China's military power

Status
Not open for further replies.

fylr71

New Member
China is still a regional power and will continue to be until they are able to establish a true blue water navy and long range strike capability. China is well behind the US in those respects. Here are some comparisons between the US and China.

US Navy

12 SuperCarriers each carrying 80 aircraft
11 Amphibious Assault VSTOL carriers each carrying a mix of over 20 fixed wing and rotary aircraft plus a marine detatchment of over 1500 men

48 9,000 ton Arleigh Burke Destroyers which are among the best destroyers in the world and are equipped with the AEGIS system

23 10,000 ton Ticonderoga class cruisers also eqipped with AEGIS and among the best in the world

14 Ohio class SSBN each among the quietest in the world
49 Los Angeles class SSN also among the best in the world
3 Seawolf class SSN which are even better then the Los Angeles
Currently introducing the Virginia class SSN which is the most advanced submarine to date

Chinese Navy

Currently researching an aircraft carrier
Has no LHD type ships but is currently planning to build them

Has 25 destroyers 16 are outdated Luda class the others are decent but except for the 1 Luzhou class ship all are significantly inferior to the Arleigh Burke. They do however have plans for more Luzhou's to enter service in the near future.

Possesses over 40 frigates but only 12, 10 of them of the Jiangwei II class would even be acceptable (and then barely)to western standards. The other two frigates are of the Jiangkai class and can be compared to the French LaFayette class in performance. However they are not as stealthy as LaFayette.

They currently have 5 Han class SSN which although inferior to western attack submarines are still very capable boats
They are building a new class of SSN the Shang class which may be comparable to some of the older Los Angeles class submarines

They have more then 30 Romeo class diesel electric boats which are totally obsolete.
There 15 or so Ming class diesel electric boats are an improvment on the Romeo's but still largely inferior to any similar western boats.
The 12 Song class are the first Chinese diesel electric boats to have a teardrop hull and be considered "modern"
The Yuan class is an improvment on the Song 2 are in service with more on the way
They also have 2 Kilo class which are known to be quiet as well as 2 imporved Kilos and 8 more imroved Kilos on the way.

They have 1 Xia class SSBN which only operates on Coastal waters as it would have no chance against western attack submarines in the open ocean.

The launching of the type 94 SSBN which is an improvment over the Xia class gives the Chinese Navy an effective and somewhat quiet SSBN that will be a major improvment to the Chinese long range strike capability.

As for there long range strike capability although it would improve if they managed to aquire the TU-22M backfire bomber would still be limited.

China is so far behind the US in terms of naval power which still determines the status of a nation (i.e. regional power, great power, super power ect.) The fear of China holding a dominant position strategically anytime soon is completely unfounded
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Nice post! :)
Should show the reality to some people who think that China is going to conquer the world in the next half decade.
 

contedicavour

New Member
Waylander said:
Nice post! :)
Should show the reality to some people who think that China is going to conquer the world in the next half decade.
Well not in the next half decade but here is how it could look in 10 years' time :

> Varyag in service with 24 navalized Flankers, with 1 or 2 more carriers building.
> 12+ DDGs with either Grumble or HQ-9, most with some sort of aegis
> 25+ FFGs
> 30 modern SSK (let's say half improved Kilos, half Yuan)
> 5 type093 SSNs (Akula-level weaponry & sensors) replacing Hans
> 600+ modern fighters (SU30MKK mostly)

...

That's enough to dominate the Western half of the Pacific Ocean, unless Japan starts building carriers with F35s onboard.

cheers (nonetheless ;) )
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Dominating might be not the right word.
The Space around Japan were the JSDFAF can reach you together with the JSDF naval forces is no good territory for China.
 

contedicavour

New Member
Waylander said:
Most experts think that they are going to convert the carrier into a training center for their future naval fighters.
It is no in really good shape and it could be cheaper to or build a new one than modernize the old one.
I guess that by now Chinese naval engineers would be able to replicate the Varyag by building a brand new twin, equipping it with radars such as those on type 052C DDGs. The real issue is mastering the art of taking off and landing Flankers on the ship, even if there are no complicated catapults to install.

cheers
 

contedicavour

New Member
Waylander said:
Dominating might be not the right word.
The Space around Japan were the JSDFAF can reach you together with the JSDF naval forces is no good territory for China.
Agree, China would still not be able to beat the JSDF navy, though if these remain in or close to territorial waters because of Constitutional limitations to their use, then PLAN would dominate everywhere else in the Western Pacific.

cheers
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
The problem with this domination is that one or two carriers are not enough. They will be able to give hell to everybody who tries to come near to the chinese coast but when they leave their land based air support US carrier task forces would come upon them like bird of preys and slaughter them.
Even within chinese air space I would not bet upon the chinese AF ability to counter the naval air power which would be send upon them by half a dozen carriers and some Tarawas/Wasps.
 

nanyangrouchuan

New Member
nanheyangrouchuan has arrived

China's strategy due to its naval weaknesses (which certainly include lack of experience and modern naval heritage) would be compensated for by trying to draw the JDF or USN close enough to China's land based air cover.

Also look for PLAN ships to have more UAVs in light of not having a carrier.
They may in fact convert cargo ships into UAV carriers.
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
I don't think that China is able to build enough capable combat UAVs in the near future which are not going to be an easy prey for USAF and USN. I would rather put my money into the development of good anti ship missiles.
 

fylr71

New Member
nanyangrouchuan said:
China's strategy due to its naval weaknesses (which certainly include lack of experience and modern naval heritage) would be compensated for by trying to draw the JDF or USN close enough to China's land based air cover.

Also look for PLAN ships to have more UAVs in light of not having a carrier.
They may in fact convert cargo ships into UAV carriers.
UAV carriers? not likely. They still have yet to get a manned aircraft to take off and land on a carrier. Also regarding Varyag: I doubt they would use it for military purposes. The reason for this is they signed a deal with the Ukrainians not to. I know the Chinese couldn't care less about what the Ukrainians feel but there credibility in the eyes of the world would be in doubt. Besides Varyag is littile more then a hull. It would make a heck of a lot more sense to build a copy of it. Also, if they wanted to use something for training purposes they could extend the deck of the Kiev which they also possess. Even if they manage to build a carrier and equip it with say 30 Su-33 that would still only be one carrier compared to 12 US supercarriers plus 11 VSTOL carriers.;)
 

contedicavour

New Member
Waylander said:
I don't think that China is able to build enough capable combat UAVs in the near future which are not going to be an easy prey for USAF and USN. I would rather put my money into the development of good anti ship missiles.
Chinese SSMs are not bad. YJ-62 are supersonic with 280km range. Plus the PLAN has 4 Sovremenny with Sunburns. The bulk of the fleet is equipped with YJ83 which have 120-150km range and some reports even claim they are supersonic.

cheers
 

contedicavour

New Member
fylr71 said:
UAV carriers? not likely. They still have yet to get a manned aircraft to take off and land on a carrier. Also regarding Varyag: I doubt they would use it for military purposes. The reason for this is they signed a deal with the Ukrainians not to. I know the Chinese couldn't care less about what the Ukrainians feel but there credibility in the eyes of the world would be in doubt. Besides Varyag is littile more then a hull. It would make a heck of a lot more sense to build a copy of it. Also, if they wanted to use something for training purposes they could extend the deck of the Kiev which they also possess. Even if they manage to build a carrier and equip it with say 30 Su-33 that would still only be one carrier compared to 12 US supercarriers plus 11 VSTOL carriers.;)
In a China vs US mode, I agree it's a waste of time to build 1 or 2 carriers, they would be destroyed by the USN in no time. The best strategy is still to remain within land bases' air cover.
However, in a China vs anybody else mode, one or 2 copies of the Varyag/Kuznetsov would make a huge difference.

cheers
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Are these SSMs good enough to overhelm up to two dozen AEGIS CGs and DDGs + AAMs fired by (Super)Hornets?
This is the main question.

I agree with contedicavour. Against the total power of US naval forces China is not going have a chance but against everybody else they might be a big bad boy in the future.
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
Waylander said:
Are these SSMs good enough to overhelm up to two dozen AEGIS CGs and DDGs + AAMs fired by (Super)Hornets?
This is the main question.

I agree with contedicavour. Against the total power of US naval forces China is not going have a chance but against everybody else they might be a big bad boy in the future.
probably not, but we've just seen C-802, which is basically the export version of YJ-8 series, got a direct hit on SAAR 5, which is protected by a fairly modern air defence and good ECM and EW suite.
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
It is kind of hard to compare a lonely corvette without long range air defence and which might not even expected to face SSMs to a complete tarrier task force on full alert.
 

contedicavour

New Member
tphuang said:
probably not, but we've just seen C-802, which is basically the export version of YJ-8 series, got a direct hit on SAAR 5, which is protected by a fairly modern air defence and good ECM and EW suite.
I agree this incident in front of Beyrouth opens a whole new era... the Saar V has 64 VLS Barak and Phalanx and was sitting 5 km away from the coastline, enough to be able to intercept the incoming missile over the open sea.
I wonder what would happen if it was a YJ83 or -62 ...:shudder
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
Waylander said:
It is kind of hard to compare a lonely corvette without long range air defence and which might not even expected to face SSMs to a complete tarrier task force on full alert.
a little on SAAR 5
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/saar5/
- we know that SAAR 5 was there to protect the gun boats against air strikes, so it's kind of hard to think that it wasn't on full alert
- we know that SAAR 5 is protected by two 32 cell Barak systems, an 8 cell Gabriel II System, and a Phalanx CIWS
- we know that SAAR 5 has very capable ECM and EW suite, since it's the most advanced AD ship that IDF has and the Israelis are known to have capable EW suite
- what I'm saying is that C-802 was facing quite a capable AD ship
- now, I obviously don't think it will be able to do the same thing against an American CVBG
- but it just illustrates that even though SAM has evolved a lot and it's not easy to shoot down a modern AShM in war situation
 

contedicavour

New Member
tphuang said:
a little on SAAR 5
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/saar5/
- we know that SAAR 5 was there to protect the gun boats against air strikes, so it's kind of hard to think that it wasn't on full alert
- we know that SAAR 5 is protected by two 32 cell Barak systems, an 8 cell Gabriel II System, and a Phalanx CIWS
- we know that SAAR 5 has very capable ECM and EW suite, since it's the most advanced AD ship that IDF has and the Israelis are known to have capable EW suite
- what I'm saying is that C-802 was facing quite a capable AD ship
- now, I obviously don't think it will be able to do the same thing against an American CVBG
- but it just illustrates that even though SAM has evolved a lot and it's not easy to shoot down a modern AShM in war situation
This is also a major hit for Israel's defence industry. Barak has been sold to India and Chile and I was hearing interest from Romania. Now some admirals must be wondering if they made the right acquisition ... :rolleyes:
 

swerve

Super Moderator
contedicavour said:
This is also a major hit for Israel's defence industry. Barak has been sold to India and Chile and I was hearing interest from Romania. Now some admirals must be wondering if they made the right acquisition ... :rolleyes:
The IDF has said the air defences were switched off to prevent friendly fire incidents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top