[quote=“TainanCowboy”]LBTW -
An absolutely spot-on assessment.
This is the current view of the Taiwanese military situation/predicament.[/quote]
How in your opinion does this compare to the Chinese? Granted the Chinese are spending far more but are they any more capable of training and running a modern army? Given the similarities in culture and the far more authoritarian impulses that run through the Chinese chain of command I would suspect they are even worse than the taiwanese.
[quote=“Muzha Man”][quote=“TainanCowboy”]LBTW -
An absolutely spot-on assessment.
This is the current view of the Taiwanese military situation/predicament.[/quote]How in your opinion does this compare to the Chinese? Granted the Chinese are spending far more but are they any more capable of training and running a modern army? Given the similarities in culture and the far more authoritarian impulses that run through the Chinese chain of command I would suspect they are even worse than the Taiwanese.[/quote]Mucha -
Good Q’s.
The PLA/PLAN/PLAF have the numerical advantage many fold in comparison to the Taiwan forces. Numerical advantage in sheer troop count as well as individual asset count. No question there.
Technology wise - things might be weighed slightly in Taiwans favor. This is a result of their long standing position as a US ally. Taiwan also has equiptment from other countries, but in small numbers. Also the Ching-kuo Indigenous Defense Fighter - IDF - has come along well with help from General Dynamics. Something to remember, military foreign asset purchases come with training, spares and upgrades for a specific time period for each package. Its not a one time - out the door deal. So this helps keep assets working. HOWEVER contracts must be renewed and new purchases made to keep the stuff timely. Here is where Taiwan runs into problems. They are cheap charlies in this regard.
This prevailing attitude is very contagious all thru thru Chain-of-Command (CoC) - up & down the ranks. No investment in the long term. Everything is “Buy the cheapest - use it till it breaks - stop using it.”
Of course along with the "Whats in it for me? mentality.
A good primer on Taiwan military capabilities:
globalsecurity.org/military/world/taiwan/
As to the “authoritarian impulses” comment - Its the military we’re discussing. Hard to get any more “authoritarian” than that environment…lol.
If you are referring to “abusing” the lower grade draftee’s…that is also a result of poor morale due to corruption and favoriticism at the top. Each CO. establishing their own little kingdoms. A bit of the old “Warlord” mentality. It needs to be addresses from the top down. And I don’t see that happening. Although, its is much better now than even 5 years ago.
added:
For info on PRNavy build-ups:
jeffhead.com/redseadragon/pl … arison.htm
No, I wasn’t refering to abuses but rather to a mindset that resists change and does not allow for the man in charge to ever ask those below him for advise (even if those below have all the relevant experience). Look at Iraq. An authoritarian government can be completely out of touch with the capabilities of its own armed forces when no one is capable of telling those in charge what is really going on.
While all armies rely on the chain of command being respected, in the US it seems as if there is still room for maverick opinion as well as genuine self-criticism and soul searching. I was reading some stuff recently about the changes the US armed forces put themselves through after Vietnam. I can’t see this happenign in the Taiwanese or Mainland Chinese armies. Academia is rigid enough. The army must be doubly so.
[quote=“ShrimpCrackers”]Got any better suggestions then?!? How about something positive, or a suggestion on what we should be doing?
Its easy to shoot anything down, its hard to create something.[/quote]
I already gave some suggestions … improve command/control, logistics, infrastructure, electronic warfare capabilities, etc. They also need to work harder towards developing a professional army rather than the conscript system … they could do this by following the US model … offering lots of incentives, such as specialized training, free university tuition, better pension program, etc.
I don’t necessarily agree with Vork that they need to purchase more fighters, but they do need to purchase more AAMs, and increase their number of pilots (they don’t have enough skilled pilots for the planes they already have).
In order to save money, and spend it where it is needed more, I think they could downsize the purchase of new subs from eight to four … this would still be twice as many as what they have now (the two US Guppy-class subs from WWII don’t count). I also think that more than three batteries of Patriot PAC III anti-missile systems are needed … perhaps three located in Taipei, three in central Taiwan, and another three in the south.
I think they need a lot more Patriots than that. I’d say at least twice as many.
But I certainly agree on the C-N-C stuff. the original package offered some of that, plus Paladin Howitzers, another need, and that has been delivered. I think they also need minesweeping/anti-mine gear. And you are absolutely right about pilots and pilot training. They need to send people overseas to get more training with the US, Israel, and so on.
Vorkosigan
I disagree. Eight is probably about the minimum they should buy for a few reasons. The most important reason for not buying just four is economies of scale for building and maintaining the boats as well as training the crews. The unit cost for the initial purchase and then recurrent spending for just four boats would not be worth it. Also, if they only had four boats, the most they could ever hope to have at sea at any one time would be two, and more realistically just one. In my opinion, they should just buy eight or none at all. Anything less would probably just result in rusty hulks sitting in port within two years of purchase (as opposed to the typical ROCN standard, which would mean they would only be useless after about 5 years of service 
).
You are right and wrong about pilot training. The ROCAF already sends a good number of pilots to Luke AFB in Arizona every year to do the weapons course at the international school there. I think they usually have six pilots there for half a year at a time. They’ve been doing that for 7 or 8 years now, so quite a lot of ROCAF pilots have done the training. Keep in mind that USAF pilots only go to that program after five or six years of flying.
The problem is not that they don’t get the best training, but that they don’t continue to train well once they’re back in Taiwan. The weapons course in Arizona lets them practice with just about everything an F-16 can do. This includes air to ground munitions and tanking. The ROCAF doesn’t own tankers and pilots very rarely do any air to ground training. Almost all the training they do back in Taiwan is for air to air engagement, and for that they are pretty good.
As it stands right now, there is no good reason for the ROCAF to do anything but air to air training in Taiwan. They own very little in the way of air to ground weapons. The stocks they do have are just tokens. The reason they don’t buy more is that for them to ever have a chance of using it successfully, they would have to make big investments in ECM platforms and they’d also have to increase the number of E-2s. Otherwise, any F-16s sent to bomb mainland targets would be doomed. The problem isn’t so much pilot training, but instead that they don’t have any strategies that require anything other than training for air to air engagement.
By buying the E-2s, the ROCAF made a big step toward building a comprehensive air to air defense strategy. Is that strategy enough? The answer is increasingly no, but at least they train well for that strategy. If they ever want to do anything other than just air to air engagement with their air force, then Taiwan would have to do a lot more than just training; they’d have to buy a damn lot of hardware like EA-6s and more E-2s. If I were a betting man, I’d bet that they’ll never do it. The initial spending and the spending to keep such systems going is too much for them to stomach. And this certainly doesn’t make them cheap. Keep in mind that a serious small country air force like Israel’s doesn’t even have a dedicated ECM platform.
JT -
Good analysis. However Israel not only does have ECM a/c flying, they, read IAI, are actually building and selling ECM’s based on the G/500550 airframe.
[quote]RC-707
It is believed that four Boeing RC-707 aircraft are operated by the IAF, two in the ELINT role and two in the ECM role. The aircraft are operated by 134 Tayeset at Lod. Some other IAF 707s are possibly configured for AAR/SIGINT operations. Some of the ELINT aircraft incorporate a cheek-antenna array externally similar to the AEELS (Automatic ELINT Emitter Locating System) on the RC-135U/V/W. Israel is currently looking for up to 9 dual role aircraft to replace their 707
There is a problem however, can’t China use its Kilo Class submarines for blockades instead of invasion?
PS: Oooh check it out, I have the first post for 2006 (according to Taiwan time) in the TP forum. Sorry, I wish it was more positive. Happy New Year everyone! May it become even better than the last.
There is a reason why Taiwan needs those submarines (no less than 8 for them to be effective and no more than 16 for us to be able to afford and maintain them). China’s first likely option is to use their ballistic missiles to destroy as much of airports and runways (include highways) in the very early phrase of war. Without runways, more aircrafts on the ground are simply waste of our money and will not contribute to the effectiveness of our fighting force.
Submarines are not fixed targets like airports and therefore will not be affected by ballistic missiles attack. They need very sophisticated sonars just to find them in the sea and destroy them. They are as important in the sea as jet aircrafts are to the air and tanks are to the land. Taiwan needs submarines as another layer of security blanket to forstall the invading force because our airforce will be fighting with many handicaps early on in the war.
The problem with the submarines is that they will take a LONG time to be built and the crews to be trained … and that’s only after (and if) the weapons budget gets passed. There are things they can do with their regular defense budget (even better if increased to 3% of the GDP) in the immediate future, such as improved command, control, and logistics, and the anti-mine warfare stuff that Vork mentioned. With the submarines, I’m thinking the US and Japan could help out a lot more in that area, but the Taiwanese will need more capabilities to fight off an initial “surprise” attack without their entire military machine crumbling under the first wave.
There’s been talk of upgrading their fleet of attack helicopters as well, and I think they should do that … that is a major knick in the armor of the PLA which doesn’t currently have an attack helicopter to speak of. They don’t need runways to take off (many of which would be taken out by Chinese missiles), and they can wreak havoc on PLA armor if they make it ashore.
As for the Patriots, I agree with Vork that they should get their hands on as many as possible, unfortunately they’re having enough trouble getting just three batteries, but the more they can get the better.
I’m open to the idea of buying USED subs from the world markets, but Taiwan MND is still run by a bunch of old geezers from the old ROC (KMT) era. Anyhow, I’m sure you remember the ‘Drink less Bubble Tea for Arms’ commercial they aired a while back, which was a big time failure in communicate the urgency of buying better weapons for our protection to the public. Well, don’t expect Taiwan (ROC) Military to move from a conscript system to a professional armed force with that kind of old retards running the shows up there. 
As for helicopters, I would prefer we get some Sikorsky AH-60L Battle Hawk. They would prove more useful for our future needs.
Sikorsky AH-60L Battle Hawk
As for Patriots, Taiwan is developing its own, ‘The TK-3 Project’ I believed. Anyhow, I have no data on how this will compared to the Patriots. We’ll just wonder if our money are wasted again by these ROC old farts… 
[quote=“Iron_Jackal_Tw”]There is a reason why Taiwan needs those submarines (no less than 8 for them to be effective and no more than 16 for us to be able to afford and maintain them). China’s first likely option is to use their ballistic missiles to destroy as much of airports and runways (include highways) in the very early phrase of war. Without runways, more aircrafts on the ground are simply waste of our money and will not contribute to the effectiveness of our fighting force.
Submarines are not fixed targets like airports and therefore will not be affected by ballistic missiles attack. They need very sophisticated sonars just to find them in the sea and destroy them. They are as important in the sea as jet aircrafts are to the air and tanks are to the land. Taiwan needs submarines as another layer of security blanket to forstall the invading force because our airforce will be fighting with many handicaps early on in the war.[/quote]
Shouldn’t the better question be why Taiwan Would fight China instead of how?!!
[quote=“phibert”][quote=“Iron_Jackal_Tw”]There is a reason why Taiwan needs those submarines (no less than 8 for them to be effective and no more than 16 for us to be able to afford and maintain them). China’s first likely option is to use their ballistic missiles to destroy as much of airports and runways (include highways) in the very early phrase of war. Without runways, more aircrafts on the ground are simply waste of our money and will not contribute to the effectiveness of our fighting force.
Submarines are not fixed targets like airports and therefore will not be affected by ballistic missiles attack. They need very sophisticated sonars just to find them in the sea and destroy them. They are as important in the sea as jet aircrafts are to the air and tanks are to the land. Taiwan needs submarines as another layer of security blanket to forstall the invading force because our airforce will be fighting with many handicaps early on in the war.[/quote]
Shouldn’t the better question be why Taiwan Would fight China instead of how?!![/quote]
Majority of Taiwanese had no interest in fighting China unless it’s for our freedom. We would prefer to live peacefully as our own country. However, they are people in China (CCP) and in Taiwan (KMT) that wants a war. For CCP, it’s to expand their empire. For KMT, to make us unable to defend ourselves by taking control in our military, media, government, and so on. All the fail attempted to enhanced our security is a result of this. :fume:
Diesels = cheaper
Diesels = quieter
Taiwan doesn’t need to project its naval power 10,000km away. Diesels will be just fine.
Diesels = cheaper
Diesels = quieter
Taiwan doesn’t need to project its naval power 10,000km away. Diesels will be just fine.[/quote]
It would also be impossible for the US or any other country to sell nuclear subs to Taiwan because of control regimes. Nuclear subs would be way too expensive for Taiwan to operate, anyway.
[quote=“Iron_Jackal_Tw”][quote=“phibert”][quote=“Iron_Jackal_Tw”]There is a reason why Taiwan needs those submarines (no less than 8 for them to be effective and no more than 16 for us to be able to afford and maintain them). China’s first likely option is to use their ballistic missiles to destroy as much of airports and runways (include highways) in the very early phrase of war. Without runways, more aircrafts on the ground are simply waste of our money and will not contribute to the effectiveness of our fighting force.
Submarines are not fixed targets like airports and therefore will not be affected by ballistic missiles attack. They need very sophisticated sonars just to find them in the sea and destroy them. They are as important in the sea as jet aircrafts are to the air and tanks are to the land. Taiwan needs submarines as another layer of security blanket to forstall the invading force because our airforce will be fighting with many handicaps early on in the war.[/quote]
Shouldn’t the better question be why Taiwan Would fight China instead of how?!![/quote]
Majority of Taiwanese had no interest in fighting China unless it’s for our freedom. We would prefer to live peacefully as our own country. However, they are people in China (CCP) and in Taiwan (KMT) that wants a war. For CCP, it’s to expand their empire. For KMT, to make us unable to defend ourselves by taking control in our military, media, government, and so on. All the fail attempted to enhanced our security is a result of this. :fume:[/quote]
What “freedom” are you talking about? “Defend ourselves” from what?
Israel don’t need many dedicated ECM platforms because they got Harpy drones to take out the ground radars. Why waste money fooling them when you can just neutralize them!? 
Diesels = cheaper
Diesels = quieter
Taiwan doesn’t need to project its naval power 10,000km away. Diesels will be just fine.[/quote]
Subs are not to PROJECT naval power. They are to PROTECT our Sea Lines of Communications. We’ll still need to make sure we can export and import many things in and out of island during the war if it occured.
phibert, not too bright people tends to ask the same question many times in different wording!! 
The purpose is Taiwanese Democracy! Keep China from attacking us! You have fun coming up the next retard SAME question!!
Israel don’t need many dedicated ECM platforms because they got Harpy drones to take out the ground radars. Why waste money fooling them when you can just neutralize them!? [/quote]
OK, so where are Taiwan’s Harpies? Oh yeah, that’s right. It’s the PRC that has the Harpies.