Replies

"I think the timetable is some time in the next 15 years or so."

I agree. If current free-trade trends continue, sometime between 2020 and 2030 China's military will reach technological/personnel-skill parity with the United States, and their development of coal gasification/liquefaction (CGL) plants will give them sufficient domestic petroleum production to engage in long term war. On top of that the US will be stripped of most of it's industry for long term war, while they will have gained (with free-trader supplied technology and funding) all the industry they need for long term war.

"Recall the USS Stark, which went down from only 1 missile fired from 1 aircraft and it was supposedly in readiness state (hey, it was an Iraqi plane that sunk it, I almost forgot). It isn't that much of a challenge to overwhelm the defenses of a ship at sea. After that, it is a direct tradeoff in blood."

The USS Stark was never sunk. It was hit by two Exocet missiles, one of which did not explode. However, it's remaining fuel contributed significantly to the fire that damaged much of the superstructure. The captain later admitted that the Phalanx, due to some earlier reliability problems, had been switched off. The ship was later repaired and put back into service. But 20 years from now, the American steel makers that do the major ship parts that would have been involved in the repair will be out of business. Their equipment bought up and shipped overseas or scrapped by the Chinese. Then we will have no major repair capability for any damaged ships.

That was Saddam's dress rehearsal for the Gulf War. During the latter, he got close only once, when a Chinese-built Silkworm (SS-2 "Styx"/"Samlet" knockoff) locked onto a U.S. BB but was intercepted and destroyed by a Sea Dart fired from an escorting Royal Navy destroyer. (Sea Dart was a miserable flop during the Falklands War, when British commanders learned to rely instead on their Sea Wolf anti-missile missiles to intercept Argentine raids, but it performed like a champ nine years later during the Gulf War. Persistence pays.)

OK, I stand corrected. But the incident does still further my point that it is relatively easy to disable a ship at sea. There aren't many places to duck. And unfortunately for nuclear carriers, the bigger the target, the harder to hide.

This next decade could be known as the "China Decade", where we first bleed jobs to China, then we pour real blood.

neutronsgalore wrote "...their development of coal gasification/liquefaction (CGL) plants will give them sufficient domestic petroleum production to engage in long term war."

They also have the option of building a large amphibious fleet in a hurry, they built over 6 million tons of merchant shipping last year, they could easily build scores of assault ships in a few years. Also LST's in their numerous inland waterway shipyards.

They could build a fleet rapidly and the world would assume it was meant for Taiwan, but strike south into oil rich Borneo and the East Indies. I think a ship like the Tarawa would be easy for them, perhaps using Ka-31 as the transport helicopters.