What's new

Vietnam Defence Forum

I figure as much but it's why modern naval ships have guided missiles. This isn't world war 2 where soldiers storm the beach while machine guns and artillery shoot at them. Any general who expose his men to that kind of needless danger needs to be hang.
PLAN has Zero experience in modern warfare and also dont know how keep their guided missiles ship survive against anti-ship missile in real combat, so they will use human wave tactic in naval combat again and again.

So, artillery will be the best choice to stop their landing craft, bro.
 
I wrote this for another forum a couple of years ago, I believe is still valid:

Vietnamese Spratly Islands multi layer defensive system (this analysis applies only to the bigger islands):

First line of defense (up to 150 km range): EXTRA (long range guided rockets).

Second line of defense (up to 40 km range): Accular guided rockets. 130 & 122 mm howitzers.

Third line of defense (up to 10 km range): Kornet anti tank missiles, Light tanks (PT-76) or medium tanks (T-54 / 55). The islands have a sizable forces of enclosed T-34-85 and even M-48 tanks, they're protected by hardened steel case and concrete bunkers.

Fourth line of defense (up to 3 km range): direct line of sight light artillery (23 / 37 / 85 mm), MATADOR anti tank missiles, other anti tank missiles, RPG type weapons (RPG-7, SPG-9, RPG-29), AGS-17 grenade launcher, 12.7mm heavy machine guns.

Against helicopter assault: Shoulder mounted Igla missiles, 23 / 37 mm anti aircraft guns and even anti tank and RPG weapons.

Air assets: The islands can deploy armed helicopters.

Passive defense: The island have steel-reinforced concrete obstacles around the islands, like the poles in Bach Dang river and/or steel obstacles on Normandy. That would slow the enemies vessels down, also act as artillery marks. So, the artillery still has its use, but its not really effective against fast moving landing boats.

Conclusions: Most things are small, mobile and easy to hide and protect, but the artillery / tanks in bunkers are vulnerable to enemy shelling.

Notes: Large weapon systems (anti ship missiles, air defense systems, etc) are too difficult to hide and too vulnerable against the enemy initial shelling and or missile attacks. Also, deploying sophisticated systems like anti ship missiles, etc, those systems have to be maintained, but can't do that properly in a small island. And lets not forget that the environment in those islands is very nasty to equipment, very nasty marine environment.

If you are going to attack these islands, you are first going to deploy plenty of assets and you are going to cut them off and then apply heavy suppression fire to destroy most of what is there and then you make your move. Its very difficult to defend against that, you can have landings coming from all directions and by air.

Now that the chinese have large bases in their newly expanded islands only makes the situation far worse. The already have 3 large air bases from where they can deploy a significant number of fighter jets as well as AWACS aircrafts. Its just a matter of time until they deploy large air defense systems which will cover the air space of the Vietnamese islands. They can also deploy long range rocket launchers to shell the islands, Vietnam has no defense against that, so there is no point in deploying large, sophisticated systems, they can't survive.

Look at what happened on the Falkland islands and those islands are far bigger, the Argentinians deployed 15,000 men and heavy artillery, but in the end they surrendered because they were cut off and had no chance of getting supplies. Actually, precisely because they deployed too many troops, the supply issue was even bigger. You can only deploy so much in an island that is 60,000 s/m (that's the biggest island, Spratly island, although its getting expanded now).

In my view those islands are not defensible against a big power like China. You can only try to do some damage to the attacking party before you lose the island, but you can't keep them. That would
require air and naval assets that Vietnam does not have and also long range missiles.

Still, only so much can be deployed in a very small island and in the end, can't stop a large landing force. Remember all those Japanese islands during WW2, all much bigger and with a lot of Japanese troops, but all were taken. Islands are not defensible against a superior enemy that can cut off the island and keep a blockade.

That's also why all those chinese islands can be easily destroyed / taken by the Americans if they want to.
 
Last edited:
I wrote this for another forum a couple of years ago, I believe is still valid:

Vietnamese Spratly Islands multi layer defensive system (this analysis applies only to the bigger islands):

First line of defense (up to 150 km range): EXTRA (long range guided rockets).

Second line of defense (up to 40 km range): Accular guided rockets. 130 & 122 mm howitzers.

Third line of defense (up to 10 km range): Kornet anti tank missiles, Light tanks (PT-76) or medium tanks (T-54 / 55). The islands have a sizable forces of enclosed T-34-85 and even M-48 tanks, they're protected by hardened steel case and concrete bunkers.

Fourth line of defense (up to 3 km range): direct line of sight light artillery (23 / 37 / 85 mm), MATADOR anti tank missiles, other anti tank missiles, RPG type weapons (RPG-7, SPG-9, RPG-29), AGS-17 grenade launcher, 12.7mm heavy machine guns.

Against helicopter assault: Shoulder mounted Igla missiles, 23 / 37 mm anti aircraft guns and even anti tank and RPG weapons.

Air assets: The islands can deploy armed helicopters.

Passive defense: The island have steel-reinforced concrete obstacles around the islands, like the poles in Bach Dang river and/or steel obstacles on Normandy. That would slow the enemies vessels down, also act as artillery marks. So, the artillery still has its use, but its not really effective against fast moving landing boats.

Conclusions: Most things are small, mobile and easy to hide and protect, but the artillery / tanks in bunkers are vulnerable to enemy shelling.

Notes: Large weapon systems (anti ship missiles, air defense systems, etc) are too difficult to hide and too vulnerable against the enemy initial shelling and or missile attacks. Also, deploying sophisticated systems like anti ship missiles, etc, those systems have to be maintained, but can't do that properly in a small island. And lets not forget that the environment in those islands is very nasty to equipment, very nasty marine environment.

If you are going to attack these islands, you are first going to deploy plenty of assets and you are going to cut them off and then apply heavy suppression fire to destroy most of what is there and then you make your move. Its very difficult to defend against that, you can have landings coming from all directions and by air.

Now that the chinese have large bases in their newly expanded islands only makes the situation far worse. The already have 3 large air bases from where they can deploy a significant number of fighter jets as well as AWACS aircrafts. Its just a matter of time until they deploy large air defense systems which will cover the air space of the Vietnamese islands. They can also deploy long range rocket launchers to shell the islands, Vietnam has no defense against that, so there is no point in deploying large, sophisticated systems, they can't survive.

Look at what happened on the Falkland islands and those islands are far bigger, the Argentinians deployed 15,000 men and heavy artillery, but in the end they surrendered because they were cut off and had no chance of getting supplies. Actually, precisely because they deployed too many troops, the supply issue was even bigger. You can only deploy so much in an island that is 60,000 s/m (that's the biggest island, Spratly island, although its getting expanded now).

In my view those islands are not defensible against a big power like China. You can only try to do some damage to the attacking party before you lose the island, but you can't keep them. That would
require air and naval assets that Vietnam does not have and also long range missiles.

Still, only so much can be deployed in a very small island and in the end, can't stop a large landing force. Remember all those Japanese islands during WW2, all much bigger and with a lot of Japanese troops, but all were taken. Islands are not defensible against a superior enemy that can cut off the island and keep a blockade.

That's also why all those chinese islands can be easily destroyed / taken by the Americans if they want to.
There are gaps and weaknesses obviously in our defense hence the Chinese threaten us with war if drilling doesn't stop. The good thing is everyone now in VN knows who is friend who is enemy.

VN needs a policy of iron fist both in diplomacy and military otherwise we can never live in peace.
 
What are other options? VN army isn't rich. We can expect before landing the enemy will bombard the beach. Navy will be the first line of defense, but the Marines as second and last line of defense will have to use every means to stop approaching landing crafts. Scenario won't differ much from WW 2.

VN need to scrape what she can and purchase more subs. From what I understand that is the only route an inferior navy can hope to slow a superior force. They're expensive. A cheaper route, and I'm pulling this one out of my ***, snipers. Lots of snipers.

You bet it does, it has a ton of missiles, particularly the type 55.

The thing is, land artillery will push an attacking naval force to stay out of the range of the artillery unless they want to take that risk. Of course a very strong attacking naval force will have the means of destroying that land artillery (plus air attacks, etc).

So in practice, that land artillery gets used mainly against landing craft.

If the attacking force is composed of smaller ships (no destroyers), the land based artillery definitely plays an important role. Go one step further and deploy long range guided rockets as VN has done and you have a much more powerful deterrent.



WW 2 style beach landings continue to be a typical scenario and that's why the US marines continue to train on that. The landing vehicles are much better now and the supporting weapons are also better. Can also combine the amphibious assault with air assault by helicopters, but the basics of the game are still the same.

Of course, some counter measure is better than none, but VN govt need to subsidize R&D for that indigenous mini sub.

PLAN has Zero experience in modern warfare and also dont know how keep their guided missiles ship survive against anti-ship missile in real combat, so they will use human wave tactic in naval combat again and again.

So, artillery will be the best choice to stop their landing craft, bro.

It is never wise to underestimate your enemy.
 
That is funny. a VN oil tanker crashed into the most powerful destroyer of Taiwan: ROCS Tso Ying (DDG-1803), seriously demaged the warship when moving out of harbor.

Such accident may repeat. VN needs huge energy imports. VN needs markets. the government hopes the exports to reach $275 billion this year, with the total turnover some $550 billion. VN Import/export volumes could reach $1 trillion by 2020. Doable only with enormous efforts from everybody. Well, unless a war breaks out in the region or a global financial crisis returns or a tsunami sinks the East Asian continent.

IMG_3793.JPG
IMG_3792.JPG

IMG_3790.JPG
 
VN need to scrape what she can and purchase more subs. From what I understand that is the only route an inferior navy can hope to slow a superior force. They're expensive.

That's what I've been saying for the last few years. In case of war, Viet surface ships will have to stay in port or will not survive. Only subs can navigate mostly undetected and hit enemy vessels. Quite a few naval exercises have shown subs getting into firing position against US carriers totally undetected.

They are not that expensive, the Kilos were $300 million each, the Italian S-1000 is even cheaper. The Gepard that is now in its way to Vietnam is $350 million and what is it good for in case of war?
 
Last edited:
That's what I've been saying for the last few years. In case of war, Viet surface ships will have to stay in port or will not survive. Only subs can navigate mostly undetected and hit enemy vessels. Quite a few naval exercises have shown subs getting into firing position against US carriers totally undetected.

They are not that expensive, the Kilos were $300 million each, the Italian S-1000 is even cheaper. The Gepard that is now in its way to Vietnam is $350 million and what is it good for in case of war?

LOL anything italian is overrated and over priced. Their 500k USD cars can't even idle without catching on fire.

In my opinion, if a ship can't hit an air target, that ship is just a sitting duck. Vietnam needs to divest from surface ship and invest in missile tech, aircraft, or sub. Any of those is better than a surface ship that will most certainly be overwhelmed.

WW2 for example, when two of the most powerful battleship from Japan were sunk from the air. Those ship never fired a shot at an enemy ship.
 
That is funny. a VN oil tanker crashed into the most powerful destroyer of Taiwan: ROCS Tso Ying (DDG-1803), seriously demaged the warship when moving out of harbor.

Such accident may repeat. VN needs huge energy imports. VN needs markets. the government hopes the exports to reach $275 billion this year, with the total turnover some $550 billion. VN Import/export volumes could reach $1 trillion by 2020. Doable only with enormous efforts from everybody. Well, unless a war breaks out in the region or a global financial crisis returns or a tsunami sinks the East Asian continent.

View attachment 430063 View attachment 430062
View attachment 430056
Yep, Such accident will repeat soon as JP petrol company,Idemitsu Q8, start operating in VN, more oil tanker will sail from JP to VN and vice vesar.

First foreign-owned petrol station opened in Hanoi
Friday, 2017-10-06 05:56:37
Font Size: |
At the opening ceremony for the petrol service station
Font Size: |
NDO - A petrol service station named Idemitsu Q8 was launched at the Thang Long Industrial Park in Hanoi, on October 5, becoming the first wholly foreign-owned petrol station to join the petrol retail market in Vietnam.

The petrol service station is operated by Idemitsu Q8 Petroleum Co Ltd, a joint venture between Japan's Idemitsu Kosan and Kuwait Petroleum International Ltd, established in 2016.

The station covers approximately 6,000 m2 at the Thang Long Industrial Park which is home to many Japanese enterprises.

Idemitsu Q8 is equipped with an automated management software system which allows card payments, with a number of advanced features, and is capable of providing accurate management of fuel quantities to 0.01 litres and a detailed report of transactions for customers.

The station is also equipped with state-of-the-art technology to prevent any leakages of fuel, while providing customers with Japanese standard services through trained staff.

Hiroaki Honjo, General Director of Idemitsu Q8 Company said that the joint venture will strive to become the leading petrol service trademark in Vietnam.

The Idemitsu Q8 joint venture is planning to open more petrol service stations in various provinces and cities nationwide in order to expand its petrol retail market.

Idemitsu Kosan has been operating in Vietnam since the 1990s and also has stakes in the Nghi Son oil refinery project in Thanh Hoa and has participated in several petrol business activities across Vietnam.


http://en.nhandan.org.vn/business/i...ign-owned-petrol-station-opened-in-hanoi.html
 
In my view those islands are not defensible against a big power like China. You can only try to do some damage to the attacking party before you lose the island, but you can't keep them. That would
require air and naval assets that Vietnam does not have and also long range missiles.


Still, only so much can be deployed in a very small island and in the end, can't stop a large landing force. Remember all those Japanese islands during WW2, all much bigger and with a lot of Japanese troops, but all were taken. Islands are not defensible against a superior enemy that can cut off the island and keep a blockade.

That's also why all those chinese islands can be easily destroyed / taken by the Americans if they want to.
We have Scud and Shaddock missiles, range from 500km to 700km since 80s, enough to cover all Spratly islands. Our Su 22 also can reach those islands during 1988 clash, but we didnt fire to CN ship cos our economy was too bad that time and we counld not make situation get even worse .
 
The 125mm far reaching canon of T90 can destroy both Abraham and Leopard before they can come close to fire their shells. Worse, the 120mm cannon can hardly defeat T90 armor hence the Germans now develop a new generation tank with 130mm cannon.

View attachment 429691
What is the penetration value of APFSDS-T in T-90 over RHA under 2 km?
 
What is the penetration value of APFSDS-T in T-90 over RHA under 2 km?
There are info available on internet, so something between 250mm (Wolfram core) to 900mm (Uran) if the armor piercing shell hits at 0 degree at tank body.

The Turks learn a hard lesson when they lost numerous Leopard tanks and armor vehicles in Syria, hit not by T90 but modern RPG rounds and antitank missiles.
 
What is the penetration value of APFSDS-T in T-90 over RHA under 2 km?
Real tank penetration value are usually kept secret but through some internet wizardry I managed to found one but remember to take this number with a healthy dose of skepticism.

The Rusky:

Lekalo & Svinets are around 600mm.

Mango at 520mm.

The good guys:

M827 tungsten, 450mm (never fielded by the US)

M829 around 800mm of penetration.

German L55 DM53 700mm, DM63 720mm (note that the german doesn't even use DU round.)

The UK charm 3 have around the same penetration as the US.
 
VN ambassador to the United States visits the Governor of Hawaii and Harry Harries, the commander of US Pacific Command (PACOM).

3 percent of Hawaii population are ethnic Vietnamese.

Vietnam infrastructure is almost ready to welcome the first visit of US aircraft carrier. Maybe more than one carriers will arrive at Cam Ranh bay.


IMG_3795.JPG
IMG_3796.JPG
IMG_3797.JPG
IMG_3798.JPG
 
There are info available on internet, so something between 250mm (Wolfram core) to 900mm (Uran) if the armor piercing shell hits at 0 degree at tank body.

The Turks learn a hard lesson when they lost numerous Leopard tanks and armor vehicles in Syria, hit not by T90 but modern RPG rounds and antitank missiles.
900 mm penetration is of DU round.

The Turks learn a hard lesson when they lost numerous Leopard tanks and armor vehicles in Syria, hit not by T90 but modern RPG rounds and antitank missiles.
Turks also fielded Pattons.
 
We have Scud and Shaddock missiles, range from 500km to 700km since 80s, enough to cover all Spratly islands. Our Su 22 also can reach those islands during 1988 clash, but we didnt fire to CN ship cos our economy was too bad that time and we counld not make situation get even worse .

Ballistic missiles are not going to help defend the islands, Its a weapon of retaliation.
Shaddock missiles and Su-22 can't penetrate a modern air defense system. Su-22s only carry short range missiles, Its a suicide mission.

LOL anything italian is overrated and over priced. Their 500k USD cars can't even idle without catching on fire.

In my opinion, if a ship can't hit an air target, that ship is just a sitting duck. Vietnam needs to divest from surface ship and invest in missile tech, aircraft, or sub. Any of those is better than a surface ship that will most certainly be overwhelmed.

WW2 for example, when two of the most powerful battleship from Japan were sunk from the air. Those ship never fired a shot at an enemy ship.

The S-1000 is not overpriced, Its actually very cost effective and a capable design. VN was very interested in it, the Italians came to Hanoi to discuss the sale but nothing else has been heard.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom