China's "Shuiqiao" landing barges seem to be the 21st century version of the Mulberry Harbours:
https://youtu.be/gmDcUsBzAZ4

>>63832808 (OP)
oh wow
have you sent this to the taiwan military yet? surely they would be interested in your analysis

>>63832808 (OP)
This seems needlessly complicated when they can just shove the bridge and vehicles into a single vessel.

>>63832808 (OP)
they won't need to invade. just launch missiles until taiwan surrenders

Oh ching chong ping ling
Impressive

Looks susceptible to drones, sea mines, and short range missiles.

>>63832830
They literally need the distance because Taiwan's western seaboard is extremely shallow.

>>63832808 (OP)
>>63832851
It's both a ship and a bridge with jackup legs built onto a single vessel, which technically means It has two "HP bars", one in bridge form with the jack up legs deployed and another in ship form. If you punch holes onto the ship's hull without destroying the jack up legs first the entire vessel would still be up since It's still supported by them like a bridge. If you destroy the jack up legs, then the vessel still floats because the hull is still intact. You need to destroy both the support jack up legs and then damage the hull in oder to sink just one section of the Shuiqiao, so they're extremely robust.

>>63832875
you can also sink it before it reached beach

God I can't wait for the inevitable POOOONTOOOONING

>>63832889
God I miss those days

>>63832830
Commercial Ro-Ro ships don't have bridges to land on unprepared beach.
>why do use commercial Ro-Ros?
Because they have total capacity larger than military landing ships by a factor of 100-1000.

>>63832875
I highly doubt these vessels could tank not just one, but likely multiple hits from AShM's. The USS Stark was hit by only a 150kg warhead, and still took heavy damage, and required counterflooding and quick repairs to remain afloat. Again, in 2022 the Moskva was sunk by yet again a 150kg warhead (though it was two successful hits this time, and an ammo detonation which finally killed it).

If Chinese damage control isn't as well honed as the US Navy's or even Japanese/British Navies I doubt these would be very survivable, and even if not 'sunk' they would be gutted by fire and consequently be unstable and unsafe.

>>63832966
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanker_war

>>63832808 (OP)
>the 21st century version of the Mulberry Harbours:
>...in theory
Makes a nice cgi anime, but assumes air superiority and calm water.

>>63832833
This assumes no retailiation against launch sites, and no missle defense.

>>63832808 (OP)
implessive

>>63832808 (OP)
What about waves? Will we see a divine wind sweep away another invasion force?

>>63832833
taiwan can probably end all shipping around chinese coasts with some jetski drones

>>63833059
And no sea drones.

>>63832875
>If you destroy the jack up legs, then the vessel still floats because the hull is still intact.
This may be true, but it can no longer (reliably) perform its intended role. It is, in effect, a mission kill to destroy/damage the legs.

To that effect, I wonder how effective torpedos would be for that. Anyone have thoughts on how durable one of these legs are?

>>63833055
Have you been living under a rock?: https://www.twz.com/sea/our-best-look-yet-at-chinas-new-invasion-barges

>>63833096
It has jack up legs that lift the entire vessel up like offshore oil rigs: >>63832875

You've spammed these things before.

>>63833159
>>63833059
See: >>63832875

>>63832966
Due to the fact that they're module if one section gets fully knocked out of action It can be replaced by another one. The remaining section can also be relocated elsewhere, something that couldn't be done with the OG Mullberry harbors

wouldn't it be easier to just go the world in conflict approach and invade the ports using cargo ships and just take them by surprise? I mean I guess there would be more resistance in the ports than at a beachhead but it would be easier to capture the port and then just bring in more firepower with landing ships probably while suppressing any defenses with missiles and artillery across the taiwan strait.

>>63833194
Those oil (and other off shore installations like the Texas Towers) have a great track record.
Now add "Made in China" and look at the intended use case in (very) shallow seas and highly dynamic loads - what could go wrong?

>>63833205
>Due to the fact that they're module if one section gets fully knocked out of action It can be replaced by another one.
Source: your ass

>>63833199
>it just becomes a hellscape for a the fleshy bits inside
I sure do look forward to so many lil emprerors getting got like that

>>63833199
See: >>63833174

>>63833213
Maybe with a couple of really innovative shenanigans you could get a couple of vehicles and units in but that's about it. In order to not just take but seize and hold Taiwan you need a huge fuckton of forces and logistics for them on the island. What you are proposing is the maritime equivalent of the Hostomel assault where even the slightest of fuckups or issues more or less is a death sentence for the forces in those ports and they will die without achieving anything after which the Taiwanese will go on whatever Asian Telegram equivalent to go pose with burning corpses and vehicles. In the age of satellites and massive quantities of sensor data it's pretty much impossible to hide large troop movements. If you look at Ukraine where neither side has the intelligence capabilities of either China or the US even there the element of surprise is really, really fucking hard to achieve.

>having a gajillion of your dudes cross through a single, sinkable choke-point
D-daying this shit would unironically be a better idea than whatever the fuck this is supposed to be. If for whatever reason you're really committed to the bridge barge concept, why not just use 1 bridge per troop transport, rather than having 2-3 bridges? I can't imagine what advantage chaining a few of those boats would give you.
All your soldiers will still end up touching ground in the same exact spot, you're just extending the amount of time they have to spend in a choke (just ask the russians how fun it is to cross bridges under fire), AND exponentially increasing the chances one of your bridge-barge pilots fucking up and accidentally dunking 300 of your ants, I mean soldiers, in the drink. And for what? To have your troop transport be a little further away from the beach? It's still in range of literally every modern weapon, including drones.

I'd love to see them try it, it sounds like it would lead to some hilarious drone footage lmao

>>63832808 (OP)

This year will be the 75th anniversary of Korean, known in China as the War to Resist America & Aid Korea. I wonder how the Chinese will commemerate the conflict.

>>63833174
>To that effect, I wonder how effective torpedos would be for that. Anyone have thoughts on how durable one of these legs are?
Torpedoes do have quite a punch (warheads range in the neighborhood of 600 lbs, which has some fancy shape) so the difficult part would be hitting one of the legs and it will be deleted. Might be easier to just detonate under the platform via the magnetic detonator, big hole in the street is a big hole in the street.
To prevent that you need something like the original Mullberry harbors, and those might only enable you to get back to a working state in a timely manner.

And bad weather in any form will disrupt operations on these things, a proper storm might damage the whole bridge beyond repair. The forces involved are just massive.

https://def.ltn.com.tw/article/breakingnews/5073439

>Taiwanese army excercise simulating Chinese invasion
>China took all outlying island by day one
>Took Southern Taiwan and made landing on eastern coast by day 2
>By day 3, the Taiwanese Army is making its last stand in Taipei, which is surrounded.
>US intervention twarted due to distance and the loss of US local basing options, US submarines prove ineffective in the very shallow waters of the Taiwan Strait.

Doenst look good, eglinbros...

>>63833191
>Homeland propaganda shoot in calm water
bug reading comprehension is at an all time low

>>63833381
Is this another case of "US and it's allies run their simulations under the absolute most dire of circumstances possible"

>>63833345
Yeah and people always talk about the Mulberrys when the US one was destroyed almost immediately and the USN still landed vastly more supplies without one than the RN did with one

>>63833410
Always is, why else would chink shill be posting it

>>63833410
Every single wargame ends up like this. It's been like this since the cold war. Hell, even the games to prove the value of the NGAD as a concept was two-fold: one wargame where they got fucked using old generation technology, and one where the US won handily with all of the fancy gizmos they're creating or designing now.
A good officer will always do a deep risk analysis and wont train himself in a situation where he'd just naturally win. Even China themselves know this

>>63832808 (OP)
Oh no I sure do hope nobody has any harpoon missiles.
Why is my expensive barge bridge on fire and sinking? Who ordered the crispy fried rice?

>>63833524
See:>>63832875

Point at your own script repeatedly isn't gonna impress much spammer.

>>63833524
Even if they do get to the shores they will still be under bombardment from 155mm, 203mm and 120mm tube artillery and mortars. Even in the most optimistic scenarios there will be a lot of casualties.

>>63832808 (OP)
I'm so fucking do it

>>63832808 (OP)
I could really only see this being useful in scenario where they've already done a successful landing and secured a beached. Are they building these in anticipation that a Taiwanese campaign would become a an extended land war on the island? It's only a couple hundred km wide and long

>>63833593
You need a huge occupation force even if you succeed. Keep in mind that Taipei alone has a population just shy of three million. Even if only a small fraction of the population resisted you still need an enormous amount of manpower, vehicles and supplies to actually get shit done.

>>63833593
>I could really only see this being useful in scenario where they've already done a successful landing and secured a beached.
Yes, that is the point. But people aren't wanting to actually engage (whether it'd work or not). They just want the gratification of easy dunks.
Clearly, the idea is to use this in the early days of an invasion when ports haven't been secured and/or have been heavily damagaed. No one is reasonably considering this as being the vanguard amphib force. Expect something akin to the special forces of the PLA to do the initial beach grab, followed by D-day style landing craft and naval bombardment, followed by these bridge barges.

>Chyna could cargo crate drone spam taiwan
>Taiwan can do the same for chinese landers

mite b cool

>>63832808 (OP)
MSPAINT COMMAND HAS REVIEWED THE SIMULATIONS AND MADE THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSION:

>>63832808 (OP)
implessive.
I give wing out of wong mighty dragon.
4444

>entire plan ruined by 1 (one) fiber optic drone
I seriously doubt this is the Chinese plan for invasion, it just doesn't make sense in modern warfare.

>>63834419
There is literally no point using fiber optic drones against ships. The small drones you are thinking of don't have the payload to actually severely damage or sink a ship and the whole point of low cost one way drones in land warfare is the price factor that doesn't matter with anti-ship missiles and ships. Your average modern anti-ship missile has a range of hundreds of kilometers and a warhead of 150kg - 450kg designed to gut a ship. The bigger naval mines in use today have 1000kg+ of TNT equivalent.

>>63832938
those things capsize if you so much as look at them funny
and they take fucking days to unload

t. dockie

>>63835205
Not him, but you don't need to sink the ship to make it unusuable. Damaging the bridge significantly would force that ship to rotate out, or even just taking out the lead tank on the bridge since it's narrow enough to not allow anything to pass.

>>63835449
Even being generous you'd need some kind of a payload that is similar to the bigger ones that you see Ukraine and Russia dropping like AT-mines. Bridges, even the amphibious mobile ones, are by necessity pretty sturdy. You can't make one unusable with a PG-7 FPV drone or similar. I think the smallest explosive that would consistently take one out of comission would be like an SDB or a direct hit from a 155mm shell. Preferrably you'd just sink the ship at sea before you have to give it a shot though. I'd love to see a 203mm shell hitting one of those bridge boats but alas it's probably impossible given that they will be priority targets for PLA missiles.

>>63835465
PG-7 might not take out the bridge, but it'll take out the tank and hold up the whole boat for a long while. In any case, hitting the bridge with a shell would be pretty easy; the taiwanese have plenty of precision missiles with things like the HIMARS in their inventory

>>63833213
>wouldn't it be easier to just go the world in conflict approach and invade the ports using cargo ships and just take them by surprise?

Yea, I'm sure the US won't be telling the world the day the Chinks plan to invade like they did Russia since hiding troop movements and buildup is trivial.

>>63832875
Couldn't you destroy the bridge itself and render the whole thing useless?

>>63834175
Kek, did you draw this?

>>63834175
>>63836196
https://desuarchive.org/k/search/image/hAcElFzg4eXCYVwP4kOCHw/
Shieeet he might actually have, pretty good regardless.

Can sea mines damage or destroy these ships?

>>63832808 (OP)
what do they do when they get hit my ASMs?

>>63836309
Before they get to shore? Yes. They only deploy the legs once they're within a few miles of the coast, so if you hit them while they're out to sea they'll sink all the same.

>>63833381

> Day one, hour one: Taiwan destroys the Three Gorges Dam. Up to 400 million Chinese get fucked. China collapses.

The fucking dam shit again. Jesus christ I hope you never reproduce.

>>63832808 (OP)
>Chinese fighting Chinese
This is only our problem because the chips. Reshoring chip production is more prudent than a full war with China.

Implessive

>>63832875
I like how they've rendered it rusty

>>63837369
Tbh chinese ships always look spotless like brand new from the factory.
They have the crew fix the paint basically on a daily basis, in the west this is not allowed due to environmental shit.

>>63835465
the ukies have a drone that is literally just a flying 155mm shell
that will do a bridge just fine

>>63835465
>>63837458
I feel like we're ignoring the obvious strategy here: wait for the first heavy vehicle to start rolling down the bridge, destroy or disable it, and then enjoy the turkey shoot that follows with the resulting bottleneck.

>>63837478
Pretty sure you just shove it overboard and try to get things rolling again.

>>63832808 (OP)
They're meant to be used for installing off-shore windturbines.

>>63832875
This seems like such a hilariously, wildly optimistic plan.
Like, these things are really kind of secondary to the whole invasion. If they get complete fire superiority then they can do it. But if they don't do that and there's even a single gun crew and spotter left in range during the landing, they're fucking beyond dead crossing that death trap.

>>63837536
>Just shove a 50+ ton object overboard without toppling yourself, in a position in which there is no room to move heavy equipment forward.
I can tell that you've never worked in construction or vehicle recovery.

>>63834175
You don't even have to destroy the bridge. Just destroying a vehicle on the bridge blocks it and makes the rest sitting ducks. Its like the highway of death all over again except over water.

*ruins your overly delicate landing operation

Nothin personal Chang

>>63833213
This game was so cool. I’m very mad we never got a sequel

>>63841226
Good luck deploying nuclear subs in the Taiwan Strait

>>63832808 (OP)
I thought their plan was just to drown the straight in bodies and just march over the landbridge of corpses it creates?

>>63835205
hit the bow with 1kg of rdx and watch it flounder.

>>63832875
Just punch a hole in the bridge part, lmao.

>>63836378
Okay real talk, can RoC (Taiwan) actually do it?
Do they have the means to penetrate so deep?

>>63833213
Yeah because the satelites whose job is to monitor troop movements won't see hundreds of vehicles and thousands of troops mustering near ports and loads of cargo ships in said ports suddenly taking in loads of these vehicles and people. You cannot hide move up. You can only say it is just 'practice' or 'deterrent' and then have your 5th columnists go 'It's just defensive, they're scared of NATO!' (in the case of Russia). So much so you have Irish politicians stating that NATO is bad then the French coming out saying we should accept responsibility for the invasion by forcing Putin to do this and give him land to 'save face'.

>>63841636
No, not even close. America could do it but they'd take terrible loses and its not even for sure.

So if these ships are on big jackup legs and you blow a hole in one, how would the chinese remove the burning wreck and the legs from the bridge to replace it in under like six hours? It sounds like only a couple ashms might force the entire bridge to relocate in order to get it running again same-day. The bigger and better emplaced the bridge, the harder it is to swap out broken sections.

>>63832808 (OP)
>>63832851
>>63833345
>>63834419
>>63833977
They released drone footage of It: https://x.com/jesusfroman/status/1934351439549050904?t=BFmzc0ju-RJYfn8rt_U-Bw&s=19

>>63833410
Yeah that's why the last 72hr wargame the US had with the Bongs they had to call for a restart because the Bongs wiped them out in less than 48hrs.
>w-w-well it was on purpose
What exactly do you learn getting yourself stomped?
>w-w-well it just was, OK?
Okay what about the time in a wargame a Swedish sub sunk a US aircraft carrier and upset the Americans so much they demanded the Swedes hand over the subs drive data so they could discover it next time and the Swedes went 'no'.
>That was all done on purpose they LET the carrier be sunk because... err... THEY JUST DID OK???
Or what about the time where US troops did an landing in the Nordic wargames and somehow landed right on top of a concealed Finnish position and got decimated? It was on done on purpose, t hey purposefully sent their unit on top of the Finnish unit (which they had no clue was there) on purpose to be wiped out. Right.

Fuck off retard. Wargames are not 'designed to be lost' they are designed for you to think on your feet and test capabilities and resourcefulness. You learn nothing if you're wiped out and have to ask for resets. It's the biggest fucking cope, especially when force handicaps are established BEFORE the games begin.

>>63841733
>The floor on the bridge is made of wood
You're kidding right? I'm sure it's just cladding over some metal supports, but that thing's gonna get blasted right away.

63841745
he big mad

>>63841745
>Okay what about the time in a wargame a Swedish sub sunk a US aircraft carrier
Didn't a German one do the same some years before that?

>>63841745
unlike chinks, we're more concerned with learning from these simulation rather than saving face and "winning".

>>63841593
just patch it with planks.

>>63835690
>>63841202
>>63841593
shhh
they don't even know the Mulberries were only feasible with total air superiority

>>63841458
Lost the forest for the trees.

>>63836196
>>63836292
Yes
>>63841202
A dead teammate is a corpse you can carry back at your leisure after you win. An injured teammate is a burden you have to carry for safety. A panicking teammate is a problem that jams your lines of communication as they scream for help over the radio and you have to make sure that you have somebody helping them out. China's strategies are built on fantasies of the Three Kingdoms period and masterful plays, dignified victories. Modern warfare is a looney toons battle royale with penis-drones and hyper-accurate missile-strikes where the best Bugs Bunny impression wins and the guy with the biggest ego gets their pants pulled down.

I also considered variations where a plane drops landmines across the bridges and ships. And my brother pointed out that you can hit the bridge AND the ship so that the ship has a hole in the side and can't go back down into the water, forcing them to have to move somewhere else and leave the barge behind. You want them shuffling around, pushing their pneumatic stilts up and down, readjusting their positions so the bridges line up right, getting everything ready... and then damaging the bridge right in front of the convoy so they have to do the process over again. They'll be screaming at each other over the radio by the second time this happens, and then their chain of command begins to strain.

Of course the weakest link is the barge carrying all the soldiers and ground forces, but so long as they're caught in a tangle, it's better to keep them alive so that they can play the blame game during their extended military downtime.

>>63832865
If only someone invented a solution to such a problem.

>>63832808 (OP)
The endless failure modes will bring great shame to the Middle Kingdom.
>real nigga prediction
>some day China decides to actually invade against all logic
>not a single PLA boot sets foot on Formosa

>>63842154
This is ineffective for quickly(!) and cheaply moving large quantities of heavy equipment.

>>63832875
You don't sink that thing - you wait until they are unloading and mobility kill offloading vehicles on the bridging sections using your snipers and ATGM teams.

>>63833349
>return to status quo was actually our victory
What's next, you're going to call Vietnam War an American victory based McDonald is operating in Ho Chi Minh City?
It was a return to status quo, that's it. Both sides failed to reach their initial goals

>>63841765
retard

>>63841710
>>63841636
>Do they have the means to penetrate so deep?
We don't know Taiwan's capabilities in this regard. The dam might be their number one target and they've got a couple of IRBMs with bunkerbuster nukes onboard. Or they might see it as some egregious action and never consider it.
I don't think they could pull it off according to current available equipment. If they had a few small nukes, yes. Maybe they have saboteurs on the mainland? We'll see if it ever goes hot.

>>63842275
Yeah but hovers are fuckin' awesome.

>>63842335
Have you considered how many AD assests China just incidentially has between Tawain and the dam? Not even mentioning those they could scramble. Its simply unbeliveable that they have a enough to even have the minimalist chance to get enough ordance to the dam to cause a substantial enough of a breach.
Its not happening.

>>63842364
You've got me there.

>>63842291
>missed the whole norks lost ground, no mao dynasty, buncha dead chinks, and no taiwan thing
Cope and seethe chang

>>63842502
Yes, im sure the chink ad based off the russian ad iran had is fantastic

>>63842291
>. Both sides failed to reach their initial goals
As much as it is fun to clown on American's, this isn't entirely true. There was a belief that in Vietnam fell to Gommunism it would cause every other SEA state to fall to Gommunism. USA wrecking the country by proxy did what they wanted to achieve. Which is prevent the the entire region falling to Gommunism because a lot of the states went
>Okay we don't want to deal with this, so lets not
So technically the US achieved their goals in a roundabout way.

>>63842515
Do you think a Ukrainian plane could fly from Kiev to Moscow currently? Do you know the distance between Taiwan and the dam?

>>63842579
honestly? maybe once yeah

>>63842510
>norks lost ground,
Not much.
>no mao dynasty
Irrelevant, China is not a monarchy.
>buncha dead chinks
even more irrelevant
>no taiwan thing
At that time, they didn't even have a proper navy that could endanger Taiwan.

>>63841458
>Fire several torpedos into the straight
>You win every single time you launch

>>63841765
Nothing wrong with wood, you can replace it with more wood, but also it's not wood.

>>63842611
I think that is exceptional unreasonable. How far are Ukrainian planes flying across the line of control? I'll admit to not following this closely but my understanding is they can't even operate up to it, much less beyond it.

>>63841745
We learn better from failure than success ya mong

>>63842713
theyre constantly getting cesna sized drones deep into russia. i know an su34 isnt a cesna but I feel like ukraine could do it once.
dont think it'd be a return trip though

>>63833381
>>Took Southern Taiwan and made landing on eastern coast by day 2
>>By day 3, the Taiwanese Army is making its last stand in Taipei, which is surrounded
Did the scenario presume China has teleportation technology?

>>63833381
would you say its a ....3 day special military operation?

>>63832966
The real threat is going to be sea mines. Sweeping under fire is going to be a total bitch. They don't have a ton of sweeping capability and it really constricts assembly/marshalling. Its just a really tough tactical situation, sea mines are even more of a red ass than terrestrial mines.

>>63832875
Dump some 155 on to the deck and it will mission kill it.

Taiwan has a shitload of artillery.

>>63832851
>these mulberry harbors seem vulnerable to mines, aircraft, coastal artillery and mortars.
You're supposed to suppress your enemy and gain air supremacy before making an amphibious landing.

>>63842896
>Sweeping under fire is going to be a total bitch.
Hmmm, sure would be nice if someone made a ship with this sort of thing in mind...

>>63833381
One nuke or moab is all it would take to cripple the invasion

>>63842502
If going the missile or fighter-bomber route, Taiwan would insert somewhere else, like Cambodia. If going the sabotage route, the elements would already be in place. Frontal assault is just silly.
>>63842507
I just need a couple hundred thousand to prove out practical hovertanks. You like Ripsaw? I've got something better in mind.

>>63842663
>China is not a monarchy
BWAHAHAHAHAHA of course China is a monarchy, their just haven't been any biological successors during the Communist Dynasty.

>>63842922
What's that have to do with Corporal Chou and his two battle buddies hanging out in the jungle with some ordinance? Times one thousand?
Honestly, the PLA would be better off developing James Bond stealth subs than these weird docks.

>>63843044
>If going the missile or fighter-bomber route, Taiwan would insert somewhere else, like Cambodia.
...China does not border Cambodia, anon.

>>63835205
Ship hulls have become laughably fragile after the end of the Cold War. A drone that can blow throw an Abrams' roof armor will core through several decks of a destroyer.

>>63843617
lol no
you have no understanding of how munitions work

>>63833381
The only way Taiwan is losing in 3 days if if the Taiwanese have no will to fight.
America will know of any concrete invasion plans ahead of time, the USMC can put a lot of Marines on that island in 24h

>>63832808 (OP)
Leave it to the Chinese to come up with retarded shit like this.

The RTS player inside of me wants to drag and select all of my ranged units and then click on those things. Imagine how many dead chinese there be. Frankly, its bizzare they're even pretending this is a good idea!

Damn look at that BBC ready to breed taiwan

>>63842928
It'd sure be nice if someone made a minesweeping package for those pieces of shit that worked...

>>63843781
Same with the allies with the mulberry harbours from WW2

>>63832808 (OP)
Oh cool, sitting ducks for artillery bombardement. Just take out the frontmost ramp and they'll be stuck for now, then bomb them some more.

>>63842291
Achieving your war goals is indeed a strategic victory, while failing them is a strategic defeat.
You could win every battle, but if you fail to achieve your objectives you still lose the war. See: Afghanistan.

War goals:
repel North Korea - achieved
prevent a Chinese invasion of China - achieved
solidify American influence in the region - achieved (America is now the guarantor of security against communist invasions)
weaken communist influence in the region - achieved

"Conquering all of North Korea" was an optional objective at most. But it was never an outright stated goal. You just keep going until the war ends. Just because it wasn't an OVERHWELMING victory with an unconditional surrender in which you can dictate all the conditions doesn't make it not a victory.

I swear WW2 has cooked people's brains. Most wars in history in the post renaissance world have an outcome like that, unconditional surrenders and with it total defeats are EXTREMELY rare.

>>63844328
>prevent a Chinese invasion of China
Who knew China was its own worst enemy. But other than that you're right. I may add that it was the last American victory.

>>63833096
A wave?
At sea? Chance in a million!

>>63836707
The chips don't matter, it's all about coralling China.

If they take Taiwan, Okinawa and Guam are next. Then they'll have unfiltered access to the Pacific.

Channeling my inner Eisenhower: it's a line of dominos.

>>63844308
>Oh cool, sitting ducks for artillery bombardement

>>63844308
>Oh cool, sitting ducks for artillery bombardement. Just take out the frontmost ramp and they'll be stuck for now, then bomb them some more.

>>63844519
>break ramp
>now you have two ramp
ramp wins every time

>>63832875
Just bomb the thing controlling the bridge or the bridge itself and mission kill it

>>63844420
>>63844519

Total and absolute air superiority sold separatelly.

>>63844968
German aircrafts actually reached Mulberry Harbours and dropped bombs on them. But most missed and damage was superficial.
So no there wasn't "absolute air superiority".

>>63844410
But why do they need to be corraled? Just why do we need to pen them in? Are they going to claim all of the Pacific? They're no risk to anybody besides the countries they have historical border issues with. And yeah it sucks for those people but the Chinks are simply not going to snatch any US soil. That's in the realm of fantasy.
If we have to pen them in so they can't access the Pacific Ocean, then fuck it, not pen in India to stop them from getting the Indian Ocean? Why not pen in the Brits so they can't have the Atlantic Ocean? It's just paranoia for paranoia's sake. China seems like a shit place to live but honestly it's an issue of two sets of Chinamen who dislike eachother. Being able to access the Pacific isn't some doomsday scenario.

>>63832808 (OP)
China might as well just send them over in those retarded gyrocopters they're mass producing for military applications.

>>63843706
A modern 120mm APFSDS will go through more than half a meter of solid steel. If it hits anything important, it'll kill a ship so hard it's not even funny. Ships are only permitted to exist by tanks being unable to swim.

>>63844077
Your memes are out of date. They've been doing minesweeping for years.

>>63845261
>tank makes tiny hole in ship
>sailors plug hole with wooden dowel
Impenetrable defense

>>63845434
>sailor puts the wooden dowel through the hole in the turbine casing and blades for the main powerplant while he's at it as well

>>63836707
>This is only our problem because the chips

Wrong. Without Taiwan the price of Cold Steel knives would skyrocket. I'm not willing to pay $80 for an SRK.

>>63832808 (OP)
>please wait while we assemble this giant megazord of a pontoon system
looks very vulnerable, same as the big ships they plan to connect them to, russia got one of their ships sunk in port by a single ballistic missile
i think building more landing ships that can get to the shore and unload stuff on their own would be better to avoid becoming a missile magnet

>>63845005

>"Aschtually"

>>63832833
Idiot. China needs to take Taiwain, its people, AND its infrastructure. The rock itself is worthless. The functioning semiconductor factories and companies are the objective.

>>63832875
>two "HP bars"
Is this the level of analysis CHINA STRONK is working off? I don't need to worry about the health bars, just
>~
>tcai
Done.

>>63834175
>mspaint used for something other than r*dditjaks in 2025
I KNEEL

>invade
>anyone worth their salt ships to japan/korea/usa/uk
>china still doesnt have cutting edge chips

>>63834175
This fucking underrated as fuck
Everyone on /k/ needs to see this

>>63834175
0/10 missing baofengs

>>63842291
>let's divide across the 38th parallel
>NO!!!! *angry commie noises*
>end of the war: SK has more land then they started with on the OTHER SIDE of the 38th parallel
If that's not a Chingchong L, I'd hate to see what one actually looks like.

Cope
Now reply

>>63843135
So? I just mean approach from the south or west as possible instead of lol direct from Taiwan.

>>63834175
baste

they build around 50 of them a year I don't think taiwan will make it.
At that scale, Normandy would look like a village level fire drill lmao

>>63834175
>>63846672
50 * (crew + passenger cap) * (n years production) = a lot of dead chinks = earth is better off

>>63846703
yes lots of dead island chinks. Now if the mutts are stupid enough to intervene there will be lots of windows for big latino cocks at home

>>63844339
>the last American victory
Vietnam - we left with a peace treaty in hand that the North would violate two years later.
Gulf War One - Overwhelming allied victory and strategic hestitation to occupy Iraq.
Gulf War Two - Overwhelming allied victory.
Afghanistan - no one has beaten the keepers of the Kyber Pass in something like two millennia.

>>63846672
how long do i have to hear
>omg CHYNA has infinity of everything and all their stuff is 10 years ahead of the west, the dlagon is unstoppable, taiwan in 3 days!
just stop talking about it and stick your dick in the bear trap already, we all know it's inevitable

>>63846748
>Vietnam - we left with a peace treaty in hand that the North would violate two years later.

...
>my GF went on a vacation with her platonic friend Jamal 9 months ago, who would have thought my son is black?!!!

>>63846723
>chink copes
Next youll tell me youre turkish too, right lmao

>>63846766
You sure are obsessed with bbc, do you have a folder you spam regularly perchance?

>>63846785
what cope. you have 2 CGB with 1 more coming in the Gulf and your master still get pounded in the ass by Iran with Temu missiles.
You should enlist and go to Asia in the next 2 years kek. This board will be much better without mutt shills. Don't be rat and stay on a big juicy carrier too not a hospital ship kek

>>63832808 (OP)
That is such a money laundering schemel

>>63846810
>pounded in the ass
Funny, you posted that yesterday and were rightfully laughed at. Im sure those dozen civvies make up for iran just having no ad now. But yes chinky boy so smol yet so mad, wect fallen chinkshit will surely be the one part of the global south that isnt hot fucking garbage lmao

>>63846810
Shits hitting the fan already. That means those who have won't die a young death. Those who don't will

Nothing you do will change that. When shit breaks down if you don't have money or your country is poor you get fucked. For decades as people flee poor countries
China has been saying they will match our per capita in 20 years for 50 years now. Nothing is going to change. It's called a fucking dark age. Thirdie worlders like Indians, Malaysians, Chinese,Russians, pakis, bengledeshis literally burned the fuck worlds library you know as the internet. This moment where we are all at is where we will all die in wealth. Do you get it now. You are why it won't change hahaha

>>63846766
The best part of the Vietnam War is what happened after, when China invaded them and suffered a half million casualties in six weeks. This was elite Red Army units getting wiped out by Viet border militia that was mostly old men and teenage girls because the regular army was off fighting the Khmer Rouge. This was also a repeat of the same mistake various dynasties have historically made in trying to invade Annam.
And no, this isn't what-aboutism, this is pointing out that the Vietnamese are historically the most ferocious and competent jungle fighters.

>>63832875
damage the bridge and the whole ship is a waste of space
punch a hole in the hull and it can't even be replaced in the setup

>>63847203
The Vietnamese are definitely great warriors. Very peaceful and gentle people that can cut the members and the heads of their enemies without a second thought when they're pissed off.

>>63841745
>Thirdies literally cannot comprehend that you can learn from simulated defeats because their exercises have nothing to do with learning, only chest thumping and trying to look scary

I can design a military exercise where I crush my foes 100% of the time without a single officer all the way down to the lowest conscript failing an objective, look how powerful we are!
Good thing my officers and I will never have any unforeseen issues in our military operations! After all, that would require us to actually HAVE a military operation, and since we might fuck up and look bad, that's simply an unacceptable risk!

>>63842364
>Hoovers are one of the few examples where the square-cube law makes bigger ones better
On one hand fuckhuge hovercraft=VERY cool, on the other it means it's not practical for me to try to make a small car sized fanboat style one for zooming around the farm on :(

>>63832808 (OP)
They look a bit tiny. How do they plan to invade Taiwan with those little cars and tanks?

>>63842502
Have you considered how effective AD was against F35s literally a few days ago in Iran? Hope they have fun eating radar seeking missiles.

>>63842713
Considering Ukraine's "cruise missiles" are essentially Cessnas full of explosives and they can basically fly right past Moscow, yes I think a jet could make it in there.
Making it back out is another question.
>Tfw no Japanese volunteer to BANZAI a F16 into monke's long table room at full burn while doing sick barrell rolls to avoid shitty pants-sars and "unstoppable" S400s

>>63845015
>Are they going to claim all of the Pacific?
Yes, this is exactly their plan.

>>63844420
Good thing artillery hasn't had its range increase over the last 90 years. It'd also be a real shame if instead of the nice rolling French hills the artillery was up on elevated mountain positions.

>>63846810
I wanna see you talking tough shit when Taiwan destroys the 4 gorges Dam and 400 million of you yellowed cockroaches die in the subsequent flood, insectoid piece of shit.

>>63845005
Good thing aircraft haven't had their bombs made more accurate or destructive in the last 90 years.
It'd be a real shame if instead of maybe scoring a single bomb hit a stealth bomber could drop literally hundreds of precision guided munitions each capable of leveling an entire city block from so far away that even if AD could detect them, (they can't), they wouldn't be able to reach them anyway.

>>63847603
You can always pick up a SCAT for a few thousand dollars for the back forty.
There is a right size for armored combat hovers that we haven't found yet.

>>63844410
China isn't building up this massive military just to take Taiwan, if Taiwan falls, Japan and South Korea are next.

>>63847616
Stealth aircraft aren't invisible to radar, they're less visible to radar. You get an AMRAAM close enough to a TEMU J-20, it'll track and destroy it.

>>63849631
First, why would they want Japan and South Korea?
Second, suppose that did happen, then those are problems they should deal with themselves. When it comes to defending SK and Japan, the juice isn't worth the squeeze for us.

>>63849884
The first single japanese war was fought between the empires of China and Japan, over Korea
Even if the chinks weren't openly ecpansionist they still believe Korea (both parts) to be part of China amd consider the total destruction of Japan as neccesary for reversing the century of humiliation

>>63849891
Do you think China will sacrifice tens of millions of men and their global standing to take over Japan and Korea for absolutely no benefit besides wrath?
Honestly, if Japan and SK really are worried, they need stop hiding behind our skirts.

>>63849654
nah that's Chinese technology. The west doesn't have anything like that
why?
No rare earth. The TEMU'd pl15e was able to BFTO the Rafael. Don't assume the West can do the same. The frogs were confident because in all of their test with the US that did not happen.
No you have card. You have no rare earth. No say "thank you."

>>63842291
The U.S.'s stated goal in both cases is to maintain the soveregnty of south Korea and Vietnam, would ukraine be considered a "loser"if they came out of the conflict with all the territory they had before it started? Does the this mean that both sides "lost" the Korean war?

>>63850026
Please tell me one (1) rare earth metal that China possesses that isn't found elsewhere.

>>63850104
none just go dig up dirt around your cuck shed and you will find every single rare earth element there is. But dirt mixed with your mom's vaginal juice and her bull semen cannot be made into radars with your technology kek

>>63850216
>cuckposters are Chinese
I knew it.

>>63844410
>>63845015
>>63847649
>>63849631

If China wanted to fuck the US over and take over the Pacific, China would support Muslim insurgents against the Philippines in Mindanao, and spam social media with pictures of Filipino atrocities against Muslims like the mass rapes at Mamasapano and Manili.

The US would have zero retort or response to this propaganda (because its all factual and all leftists and Muslims would support China against Philippines)

China hasn't done anything like that. So called "communist leftists" in the US haven't done anything like that (because they are controlled opposition shills by the US government)

If the Philippines got fucked, the US would receive a massive blow materially, psychologically and in propaganda.

The fact is, unfortunately China isn't doing that, because its not interested in conquest of the Pacific, the communist party of China actually believes in their own dumb principles and ideology, about non-interference militarily in other countries, they genuinely claim Taiwan only because it was officially part of the Republic of China and the KMT government fled there.

>>63849891
It was fought after Japan invaded and annexed the Ryukyuan kingdom (Okinawa) and sponsored a violent coup in Korea you retard. Japan also annexed Hokkaido from the Ainu just before that.

>>63847669
>Good thing aircraft haven't had their bombs made more accurate or destructive in the last 90 years.
Good thing for defenders now SAMs and AA missiles exist. Progress works both ways.

>>63847654
Good thing for artillery counter battery radar, recon drones and Lancets didn't exist 90 years ago.
>I am spamming art.....ACK!

>>63841226
It won't be there alone.

>>63842683
>fire antisub missiles at the subs firing torpedoes into the straight
Heh, nothing personnel gweilo

>>63833349
South Korea didn't win the war because it never ended. Nor did they manage to topple the North and capture the whole Peninsula. Then again, this also applies to the Norks.

The norks are winning by default though, in a generation or two South Koreans will go extinct. They wouldn't even need to glass Seoul but to walk in

>>63832833
In under a decade Taiwan will ask to be annexed by China anyway

>>63843049
Since it doesn't need biological successors over ideological ones it isn't a monarchy. That ended at the turn of the 19th century.

>>63842510
And what does that have to do with defeating the north and taking the Peninsula, both of which was the raison de guerre and both of which didn't happen?

>>63850690
>but it's good and means they're winning when russia does it

>>63832808 (OP)
That's just a scam to launder money in no way is that useful

>>63851888
Basically all china is based around that concept

>>63851888
>>63851897
COPE: >>63841733

>>63844328
The irony is that I can use the same arguments you make in favor of China

War goals:
>repel South Korea (and friends) - achieved
>prevent a US invasion of China - achieved
>solidify Chinese influence in the region - achieved (China is now the guarantor of security against capitalist pigdog invasions)
>weaken capitalist influence in the region - achieved

However, the South
>failed to take the entire Peninsula
>failed to destroy the communist North
>failed to establish a capitalist society across Korea
The North and South still stand, somewhat close to the status quo. If their goals were not to utterly eradicate the North the UN wouldn't have pushed towards China and provoke a Chinese invasion. But this is all up in the air, because the war is still going on.

>>63846748
America lost Vietnam the moment Nixon was elected by a fed-up public to "end" the war, not win it. That's why America was pulling out since the late 60s, well before any sheet was signed. The peace treaty was an escape clause allowing America to abandon the South and their boondoggle cause. They did not crush the Chinese backed, communist North (deja vu?), they did not preserve the capitalist South, they didn't even shift the borders. Violating the peace treaty was a given since it happened the very same day it was signed, and yet America decided years ago to walk away regardless. And that's why South Vietnam evaporated.

>>63851910
>ROOOOOK
>ISA BEEEEEG LETALDED BALGE
ok retarded hapa

>>63851910
>>63834419

>>63845776
South Korea is going extinct in a few decades. If that isn't a Sork L I don't know what is. It won't matter how much land is owned when there's no one left to occupy it.

>>63851950
Yeah, you posted that in the other shill thread and I silently laughed at you. I'll do it publically here tho lmao lil emperor syndrome hapa

>>63845776
Because the US invasion of North Korea never happened right? The US just stopped at the 38th parallel and told the South Koreans this will be your new border, right?

>>63833410
Simulation? More like prediction.

>>63841824
>>63842733
Maybe you will learn to give up the ghost instead.

>>63845015
they are communists. the very fact that they continue to draw breath is a festering cancer that threatens any human being who is the least bit concerned about principles of truth, freedom, justice and prosperity.

ALL fucking bolsheviks, and every iteration of bolshevism, MUST fucking HANG FROM TREES

>>63850104
None, it's just that you'll have to pay out the nose for tiny amounts that won't be enough to supply all the industries that need it. There's plenty of drinking water in the ocean, you'll just have to sort through all the salt. Good luck

>>63842930
One nuke would be enough to cripple Taiwan, it's moot. Well maybe 2.

>>63834419
It's like you've never heard of SPAAGs before

>>63852039
>spaags light up the struts
i look forward to this retarded yolo

>>63841874
Theres a simple solution to what you just suggested, which is to prevent it from happening by glassing everything that can shoot at the ships that way. Not even the Normandy landings were done without fire support, that'd be pants on head retarded

>>63852074
That's why you shoot the Drones down before they even get there retard

>>63844001
AGM go zooooom

>>63852149
Soooo you slap spaaaaags ontop of the struts?

>>63832808 (OP)
This is some dahir insaat level shit, holy lulz.

>>63847663
All fun and games until daddy Xi triggers Yellowstone's supervolcano. Youll be black inside and out, you inbreeding bitches. Total mutt death.

>>63852149
>That's why you shoot the Drones down before they even get there retard
The Chinese don't have the SPRAAG capabilities on these ships to do that.

Or are you saying they're just going to clutter the deck and bridge with mobile units?

lol&lamo if true, they'll be hit by 1 (one) fiber optic drone and become 40 tonnes of burning wreckage to be cleared then. Terrible idea. Like I said, this plan can't be real it is just too shitty for modern warfare
>uhhhh they'll be escorted
All the way to the shallows? Nope. That's the problem in the first place. Like I said, fiber optic drone bait. Even some vatnik group like Wagner would pwn the Chinese if this is real.

>>63852211
Is this china's version of using a poseidon torp to send a radioactive tidal wave over britain?

>>63852155
No you use them on the shores or beachhead or use other guns like autocannons and HMGs on support boats nearby. And that's assuming China doesn't just glass the surrounding area so that no resistance is nearby to interrupt the landing operation. Imagine making contested landings in current yesr

>>63852230
Not quite, it's ash instead of water. They could also just glass Taiwan before or after. Or blow up the hoover dam if America was behind it

>>63852220
Are you assuming these things are going in first?

>>63852233
You'd have to get them there first, chinky the chinktard.
>nooooo itll be an uncontested randing island depopurated
kek

>>63852233
>autocannons and HMGs
Ukraine and Russia has provide this to be an utterly mediocre solution for your average fiber optic drone, otherwise advances wouldn't be an order of magnitude slower than a snail.
>And that's assuming China doesn't just glass the surrounding area
If you're going to NOOK this is all irrelevant anyway.
>n-n-no I mean they'll have air superiority and ballistic missiles and stuff
No they wont + that's not sufficient to stop an embedded and prepared drone company anyway. Russia and Ukraine have also proved this to be the case.
>>63852252
I'm assuming they have to go in eventually to project armor at scale, otherwise these ships wouldn't exist and the Chinese would instead opt for dumping amphibious units across the strait.
They're not because even they realize that's turbo-retarded.

in offshore construction, jackup barges take hours to get set up on their legs. granted, in a military use this can be done faster (unsafely) but then you also have to connect multiple barges together for this system to work.
the chinese better hope to god that they can keep reasonable air defense cover over these things while they sit motionless, feet off the shore, and completely unable to move.
what's their open ocean speed anyway? maybe 10kts loaded? barges suck in bad weather too, they don't have nearly the seakeeping characteristics of an actual ship hull.
go look up incidents of conventional and jackup construction barges sinking and you'll get an idea for how well this is going to go.

>>63852248
>tlansration
yes

>>63852220
It doesn't need to be a SPAAG but merely AAA. SPAAGs are AAA guns on wheels after all. So if you haven't bombed all the drone operators, arty batteries and everything else of note in the area already then just shoot their little toys down with a autocannon. It's because of the risk of lead vehicles being destroyed and blocking the path that any deployments of these boats won't be unprotected. Just nip it in the bud. Even the Allies at Normandy knew to soften the opposition up before touching ground.

>All the way to the shallows? Nope
That's why you have air support, littoral combat ships, and normal landers to establish a secure beachhead first. Assuming they have all that of course. I don't think these bridge ships will operate alone but as a supplement to conventional landing operations. More vulnerable but more higher volume delivery, whereas landers are more hardy but low volume.

>>63852258
But of course, mart sharter. It will be uncontested once the sorties are done.

>>63852309
>no denial detected
I accept your concession

>>63852327
>So if you haven't bombed all the drone operators
These aren't marked on a map btw. Also not exactly static.
>then just shoot their little toys down with a autocannon
You should sell this idea to someone, as it has clearly never been tried and categorically failed to deal with a fiber optic drone company in the field.
oh wait
>air support
insufficient to suppress them
>littoral combat ships
drone bait
> and normal landers
very flammable drone bait

Wager > PLN + PLA at this rate.
Just awful, especially considering they just got ran out from Mali

>>63852294
You're kinda of contradicting yourself when you say you assume they're sending in amphibious units, then say they're not even doing that. We can reasonably expect them to do that and establish a perimeter before the bridge ships go in.

In amphibious assault terms, these ships are a massive leap. As has been pointed out
>They're not pontoon based, like virtually every known military amphibious bridge from Mulberry to Incheon landing bridges to current USMC ones (eg Gaza one)
>They're on jack up legs, they do not suffer the immense stresses of waves/tidal changes, but if the legs are destroyed would continue floating
>These ships are cheap, generic and modular, two or three can reform another pier if one is destroyed
>Ro-ro integration means even commercial vehicle carrying ship (and China has an entire fleet of this) are now transports

>>63852347
kek, china will either do nothing and taiwan will continue being best china or go for it and kick off another century of humiliation,

>>63852304
Valid, but
>Assuming approximate draft of Panamax ships max of 12 meters, and double it for margin of safety, your legs are only 24 meters long
>This is a massive leap. For comparison, the Mulberry's took two weeks, the Gaza pier ~5 weeks

Damage is a big thing, depends on how they build it, but compared to every other kind of ship
>These are in extremely shallow water, it's Pearl Harbor depth where they could be refloated in days probably
>No magazines, no risk of catastrophic explosion
>It is lifted by both the intrinsic buoyancy of the hull and support of the legs
>Would probably be repaired easily even if sunk
>You can cheaply pre build redundant backups

>>63852460
>>It is lifted by both the intrinsic buoyancy of the hull and support of the legs
see vidrel
>>63841733
you are wrong. the legs carry the entire weight of the structure. if you kill a leg, it will fall over. maybe the hull will "catch" it, but my money's on it capsizing and it's a mission kill regardless.
refloating - yeah, maybe. but it's a LOT of iron to deal with. I don't know if china has the heavy salvage capability to get this done under fire.
>backups
yes, but it's a bridge. if the center "span" (ship) fails, you're kinda fucked and have to start all over
these are basically a quantum leap in heavy landings compared to the mulberrys or the gaza pier, but they're not a wunderwaffen.
I'm not familiar with the geology of taiwan's coast, but these are relatively limited to areas where the seafloor will bear the weight, which may make pre-emptive defensive targeting by the taiwanese easier.

>>63851819
In China, they actively refer to this as the Communist Dynasty. It might not be monarchy, exactly, but it is still as much or more imperial than Communist.

>>63852387
>These aren't marked on a map btw. Also not exactly static
No, but those can be dealt with another way, like infantry screens, ISR drones, china's own bomb drone swarms, all the way up to artillery barrage or precision airstrikes. If there's even the slightest resistance nearby then it's not time yet to deploy the ships.

>clearly never been tried
Lead works on plastic drones. Not big surprise. Quad barrel AAs have never been more back

>drones drones drones
Bombs bombs bombs. And some boots on the ground for good measure. This is not Ukraine with trenches and no air dominance. Ignoring the fact China has their own drones to keep the locals busy you just bombard the shore using planes and naval guns enough to send in paratroopers and marines to flush out their users. Drones work both ways.

>>63852420
Big words from someone within ICBM range

>>63851950
We were at war with NK and China, RoE forbade us from defeating SK women.

>>63852497
It's very unlikely it will fall over/capsize if a leg is destroyed
>If a leg is destroyed, assuming rigidity, each leg will take 1.333 times the load, which would probably be easy
>Assuming all the legs fail, it will just float
>In a case where legs on one side fail, the center of gravity of ships is very low (below the center of buoyancy so the ship is self righting in water). So the scenario it tips over is it was raised so high above the waterline that the CG falls on the other side/outside the legs
>In reality the studs on the legs will will embed themselves in the seabed, so would absorb a lot of the horizontal force that could cause it to tip

>If the center span fails, you have to start over
Yes, but the downtime would be orders of magnitude smaller than pontoon based ones. And the economics factor - these ships probably cost nothing to build, compared to even a single fighter jet.

>>63852523
>Big words from someone within ICBM range
He is not Chignise tho

>>63832851
ships are actually very difficult to sink quickly.

>>63852294
>mediocre solution
Sure, but it's better than sticking your thumb up your ass and smiling for the camera. If shotguns still work on drones then machine guns and prox fused rounds will do better. It worked for Ukraine.

https://en.defence-ua.com/news/how_gepard_spaag_takes_down_shahed_drones_and_why_its_so_effective_in_doing_so_ukrainian_operators_explain-8093.html

>nook
I was being metaphorical, any bombing will do

>No they wont + that's not sufficient
Taiwan wont be taking on the entire Chinese air force anytime soon, especially when they have the second largest combat air fleet in the world, let alone the ordnance to supply it. But realistically they will pave the way for ground troops to clear the area. And they'll have drones of their own at their disposal too.

>>63852775
He'll still be in range though

>>63852880
>He'll still be in range though
But you see my dear friend Xi Lee Choo, Chigna still will be first in that range with her cities pop density and pop grow index
lol lmao wumao

>>63853296
Are you having a stroke? Jeez you speak worse English than a Chinaman can.

>>63852408
>We can reasonably expect them to do that and establish a perimeter before the bridge ships go in
In the era of cheap long range precision guided weapons your perimeter would have to extend for tens or hundreds of miles around your landing site to actually protect your ships. One funky little truck could wreck two entire bridges from anywhere on the island.

>>63850690
>Counter battery
You need to be in range to counterbattery. Did you know an artillery piece on top of a mountain has a longer range? Also, did you know that an artillery piece that's already set up will fire before an artillery piece that needs to be set up first?
But most importantly, did you know your artillery is meaningless if the retarded boat-bridge it relys on to reach the island is shelled by the artillery that's already set up and ranged to hit that exact area?
Let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say that chinks manage to counterbattery with ships or glide bombs though.
Does it even matter? The entire landing operation has already been fucked by artillery, the "vital artery" of logistics and troops severed and bleeding into the ocean before even reaching shore.
>Lancets
lol
lmao
Even shitty chink drones would be better than those anemic little toys.
And as always,
>Muh Drones fags conveniently ignores the fact that the other side will have their own drones seeking out drone operators and EW systems, except instead of hastily made field defenses they are already dug in, camouflaged, and fortified positions

>>63853389
Thanks! I was trying to simulate level of concern trolling that coming from wumao

>>63832808 (OP)
Good luck. I heard that the current is very tricky.

>>63833230
>>63833194
Dont forget that you need to navigate the ship before changing into plattform mode!

>>63833191
One rocket hit on the bridge carry construction may remder useless.

>>63834175
Lol

>>63832875
No, you just have to take out the legs.
A 100m long ship with a 150m long bridge sticking out of the bow will nose dive into the water. I’ve never seen a boat capsize by pitching before, just rolling, this should be interesting to watch.

>>63833205
>this will work because if they blow up one ship we’ll just replace it with another
And then that ship can’t get blown up for some reason? Also, this thing is going to be secured to the ship in front of and behind it. If it sinks then bad shit is going to happen to more than just that “module”.

>>63832808 (OP)
China once again proving that any good ideas they’ve ever had are just copied from white people.

>>63852797
No, they do it by accident all the time.

>>63850530
It’s cute you think lefties like China. We hate them because they fucked up our cities and housing markets, they’re rude as fuck, push more deserving kids out of college, and generally don’t integrate in to their new living situations. The only people who like China are Walmart/Amazon/Anyone else who needs to buy lots of cheap shit. No one likes China but businesses and the Chinese who left their shitty country and think they should make their new one the same.

Taiwan has a ton of anti ship missiles

we all know how easy it was for ukraine using their neptune anti ship missile to blow up that russian cruiser

taiwan is also building submarines, either way it will be hard for china and Taiwan will be able to detect the invasion ship and assembling soldiers in in china well before it starts

>>63842663
>China is not a monarchy
lol I love this kind of retarded polisci.

>>63832875
>putting legs on it
Asians so desperately want to make metal gears and mechas its unreal

>>63832808 (OP)
i want a micro machines set of whatever this is.

>>63832883
you can say that about any landing craft retard

>>63832808 (OP)
very cool, i think they are totally capable of something like that, they operate the biggest and more modern ports in the world or close to.

same as the artifitial ports the allied used in op overlord

>>63852211
Total northern hemisphere death*

>>63834175
BASED

>>63854350
Where's the western equivalent made by white people?

>>63856397
We don’t have equivalents chang, everything we make is better.

>>63856087
Those allied ports weren’t dealing with long range surveillance and PGM’s. This barge is getting sunk long before it gets anywhere close to the coast, same as the rest of china’s fleet.

>>63856507
we would run out of missiles before they ran out of ships

>>63834175
Too bad that Taiwan's artillery are mostly fixed emplacements from Chiang's era and towed ones which in today's age are nothing more than sitting ducks: https://youtu.be/YGh8xwcquQs?si=2xYVhesuDTbBwmx5

>>63834175
lmao

>>63856521
No lol

>>63856582
Our own DOD says as much in their own wargames. Going against the largest manufacture of everything in the world as it turns out is no easy task. We once held that title but now they do so they do have the numbers on their side. Pull your head out of the past china is the largest external threat to America by a landslide.

>>63852003
replace ‘communists’ with ‘jews’, and your post would be true.

Also China isn’t a communist country, its a State-capitalism country.

>>63832851
fucking retard

>>63832808 (OP)
Bless their hearts.

>>63851761


动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 劉曉波动态网自由门

>>63854233
Doesn't seem like a simulation, take some remedial English

>>63853436
Which is why you don't set them up until those sites are identified and squashed using your own cheap long range PGMs. Sticking to landers and airdrops to provide some supplies and reinforcements will allow some boots on the ground, it just won't be as high volume as those bridge boats will allow

>>63853998
Did you know you don't need Arty to destroy arty and that a well placed gravity bomb or missile can still take out batteries? You don't need to counter batteries if you destroy them before arrival.

>Muh Drones fags conveniently ignores the fact that the other side will have their own drones
Key phrase: the other side
Except instead of rinky dink bomb drones they also have stealth bombers and naval guns to bear down on any resistance.

>>63856503
Too good to be true then, cletus

>>63858310
>you don't set them up until those sites are identified and squashed
>drives another truck out from bunker buried 100m under a mountain
what now?

>>63858310
>>63858317
>chang woke up, still mad
You must really need the social credit to come back a day later to seethe at guys who already left.

>>63856507
Those missile platforms will be getting blown up long before these barges get anywhere close to the shore. Because why the fuck would they arrive under fire? Why would anyone? Nothing a bombing campaign won't fix.

>>63856521
China wouldn't be allowing their boats to be shot at at all, let alone running out of them.

>>63858355
Destroy them using ground assets or from the air using surveillance drones and airstrikes. It's called suppression. Don't play dumb.

>>63858356
>cletus woke up, still fuming
You must need the meth money real bad if you took over from them.

>>63858310
>take some remedial English
coming from someone with that lvl of ESL
lolus lmaosos even

>>63857213
War on Terror 9/11 Larry Silverstein Mikhail Gorbachev The Westington House Scandal Latin American Puppet Dictators Operation Condor Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein CIA Agents The Clinton Chronicles Waco Siege Kinder Egg Surprise The Clinton Blowjob Scandal Nixon Watergate Scandal The Fake Tibetan Protest of 2008 Staged Coup of Colombia Kandahar massacre War on Terror Patriot Act PRISM Edward Snowden The Guantanamo Bay Illegal Occupation CIA black sites Human Rights NSA mass surveillance Warrantless Wiretapping 4th Amendment violations Julian Assange whistle-blower manhunt Ecuadorian embassy refuge Corporate interests worker's rights healthcare rights free education Police militarization incarceration rate fake weapons of mass destruction Petrodollar warfare Israel "special" relationship ban on boycott Free Palestine USS Liberty attack by IDF Mossad cover up false anti-semitism accusations depleted uranium mutinions war crime ignoring the Geneva Convention Agent Orange My Lai Massacre Contras 1973 Chile coup CIA backing puppet dictators Illegal Occupation 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état United Fruit Company Cuban Missile Crisis and the Turkish Missile Crisis Bay of Pigs Iran Contra Operation Northwoods Area51 Saudi lobby American Cover-Up of Trials of Unit 731 Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse MKUltra Tuskegee syphilis experiment Suspension of Habeas Corpus Sedition Acts civil rights Martin Luther King murder Cointelpro Bombing of Libya Bombing of Yemen Bombing of Syria Intervention in Yugoslavia Philippine Genocide of 1900 Choctaw Trail of Tears Andrew Jackson illegal Overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii the Illegal Colonialism of American Samoa Guam and other Pacific Islands the Economic Embargo on Mexico haole invasion the rape of Okinawa Jarhead rapists migrant caravan ICE children in cages Russian puppet president Kinder surprise

>63858421
You must really need remedial English if you think there's anything wrong. Who gave you apes a keyboard?

>>63858417
Is it 50 cents a post or 50 cents a day?

>>63858417
Good luck hitting them before they can launch. You can't keep the entire island under surveillance and be ready to strike any point in <5 minutes without landing any forces.

>>63858450
Is it 50 grams or 50 hits for you? I can tell you're supplied by the post, a daily regimen can't get you high enough to post that shit

>>63858451
Well, all the more reason to land troops then. With landers, heliborne assaults, paratrooper units, dinghy teams, HALO insertions, a tunnel dug from China... Who said they're ONLY using these bridge boats?

>>63858599
And with that we have come full circle. >>63853436

>>63858599
>50 grams of meth a day
Fuck, I'd quit my actual job for that. But really 50 cent army, we all know china isn't gonna do shit. This all for the few domestic changs out there who might be reading this and the retarded hapas across the planet.

I'm totally sure that Taiwans 100k army of part time twink soldiers are totally ready for the CCCP Naval, Air, Land invasion force that they have been growing since 1990

>>63858772
>chang biolabs confirmed
How many bolis johnasons?

>>63858448
>Who gave you apes a keyboard?
>anything wrong
lmao

>doesn't know how to replay
bot confirmed lel

>>63845261
>If

>>63836355
>They only deploy the legs once they're within a few miles of the coast,

When they are a within a hundred meters of the coast, at least for the first one. Its flat bottomed and will float as close to shore as possible, then jack itself up.

>>63841783
>Didn't a German one do the same some years before that?

An old Oberon sub did the same a few years before that.

>>63858599
>insecure chinkshill is still the only one desperately trying to push his cleetus meme because getting called chang made him so fucking mad he HAD to have a reply.
sad lol, god i’m glad i’m not a mentally ill contrarian who spends years of his life shilling near-daily on a tiny forum.

>>63842928

That thing is nothing but a target.

>>63851700
>The norks are winning by default though, in a generation or two South Koreans will go extinct. They wouldn't even need to glass Seoul but to walk in

The southerners will get replaced by infinite pajeets, africans and flips.

>>63851950
>South Korea is going extinct in a few decades.

Sigh no they wont, the south korean government will embrace replacement migration because curve must go up, and the norks will either abstain from invading because they do not know what to do with these people or go full exterminatus. It is not as if south korea will become totally depopulated.

>>63841824
>Learn exactly how you will die with zero power to stop it

as if the US military has the capability to retool its core organization for a peer-to-peer conflict lmao. The whole rare earth mineral fiasco already shows the US won't be able to fight China within the decade.

Even the hohols and slavniggers from Moscow know more about modern warfare than the US right now.

>>63861612
>delusional thirdie who hates the west shows delusions in public
Lol, i’m not even american, but i genuinely envy how much seethe americans produce on a daily basis, you literally have no other reason to be here other than to suck off thirdie militaries, do you?

>>63861633
Don't be silly, I just like seeing the kike's favorite meat golem end up in bodybags.

>>63861901
>>63861612
/pol/
you gotta go back man