Posted on 06/28/2011 8:18:16 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Should We Be Afraid of China's New Aircraft Carrier?
Not yet.
BY ABRAHAM M. DENMARK, ANDREW S. ERICKSON, AND GABRIEL COLLINS | JUNE 27, 2011
Six months ago, Gen. Liu Huaqing -- the father of China's modern navy and its commander from 1982 to 1988 (and, according to the state-run People's Daily, "a distinguished member of the CPC, a seasoned loyal Communist fighter, an outstanding proletarian revolutionist, politician and strategist, and an excellent leader of the Party, the state and the military") -- passed away. Liu sought to build China's navy first into a "green water" fleet and, eventually, into a full-fledged "blue water" navy capable of projecting power over vast distances. Key to realizing Liu's vision was an aircraft carrier, and Liu reportedly vowed: "I will not die with my eyes closed if I do not see a Chinese aircraft carrier in front of me."
While Liu may have died with his eyes open, they can close now. From the harbor at Dalian naval shipyard in northeast China, the first aircraft carrier of the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) will soon set sail for the first time. And much of the Asia-Pacific region, as well as the Asia-watching strategic community in the United States, is hotly debating the implications of this move.
Adm. Robert Willard, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, said in an April interview with Bloomberg that he is "not concerned" about China's first carrier going to sea, but allowed: "Based on the feedback that we received from our partners and allies in the Pacific, I think the change in perception by the region will be significant." Japan's Asahi Shimbun
(Excerpt) Read more at foreignpolicy.com ...
Re: 60+ CVs, or SSBNs?
SSBNs [I don’t think they are putting anymore emphasis] than a maximum of up to 12 boats split between the 094, the 096, and, possibly, just possibly, by 2050 the rumored 098.
But 60 SSKs they already have and adding to this roster continuously, a batch at a time, are more modern cutting edge systems such as the 039, 040, and the newest addition the 041. This number I think will exponentially be increased three folds by 2050 with one fleet for the South China Sea, another Sea of Japan, and the balance stretches across the rest of the ChiCom coast.
light to medium tonnage [Chinese productions of Varyag class carriers] however may be the way to go with Chinese if their concentration in front line submarines, air power, and ballistic missile strategy is any indication.
Unlike the super carrier sported by the Americans, these Varyag class light to medium carriers are likely very very low cost to built, to maintain, to man, to operate, and to arm therefore 60 such boats does make for good economic sense.
I’m speculating also that a Varyag class battle group would consist of no more but one carrier; one supply ship (possibly with hangers to house up to 12 022 FACs); 2 frigates; and two destroyers. This combination, if my estimation is correct, is about half or a third of the strength of an American battle group. Even less if you consider fire power between the two, therefore the math is relatively similar.
Re: If the ChiComs are able to product two indigenous CVs by 2020 or 2025
Apparently, and I don’t know [how on-target this is], but, US Intelligence had been issuing reports lately that the ChiCom’s are expected to launch two indigenous versions (based on scale models uploaded in the Internet) of what appears to be something similar to the Varyag. One expected by end of 2013 and another by 2015 time frame.
Given the speedee d’ gonzales ways the ChiComns does things, I would not be surprised a bit if they come up with two indigenous IKEAed-together boats of their own by 2015. I mean how long does it take if they modularize everything and slap them together one module at a time? Not long my opinion.
There are clear indications that this plan is maybe covertly being put together and these indications are: they keep pumping out 052, 053, and 054, frigates and destroyers fast pace almost one or two new boats every year. The math tells the story.
If I’m not mistaken, the anti-ship variant of the Tomahawk was retired after the Cold War while the nuclear-armed variant has been/is being mothballed.
Success is when preparation meets opportunity.
Re: ...it was less than 40 years ago when China’s Navy got beat up by Vietnam’s Navy.
Really?!!!
And is that akin to [the same logic] as that of Vietnam’s gallant claims that she had beaten the craps out of the USA and won the Nam war which is also 40 years ago?
Or, on second thought, could it even be the affects of the psyches behind the West’s, or behind the minds of some westerner’s, over face saving values over their inability to conquer an anomaly as medieval and as primitive as Vietnam and hence had to pull out because of the pressure building at home that they have this need to add the Chinese to this roster of Vietnam failures?
I mean seriously, I don’t see a single back door garage in the USA having been B-52’ed by Vietnam throughout while the whole of Vietnam was cratered to ruins with a ratio of 50,000 casualties to maybe 40,000,000 in favor of the US to boot, do you? I mean do you truly understand what the term “beaten” and “lost war” mean?
Research the event again. Don’t place the psyche of “nationalism” as a thing to override all else of importance. You should then know how the incident truly and exactly concluded.
Patriotism is one thing. Truth is quite another.
Re: The Imperial Japanese Navy needed a lot less than three centuries to take care of HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse in 1941. Bottom line is that like Japan in the interwar years, China has built up a large navy. If we decide to oppose their policy of gradual territorial annexation at the expense of their neighbors, I expect our sailors will run into a lot of unpleasant surprises, much as they (and the Royal Navy) did against the Imperial Japanese Navy during WWII.
Patriotism is one thing and truth and reality is quite another. Meaning there will be “Cuban Missile Crises incidents” between the USN and that of the PLA-N in the Asia Pacific theatre, no doubt.
But, being that it’s probably nuts for the two to even consider cranking up the guns aboard their cruisers and their destroyers because doing so would ultimately evolve into a nuke stand off and from a nuke stand off the potentials of a full blown nuke exchange that it would be nothing more but a war of words coming from out of both the US and China in any face off.
The Chinese of course [will pull out all of the stops] because American involvement in the region interferes with what Chinese logic terms as their “CORE INTEREST”, aka, similar to how it is that the USSR’s stationing of nukes in Cuba becomes America’s core interest.
The Americans however have their own “CORE INTERESTS” to think about and that American core interest is that she is finally accessible to the Chinese, a variable in vulnerability never before faced by the Americans others than those of the USSR.
I mean if you were China or if you were America, what are your only options? That answer is clear — America won’t intervene directly but, she will support all who have a beef with the Chinese by arming them.
I mean hell, after any such conflict, i.e., the Korean war for examples, it took China two and a half decades to pay off all of the military hardware’s they got from the Soviets to fight in the Korean war while the masses were requested to tighten their belts therefore imagine the incomes plus interest that’ll be coming in from the Pinoy boys as well as the VC’s to American suppliers after the war is over.
Because of the about you are screwed if you do and you are screwed if you don’t scenario faced by both the Chinese and the American, their only recourse in the future is compromises and allow the core interests of both parties to run amok in the world of politics. In other words: Yes, “Superfusion” is and will become a reality and it’ll happen between 2050 and 2100. It could happen even beyond our wildest of dreams — tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, in 2012, maybe even 2013. I mean that’s a wild card I’m not willing to call.
Sorry I got the date wrong. But the point is that we by no means should be blunder estimating the Red Chinese Navy. Thats what Obama wants the US public to think in order that he can continue to destroy as much of our tech capability as possible. I am quite convinced of this, its the old racial and ethnic minority nationalism, retribution for the alleged killing by the US of too many racial and ethnic minority “victims” throughout our history.
Obama is a nationalist ( racial ethnic minority nationalist)
socialist, the soft name for fascist.
Good read:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html
Thats why Obama has said publicly “ The USA can withstand an attack.” In his mind its mostly just taking out the white trash.
Few people dare mention this Obama mind set, or work to reveal its truth. We see it in Obama’s conduct, as well as Holders.
And it is effecting our national security.
That would be true if Obama were not in the process of destroying the US Navy by demoralization ( gays), cutting funding for new weapons and the maintenenace of nuclear arms,and by squandering the US Navy's fuel reserves.It is grim. And China knows it.Our Navy may be strong right now, but 10 years out? Its very uncertain.We have a lot of making up to do once we get rid of the Obama regime and its nationalist socialist ideologue retards. And all of our money has been borrowed that we can, the debt is 85% of GDP, so we won't be able to strengthen like we had to do after Carter and his idjits. Obama means to weaken our military and let the ChiComs or the new World Wide Caliphate under Iranian nuclear arms, or both, finish us off. Eff Obama and his pukes.We are not in a good way.
In the Battle of the Paracel Islands (1974), the PLAN sent the RVN Navy packing, despite sending 4 corvettes and 2 sub chasers against the RVN's force of 3 frigates and 1 corvette. The Chinese have since established a permanent physical presence on the island chain, including a 737-capable airstrip on Woody Island.
Re: Battle of the Paracel Islands (1974)... PLAN sent the RVN Navy packing...
The info I had was that two RVN frigates were crippled beyond repair with smoke billowing from their decks and superstructure.
After the incident had subsided, it was suggested that RVN command dispatched further units to the region and had the two crippled frigates sunk. A number of Vietnamese fishing trawlers used as naval vessels also took part in the battle.
However, like Vietnam’s other crude Soviet era frigates and Corvettes, their guns did not have the range that PLA-N forces have. As a result, RVN was out ranged by guns from PLA-N forces and suffered massively.
Pics uploaded in the Internet depicted and suggested that between two to three hundred RVN sailor from the two crippled RVN frigate were snatched from the water and taken prisoner and later released.
Western sources however had either honestly misquoted the event or they may have intentionally made discrediting accounts of what had happened either for pure political reasons or purely to keep the truth from reaching other countries in the region.
The RVN Navy used American equipment until the RVN's demise at the hands of the DRV in 1975. The RVN account of the battle indicates that the Wikipedia entry may have exaggerated the equipment used by the RVN Navy against PLAN (possibly the result of commentary entered by English-savvy Chinese Wikipedia contributors). PLAN appears to have had the advantage of missile boats (vs the RVN Navy's guns-only ships), as well as air support from bases on Hainan. Bottom line is that China's superior equipment was lined up against the WWII cast-offs that the RVN inherited from the US, at a time when the US was determined to not only abandon its erstwhile ally, but ensure its demise. The battle was lost way back in 1973, when Kissinger arranged for the end of American financial and military aid to RVN, even as the Soviets and the Chinese ramped up aid to the DRV.
Re: The RVN Navy used American equipment until the RVN’s demise at the hands of the DRV in 1975.
Well... The F-5’s and some of the armors left behind was American. But the recollection I have for those frigates was that they are second hand Soviet clunkers just as those of the PRC’s of the day. Both are crude tin foil bath bubs with a Soviet stencil stamped in it that comes attached with limited functionability with one exception: the Chinese had fiddled with theirs and as a result, it conforms to the requirements that the PLA-N had set out. I do not recall any mentioning of air power and/or missiles deployments in that incident. Only guns aboard both navies were used.
Regarding Wikipedia” I never take what’s printed in the site with more than a grain of salt. Wiki is still western by nature and the contents in it still have this smell of western trickery and bad after taste to it. I use my own judgement and I use logic to arrive at a conclusion rather than reading up on what western medias had printed time and time again.
I mean after haviing been force fed these implants of an information, like all the “lose lips sinks ships of this board” who doesn’t have a mind of their own, one starts to live in these tales and in due course, get poisoned and hypnotized by it.
RVN collapsed in 1975. The Paracels Islands battle occurred in 1974. The only Soviet equipment used by RVN was perhaps Vietcong or NVA battle rifles, RPG's or artillery pieces captured in combat. DRV did use a lot of Soviet equipment, but it took no part in the battle with China over the Paracels - that was an all-RVN show.
True. To a great extent you make your own luck.
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.