Does China Really Need Aircraft Carriers?

National Security Journal ^ | 10/15/2024 | Brent Eastwood

[whyilovetexas111]

One question that few are asking about the potential of war between the United States and China is this: Does the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) even need aircraft carriers to win the fight?

[whyilovetexas111]

Why does China even want carriers? Seems like just a bragging rights thing.

[z3n]

Aircraft carriers may not be as important as they used to because a lot of aircraft have a much farther range than they used to, and China has bases all over the world, but carriers are not obsolete just like tanks aren’t. In wartime particularly, you would still want the ability to have mobile bases of operation.

[ClearCase_guy]

As I understand it, aircraft carriers are about power projection. If you want to be the world’s policeman, or if you are planning to put boots on the ground on the other side of the ocean, then (for 80 years or so) the thinking is that you need aircraft carriers.

But I think China’s primary concern is just keeping sea lanes open so that they can manage their imports and exports. They are very dependent on both of those. I don’t see aircraft carriers being crucial to that task. Subs and Destroyers seem like the workhorses for maintaining ocean commerce.

[bakeneko]

Pentagon asks why anybody but us ‘needs’ aircraft carriers.

Kind of like ATF asking why anybody ‘needs’ an AR-15.

[POGO163]

China can’t even keep a submarine alive...They have no upper ranks who have seen combat. The last major ground war they fought was in 1979. China is a paper tiger like Russia. Atomic bombs: They lie so much no one knows if they have more than 10 ICBMs or not. If they could take Taiwan, they already would have.

[uranium penguin]

How many drones can fit on an aircraft carrier?
How much fuel/ munitions can a carroer hold?

If a carrier was parked off of Taiwan. And solely used as drone rearming and refueling station.

[PGR88]

Not that its China’s sole focus, but in many things, China very much as an attitude of: “if India, Brazil, the UK, Russia and of course the USA have aircraft carriers - then we need some too.”

[buckalfa]

"They have no upper ranks who have seen combat."

That makes them unpredictable thus dangerous. We simply do not know. China's obvious strategic focus is the South China Sea and keeping the sea lanes open for their mercantilism. Yet will the US self destruct on its own and simply cede the world stage to China? Xi plays the long game. Is he orchestrating Russia, Iran and now the Norks to bleed us dry of material and will?

[ClearCase_guy]

Could be an interesting turning point, which might work in their favor.

Although opinions were still somewhat mixed in 1941, plenty of US Navy folks thought that battleships were the important ships. Aircraft carriers, you know, might have a role, but big battleships had ruled the waves for centuries.

But we lost a ton of battleships at Pearl Harbor because air power is pretty effective. So we went full press on building aircraft carriers, and this worked well for us.

China, today, has a small number of aircraft carriers, and it’s not clear that they know how to use them. But that type of ship is central to how the US sees its navy. But what happens (like at Pearl Harbor) if the game changes and nations realize that carriers are vulnerable and too expensive to risk? Well, the US would really need to re-think our whole approach. China? Not so much. They have a big navy and it is not built around carriers. So, which nation really has a 21st century navy? Too early to tell.

[House Atreides]

Why does China even want carriers?
*************************************

They are used to “project power”. They’re another tool in the toolbox.

[uranium penguin]

The immediate future of warefare is drones.

Pilots cost a ton of money and are hard to replace. Taking the pilot out of the cockpit and putting them at a remote computer is a game changer.

A $25 drone with essenitally a hand grenade in a pin point strike. Can take out a lot of stuff. People, Tanks, vehicles, communications, etc.

[Vermont Lt]

The weight savings (and structure) of a plane without a human pilot would allow for faster, more maneuverable aircraft that could go perform much better than its piloted counterpart. Right now, the limitation would be the data connection that would allow for instantaneous response from the driver on the ground. Once that is optimized, look for airborne pilots to become outdated in a couple of generations.

[calljack]

I saw a drone about 20 years ago. Wire guided. Basically a brick of C4 with wings on the side motor in the back and a camera in the front. Crude but effective. Little more sophisticated today.

[wildcard_redneck]

“China can't even keep a submarine alive...They have no upper ranks who have seen combat. The last major ground war they fought was in 1979. China is a paper tiger like Russia. Atomic bombs: They lie so much no one knows if they have more than 10 ICBMs or not. If they could take Taiwan, they already would have.”

US Official Reveals China Has ‘World's Leading Hypersonic Arsenal’
Newsweak
Published Mar 14, 2024 at 2:26 PM EDT
By Micah McCartney
China is winning the hypersonic weapons race and is moving full speed ahead with plans to expand the reach of these hard-to-target weapons, an intelligence analyst says.

“China's missile programs are comparable to top-tier producers internationally, and China now has the world's leading hypersonic arsenal,” said Jeffrey McCormick, senior analyst with the National Air and Space Intelligence Center, in a statement prepared for the House Armed Services Committee.

Hypersonic missiles travel at speeds of Mach 5 or faster, using advanced propulsion systems to maintain velocity while gliding through the upper atmosphere. In addition to their speed, these missiles are mounted with highly maneuverable hypersonic glide vehicle payloads that can easily evade traditional missile defense systems.
https://www.newsweek.com/us-official-reveals-china-has-leading-hypersonic-arsenal-1879142

America can no longer manufacture its way out of the world war thanks to the free traitors.

All this is due to a parasitic traitorous mercantile class pushing "free trade" and the communist globalists who want to destroy the self-sufficiency of all nation states into subdivisions of the UN, even America itself.

Shame on you for supporting this evil project.

[calljack]

The current limit on maneuverability is the pilot. Get the pilot out and 15 to 20 g turns are on the table.

[DesertRhino]

And at the same time, the striking range of our carrier aircraft has never been shorter. The F-35 moonpig is way shorter legged than the fleet could manage in the A6E and F-14 strike model days.
We do need them because we have to engage in power projection very far from home. But we need better planes. Our current naval air wing is weaker and shorter and less skilled than the one embarked in 1990. The Chinese need subs and a robust surface fleet armed with missiles. They mostly need to play defense under their mainland missile and bomber fleet.

Horses for courses.

[lonestar67]

I’m particularly impressed by their missiles fueled with water.

https://www.newsweek.com/china-missiles-rocket-fuel-corrupt-officials-water-xi-jinping-1858491

[uranium penguin]

A 15 year old gamer sitting at a computer can be essentially as good a “pilot” as a multi million $ Top gun.

Ukrainians are taking out Russian tanks with home made one way drones for (by some accounts) under $100.

A small helicopter drone with a grenade or C4 or gas, can fly in tunnels.

cheap, replacable, no risk to operators. The only limits are communications, range and payload capacity.

[antidemoncrat]

“Does China Really Need Aircraft Carriers?”

No ... unless she wants to conquer the world.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

If you wish to control the Pacific Ocean—you need a big modern navy. To intimidate the USA you need to threaten the Pacific coast the way Japan didn’t do after Pearl Harbor.