what's the big deal? Retired UK Pilots took jobs in China

[applesauce]

lol. It's only BS because you know shit about how military logistic work.

It's not just building a few roads and you can have solved your logistic problem, to supply a expedition like that, you would need to have a fully function network. With Ports, Road (Both MSR and ASR) Railroad and Airport. You can ride a tank from North Korea to the South, even a bombed-out road, but you can't ride a tank from Japan or Philippine or Australia or United State to Korea. That is something you still failed to get. Building all that take time, and South Korea have NOTHING back in 1950. There are 3 stages to conduct logistic operation, first is to build your infrastructure, then you increase your capability (ie start producing more stuff), then you fine tune your need, you don't get to overhaul an entire operation in just a few months. You probably aren't going to get out of the first stage with that time rame.

On the other hand, who told you that you can't have logistic capability when you are under constant bombardment? Ho Chi Ming trail is the most bombed logistic supply line in history, NO OTHER Logistic trail have been comprehensively bombed before and since then, does that stop the North Vietnamese from supplying the Vietcong?

And finally, I never said North Korea have better logistic than the UN, I said there is a limit on either side, and that limit is independent to each other, just because the North rely on donkey to supply their troop and the UN rely on Aircraft and Ship, that does not mean UN is a sure win in the war, because as long as North Korea and Chinese can supply their frontline troop, they can and will hold out the UN, on the other hand, the UN supply line also have its limit and as I said, that line in 1953 is just north of the 38. parallel. There is an old saying in quartermaster "You need fuel to bring fuel to the frontline" every can of fuel you brough in the frontline have to waste another can of fuel just to transport it from you Log Train to frontline. Which mean the longer the Log Train from end to end, the more resource you use to constantly supply your troop. And again, the Log Train for China form end to end is less than 300 mile (from China to 38 Parallel) the Log Train for UN is around 5000 mile + depends on where you are getting your supply from. UN is good, but not that good to offset that difference in just 3 years, even now in modern war. We need approximately a year and a half to stabilise the supply situation in Iraq, and you know how I know? I was there.

Dude, you are extremely simplifying battlefield.

except the us had all of those.
they had the ports like i said. they had unimpeded supply routes from japan and the us. they had years to build the required roads and rail that were not under any danger if it was behind the lines.

you keep saying its thousands of miles away. sure, no disagreements there. but what i keep telling you is that the route is secure, once the convoy route is set up and under way, which it was by the time the stalemate happened, the supplies came into korea non-stop.
the us kept its main supply depots in japan, which is completely untouched by the korean war, and later in Busan which is again untouched post breakout. their supply lines to the front was no longer than china's supply line to the front. you want to count the start point as the us mainland when its actually not, then we might as well count the chinese supply lines as starting moscow then.

i also never disagreed that initially the logistic was not good. but that the us had 2 years to work on it and they did work on it and yet the stalemate continued. you still say oh it takes longer than two years, and yet somehow it took much less than that in ww2

then i keep telling you, the chinese supply routes to the 38th is more perilous, i did not say its was completely stopped, because obvious it was not. but the fact remains it was much harder to supply an army from the yalu to the 38th under enemy near complete air supremacy and having all the roads and rail bombed, than it is from busan with air and naval dominance on your side (along with ports to use and forward airfields).

you act like all of the UN supplies are ordered directly from the us mainland and then carried thousands of miles to the front. this was not true, the main supply points are in japan and busan, what the front required was sent from those areas and those supply points in japan and busan constantly received large unimpeded and safe deliveries from the us. just like how many chinese supplies came from thousands of miles away in south china or even in moscow and send thousands on miles to staging points in manchuria before sending it to the front in Korea.

my point is simple, UN had supply issues in NK and it is a part of the reason why it retreated. however that's only half of it, the other half is that the chinese army in korea could actually fight and even if the UN had adequate supply a retreat to some extent still would have happened. as such PVA fighting capability is on par with supplier issues for the reasons on the UN retreated

for my evidence i showed that the PVA with worse supplies than UN at the 38th was able to continued a stalemate for years despite many issues, including but not limited to enemy air and naval dominance and general equipment deficiencies.
and all you got is "well the us is thousands of miles away" but distance doesn't matter if you can just stash up huge quantities near by completely unopposed

 

[jhungary]

except the us had all of those.
they had the ports like i said. they had unimpeded supply routes from japan and the us. they had years to build the required roads and rail that were not under any danger if it was behind the lines.

They don't.

Japan is seriously damaged during WW2, and the US force in Japan is for occupation only, which is why when the war started there are not enough troop, equipment ad supply for US to move from Japan to Korea.

Read Task Force Smith

Battle of Osan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

you keep saying its thousands of miles away. sure, no disagreements there. but what i keep telling you is that the route is secure, once the convoy route is set up and under way, which it was by the time the stalemate happened, the supplies came into korea non-stop.

Secure does not mean you don't need to travel, it takes US about 2 weeks now to traverse from West Coast to Japan, it would have been months back in 1950.

And interruption of Supply line does not just happen because enemy interdiction, just like peace time, logistic can be affected by weather event, mechanical problem and so on, I mean if you ship something from US to Japan all the time, not every time they will get there on time, even there is not a war going on.

And with a longer supply line, you have MORE chances problem going to arise, not just because of enemy suppression.

the us kept its main supply depots in japan, which is completely untouched by the korean war, and later in Busan which is again untouched post breakout. their supply lines to the front was no longer than china's supply line to the front. you want to count the start point as the us mainland when its actually not, then we might as well count the chinese supply lines as starting moscow then.

They don't, again, that's the reason why the 24th infantry were in Korea to act as a "Delaying" troop. If US had both troop and supply in Japan, they wouldn't go defend Busan Perimeter.

And lol, you didn't touch Busan port? You do know North Korea have Artillery, right??

i also never disagreed that initially the logistic was not good. but that the us had 2 years to work on it and they did work on it and yet the stalemate continued. you still say oh it takes longer than two years, and yet somehow it took much less than that in ww2

2 years is a very short amount of time to deal with buildup supply, I mean, how long does it take China to gain the logistic capability here? You are talking about decade, you don't just "develop" in a few year. Sure, South Korea is smaller than China, but then that does not mean you can fully develop Korea in a few months now, can you??

WW2 is differnet in 2 aspect,

1.) All nation involved are under military economy, they basically shifted EVERYTHING to build up their military, the US don't build any ship in any of their shipyard to turn out a Liberty ship every month. Mind you. in full military production mode. It still takes US 9 months, with the help of Australia to invade Guadalcanal (Which is about 1200 miles from Brisbane) Guadalcanal Campaign started at August 7, 1942. While US officially enter the WW2 on Dec 7, 1941 (US war production started actually way earlier than that) with Japan being an expeditionary force. (So the role reversed)

And then It takes US close to a year to invade North Africa, with British and Commonwealth Force already established in Africa.

2.) WW2 Is not really an expeditionary war for US and Allies, German and European Allies are fighting at the same home turf, while Africa are colonised by both side. Japan is the one fighting expeditionary warfare in the Pacific. US did not start their own expeditionary warfare until 1944 when they started invading Iwo Jima and surrounding island, before that Guam, Mariana, Philippine are all US territories.

then i keep telling you, the chinese supply routes to the 38th is more perilous, i did not say its was completely stopped, because obvious it was not. but the fact remains it was much harder to supply an army from the yalu to the 38th under enemy near complete air supremacy and having all the roads and rail bombed, than it is from busan with air and naval dominance on your side (along with ports to use and forward airfields).

As I said, you cannot stop supply coming in by Naval and Air Bombing, otherwise North Vietnam would not be able to supply the Vietcong.

As in the war in Ukraine, you don't cut supply line until you take the MSR or ASR, that's why the Ukrainian are attacking thru the road network, and that is what giving the Russian headache on their supply situation.

you act like all of the UN supplies are ordered directly from the us mainland and then carried thousands of miles to the front. this was not true, the main supply points are in japan and busan, what the front required was sent from those areas and those supply points in japan and busan constantly received large unimpeded and safe deliveries from the us. just like how many chinese supplies came from thousands of miles away in south china or even in moscow and send thousands on miles to staging points in manchuria before sending it to the front in Korea.

lol, Japan and Busan don't have supply produce, a bazooka round in Busan and Japan have to come from a factory in the US, Japan and Busan DID NOT produce those rounds. You don't just count the tail end on the onshore support, you count the original of the supply, other than food and maybe clothing that were locally made in Korea or Japan, both country did not produce ammunition, fuel and spare parts of tanks, all those have to come from the US or allied country in the area..

my point is simple, UN had supply issues in NK and it is a part of the reason why it retreated. however that's only half of it, the other half is that the chinese army in korea could actually fight and even if the UN had adequate supply a retreat to some extent still would have happened. as such PVA fighting capability is on par with supplier issues for the reasons on the UN retreated

Again, if Chinese army can actually fight, would they be stopped in Han River??

You are not talking about a complete route of the UN force dude...

If Chinese force really is hammering the UN force, then they would be able to at least replicate the early North Korean success in the war and push the South and UN force back to Busan or a similar phase line. This is not to be. And then you are talking about a defensive war on the UN and spin it as it was a continuation of the Chinese roll over of the UN troop in Late 1950.

As I explained the third time, just because you have your own supply limit does not mean I am in a position to exploit that, I too, have my own supply limit, and as I explained, that line is about 38 parallel, the reason why there is a draw or stalemate is because BOTH SIDE cannot advance on the other, it's not just because UN cannot advance on the Chinese position...or vice versa

for my evidence i showed that the PVA with worse supplies than UN at the 38th was able to continued a stalemate for years despite many issues, including but not limited to enemy air and naval dominance and general equipment deficiencies.
and all you got is "well the us is thousands of miles away" but distance doesn't matter if you can just stash up huge quantities near by completely unopposed

I don't really care about "Your Evidence" I mean, can I ask what is your background on military science??

Form this exchange, this is quite obvious you know shit about how war and line of communication work tho, so forgive me if I treat "Your Evidence" with a giant pinch of salt..