Last couple of years everybody has seen lots of spy photos coming out of the shipyards at Shanghai and some others (which I don't know the names). However I have lost track of the state of the art DDGs and FFGs which are being churned out. Can some of our Chinese members please enlighten me on the current strength and future plans of the PLA Navy.
PLAN's growing power. Input needed.
- Thread starter Red aRRow
- Start date
www.china-defense.com has a forum which is also informative for this issue.
Pity The Poor Chinese Navy
An article by the Lexington Institute - in light of the progress made by FORCENET in the last 3 months, it would be interesting to see how most OPFORs view the world now.
China has been busy trying to develop a military that can isolate Taiwan, and, if necessary, hold the U.S. at bay. The PLAN’s one hope for success in a campaign against Taiwan is to blockade the island and limit, or even negate, a U.S. response by challenging the U.S. naval presence in the waters to the east of Taiwan. The target of choice, naturally, is a U.S. aircraft carrier.
Attacking a U.S. aircraft carrier, particularly one steaming in harms way, is one of the most difficult challenges facing any hostile power. In Aircraft Carrier (In)vulnerability, author Dr. Loren Thompson concludes that U.S. aircraft carriers are extremely difficult to find and target. Were it even possible for an adversary to do so, the defensive firepower in the carrier battle group makes it highly unlikely that the aircraft carrier could be attacked successfully.
The substantial defensive capability that the Navy enjoys with its current assets will be further augmented by a number of programs presently underway. First, there is the advanced E-2C Hawkeye based on the Radar Modernization Program (RMP). Providing enhanced airborne command-and-control as well as an expanded surveillance umbrella, the Hawkeye will act as an airborne node for Cooperative Engagement Capability, supporting complex air defense missions and leveraging the RMP’s electronically-steered Ultra-High Frequency radar system. Second, the U.S. Navy and the Missile Defense Agency are working hard to develop the Area Missile Defense System and the Theaterwide Missile Defense System to counter ballistic missile threats at various ranges. Finally, the extended range active missile (ERAM) will be deployed on Aegis-capable ships to address advanced cruise missile and aircraft threats.
On the offensive side, extended air defense will be enabled by the deployment of the F/A-18 E/F and F-35 JSF. With its enhanced radar, large payload, increased range and networked data sharing, the F/A-18 E/F will allow the carrier battle group to operate at a greater distance from the enemy while delivering a more powerful punch. The addition of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter with its stealth capability and advanced avionics at the end of the decade will further enhance the ability of carrier-based aviation to conduct both offensive and defensive missions.
Perhaps most significantly, the U.S. Navy is developing Forcenet, an information architecture that networks sensors, weapons, command-and-control, databases and platforms. Integrating ground, air, space and sea-based capabilities, Forcenet will serve as the structure for acquiring, processing and distributing a vast amount of information that will improve battle space awareness for both offensive and defensive operations.
The Chinese can buy ships and missiles, but no one is selling net-centric capabilities. This alone is likely to tip the scales in favor of the U.S. Navy in terms of overall combat capability in the region. China’s current intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities do not, as yet, allow the PLAN even to see over the horizon. In the race to dominate the seas, don’t bet on China. As fast as the Chinese move to improve their capabilities, the U.S. Navy’s transformation plan will only widen the gap between itself and the PLAN. Pity the poor PLAN strategic planner.
http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/defense/030915b.asp
An article by the Lexington Institute - in light of the progress made by FORCENET in the last 3 months, it would be interesting to see how most OPFORs view the world now.
China has been busy trying to develop a military that can isolate Taiwan, and, if necessary, hold the U.S. at bay. The PLAN’s one hope for success in a campaign against Taiwan is to blockade the island and limit, or even negate, a U.S. response by challenging the U.S. naval presence in the waters to the east of Taiwan. The target of choice, naturally, is a U.S. aircraft carrier.
Attacking a U.S. aircraft carrier, particularly one steaming in harms way, is one of the most difficult challenges facing any hostile power. In Aircraft Carrier (In)vulnerability, author Dr. Loren Thompson concludes that U.S. aircraft carriers are extremely difficult to find and target. Were it even possible for an adversary to do so, the defensive firepower in the carrier battle group makes it highly unlikely that the aircraft carrier could be attacked successfully.
The substantial defensive capability that the Navy enjoys with its current assets will be further augmented by a number of programs presently underway. First, there is the advanced E-2C Hawkeye based on the Radar Modernization Program (RMP). Providing enhanced airborne command-and-control as well as an expanded surveillance umbrella, the Hawkeye will act as an airborne node for Cooperative Engagement Capability, supporting complex air defense missions and leveraging the RMP’s electronically-steered Ultra-High Frequency radar system. Second, the U.S. Navy and the Missile Defense Agency are working hard to develop the Area Missile Defense System and the Theaterwide Missile Defense System to counter ballistic missile threats at various ranges. Finally, the extended range active missile (ERAM) will be deployed on Aegis-capable ships to address advanced cruise missile and aircraft threats.
On the offensive side, extended air defense will be enabled by the deployment of the F/A-18 E/F and F-35 JSF. With its enhanced radar, large payload, increased range and networked data sharing, the F/A-18 E/F will allow the carrier battle group to operate at a greater distance from the enemy while delivering a more powerful punch. The addition of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter with its stealth capability and advanced avionics at the end of the decade will further enhance the ability of carrier-based aviation to conduct both offensive and defensive missions.
Perhaps most significantly, the U.S. Navy is developing Forcenet, an information architecture that networks sensors, weapons, command-and-control, databases and platforms. Integrating ground, air, space and sea-based capabilities, Forcenet will serve as the structure for acquiring, processing and distributing a vast amount of information that will improve battle space awareness for both offensive and defensive operations.
The Chinese can buy ships and missiles, but no one is selling net-centric capabilities. This alone is likely to tip the scales in favor of the U.S. Navy in terms of overall combat capability in the region. China’s current intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities do not, as yet, allow the PLAN even to see over the horizon. In the race to dominate the seas, don’t bet on China. As fast as the Chinese move to improve their capabilities, the U.S. Navy’s transformation plan will only widen the gap between itself and the PLAN. Pity the poor PLAN strategic planner.
http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/defense/030915b.asp
China's navy at Gwadar port and its effect on regional navies
Once china and it's navy gain there Presence in southern pakistan via the new Gwadar port, no one will have the guts to attack pakistan from the south. also all of the trade from asia to the middle east and visa versa will have to go through the pakistan AND chinese navy's before getting to its destination. therefore china and pakistan will occupy the indian and arabian waters and have more strenght then it's competitors
Merging
Once china and it's navy gain there Presence in southern pakistan via the new Gwadar port, no one will have the guts to attack pakistan from the south. also all of the trade from asia to the middle east and visa versa will have to go through the pakistan AND chinese navy's before getting to its destination. therefore china and pakistan will occupy the indian and arabian waters and have more strenght then it's competitors
Merging
Gwadar Port and the implications of Chinses Navy using it...
As we all know China is helping Pakistan a great deal to build the Gwadar Port so that Karachi Port isn't the only major port which Pakistan depends up on at all times and which is quite vulnerable to an Indian Navy strike (given Pakistan'z quite weak naval forces as I see it being a Pakistani myself). Gwadar would provide Pakistan with more of a strategic depth as far as water communications and traffic is concerned. The middle eastern countries would easily be able to send help to Pakistan in case of any crisis (and if they're willing to help UNLIKE Iran and Libya). China could most probably use Gwadar to make its presence felt in the Arabian Sea and would most likely challenge the Indian Navy's "blue-water-navy" ambitions.
I think I'd like the Chinese to be present in the Arabian Sea as it would provide a sort of a psychologically positive effect on PN's moral... keeping indian navy vessels quiet in their dockz while at the same time keeping the U.S. navy away from our waterz... seeing that the U.S. thinks that the whole world is its property and it has the right to do watever it feelz like doing. From my point of view, if there's one country who can challenge and keep a check on U.S. power and hegemony........it is CHINA with its 9% average of economic growth and a fast modernisation of its forces. Take my word, when the days of the U.S. Empire are over....China's gona be here to stay and we as Pakistaniz should prove to the Chinese that our friendship is sincere and deeper than any other alliance...... and to a great extent China sees this. Even if it is improving its relations with India... doesnt mean they're willing to sacrifice Paki friendship at the cost of Indian friendship.. they're just playing by the rules! So I don't see a problem for Pakistan in allowing the Chinese navy to have a taste of the Arabian Sea :smokingc:
As we all know China is helping Pakistan a great deal to build the Gwadar Port so that Karachi Port isn't the only major port which Pakistan depends up on at all times and which is quite vulnerable to an Indian Navy strike (given Pakistan'z quite weak naval forces as I see it being a Pakistani myself). Gwadar would provide Pakistan with more of a strategic depth as far as water communications and traffic is concerned. The middle eastern countries would easily be able to send help to Pakistan in case of any crisis (and if they're willing to help UNLIKE Iran and Libya). China could most probably use Gwadar to make its presence felt in the Arabian Sea and would most likely challenge the Indian Navy's "blue-water-navy" ambitions.
I think I'd like the Chinese to be present in the Arabian Sea as it would provide a sort of a psychologically positive effect on PN's moral... keeping indian navy vessels quiet in their dockz while at the same time keeping the U.S. navy away from our waterz... seeing that the U.S. thinks that the whole world is its property and it has the right to do watever it feelz like doing. From my point of view, if there's one country who can challenge and keep a check on U.S. power and hegemony........it is CHINA with its 9% average of economic growth and a fast modernisation of its forces. Take my word, when the days of the U.S. Empire are over....China's gona be here to stay and we as Pakistaniz should prove to the Chinese that our friendship is sincere and deeper than any other alliance...... and to a great extent China sees this. Even if it is improving its relations with India... doesnt mean they're willing to sacrifice Paki friendship at the cost of Indian friendship.. they're just playing by the rules! So I don't see a problem for Pakistan in allowing the Chinese navy to have a taste of the Arabian Sea :smokingc:
Re: Gwadar Port and the implications of Chinses Navy using it...the balance, imbalance and effect on strategic interests
So what do you guyz think? Post your comments and views and let me know! And if any one has any lastest articles or news on this issue. Do paste the link for all of us to enlighten ourselves on this :alian
So what do you guyz think? Post your comments and views and let me know! And if any one has any lastest articles or news on this issue. Do paste the link for all of us to enlighten ourselves on this :alian
Re: Gwadar Port and the implications of Chinses Navy using it...the balance, imbalance and effect on strategic interests
yes my fellow pakistani friend. i agree 100% with you and as i said in my last post, the gwadar port has vastly improved pakistans position in asia as well as the middle east. it also will increase pakistan's naval radius.
unfortunatly there is a down side to this. i read an article on www. dawn .com that people in balochestan were against this project and see it as a chinese invasion of pakistan.
yes my fellow pakistani friend. i agree 100% with you and as i said in my last post, the gwadar port has vastly improved pakistans position in asia as well as the middle east. it also will increase pakistan's naval radius.
unfortunatly there is a down side to this. i read an article on www. dawn .com that people in balochestan were against this project and see it as a chinese invasion of pakistan.
Re: Gwadar Port and the implications of Chinses Navy using it...the balance, imbalance and effect on strategic interests
o and by the way the gwadar port will have a motor way, a railway, and canals leading goods in and out of pakistan. pakistan is also said that it will make around 12 billion dollars anually from this port.
o and by the way the gwadar port will have a motor way, a railway, and canals leading goods in and out of pakistan. pakistan is also said that it will make around 12 billion dollars anually from this port.
Re: Gwadar Port and the implications of Chinses Navy using it...
Don't write an essay in the subjectline. It should be short. We should open training school here so we know how things should be in a discussion forum.
There is already discussion going on this topic and I am merging this into that. :cop
Don't write an essay in the subjectline. It should be short. We should open training school here so we know how things should be in a discussion forum.
There is already discussion going on this topic and I am merging this into that. :cop
here u go guyz...this article is a bit old but does tell us about Indian worries about China's help in the Gwadar Port...
http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/may/23gp.htm
Read it n let me know what do u think abt it...
http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/may/23gp.htm
Read it n let me know what do u think abt it...
Revival_786
New Member
Uh Panzer... Pakistans GDP is more like 310 billion (2002).
These figures are for 2001
Pakistan
GDP (US$ bn) 61.3
GDP per head (US$) 446
GDP per head (US$ at PPP) 1,848
Consumer price inflation (av; %) 4.4
Current-account balance (US$ bn) -1.4
% of GDP -2.3
Exports of goods fob (US$ bn) 8.63
Imports of goods fob (US$ bn) -10.88
External debt (US$ bn) 34.8
Debt-service ratio, paid (%) 22.5
Link
http://www.economist.com/countries/Pakistan/profile.cfm?folder=Profile-Economic Structure
The figure of $61b in 2001 is GDP in actual dollar terms
Whereas the figure of $300b in 2002 is in terms of purchasing power parity.
purchasing power parity
A theory stating that over the long term the exchange rate between two currencies adjusts to relative price levels, that is, relative purchasing power.
In other words, an identical good in different countries should cost the same after adjusting for currency.
If a commodity is valued at $50 in US and same is available for $10 in Pakistan, it means a dollar in Pakistan is equal to 5 dollars in US.
Basically adusting for currency differences and cost of living factor
Since P.A.F gave value of $12 billion in actual terms/money, it is only fair to compare it with actual GDP in money terms.