If Cold War did not end, what would US and Soviet navies look like?

US Navy:
12 to 15 supercarriers in service by keeping the older ones in service.
Seawolf-class SSN built in large numbers.
Zumwalt-class DDG built in significant numbers

When I retired from the USN they had 15 carriers. So I imagine that number would hold. Plus all Tico CGs would still be in service along with all Spruance class DDs equipped with Mk 41 VLS. Those numbers would be needed to complete Carrier Strike Groups(CSG).

USN CSG would still be deploying to the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf region.

We could even see the four Iowa class still operational and fully re-fit with probably Mk 41 VLS. One Iowa may be forward deployed in the Pacific. Possibly Yokosuka or Hawaii.

In addition the Naval Station at Subic Bay would be open to keep with ships operating their to keep an eye on the Soviets and Chinese in the Pacific..Not to mention the logistic support available at Subic Bay.

The USN would still be deploying P-3s to Guam, Diego Garcia and Iceland.

In Germany the US would have US Army & USAF forces still peaking in strength around 225,000.

The USAF would still have Tactical aircraft stationed in the Philippines and still than today aircraft in Hawaii, Guam & Japan.

Yes in my opinion the situation would be a lot different.

Originally Posted by bd popeye

We could even see the four Iowa class still operational and fully re-fit with probably Mk 41 VLS. One Iowa may be forward deployed in the Pacific. Possibly Yokosuka or Hawaii.

About the Iowa-class, where would the VLS be fitted? Those big guns would be kept in place, right? Big guns are needed for shore bombardments (like during the first Iraq war).

Originally Posted by bd popeye

We could even see the four Iowa class still operational and fully re-fit with probably Mk 41 VLS. One Iowa may be forward deployed in the Pacific. Possibly Yokosuka or Hawaii.


In Germany the US would have US Army & USAF forces still peaking in strength around 225,000.

Yes in my opinion the situation would be a lot different.

I don't know about the Iowa...I think in the age of modern missle technology ships like that just aren't useful, and those things would be about 60 years old so I personally think they would have been retired regardless.

This is a little off topic, but what would the NATO-Warsaw Pact face-off in Europe look like?

Germany would have more and maybe varieties of these cute little Trabants <3

----(ﾟ∀ﾟ)----!!!!!

I wonder if they would make WAR TRABANTS XD

----(ﾟ∀ﾟ)----!!!!!

I wonder if they would make WAR TRABANTS XD

Do not use these text message or IM symbols.

Originally Posted by Gollevainen View Post
Due recent unclearness A another thing needs to clarifying...

Do not use slang or any other intentional misspelling of normal English grammar.
(This from directly DF rules: )[Its hrd 2 reed whn peple tipe poorly, its also trashy! This will make posts much nicer, neat and easy to read for fellow participants. This isn't done on most forums, its time you get use to it here.

We have members from all parts of the world and some of us (like the author) will make unintentional misspelling and some of us have even difficulties to understand clearly written English so lets not make it harder by those who speaks English as native language intentionally writing it wrong.

Also it would avoid giving this forum an image of play ground for kids BS that unfortuanetly plagues many other forums in internet.

bd popeye super moderator

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

About the Iowa-class, where would the VLS be fitted? Those big guns would be kept in place, right? Big guns are needed for shore bombardments (like during the first Iraq war).

There was a study to remove the aft 16 inch gun mounts and replace it with VLS cells..But honestly the feasibility studies showed that an Iowa would probably be un-sea worthy and some sort of extra ballast would need be added to stabilize . It would be a very expensive re-fit.

And lets guess what Chinese navy would be like:
Surface combatants would be roughly the same as it is nowdays.
More nuclear submarines and JH-7 aircrafts would be built.
The first light helicopter carrier under construction.

On another note- If the USSR did not collapse, the arms embargo would most likely be lifted and there would have been more TOT between China and the West. On the other hand, it would be very unlikely to see Russian/Soviet tech/weapons in the PLA. China would have received Western assistance on J-10 and FC-1, and those aircrafts would be relying on GE engines. In fact, if the Super-7 program went through the FC-1 might never have even been conceived. With a lack of heavy multirole fighters, expect to see higher numbers of J-8 and JH-7, both with possibly western powerplants. Also, the lack of Kilos in the PLAN would most likely have impacted the development of China's diesel sub fleet (Yuan, Song) negatively. Instead of Sovs and the 052C/051C, China might have AEGIS ships. On the whole, the Russian flavor of the PLA would have been replaced with a more Western favor. Furthermore, Chinese indigenous weapons development would be behind where it is today, but reverse-engineered weapons systems would be more prevalent. China would probably not have WS-10 or any type of domestic advanced turbofan.

Originally Posted by FriedRiceNSpice

On another note- If the USSR did not collapse, the arms embargo would most likely be lifted and there would have been more TOT between China and the West. On the other hand, it would be very unlikely to see Russian/Soviet tech/weapons in the PLA. China would have received Western assistance on J-10 and FC-1, and those aircrafts would be relying on GE engines. In fact, if the Super-7 program went through the FC-1 might never have even been conceived. With a lack of heavy multirole fighters, expect to see higher numbers of J-8 and JH-7, both with possibly western powerplants. Also, the lack of Kilos in the PLAN would most likely have impacted the development of China's diesel sub fleet (Yuan, Song) negatively. Instead of Sovs and the 052C/051C, China might have AEGIS ships. On the whole, the Russian flavor of the PLA would have been replaced with a more Western favor. Furthermore, Chinese indigenous weapons development would be behind where it is today, but reverse-engineered weapons systems would be more prevalent. China would probably not have WS-10 or any type of domestic advanced turbofan.

A continued Cold War would probably have prevented a lot of the phenomenal economic prosperity China is experiencing today, so we have to factor that into the equation. I think that this would have prevented a lot of rapid modernization that we are seeing today.

I know with the Iowa class battleships their were studies about removing one or more of the 16 inch batteries and installing a nuclear reactor to give it extended range and reduce its fuel consumption. I believe the Russians had a similar scheme with the Nuclear heavy cruiser's were a nuclear reactor would preheat the water being feed to the boilers.

Their were also plans to install a hanger and improved flight deck.

A attribute that the Iowa's had was their massive armor which made them essentially immune to all but the most massive anti ship missiles.

Originally Posted by FriedRiceNSpice

Chinese indigenous weapons development would be behind where it is today, but reverse-engineered weapons systems would be more prevalent. China would probably not have WS-10 or any type of domestic advanced turbofan.

China might have been allowed to buy manufacturing licenses for many American or European get engines and allowed to import sophisticated manufacturing technology that today are restricted as dual use technology.

Sorry I double posted.

China would have received Western assistance on J-10 and FC-1, and those aircrafts would be relying on GE engines. In fact, if the Super-7 program went through the FC-1 might never have even been conceived. With a lack of heavy multirole fighters, expect to see higher numbers of J-8 and JH-7, both with possibly western powerplants.

That's quite a statement. What do you base this on? And just how friendly would have the PRC become(Military wise) with the USA if the Cold war continued?

I'm not really sure.

Originally Posted by bd popeye

That's quite a statement. What do you base this on? And just how friendly would have the PRC become(Military wise) with the USA if the Cold war continued?

I'm not really sure.

From several books I've read on the subject Ronald Reagan envisioned a modernized PLA with M60A3 level tanks and F-16 level fighters as an ideal deterrent force against the Soviet military, although the state of the Chinese economy and technical capabilities seriously impeded developments at the time.

Thanks Monty165..I learn something new everyday.

Originally Posted by bd popeye

That's quite a statement. What do you base this on? And just how friendly would have the PRC become(Military wise) with the USA if the Cold war continued?

I'm not really sure.

Like this entire thread, those statements are pure speculation.

However, prior to the break-up of the Soviet Union, the Chinese had received military and technological assistance in many areas from the US, France, and other Western nations. However, once the breakup of the USSR was imminent, there was no longer reason for the West to continue such assistance. The incident on June 4th simply provided a convenient excuse for the West to halt such aid and slam the arms embargo down on China.

Prior to the arms embargo, the United States and China were in the process of developing a fighter aircraft based off the J-7 airframe known as the Super-7, which was going to be powered by an American engine.

The JH-7 was originally designed to use British engines. There are claims that the J-10 was designed to use a Western engine as well, hence the resulting delay in the J-10 program following the arms embargo. Also, the HQ-7 was reverse engineered from the French Crotale during this time.

Originally Posted by Finn McCool

A continued Cold War would probably have prevented a lot of the phenomenal economic prosperity China is experiencing today, so we have to factor that into the equation. I think that this would have prevented a lot of rapid modernization that we are seeing today.

That's probably true.

A continued Cold War would definitely slow down PLAN's blue water agendas. Instead of refitting one full size carrier and planning for another one, the largest surface combatant China would build before 2020 would probably be a helicopter carrier similar to HMS Ocean, mainly for anti-submarine operations. Soviet subs was a substantial threat to Chinese military and civilian vessels during the 1980's, and that threat would continue to influence PLAN's strategies if USSR did not collapse.

Originally Posted by F40Racer

That's probably true.

A continued Cold War would definitely slow down PLAN's blue water agendas. Instead of refitting one full size carrier and planning for another one, the largest surface combatant China would build before 2020 would probably be a helicopter carrier similar to HMS Ocean, mainly for anti-submarine operations. Soviet subs was a substantial threat to Chinese military and civilian vessels during the 1980's, and that threat would continue to influence PLAN's strategies if USSR did not collapse.

Overall the navy would be much less of a priority, because China would not be as economically developed as it is today, and therefore would have less strategic reason to build its power projection capability and the SLOCs would matter less. Moreover, with the Soviet threat in Siberia and the Maritime Provinces, the Army and Air Force would continue to get the lions share of resouces to prepare for what would have been a truly epic series of land battles, which would inevitably turn nuclear.

So USN/VMF, bigger, PLAN, smaller.

What would the effect of a continued Cold War have been on the formation of the EU and a common European defence policy? Perhaps current developments in that area would have been sped up and NATO would have been augmented/ largely replaced on land by a common EU military force?