Even the recent purchase of four large Russian hovercrafts adds very little to the tactical picture in terms of swinging the balance in the PRC's favour. The mainland Chinese know they don’t have the capacity to carry-out a successful invasion, their plan is to saturate Taiwan with wave after wave of missile attacks destroying strategic infrastructure, breaking the populations will to continue until they finally capitulate. The belief being ‘we are all ethnic Chinese’ why fight each other look at the success of Hong Kong - one country two systems blah, blah, blah!

 

[steve33]

Taiwan parallels South Korea in some respects. Its military and Government has spent the last fifty years scenario planning and building the command structure to respond to an invasion by a numerically superior foe.

The countries infrastructure (airports, transport system etc) is designed to be very quickly transformed to support the military. All possible landing points are covered and contingencies in-place to mine all approaches. They have a system in-place to facilitate a very rapid call to arms, which will have more active units in defence in depth positions quicker than the mainland Chinese can bring troops to the beaches due to lack of adequate lift. Even the recent purchase of four large Russian hovercrafts adds very little to the tactical picture in terms of swinging the balance in the PRC's favour. The mainland Chinese know they don’t have the capacity to carry-out a successful invasion, their plan is to saturate Taiwan with wave after wave of missile attacks destroying strategic infrastructure, breaking the populations will to continue until they finally capitulate. The belief being ‘we are all ethnic Chinese’ why fight each other look at the success of Hong Kong - one country two systems blah, blah, blah!

The Chinese can,t of learnt the lessons of past wars with civilian populations being pounded from the air and not giving up.

 

[riksavage]

Just to put an invasion of Taiwan in context, the following is an overview of resources required for the D-Day landings:

On D-Day, the Allies landed around 156,000 troops in Normandy. The American forces landed numbered 73,000: 23,250 on Utah Beach, 34,250 on Omaha Beach, and 15,500 airborne troops. In the British and Canadian sector, 83,115 troops were landed (61,715 of them British): 24,970 on Gold Beach, 21,400 on Juno Beach, 28,845 on Sword Beach, and 7900 airborne troops.

11,590 aircraft were available to support the landings. On D-Day, Allied aircraft flew 14,674 sorties, and 127 were lost.
In the airborne landings on both flanks of the beaches, 2395 aircraft and 867 gliders of the RAF and USAAF were used on D-Day.
Operation Neptune involved huge naval forces, including 6939 vessels: 1213 naval combat ships, 4126 landing ships and landing craft, 736 ancillary craft and 864 merchant vessels. Some 195,700 personnel were assigned to Operation Neptune: 52,889 US, 112,824 British, and 4988 from other Allied countries.By the end of 11 June (D + 5), 326,547 troops, 54,186 vehicles and 104,428 tons of supplies had been landed on the beaches.

Just look at the shear numbers of assets required to mount a successful landing, and this was against an occupying army (weakened through years of conflict on the Eastern front), not a indigenous armed forces supported by a local population.

The PRC does not own enough assets to lift the man-power from Xiamen to Taiwan required to subdue and hold the island. Plus only 15% of their huge standing army could be considered a modern, well equipped and trained offensive force. They also have zero experience at such complex operations. Other than a protracted bombardment campaign supported by a fifth-column targeting key politicians and military leaders they have very little alternative option.

 

[ahussains]

Just to put an invasion of Taiwan in context, the following is an overview of resources required for the D-Day landings:

On D-Day, the Allies landed around 156,000 troops in Normandy. The American forces landed numbered 73,000: 23,250 on Utah Beach, 34,250 on Omaha Beach, and 15,500 airborne troops. In the British and Canadian sector, 83,115 troops were landed (61,715 of them British): 24,970 on Gold Beach, 21,400 on Juno Beach, 28,845 on Sword Beach, and 7900 airborne troops.

11,590 aircraft were available to support the landings. On D-Day, Allied aircraft flew 14,674 sorties, and 127 were lost.
In the airborne landings on both flanks of the beaches, 2395 aircraft and 867 gliders of the RAF and USAAF were used on D-Day.
Operation Neptune involved huge naval forces, including 6939 vessels: 1213 naval combat ships, 4126 landing ships and landing craft, 736 ancillary craft and 864 merchant vessels. Some 195,700 personnel were assigned to Operation Neptune: 52,889 US, 112,824 British, and 4988 from other Allied countries.By the end of 11 June (D + 5), 326,547 troops, 54,186 vehicles and 104,428 tons of supplies had been landed on the beaches.

Just look at the shear numbers of assets required to mount a successful landing, and this was against an occupying army (weakened through years of conflict on the Eastern front), not a indigenous armed forces supported by a local population.

The PRC does not own enough assets to lift the man-power from Xiamen to Taiwan required to subdue and hold the island. Plus only 15% of their huge standing army could be considered a modern, well equipped and trained offensive force. They also have zero experience at such complex operations. Other than a protracted bombardment campaign supported by a fifth-column targeting key politicians and military leaders they have very little alternative option.

Nice detail quote so what PRC have to do if they need the Full scale invation of the Taiwan.. What counter massuers they have to take..
any idea ?

 

[knightz33]

Haha...thanks guys for your replies....but i was wondering if America intervenes, taking the side of Taiwan, will China still be able to take over Taiwan in a matter of hours???