PLA Navy news, pics and videos

[ZeEa5KPul]

Even if this were the case, that's still 10 super carriers, lots of F-35s, 67 destroyers, 22 cruisers, and a lot of superior nuclear powered attack subs and everything in between holding it all together and strengthening their capabilities.

I grow more convinced by the day that China must have its dozen carriers purely for the psychological effect. This is the only yardstick in the popular imagination by which military strength is measured, even among people who should know better. We can go into a discussion of how it would be suicidal for these ships to operate near China and waste pages of digital ink, but why bother? Who cares what a supercarrier's actual combat capabilities and vulnerabilities are? Its psychological impact is worth far more than its military utility.

PLAN has some way to go and bragging about having 10 carriers, 15 years before the job is done is Indian caliber arrogance.

I know how this story is going to turn out just like I know how a footrace with Usain Bolt in it is going to turn out. As for arrogance, I'm arrogant - so what?

And India's problem isn't that it's arrogant, it's that it's a failed society.

I never get this insistence to dismiss the US, even if its industries are currently relatively weaker than before.

That's like saying someone with terminal cancer is relatively less healthy than before - true, but misleading. The US has no shipbuilding industry whatsoever; those shipyards that churn out failures like the Zumwalt exist purely as a mechanism for private defence companies to price gouge the American government. It's daylight robbery, nothing more.

Just remember what happened to the Germans on the Eastern Front.

Instead of me remembering a wholly irrelevant historical factoid, how about you try to come up with a historical analogy that doesn't involve Nazi Germany. I'm sure you've studied history beyond the WWII era, or have you not?

Time and again we have seen it change and augment its forces to meet combat demands in a rather rapid fashion, like WW2, cold war etc.

Time and again we've seen societies that were gods astride the Earth fail and crumble. Italy could once muster armies that conquered Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East - look at it today. America is in no position to do what it did then; it's fiscally, economically, and socially exhausted. It's already spending $750 billion and getting peanuts for it.

China is just beginning its ascent. As superpowers go, it's in the adolescent phase similar to the US during the middle of the 19th century and it still has enormous room left to grow.

Once a direct threat or casus belli is instilled into the US power structure, the initial stages of which is pretty much showing itself now, thats when the real picture will emerge.

The real picture has already emerged and it's one of a failing state well on its way to becoming a failed state.

 

[banjex]

fucken lel

Laugh all you want pal, but a policy of carefully avoiding arrogance and quietly building up their strength has been pretty much China's quasi official policy since Deng. Yes, this has changed under Xi, but with mixed results at best, I would say. Seems like Chinese leaders by and large have been wiser than your posts. Anyway, it's not my job to dispel anyone's ignorance.

lol wrt to Nazi Germany, I'm getting at the analogy.

anyway, another one to add to the ignore list.

 

[The Observer]

Guys, just a reminder, but this thread is about PLAN stuff. Last page and a half had been about US shipbuilding and stuff, but can we please get back on track?

 

[banjex]

Stay mad love

 

[Blitzo]

Not at all, it's well within China's capacity, it wouldn't even break a sweat. It's difficult for America because of its absolutely crippled shipbuilding industry. If there's anything that's going to be a serious lift for China then it's the air force buildup since it doesn't have a deep civilian aerospace industry it can draw on.

While shipbuilding is definitely a relative industry of strength for China, the notion of having 10 carriers by 2035 is still a rather eyebrow raising idea and not something that I think any of us can shrug and go "yeah totally expected, totally normal".

It's not impossible, but there's also a certain level of humility and caution that should come with observing new predictions imo.

 

[Blitzo]

Pop3 is not a fanboy to the extent that he's our most authoritative source on PLAN affairs. Especially since most of the original big shrimps are 'retired'.

The first point is believable enough. The PLAN is undisputably at the forefront of the world when it comes to naval radars, launch systems, and ship design in general. They still need to work on the missiles, but the ship and sensors are solid. IEPS will be out very soon, so the PLAN certainly is not lacking in the propulsion department either. How can you be more advanced than that?

US ships being ten times the cost sounds ridiculous, but it's also true. The Zumwalts are sitting on a per-unit cost of 7.5 billion. So does a Type 052DL cost more than 750 million USD or not? Yeah, exactly.

On his second point, 10 CV by 2035 is possible. Our projections from 3 years ago to now has been 4-6 CVs by 2030. 003/004 can be in service by 2023-2025, while 005/006 can be in service by 2028-2030.

So, 10 CV in service by 2035 is a stretch, but 8 in service + 2 launched/fitting out by 2035 is not only possible, it should be expected!

I'm trying to read the phrasing of his original relevant Chinese part...

" 昨天很多媒体都在传说，什么2035年中国将拥有6艘航母的消息，也不知道他们怎么知道的，是看了海军中长期发展规划纲要了？还是拍脑袋想出来的？媒体一惊一年现在是常态，动不动就来个鸡血文并配上惊悚的标题，但这次吧，该鸡血的时候，又战战就益的不敢鸡血了。海军现在是特码的按10艘航母去规划的，而不是6艘。"

Is he saying that he can see 10 carriers by 2035, or is he instead saying that 10 carriers is in the plan?

Because regarding the 2035 thing, he is first observing that foreign media have said China will seek to have 6 carriers by 2035.
He then proceeds to criticize the "6 carrier by 2035" thing as misguided on behalf of media.
Following that the navy is planning for 10 carriers (rather than 6), however he doesn't directly say that we should expect 10 carriers by 2035 I believe.

However, if we take that entire section as one overall argument, he seems to be implying that the timeline for 10 carriers is the same timescale mentioned by media in terms of 6 carriers (i.e.: 2035).
Or am I misreading him?

 

[Mirabo]

I'm trying to read the phrasing of his original relevant Chinese part...

" 昨天很多媒体都在传说，什么2035年中国将拥有6艘航母的消息，也不知道他们怎么知道的，是看了海军中长期发展规划纲要了？还是拍脑袋想出来的？媒体一惊一年现在是常态，动不动就来个鸡血文并配上惊悚的标题，但这次吧，该鸡血的时候，又战战就益的不敢鸡血了。海军现在是特码的按10艘航母去规划的，而不是6艘。"

Is he saying that he can see 10 carriers by 2035, or is he instead saying that 10 carriers is in the plan?

Because regarding the 2035 thing, he is first observing that foreign media have said China will seek to have 6 carriers by 2035.
He then proceeds to criticize the "6 carrier by 2035" thing as misguided on behalf of media.
Following that the navy is planning for 10 carriers (rather than 6), however he doesn't directly say that we should expect 10 carriers by 2035 I believe.

However, if we take that entire section as one overall argument, he seems to be implying that the timeline for 10 carriers is the same timescale mentioned by media in terms of 6 carriers (i.e.: 2035).
Or am I misreading him?

He doesn't specifically say "10 carriers by 2035". The passage is more of an observation.

Rougly translated, what he's saying is that he doesn't know where the media pulled their number from. Why has the media been parroting '6 CVs by 2035', or '6 CVs by 20XX'?

He notes that the media these days is notorious for writing clickbaity and often inaccurate content for the sake of getting more attention, referring to the myth that China might have 6 CVs by 2035. But why not more than 6? On the topic of China's CV program, the media is ironically setting the bar too low.

6 is just an arbitrary number made up by pundits and analysts. The "6 CV by 20XX" notion is pointless, he says, because China is in reality planning for a 10+ strong carrier fleet.

So we should stop asking ourselves stuff like "can China get 6 CVs by 2030?" and instead start thinking along the lines of "China wants 10 carriers, when's the soonest that can be achieved?" That is the key point.

 

[Jono]

海军现在是特码的按10艘航母去规划的，而不是6艘。"

He is writing in a definitive tone, not speculating.
" the Navy is specifically planning for 10 carriers, not 6 ".

 

[tazket]

to be precise,
The navy is FUCKING planning for 10 carriers, not 6.

 

[Tyler]

海军现在是特码的按10艘航母去规划的，而不是6艘。"

He is writing in a definitive tone, not speculating.
" the Navy is specifically planning for 10 carriers, not 6 ".

So this is no longer a fanboy fantasy? So 10 CV by 2035, that would be cranking out another 7 in 15 yrs, another every 2 yrs?