PRC Peoples Liberation Army Navy

Wall83

New Member
China are once again deploying new resources to its navy.
The last month 1 large amphibius transport landing dock (Type-071) has been launched. 2 possible 4 new Type-052C air defence destroyers are under construction with 2 ready to be launched.
The modern Type-054A missile frigate are in serial production with atleast 12 ships ready by the end of 2010. Then add the rumors about a new large corvette class (Type-056) and that the work on the aircraft carrier Varyag has been speeded up latley.

Are we seing the result of the Blue navy plan set in the early 2000 now?
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
China are once again deploying new resources to its navy.
The last month 1 large amphibius transport landing dock (Type-071) has been launched. 2 possible 4 new Type-052C air defence destroyers are under construction with 2 ready to be launched.
The modern Type-054A missile frigate are in serial production with atleast 12 ships ready by the end of 2010. Then add the rumors about a new large corvette class (Type-056) and that the work on the aircraft carrier Varyag has been speeded up latley.

Are we seing the result of the Blue navy plan set in the early 2000 now?
they took a couple of years off in the shipbuilding program. They just restarted again, that's all. What PLAN does is building one or two prototypes, then wait until the technology on it matures before starting mass production. In the case of 052C and 071, they are finally ready for mass production, that's why you are seeing so many new ones coming out now.
 

Pathfinder-X

Tribal Warlord
Verified Defense Pro
The problem with PLAN seems to be they have not yet developed the suitable turbine technology for ship propulsion. The first two 052C were commissioned into service in 2006, and it took them until this year to complete the 3rd ship. This might change soon since they managed to license produce Ukranian GT25000 and design a domestic QC-280.
 

weasel1962

New Member
Re:

China are once again deploying new resources to its navy.
The last month 1 large amphibius transport landing dock (Type-071) has been launched. 2 possible 4 new Type-052C air defence destroyers are under construction with 2 ready to be launched.
The modern Type-054A missile frigate are in serial production with atleast 12 ships ready by the end of 2010. Then add the rumors about a new large corvette class (Type-056) and that the work on the aircraft carrier Varyag has been speeded up latley.

Are we seing the result of the Blue navy plan set in the early 2000 now?
This is only what's been spotted at the usual yards. Actual construction could be higher.
 

Sampanviking

Banned Member
Do bear in mind that there are something in the order of 50 type 53 Frigates of numerous variants due; if not long overdue for retirement.

Nobody is expecting a one for one replacement rate, so that the new PLAN may be modern, but it is likely to be smaller than its current values.
 

Wall83

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
Do bear in mind that there are something in the order of 50 type 53 Frigates of numerous variants due; if not long overdue for retirement.

Nobody is expecting a one for one replacement rate, so that the new PLAN may be modern, but it is likely to be smaller than its current values.
True, however one 054A frigate must be atleast three times as powerfull as one of the early 053 frigats.

And the last 053 frigates, the Jiangwei I-II class, was commisioned in the late 90s early 00s so they are modern enough to continue to serve for some years to come.
 

weasel1962

New Member
Re:

True, however one 054A frigate must be atleast three times as powerfull as one of the early 053 frigats.

And the last 053 frigates, the Jiangwei I-II class, was commisioned in the late 90s early 00s so they are modern enough to continue to serve for some years to come.
Consider that the 022s with its 8 YJs have same or better SSM capability as the newer Jianghus, faster and 10-15 times less crew.

For FFGs, if one considers the number of Jiangweis and Jiangkais together, its almost 30 identified already or 60% of Jianghu numbers. Counting another 20+ Jianghus still in operation, there's no drop in numbers. Add in new 056s which will likely be able to replace existing Jianghu roles, I wouldn't be surprised if numbers do match or exceed prior numbers.

The 054As have better capabilities in all fields, ASW/AAW/SSMs than the 051 Ludas (DDGs) and they are also bigger.

CVs, DDGs (after Ludas), LPD are areas that China will exceed its past inventories or are new areas. Its significant fleet expansion since the 90s.

Projected sub numbers (~60-90+ based on construction of 2-3 a year for a 30 yr life) aren't very far from prior romeo numbers (84).

One significant area where numbers will decline from the 80s are FAC where PLAN used to operate hundreds of shanghais, huchuans etc. Having said that, at the rate 022s are being churned out (since Apr 2004 ), difficult to say where numbers will end and that will at least match or exceed FAC(M) numbers. Production rates already appear to be matching (DOD annual china report stated 60 over ~6 yrs) or exceeding (other sources 80-100+ over the same period) prior Huangfeng rates of ~10 a year.
 

Wall83

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
Its uncertan how many Type 054 frigates that is going to be built. When the production started the preseumed end number was 12. Well this number has now been reached and the production continues.
I wouldnt be suprised if the production dont stops until 20 are built.

I think also the destroyer production will now encrease. The 52Cs are now tested and valuated and they are ready for serial production. We probably will have 8-10 of them around by 2015. Then its the question of the rumerd future type 052D destroyer.
 

rip

New Member
I think a more interesting question is not the type or number of ships that the Chinese have or are building but the type, quality and experience of the personal in a quickly expanding blue water Navy. It is changing from a costal defense force (more like a part of the army) to a true blue water would ranging Navy. As a general rule you can build an Army is a few years if you have the money, the equipment, and a few professionals to build it around. You can likewise build a modern Air Force in a decade or so with the same resources, but unless you have a strong, long, and deep maritime tradition behind you, it usually takes forty years to build, a state of the art, professional blue water Navy.

I am not disrespecting the Chinese now, they are a competent sort as we all know but it takes a while for the salt to sink deep into the institutional veins of a world ranging, blue water Navy and that just takes time. The time to see, experience, and deal with all that the ocean, the vastly different peoplies that seround it, and above all its remarkable weather, with its various challenges and particularities that just don’t happenvery very often to be easily learned and internalized. Andwhich are never seen on land but have often determined the results of naval actionsThroughout history. They can get all the technology right, and build enough ships but still fail as an effective sea power. What do you think? Is it all about weapons and numbers?
 

dingyibvs

New Member
Umm, that would be rather... automated. 10-15 men less crew sounds about right tho.
No, 10-15 times less is closer, they're very different boats. The 022 is a FAC with a crew of ~10 ppl, while the Jianghu's(053) are light frigates with a crew of closer to 100. The 022 and the late variants of the 053 do carry the same number of SSM's though.
 

weasel1962

New Member
Re:

I think a more interesting question is not the type or number of ships that the Chinese have or are building but the type, quality and experience of the personal in a quickly expanding blue water Navy. It is changing from a costal defense force (more like a part of the army) to a true blue water would ranging Navy. As a general rule you can build an Army is a few years if you have the money, the equipment, and a few professionals to build it around. You can likewise build a modern Air Force in a decade or so with the same resources, but unless you have a strong, long, and deep maritime tradition behind you, it usually takes forty years to build, a state of the art, professional blue water Navy.

I am not disrespecting the Chinese now, they are a competent sort as we all know but it takes a while for the salt to sink deep into the institutional veins of a world ranging, blue water Navy and that just takes time. The time to see, experience, and deal with all that the ocean, the vastly different peoplies that seround it, and above all its remarkable weather, with its various challenges and particularities that just don’t happenvery very often to be easily learned and internalized. Andwhich are never seen on land but have often determined the results of naval actionsThroughout history. They can get all the technology right, and build enough ships but still fail as an effective sea power. What do you think? Is it all about weapons and numbers?
History is no gauge. Japan defeated Russia in the Battle of Tsushima with no precedence before that. And then repeated the feat in the early years of WW2 until Midway. Brittania ruled the waves until then but history didn't prevent its decline. That's the benefit of technology.

China has had a modern navy since the 50s and was the 3rd largest navy in the 80s. Today its probably the 2nd largest and working itself upwards.

The 2009 ONI report on China's navy is a good starting source.
http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/oni/pla-navy.pdf

The problem of perception is the opposition. Comparison against the best, largest and most modern ie US navy, tends to make the other party "less effective". No doubts there.

It will take an investment level far higher than current before China catches up to the US navy.
 

Wall83

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
China has had a modern navy since the 50s and was the 3rd largest navy in the 80s. Today its probably the 2nd largest and working itself upwards.
Modern navy? I comparesment to what...the North Korean navy? Except for the latest decade chinas navy has been more about quantity then quality. Up to the late 90s the most modern ships in the PLAN was copied missile destroyers of old Soviet designs.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Today its probably the 2nd largest and working itself upwards.

Nope, that goes to the japanese. - and certainly in capability terms

eg look at the submarine forces, missile cruisers, CEC capability, expeditionary capability, ASW etc.....

the chinese are nowhere near the japanese in force structure and capability
 

Blitzo

New Member
Nope, that goes to the japanese. - and certainly in capability terms

eg look at the submarine forces, missile cruisers, CEC capability, expeditionary capability, ASW etc.....

the chinese are nowhere near the japanese in force structure and capability
I think the Japanese are currently 2nd in capability, but the PLAN currently has the most ambitious building scheduale out of the USN for the forseeable future. I don't think the JMSDF have any real plans outside the Azizuki class and the hyuga/21k ton DDH.

The biggest problem is that the PLAN simply doesn't have as many destroyers and frigates yet -- the few they do have are pretty good if not world standard in their classes, but too few are in service.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I think the Japanese are currently 2nd in capability, but the PLAN currently has the most ambitious building scheduale out of the USN for the forseeable future. I don't think the JMSDF have any real plans outside the Azizuki class and the hyuga/21k ton DDH.

The biggest problem is that the PLAN simply doesn't have as many destroyers and frigates yet -- the few they do have are pretty good if not world standard in their classes, but too few are in service.
PLAN
They don't have the force structure to participate in modern CEC environments
They don't have an effective sub force (even though they are making serious efforts to change that)
They don't have any expeditionary capability
They don't have any history in running blue water exercises
They don't have any practical experience in running fleet events
They don't have an effective marine force (as in self contained corp) to conduct discrete expeditionary work,

They're a long way from having japanese capability - let alone putting into place a coherent doctrine that they need to develop along with the modern force elements.

in absolute terms, they're nowhere near the sth koreans at a force maturity and force development level.

they are literally 5 years away from demonstrating the basic force constructs - and IMO closer to 10 years. At the same time, there will be a few countries in the PACRIm that will not be standing still and will not be letting china get an easy run to "parity" - let alone superiority
 

Schumacher

New Member
I put the English Navy a clear second and French third right now in terms of capabilities. PLAN can be second 2018 or later if their planned expansion, especially with carriers and new subs, go smoothly.
 

weasel1962

New Member
Re:

PLAN
They don't have the force structure to participate in modern CEC environments
They don't have an effective sub force (even though they are making serious efforts to change that)
They don't have any expeditionary capability
They don't have any history in running blue water exercises
They don't have any practical experience in running fleet events
They don't have an effective marine force (as in self contained corp) to conduct discrete expeditionary work,

They're a long way from having japanese capability - let alone putting into place a coherent doctrine that they need to develop along with the modern force elements.

in absolute terms, they're nowhere near the sth koreans at a force maturity and force development level.

they are literally 5 years away from demonstrating the basic force constructs - and IMO closer to 10 years. At the same time, there will be a few countries in the PACRIm that will not be standing still and will not be letting china get an easy run to "parity" - let alone superiority
Agree wrt capability comparisons.

However, China still has the 2nd largest fleet in the world and working its way up. Largest is still determined by numbers.

Whilst Japanese, South Korean and navies that utilise traditional western naval training methods have fairly well known and/or documented capabilities, it is more difficult to gauge chinese technical capabilities and the operational effectiveness of their vessels particularly their subs. The publication of OMTE in 2008 raised a few eyebrows in US circles and received mention in the CMPR.

As an example, there is the claim that their force structure does not enable CEC or cooperative engagement capabilities. However datalinks are extensively used particularly in view of chinese capabilities in computing. At the same time, electronic warfare is recognised as a key element in chinese warfare (ie informationalization). Force coordination is enhanced through the introduction of new capabilites eg AEW, MP aircraft and joint exercises between the various arms etc. Joints ops was first noted as part of doctrine in 1999. At the very least, there are already surface appearances of the building blocks of CEC.

They may not be considered by some to have expeditionary and blue water capabilities but they have deployed their vessels for anti-piracy operations in the Indian ocean and started raising eyebrows when they deployed vessels off and past okinawa into the South China Sea in April of this year.

Once the anticipated CV begins operations, it is difficult to characterise the PLAN as a non-blue water navy.

Recently, more and more analysts are questioning what exactly is China's naval doctrine. If one reviews the 2010 CMPR, PLA Navy doctrine for maritime operations is stated as focussing on six offensive and defensive campaigns: blockade, anti-sea lines of communication, maritime-land attack, antiship, maritime transportation protection, and naval base defense.

Rather than comparisons to Japan which has differing doctrine and requirements, it might be more useful to consider how effective can China's navy be in achieving its intended aims currently and in the future.

For example, in a anti-SLOC scenario, Japan might be very effective with their vessels are but lack the numbers to patrol the entire SLOC so the Chinese navy might be able to interdict Japanese SLOC at various vulnerable points eg off philippines, south china sea etc.
 
Top