Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia - 2007 Update
The rRsing Sea Dragon in Asia Web Site ^ | 24 February 2007 | Jeff Head

Posted on 02/24/2007 7:24:58 PM PST by Jeff Head

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: Strategerist

However, having said that, in a one on one engagement, the PLAN sovs, the new 52B and 52C destroyers are going to be a serious threat. No Burke captain would take them lightly.


21 posted on 02/24/2007 8:35:20 PM PST by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Wonder how many of these craft one Attack sub could sink in one well planned night.. followed by one F-22 at dawn to mop up any leftovers and photograph the remains..

Could be massive waste of excess American bucks..
Is that a good thing wasting capitalist capital?.. d;-)

22 posted on 02/24/2007 8:52:21 PM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Buump!


23 posted on 02/24/2007 8:55:11 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
I do ont know. If the action were within the more confined waters of the china Sea where the PLAN diesel/electrics ar elocated and where their ASW capabilities are stronger...I would not say it would be so easy.

At this point, on the high seas, our ADCAP LA class boats, the Virginias and particularly the Sea Wolfs would raise cain with them for sure.

...and, if it were on the high seas, unless within range of Okinawa, make it an F-16 superhornet doing the mom-up and photography.

Just the same, as they produce more and more modern warships and subs, we would be foolish to underestimate them...particularly as we continue to dwaddle right at or under three hundred ships in our navy.

24 posted on 02/24/2007 8:57:13 PM PST by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Actually ANY Navy even ours seems to be at immense risk with modern military tools.. especially air tools.. Serious stealth Predator(s) would/should be unerving to any Navy.. If it/they carried internally held ship to ships that were also stealth..

Big navys except for politics and logistics might be a WWII concept.. Could be China is working on WWII Strategy.. Moving a huge Army or Navy with satellites watching now would not be easy..

25 posted on 02/24/2007 9:32:16 PM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All
As the PLA modernizes hundreds of thousands in the land forces are being let go. An estimated one-and-a-half-million so far.

They join the estimated 100 million to 200 million in the "floating population" of unemployed plus millions more of acknowledged people in the unemployment line.

The rural population estimated at 800 million is more restless than ever as corruption dominates and income disparity grows. Pollution is killing hundreds of thousands every year.

Rural residents are facing eviction as the "dam happy" Chinese build more and bigger. Rural residents head to the cities only to be treated with disfavor. Industrial deaths occur at a rate of more than 100,000 each year.

There are nearly 100,000 clashes between citizens and authorities each year. A radio report (here in the U.S.) the other day stated that a PLA warehouse was raided and all contents of weapons, etc. were carried off.

The "iron rice bowl" is no more. Tens of millions more face lay-offs from the thousands of worthless government owned enterprises that are a huge drain on resources just to keep the millions "employed."

New Democrat Third Way progressives and mainline Republican "free traders" want to raise everyone's boat. China has some really big boats and it's our progressives and "free traders" that are keeping them afloat.

I know why the progressives are doing it: ideology; and Lenin knew why the Republican "free traders" are doing it: they are useful idiots.

26 posted on 02/24/2007 9:47:22 PM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

You must be a zoomie. Who was it? Air Force General Spaatz that said, "who needs a Navy?" The zoomies are a conceited bunch. On the need for a Navy, Spaatz has been proven wrong time and time again.


27 posted on 02/24/2007 9:51:00 PM PST by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sasportas

I'm ex-Navy.. Squid..


28 posted on 02/24/2007 10:12:20 PM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head; SLB
When those Chinese decide to build a fleet, they sure don't mess around.

From this update, it looks like they will have a decent start on a blue-water navy by 2009-10 and if they continue on this production rate, they will have a massive fleet by 2015-16.

The continuing buildup of their fleet, the modernization of their army and air force, and their new ability to neutralize satellites from the ground could combine into making China a very serious threat in the next decade.

I sometimes feel like Billy Mitchell, who, in 1924, knew deep down in his gut that the Japanese were going to attack the US. The Chinese don't need this large of a fleet to capture Taiwan (they have enough fifth-columists on Taiwan and so many missiles aimed at the island that they will likely knock out half to two-thirds of its defenses before the first Chinese transport leaves port); the Russian Pacific Fleet is a pathetic shadow of its former self; none of the Southeast Asian nations have naval forces that can begin to stand up against the Chinese India might be considered a moderate threat against the Chinese, but the Indian Navy is mostly defensive and lacks the ability to take the fight to the Chinese territorial waters; Japan, too, might be considered a threat, but most of their surface fleet consists of destroyers and frigates that are primarily defensive in nature, their submarines might be a threat against China, but the PLAN already has a fairly effective ASW program in place. Once you take all of these countries out of the equation, the only other logical opponent that the Chinese might he building up their forces to face is the United States.

We need to begin a massive naval construction program in the next few years if we want to have any chance of facing the Chinese on an equal footing. Otherwise we will end up like we were in 1941-42, fighting a defensive war while our shipyards scramble to produce the ships we need to take the fight to the enemy. Only this time, the enemy will have a capability of hitting us on our own soil, using sub-launched cruise missiles to hit our shipyards and repair facilities.

Beijing has studied the history of the United States and they know us almost as well as we know ourselves. They know our strengths (our vast natural resources and our massive industrial capabilities) and they know our weaknesses (our inability to truly see the evil in some men and our short tolerance for a costly war). They know that if they go to war with the United States, it will be a fight to the finish, with no quarter asked and none given. The frightening truth of the matter is that they appear to have weighed all of these risks and have decided to continue with their plans.

29 posted on 02/24/2007 10:27:15 PM PST by Stonewall Jackson (Captain, I must protest! I am not a merry man! - Lt. Worf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy; Jeff Head
Speaking for those on the other thread

"it's only a model"

Yes, but these models really do represent a threat, unlike those "global-warming models" our media keeps touting. /grin

30 posted on 02/24/2007 10:32:23 PM PST by tarheelswamprat (So what if I'm not rich? So what if I'm not one of the beautiful people? At least I'm not smart...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Stonewall Jackson
Well, I agreew with most all of what you have said. But, the Japanese Navy (their Japanese Maritime self Defense force) is very credible and represents the second strongest destroyer navy in the world, second only to the US. They are a serious threat to the PLAN. South Korea also has a very potent and modern force, smaller than the Japanese, but very modern and capable...if they have the will to use it.

My concern is that we are slowing our build rate and that we have only a couple or three yards that can build our major combatants (carriers, destroyers, amphibs, etc.).

We have decent designs coming up on the ways...but our ability to produce them quickly is seriously eroded...they yards simply do not exist...and our ability to produce them at all is jeopardized.

Anyhow, this is why I have that site, and also why I wrote my:

Dragon's Fury Series of Books.

If you are interested, the entire series is available to all Freepers as a free download in a professionaly done Adobe eBook --> HERE.

31 posted on 02/24/2007 10:37:23 PM PST by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tarheelswamprat

Oztrich Boy doesn't tag sarcasm, he says so right on his FR page...and I believe he was being that way. hehehe.


32 posted on 02/24/2007 10:40:30 PM PST by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Yes, I knew it was in fun! The underlying reality is serious, though, so thanks for the timely update.


33 posted on 02/24/2007 10:57:09 PM PST by tarheelswamprat (So what if I'm not rich? So what if I'm not one of the beautiful people? At least I'm not smart...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
I agree that the Japanese and South Koreans do have the ability to cause the Chinese Navy significant damage, but I'm not sure if they have the political will to do so until it is too late.

Most of the destroyers and frigates in the Japanese MSDF carry the Harpoon or Type 88/90 ASMs, the Japanese government refused to allow the deployment of Tomahawk cruise missiles on any of their warships. Since the effective range of the Harpoons and Type 88/90's is approximately the same as most missiles deployed by the Chinese (but shorter than the range of the 9M80E extended-range version of the SS-N-22 Sunburn that the Chinese bought for their Sovremennyy destroyers), this would put the Japanese warships in harm's way.

Still, it is interesting to wonder how the Japanese would fare in a modern fight against the Chinese. I might have to sit down and write that one out.

Thanks for the discussion. Good night.

34 posted on 02/24/2007 10:58:32 PM PST by Stonewall Jackson (Captain, I must protest! I am not a merry man! - Lt. Worf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael; Jeff Head
Both of you might be interested in my recent vanity on China.

Cheers!

35 posted on 02/24/2007 11:02:15 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Stonewall Jackson
You are welcome.

You know that the anti-ship version of the Tomahawk was pulled long ago from our combatants. They are all Land Attack missiles now. The latest Burkes do not even carry Harpoons.

At least we still have the carriers and their long "reach" with the air wings.

36 posted on 02/24/2007 11:03:15 PM PST by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

You have got to be kidding!!!


37 posted on 02/24/2007 11:10:45 PM PST by Stonewall Jackson (Captain, I must protest! I am not a merry man! - Lt. Worf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Jeff I understand what you are saying.

However, there could be several forward looking apparent/not apparent considerations that affect what we see at the the present.
38 posted on 02/24/2007 11:33:20 PM PST by RunningWolf (2-1 Cav 1975)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

There are some interesting projects (both Australian and joint Aus/US) going on down here which should greatly improve our naval capabilities. Nulka, Mk-48 CBASS, and CEAMOUNT/CEAFAR are just the tip of the ice burg.

That said, both the RAN and the USN need to double the size of their fleets.


39 posted on 02/24/2007 11:37:35 PM PST by Dundee (They gave up all their tomorrows for our today's.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Stonewall Jackson
Nope. And they have retired the S-3 Viking and their ASW capability from the carriers...with no replacement.

The Spruance destroyers, among the quietest most effective ASW platforms we had have all benn decommissioned, many of them with 10-15 years service life left. A large part of them have been sunk in live fire exercises. IMHO it is a sad day when you see sites like these...

We have sunk nineteen of the class to date.

Spruance DD 963 - class disposition



Ship's Name Hull Number Homeport / Status
SPRUANCE DD 963 decommissioned, sunk as target
PAUL F. FOSTER DD 964 decommissioned
KINKAID DD 965 decommissioned, sunk as target
HEWITT DD 966 decommissioned, scrapped
ELLIOT DD 967 decommissioned, sunk as target
ARTHUR W. RADFORD DD 968 decommissioned
PETERSON DD 969 decommissioned, sunk as target
CARON DD 970 decommissioned, sunk during tests
DAVID R. RAY DD 971 decommissioned
OLDENDORF DD 972 decommissioned, sunk as target
JOHN YOUNG DD 973 decommissioned, sunk as target
COMTE DE GRASSE DD 974 decommissioned, sunk as target
O'BRIEN DD 975 decommissioned, sunk as target
MERRILL DD 976 decommissioned, sunk as target
BRISCOE DD 977 decommissioned, sunk as target
STUMP DD 978 decommissioned, sunk as target
CONOLLY DD 979 decommissioned
MOOSBRUGGER DD 980 decommissioned, scrapped
JOHN HANCOCK DD 981 decommissioned, scrapped
NICHOLSON DD 982 decommissioned, sunk as target
JOHN RODGERS DD 983 decommissioned, scrapped
LEFTWICH DD 984 decommissioned, sunk as target
CUSHING DD 985 decommissioned
HARRY W. HILL DD 986 decommissioned, sunk as target
O'BANNON DD 987 decommissioned
THORN DD 988 decommissioned, sunk as target
DEYO DD 989 decommissioned, sunk as target
INGERSOLL DD 990 decommissioned, sunk as target
FIFE DD 991 decommissioned, sunk as target
FLETCHER DD 992 decommissioned
HAYLER DD 997 decommissioned, sunk as target

40 posted on 02/25/2007 12:07:44 AM PST by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson