I agree one hundred percent. I just don't think you should compare the PLAN to the USN but rather to the IN, it would be a closer match up.contedicavour said:I'm not so sure the reasons for the arms build-up in China, India, South Korea and even in Japan can be tracked back to the very logical thinking of who will have better access to oil and other commodities in the next years. This surely plays a big role, fair enough.
However, seen from good old Europe, this all resembles the arms race we had in the first half of the 20th century, when powerful recently industrialized governments tried to dominate the others buying ever better battleships and fielding ever more mechanized divisions. Nationalism was the ideology that fed the arms race, and inevitably brought to confrontation despite all the trade and commercial interests that should have stopped this.
Let's just hope that good sense will prevail, and that emerging democracy will stop raw nationalism from escalading disputes. Especially in mainland China, where it would be tempting indeed to federate all Chinese, newly rich and the masses of poorer peasants in the interior, behind a message of "China against the enemy". Much more effective than whatever appeal the communist party may still have in that huge country.
Now, technically, since this is a military affairs site, I don't think it makes much sense for China to push for a blue-water navy with its current technology (even with the bits imported from Russia). The only SSBN is probably not operational, the Han class SSNs are so noisy that they can easily be followed as soon as they leave their bases, and despite some Sovremenny and DDG-51C ships, 95% of the Chinese surface escorts lack decent AAW or ASW equipment. Even the Sovremenny Russian-built DDGs have AAW missiles that are not VLS but still need to be launched like the old Mk-13 on the OH Perry USN frigates (i.e. one by one, max 7 a minute).
Priorities should be to have decent SSNs and several ships capable of defending themselves against harpoons, tomohawks, Mk48 ADCAP torpedoes and so on. A carrier with 2 dozen navalized SU-27 would be a superb asset but would probably be sunk by the Japanese or USN in no time with current SSNs and DDG/FFG.
cheers
Update on Chinese Navy 2006
- Thread starter norinco89
- Start date
I was reading a article today on the PLAN. I was shooked to discover that the RIF s-300 air defence system only has a 90km range and the shitl only has a 35km range. That is only a fraction of the range of the US standard missile.
What future air defence system is the PLAN going to use.
Why is it that the naval s-300 has a 90km range while regular land one has a 300km range
What future air defence system is the PLAN going to use.
Why is it that the naval s-300 has a 90km range while regular land one has a 300km range
contedicavour
New Member
I didn't know the Chinese were planning to install SA-N-6 (navalized S-300) on board any of their new destroyers ? I am aware of SA-N-7 and -17 only.zoolander said:
powerslavenegi
New Member
Crude Hmm...
Well I dont see India V/s China in future that too over oil.By the way was that the case for bombing Iraq and now targeting Iran interesting.:ar15Big-E said:
contedicavour
New Member
How many destroyers with SA-N-6 are we talking about ?Big-E said:
I'm anxious to read the new Jane's Fighting Ships once it is published this summer... but if somebody can answer me before July it would be cool
The s-300f has a range of 90km while the s-300fm has a range of 180km. Is it possible to to used use the s-300fm missile on a s-300f. Is there only missile difference or there is also a laucher difference.
I am a bit confused on the s-300 russian missile format with all of it different variations
on the 51c will the S-300f be in a grid style(square or rectange with hatch openings) or will it be russian revolver style or the chinese revolver style.
I am a bit confused on the s-300 russian missile format with all of it different variations
on the 51c will the S-300f be in a grid style(square or rectange with hatch openings) or will it be russian revolver style or the chinese revolver style.
Depends on how big the booster is. It's not a problem of width with the launcher but depth. Switching out the tubes isn't going to make one fit over the other. 1) I doubt that a Luha design is deep enough to hold the extra stage for the longer missile. 2) Having a missile with that kind of range but not having a sensor range to go with it makes it unlikely as well.norinco89 said:
norinco89 said:
CHina is rrreally worried about INDIA(they should b). If not, there would not have been the development of Gwadar nor the massive radar station on the leased Myanmar islands to check on the Indian Navy.
Taiwan is in their sites and they are preparing the PLA for this, but no matter how much they prepare they will get "WACKED" by the US.
How quickly norinco forgets his history. cough 1962 Sino-Indian War cough... Not to mention Tibet, Kashmir and the multitudes of refugees cough cough. You notice he didn't deny the fact PLAN is going blue water yet doesn't acknowledge the growth of the future IN.Jawan said:
contedicavour
New Member
Agree, a blue water navy is more useful to tackle India than a USN carrier battle group close to its shores. To tackle a USN carrier it makes more sense to increase air force assets and potentially submarines.Big-E said:
Even if (nightmare scenario) the PLAN navy attacked Taiwan, land-based air cover is enough to cover the LSTs and escorts.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #35
Of course China is worried about India but the situation is ice cold compared to the events in the East. Taiwan, Japan, US are imminent threats. Something can easily spark a conflict.
India is a future rival. Notice China does not have a Western fleet or Indian ocean fleet.
a analomy to this conflict would be
China: Taiwan: India :: India: Pakistan: China
i didnt forget the 1962 conflict. That was history and it was rather minor. People learn to forgive.
India is a future rival. Notice China does not have a Western fleet or Indian ocean fleet.
a analomy to this conflict would be
China: Taiwan: India :: India: Pakistan: China
i didnt forget the 1962 conflict. That was history and it was rather minor. People learn to forgive.
chinawhite
New Member
Gwadar is a COMMERICAL port. (at least for the chinese government)Jawan said:
And the listening port would be more to check up on the USN than india. Its the indian media which states that the coco islands was built to counter india. But dont forget the fact that it is a small communications base incase you decide to dramatize its importance.
contedicavour
New Member
Japan has approx 30 main surface units (all DDG size), multi-purpose. 4 are the Kongo Aegis destroyers, 4 are large helicopter carriers just being replaced, 20 are mostly ASW units. Plus the 18 SSKs... although Japan has actually some 25, but only keeps 18 operational. I don't even mention the huge P-3C Orion maritime patrol force.norinco89 said:How does the Japanese fleet compare to the chinese fleet.
Raw facts only. i want a quantitative comparison
Start listin!
China has some 25 "destroyers" of which most are obsolete Luda ships with no real AAW. The only modern ships are 4 Sovremenny Russian DDGs and a handful of more recent locally built DDGs (Luhu, Luhai...). Plus some 30 frigates which are mostly obsolete (except for a few Jangwei class). The sub force is in theory 50+, but the 5 SSNs are obsolete, the only SSBN isn't operational, and the only modern ships are 8 Kilos and some of the new Yuan class.
The current Chinese fleet would not be able to resist the Japanese one if it ever came to blows in the North China Sea.
cheers
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #39
The chinese are finishing up sea trials on alot of ships. Destoryers they are going to continue experimenting in twos. They will eventually mass produce a model they find fit.
They are developing a impoved Type 54 known as 54a. It has the shitl air defence system. It should have improved sensors, missiles and etc. It is supposed to be mass produced to replace the obsolete fleet of chinese frigates.
The new nuclear subs are victor III level which is pretty good.
The yuan diesel sub will begin be mass produced. They are rumored to have AIP and are very similar to the newer kilos.
they are also focuing on landers and etc.
air plane carrier is no where in the sights of the PLAN rite now. at least in my eyes.
They are developing a impoved Type 54 known as 54a. It has the shitl air defence system. It should have improved sensors, missiles and etc. It is supposed to be mass produced to replace the obsolete fleet of chinese frigates.
The new nuclear subs are victor III level which is pretty good.
The yuan diesel sub will begin be mass produced. They are rumored to have AIP and are very similar to the newer kilos.
they are also focuing on landers and etc.
air plane carrier is no where in the sights of the PLAN rite now. at least in my eyes.
contedicavour
New Member
AFAIK the SSNs under construction to replace the obsolete Han class are still far from being completed. When they will be, the subs will be already obsolescent since they are indeed based on Victor III Soviet-era design.norinco89 said:
Most of the decently modern SSKs are Song class (14 if I recall correctly) which are inferior to Kilos in terms of noise reduction, sonars and quality of construction. I am curious to see how the Yuan will perform.
cheers