PLAN breaking news, pics, & videos

Discussion in 'Navy' started by Jeff Head, Oct 24, 2014.

  1. Rachmaninov
    Offline

    Rachmaninov Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    248
    https://mobile.twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1129942889948110849

    Le chantier naval Huangpu a commencé la construction du premier patrouilleur maritime chinois d’un déplacement de plus de 10 000 tonnes.

    Translation by google:

    Huangpu shipyard has begun construction of the first Chinese shipping patrol vessel of more than 10,000 ton.
     

    Attached Files:

    N00813 likes this.
  2. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,801
    Likes Received:
    8,895
    10,000 tons

    Reminds me of the time when we first heard of the 2 x 12,000 ton cutters for coast guard

    Is this for maritime security?
     
  3. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,801
    Likes Received:
    8,895
    China will not only have to face USN but also its allies

    RAN has two LHD
    South Korea has two LHD
    JMSDF has 2 large LHD and two smaller LHD

    China needs to match each ARG with its own ARG

    Type 075 LHD with 3 x Type 071 LPD against RAN
    Type 075 LHD with 3 x Type 071 LPD against South Korea
    Larger Type 075A 2 x LHD and 6 x Type 071 LPD against JMSDF

    Which means China need another 4 x LPD

    Also allowing the carriers to be committed against either Indian or USN carriers
     
  4. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,698
    Likes Received:
    26,762
    Are you sure those countries are going to align with the US because empire may come and go in Asia but China will be there forever. And why you have to match ship per ship ? Unless you planned for invasion those LHD are vulnerable to air attack or cruise missile strike from sub

    I have no doubt that China will built more than 4 LHD but not to face those countries LHD There are better weapon to use against them
     
  5. Peter2018
    Offline

    Peter2018 Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2018
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    65
    China does have the resource and capacity, considering it has all the indigenous technology for building such ships. If you consider a small country like South Korea with that number of ships. By proportion of population, you can easily calculate the full capacity of China. Whether they need that many is another thing.
     
  6. jimmyjames30x30
    Offline

    jimmyjames30x30 Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2019
    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    267

    I don't understand the reason behind why China needs to match the number of LHD/Heli-carriers in regional rivals/competitors. If China consider those Heli-carriers as threats, why would you think that China could best deter these threats by building the same type of ships in matching numbers?

    All of these navies: RAN, ROKN, JMSDF have their own particular mission for their Heli-carriers. Simply matching their numbers without allocating assets according to mission requirement is a waste of resource. In my opinion, if those Heli-carriers post a threat to China, they are best matched with long range anti-ship missiles, naval fighter-bombers, numerically overwhelming AIP submarines, naval attack drones, CATOBAR carriers, etc.
     
  7. kwaigonegin
    Offline

    kwaigonegin Colonel

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    4,363
    Likes Received:
    5,168
    I agree. Strategically, PLAN doesn't need to have to match anyone on anything. Most certainly not on a 1:1 basis. All they need is to have a large enough force to conduct missions out to the 2nd island chain and also have enough firepower for deterence.
    The odds of RAN, ROKN, JMSDF and USN all suddenly ganging up on China in a full on seabattle trading blows is best left to a Hollywood movie. Many many things would need to play out for that scenario to come to fruition and I just do not see that happening in the near future inspite of less than warm relations between the Trump admin and China.
     
    PanAsian likes this.
  8. jimmyjames30x30
    Offline

    jimmyjames30x30 Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2019
    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    267
    By the way, I read numerous times in previous posts about your frustration with the lack of large hardware transported by PLAN Marine Corps LCAC.

    I have a very simple response to that:

    PLAN Marine Corps don't operate MBT's or Mengshi (Chinese Humvee's).

    The LCAC and LPD's are part of the PLAN Marine Corps, it can only carrier and exercise with what the Marine Corps are equipped with. From what I observed so far, the only vehicles I have seen the PLAN Marine Corps train with are the ZBD-05 series amphibious fighting vehicles. I have yet to even find evidence that they operate Mengshi in combined armed war games in Zhurihe Training Base (朱日和训练基地) which locates in Inner Mongolia.

    Yes, this means they brought their Amphi-vehicle to "fight" in land-locked Mongolian Steppes. Stupid, isn't it! lol

    Yes, you may certainly call this bureaucracy.

    I too, don't see why they couldn't equip them with some Mengshi, Type 09 wheeled IFV's or MBT's.
     
  9. jimmyjames30x30
    Offline

    jimmyjames30x30 Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2019
    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    267
    It's not unfathomable that they would "gang-up-ed" on China. Actually, the PLA has been "gang-up-ed" on by a much larger and relatively much more powerful force before: The "United Nation Forces" in the Korean war. PLA are formed with "the worst case scenario" in mind. PLA are trained to face an enemy not just made up of the USA and her wee little sisters the RAN, ROKN, JMSDF, but also the mighty NATO, and possible even Russia. The gist of the matter has never been whether they will "gang-up", but rather how to counter them most effectively with the resources we have, when they come "ganged-up" to take us out.

    This, my friend, is exactly why not even an ounce of Chinese military resources shall be wasted on superficial bragging rights like "I got matching number of LHD's as you, haha". One pound of PLA weapons needs to be focused on taking out 10 pounds of potential enemy's equipment. This is why I don't support wasting resources on the superficial.
     
  10. Tetrach
    Offline

    Tetrach Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2019
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    143
    The PLAN operates lighter units than the PLA, with the 1st and 164th amphibious brigades currently not maintaining any MBTs, in contrary to the PLA's armored force with one armoured brigade and the 1st and 124th mechanized infantry divs, each comprising one tank regiment.

    At least theoretically; I have yet to see proofs that indicates a real operational mobilization of tanks on any of those units. But the hype is still here as we have photos "ZTQ-15s" in naval camouflage;

    112504pz7g2752j2p2w7q3.jpg
     
    N00813 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page