This means that the PLA can deliver forces literally anywhere in Taiwan's coastline contrary to what people previously believed
This means that the PLA can deliver forces literally anywhere in Taiwan's coastline contrary to what people previously believed
a rotary cannon or a submarine fuck all of that up
china will never get an uncontested beach landing on taiwan
>Submarines
>In the Taiwan strait
Good luck!
The entirety of the east UK and northern Europe waters are like that, Europe and the US have been conducting simulated cold submarine warfare vs Russia around there for decades but ok
That's the depth not temperature retard. The Taiwan Strait is extremely shallow, not suited for subs
you realise that britain is a coastal island too right? submarines can operate in 50m-20m deep water
i dont even think submarines are needed for this either, remotely accurate artillery fire from the coast could destroy this as well, let alone any airstrike. its a solution for an already seized coast, which has no impact on the current issue that china lacks the amphibious fleet to land a sizeable enough military force on taiwan to take it *under fire*
that leaves them the only option of carpet bombing all the military instalations as they do it, but good luck getting away with that and not giving the americans a casus belli chang
tl;dr the depth is the same and the taiwanese wouldnt need a sub to destroy a fucking pontoon bridge and unarmed ferry on their coast anyway
Submarines can but they're operating basically just under the surface at that point. They would be extremely easily detected by sonar because there's so little vertical distance and there's no thermocline. MAD booms would also extremely easily pick them up.
>Where does the USN conduct its non-Antarctic sea trials for 1000, Alex?
I'll answer it for you. The Caribbean because you can train at literally any practical depth imaginable in that area.
Unlike the Straits of Taiwan, where you can't train deep.
Most importantly cavitation speed is depth dependent. Submarines can go faster more quietly if they are deeper.
Unless they train to fundamentally rewrite the laws of physics, your point is completely irrelevant to mine.
i think youre just underestimating the range/stealth/effectiveness because it helps your argument in this case but this isnt ww2 and honestly, submarines really wouldnt be necessary to defend the straight from these sorts of landings
I'm not the other guy, I'm just talking about subs. It's far from an exaggeration, there's a reason why submarines keep getting built to go deeper, because depth = stealth. Not just because you're further from sonar, but because you generate less cavitation. A submarines height is above 10 meters. You need at least another 15 meters of clearance above the seabed so you don't run into banks, reefs, and other features. You're just 25 metres from the surface. To put that into context, that's about 6 storeys.
Your own point is moot because the Chinese subs don't also magically get to operate at those same depths without the same problems, without being loud as shit, and without long-range systems targeting them.
This bridge would just get blasted by artillery, and cruise missiles from as far away as needed while the Chinese subs that are there to protect the strait get absolutely toasted and the American subs can move in to sink the littoral vessels and then coordinated hell is brought down on their harbors and ship yards in the area.
What the fuck is this picture? That's not where the UK, US and USSR would have duked it out with submarines. It would have been GIUK and then maybe Atlantic, not the fucking English Channel and Med.
Anon, they train all across that. Literally the only point made.
Anon, I'm pointing out to you that if the world's oceans were 50m deep then no one would have built nuclear submarine fleets. We all built them because the bits of water between Murmansk, Holy and Gare Lochs, King Bay and New London are deep enough that SSNs are useful.
we were talking about TRAINING you fucking moron and if you think that submarines were designed and intended for submarine on submarine conflict you are just nonfunctional
if you think russians are concentrating their naval forces on invading iceland and norway i really, really dont know how to help you - see a special learning needs teacher or a neurologist because i am not qualified for this anon
good thing in an actual war they arent training? submarines could operate effectively to combat these sort of pontoon docks in the taiwan straight and if youre pretending otherwise then youre just stupid
Sp00ky
Singaporean here. Strait of Malacca is like 200m deep and we can operate our stinky submarines just fine.
200 is still a lot. Most of the Taiwan strait is 50m or less. At that depth a submarine will even generate waves on the surface.
this is patently false what the fuck
even at 20m a submarine isnt going to generate significant waves, thats like a six story building
this is partly true but ssns are hardly the first or only attack submarines built and the earliest ones definitely werent operated at 1000m depth
even at 50m submarines are more effective at stealth than surface ships, even if nuclear power wouldnt have been a boon like it is for our current submarines
depth certainly equals stealth im no stupid enough to argue that point, but that doesnt prevent submarines operating effectively in the taiwan strait - even china at this point does it, and if your target is a goddamn static pontoon bridge you wouldnt need to do anything drastic that would comprimise yourself
regardless i dont think the submarine hillis something i want to die on - they wouldnt be used for this anyway because there are much better options and ill never be proven right (or wrong) because of it
>a rotary cannon
why would you bother?
>or a submarine
this is the most retarded thing I've read all morning.
The answer is you let them get several somethings carrying explosives or incendiaries onto the bridge, then take them out with precision artillery, preferably spaced a mile or two apart so a whole chunk of that thing floats away in the wind and tides.
yeah
A cruise ship?
Why is it being loaded off a dock far out in the sea then?
https://twitter.com/AlexLuck9/status/1634790757524709376?t=tt1eBqL_vXoueQ_gtD9J-A&s=19
>via pontoon bridge and floating platform
Are they just going to build one under artillery fire then?
vely implessive
>Built a pontoon bridge
>watch American nuclear subs flock to it like moths
>destroy the American submarine fleet
lets ask vladi what he thinks about pontoons