quote:

---

Originally posted by ki1

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlueWhaleMoon

quote:

---

Originally posted by ki1
CSIS兵推已經顯示維持海上航道不只是盟友的事情,需要(至少一部分)自己來

---

請問那一頁那一行有這個?

---

不只一頁一行,而是處處如此

沒有蟲洞的話,實際上無法運輸部隊的更深含意是無法運輸各種物資,遲早長春太原擇一重演
頁碼106(PDF112)
Once the conflict starts, Chinese air and naval units surrounded the island. The resulting Chinese
defensive zone was so dense that no cargo ships could get through, and the danger to airlift aircraft
was extreme. In one iteration, an attempt to insert a U.S. Army brigade onto Taiwan by air resulted
in two of the three battalions (roughly 2,000 soldiers) being destroyed in the air

===

Base Scenario,共軍掩護登陸艦隊做法之一即為大量艦艇在台灣以東積極行動
此時美海軍損失已不低,
文中提到的各方,台灣顯然是技術上最有可能加強海上戰力的
(把老船換掉,就是倍數級的提升)

---

quote:

---

頁碼86(92)
Sound Chinese strategy could mitigate, but not stop, this attrition of the amphibious fleet. China
has a substantial fleet of modern warships, and most Chinese teams placed SAGs, comprised
of cruisers, destroyers, and frigates, to the east of Taiwan to serve as air and missile defense
pickets. They also dispatched submarines further into the Western Pacific to keep U.S. surface
forces at bay. These slowed attrition to the amphibious fleet while making the surface combatants
themselves more vulnerable to attack.
...
88(94)

In all iterations of the base scenario, U.S. Navy losses included
two U.S. aircraft carriers as well as between 7 and 20 other
major surface warships (e.g., destroyers and cruisers).

===

Pessimistic Scenarios
需要船團強行突破,這裡也包括台灣
頁碼90(96)
For Taiwan,the United States, and its partners,
this would have required running convoys to the island under air and missile attack.
但兵推中台灣近海船舶損失極高,且讓美日在投入海上戰力時猶豫
此時要維持運輸船團:
a.台灣自己來,

---

quote:

---

b.台灣的海上戰力讓事情不這麼嚴重

---

quote:

---

頁碼94(100)
The pessimistic scenarios often provided fewer naval reinforcements during the first several weeks of the conflict.
The greater surviving Chinese capabilities tended to make the U.S./Japanese player more cautious with the use of surface forces.
Any surface ship that approached Taiwan was destroyed in both scenarios, and
the remainder were often not a high priority for China since they posed only a limited threat to the Chinese operation.

===

Taiwan Stands Alone
除了直接提到彈藥短缺外,亦可以想想其他各種物資
頁碼96(102)
First, Taiwan’s operations would be weakened by a long-term shortage in ammunition. The
scenario assumed that after two months of operations, ammunition shortages would force Taiwan
to fire half as frequently, with a corresponding reduction in effectiveness. After three months,
ammunition exhaustion forces artillery crews to be reformed into infantry units.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by damau

守勢作戰遇戰防雷機會較小，因為會拖慢進攻速度/途徑，但也不是不可能，新一代戰防雷可設定時間或遙控引爆.不過運用機會還是不大.M113在烏克蘭有中雷視屏，基本上在那視屏全員生還逃脫，看起來還算可以的.
雲豹至少一次機會也是沒準，打過仗誰知道，何況鋼板裂紋的消息更讓人對其防護力打問號.

至於廢氣問題，烏克蘭也有不少其他歐洲國家給的老M113,看視屏運兵時上蓋常被打開，聽説國軍也有裝增壓的M113,過去演習時沒聽過有哪個兵坐在M113上中毒，情況應沒想像嚴重.
把M113當成騾子，別把他當戰馬就對了.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlueWhaleMoon


首先感謝ki兄的整理

但是我看起來每個地方都是曲解與腦補"台灣自己來護航運補"

---