Taiwan getting even closer to buying US Harriers

With the recent victory of Tsai Ing-wen (first female Taiwanese president) and her Democratic Progressive Party, the possibility for Taiwan to acquire retired US AV8-B Harrier VSTOL fighter jets is a lot closer to becoming reality. One of the talking points Tsai made during her campaign was to increase defense spending and Taiwan has been pushing to get a VSTOL jet for some time. They see a VSTOL as the only way to prolong a fight with China as most long runways will be taking out in the first few hours of any potential conflict with China. A VSTOL fighter can be hidden in the mountains or even be flown from converted container ships that can give Taiwan it's own carrier capable fighter fleet.
Taiwan expressed interest in buying F-35B's but with Taiwan and China's relationship as it is and the fine line that the US must walk between the two, that's not really a possibility. What is a possibility however is selling retired and upgraded AV8-B Harrier II Plus's to Taiwan through the Pentagon’s Excess Defense Articles (EDA) program. Taiwanese defense officials were in Washington DC recently meeting with US officials and declared their intentions of importing the Harrier by 2019. The addition of the Harrier will give Taiwan added security and the needed experience to develop their own indigenous designed and built VSTOL fighters since getting the F-35B will be near impossible.

The move is a precursor towards developing an indigenous short take-off and vertical landing fighter (STOVL) by Aerospace Industrial Development Corporation (AIDC).

AIDC informed the DPP that the company would require 13 years to master the technology required for thrust vectoring nozzle. Using the IDF fighter as a basis, another 13 years are needed to produce a prototype.
The program will also face obstacles from Britain as the Pegasus engine technology belongs to Rolls Royce. The RoCAF must also be persuaded to give up its hope of obtaining the F-35B.

alert5.com...

nationalinterest.org...

www.taipeitimes.com...

a reply to: Sammamishman

They see a VSTOL as the only way to prolong a fight with China as most long runways will be taking out in the first few hours of any potential conflict with China.

Ummm… along with the Harriers.

Whatever facility Taiwan uses to house them will be known long in advance of 'any potential conflict'. Made potentially more imminent because,

One of the talking points Tsai made during her campaign was to increase defense spending…

although it's better than nothing, and the US will be getting some money and political leverage with the new Taiwanese administration, I don't think those harriers will last long against newer Chinese aircraft.

Another thing to consider is that it's very easy for the Chinese to infiltrate Taiwan and discover ahead of time exactly where these assets are kept and thus easily targeted both from Chinese military and from those same insurgents using portable shoulder launched systems while the birds are taking off.

Either way it would be a waste of Taiwan's money since the assets would get clobbered so quickly.

too bad China would have a meltdown, and although Taiwan's friendlier to the USA than say China I'm not sure they go along with it either, what they really need to do is to just let the USA base there.

true we'd run the risk of spies getting a little too close to our stuff. but it would keep Taiwan safe, bring them politically to our side, keep China worried. and to be honest China doesn't dare attack the US or her assets.

besides two could play the lets take over islands that aren't ours game. last time I checked America was much better at it.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

So what do you suggest they do? Nothing, and let China in, while waving the white flag? Really?

Is it a waste of money for Eastern Europe to arm themselves against Russia because they won't stand a chance against them? Or anyone else for that matter? Doing something is better than doing nothing.

I think assets are easier to hide than you think. Look what the US have been able to do over the last 50 years. And even if the Chinese are able to accurately locate and accurately target and accurately hit those areas (which is a tall order I might add) it still leaves time far a quick reaction force to get up in the air from the time the missiles launch to the time they strike. The whole reason Taiwan has a military agreement with the US is because they know that they won't last a long time against a full on fight with China. Their goal is to fight and buy time for the population to escape the the US to come in and bring the pain.

The US will never base out of Taiwan. The Chinese would have a MAJOR fit and potentially push them into a preemptive strike against the Taiwanese with US assets being 110 miles from Mainland China. The US is in a precarious place with relations between the two. We can't push China too far even though we want to.

a reply to: intrptr

Hardened Switzerland-style mountainside bunker hangars leading to 300ft runways with ski jumps for land-based STOVL operations would be one option. They'd be cheap enough to build that Taiwan could scatter a dozen or two of them throughout the country the way the Swiss do, with only 2-3 aircraft per "micro-base", so in a combat situation you could scramble most of them in the ~5-10 minutes before the missiles hit.

I love it the UK designed them and built them and we sold or scrapped them all before its replacement was even active.....

Yet the USA still use them and Taiwan want them.


Another failure of the UK goverment

Taiwan is well aware of what China can do to them and has prepared for it. There are multiple underground command posts and bases in the mountains, including one rumored capable of operating over 200 aircraft.

Taiwan would a hard nut to crack. The fact it would require a seaborne invasion would make it pure murder on the Chinese. It is interesting that the US does not recognize Taiwan but, it bound by law to maintain its defense. The US walks the line with this one. It keeps Taiwan just powerful enough that China would be hard pressed to be able to invade and no so powerful that it would try to challenge China more aggressively. It does this throughout the region. Of course the US being required to defend Taiwan is also a big deterrent to China. And the fact the Japanese have changed their laws to the could support the US in defense of a place like Taiwan.

The day you know things have gone bad between China and the US is they day you see massive new arms shipments of modern weapons to Taiwan, Philippines, Myanmar and Vietnam. That would be a good sign war was coming.

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: intrptr

Hardened Switzerland-style mountainside bunker hangars leading to 300ft runways with ski jumps for land-based STOVL operations would be one option. They'd be cheap enough to build that Taiwan could scatter a dozen or two of them throughout the country the way the Swiss do, with only 2-3 aircraft per "micro-base", so in a combat situation you could scramble most of them in the ~5-10 minutes before the missiles hit.

I understand the scenarios 'as presented', did they leave out the sneak attack by ground hugging hypersonic cruise missiles? There isn't enough warning time to 'scramble'.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Taiwan is well aware of what China can do to them and has prepared for it. There are multiple underground command posts and bases in the mountains, including one rumored capable of operating over 200 aircraft.

If you know about their 'preparations', the Chinese do too. Especially so close to home.

a reply to: intrptr

And that doesn't change the fact that a mountain isn't an easy thing to crack. Knowing about something doesn't mean they can easily counter it.

originally posted by: MrSpad

The day you know things have gone bad between China and the US is they day you see massive new arms shipments of modern weapons to Taiwan, Philippines, Myanmar and Vietnam. That would be a good sign war was coming.

Or were switching chunks of the industrial base that China has been making a fortune selling products to the US with over to South East Asian countries crippling the chinese economy while at the same time keeping ours more or less stable and the factors that make our economy fluctuate more under our control. Part of it would come with reinforcing those nations boarders with weaponry. China on the other hand might try some stunt like building islands in the middle of the shipping routes and try and throw a wrench in the plan or bully shipping. But I'm sure if they really tried to enforce their new "territory" the USA would have a answer to that.

a reply to: MrSpad

Long time Mr. Spad, as always you deliver an informative post.

Makes me wish I should of stayed military and see how far I might of progressed.

I've been closely watching the situation in the south china sea.

I often wondered what would happen if we decided to give Japan its "sword" back.

We're allies now, right? A militarized Japan in the region would probably be a huge cause of concern for China, especially old wounds...

a reply to: intrptr

A hypersonic missile carrying anything less than a tactical nuclear weapon might cause problems for an aircraft carrier or an unprotected airfield, but it won't do squat against something like this:


And the nuclear option carries way too strong of a risk that one or two of these:

will return the favor, and the Chinese are many things, but "suicidal" isn't one of them.

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: MrSpad

Long time Mr. Spad, as always you deliver an informative post.

Makes me wish I should of stayed military and see how far I might of progressed.

I've been closely watching the situation in the south china sea.

I often wondered what would happen if we decided to give Japan its "sword" back.

We're allies now, right? A militarized Japan in the region would probably be a huge cause of concern for China, especially old wounds...

A fully militarized Japan would be bad for the region indeed. The other nations would be even more afraid of Japan than China, considering Japans history. Nations opposed to China might change sides. Since in this case US influence over Japan would be much less. The idea of the US keeping Japan a peaceful state would no longer exist in the region.

So the US follows with Japan the same program it does with Taiwan. Being to powerful to make an easy target but no so powerful it becomes aggressive. The fact that right now the US has its traditional allies ANZUS, Philippines, Thailand, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea and Japan all working together with ASEAN and India to contain China is something of a minor miracle. The US has played a very smart role bringing them together, improving some of their defenses without tipping the balance of power in the region and upsetting the apple cart. Taiwan is a prime examples of the policy on a smaller level.

a reply to: MrSpad

I honestly don't think that a re-militarized Japan is that big a danger to Asia... Though there are a few nations that would disagree strongly...and noisily.

They still remember, only too clearly, what happened the last time they took on the world. Hiroshima. Nagasaki.

Neither of the Koreas like it. Neither do the two Chinas. ...and so on.

Then again, Japan has a real habit of "forgetting" things it doesn't like. Nanking. ...and assorted other atrocities.

I wonder which will win out?

Taiwan needs to be able to show that they'll be too tough a nut to crack. If Harriers allow them to do so? Sell 'em.

The US should sell Taiwan everything it wants. Taiwan needs the US and has no reason to cross the US. Taiwan could use F-15C/E, F/A-18E/F/G, and F-16V. American jobs, strong deterrent to Chinese aggression, and cheaper parts for all countries operating the equipment. Yet the US chooses to arm Islamist regimes who would love nothing more than to wipe America off the map, nation states that choose to collaborate with our enemies on technology and design **cough Israel** etc, etc. There is no rhyme or reason to it.

Harriers are still pretty effective aircraft, especially down low and at slow speeds. The RoCAF also has some pretty good fighter aircraft that can hopefully carry out the over watch duties while other aircraft like the Harrier can do what it can to control shipping lanes and wreak havoc in the littorals. The upgrades are where I'd be interested, with an AESA radar and a more efficient engine/greater range I don't see why the Harrier couldn't be relevant until 2040 at the least. Certainly not air dominance but with the right EW assets it'd survive.

2x AGM-84 will cause a problem for a seaborne invasion for many years.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: intrptr

And that doesn't change the fact that a mountain isn't an easy thing to crack. Knowing about something doesn't mean they can easily counter it.

If its 'impossible' to crack, it will just take a little longer.

a reply to: Barnalby
I think it was Patton that said fixed fortifications are monuments to mans stupidity.

In a nuclear exchange (your proposed scenario), the sub launched cruise missiles will arrive in a few minutes, sealing these bunkers shut, entombing whatever is inside them forever.

What an archeological dig site that would make.

What a target these 'defenses' will paint on little Taiwan.