PLAN: submarines or aircraft carrier? (Closed)

I think that submarines are much more adequate for PLAN, IF they want to face the USN.

Aircraft carriers have a lot of fighting power, but are highly detectable to a force like the USN, and chinese naval fighters wont be able to stand against
USN fighters. Specially since USN have 11 carriers and PLAN none so far. No country can wage a frontal war against the USA. With aircraft carriers, PLAN will put too many eggs into one basket. The less assets PLAN has to "defend", the better.

Thus, it makes all sense to concentrate on submarines, which are stealthy, and thus, much more survivable, and are highly offensive too. Besides, with submarines, PLAN can disperse their assets, something crucial to an inferior force.

Of course, if China only wants to have a blue navy, and doesnt have plans to confront USA, aircraft carriers are indispensable. Several nations like India, etc, have aircraft carriers. But those nations dont worry about facing the USN...


what do you think of it?

While I agree PLAN should not invest too heavily into Carriers, as they are very expensive and technical to invest and maintain, I do not think PLAN should rely on submarines alone.

Right now what PLAN lacks is power projection and that is something that submarines lack. I believe what they should be working on is primarily amphibious assualt ships/helicopter carriers which would allow a larger degree of power project with less expense of a full scale carrier.

Eventually when they have acquired sufficient experience they should acquire medium sized carriers and limit them to 3-5, as that number should be sufficient to deter other naval powers and protect national interests while not having the same expense nor quantity as an American model fleet.

China has absolutely no intention of confronting the US in war. I think China wants to avoid war with ANYBODY in fact, especially because world events today are evolving in a way that they are quite happy with. However, this very fact may tempt other powers that are not so "lucky" to change the course of things through war, especially if they are feeling militarily strong, "standing tall", and China also seems weak to them. This is what is behind all of China's military modernization, of course, and not just submarines or aircraft carriers.
As to this 'either/or' question, I think the large submarine force that the Soviet navy fielded and that the PLAN commands now, is a reflection of the view that this is the best way to deal with the American navy from a DEFENSIVE perspective (I am referring more to attack submarines than SSBN's). I don't think this view has changed, and in fact, China seems to have lots of new subs. The thing is that submarines cannot by themselves give you much of a power projection cabability: only a blue water navy can, and this means aircraft carriers. Militarily, power projection is China's main weakness, and a CVN goes a long way towards fixing this.
That a flanker derivative appears to be their main choice of aircraft may signify that they view the aircraft carrier as having a fleet defence role, as in Soviet times. In this sense, yes, the USN is one of the threats they have to consider. But, more important, this airplane also gives the PLAN a platform that can reach a large area from a single base and is competitive in the region. The Plan will have good aircover, and also serious strike capability, throughout Southeast Asia, and not just the countries bordering it.
Much is said about China's neighbors' "concern" about its military power, but I think, for example, that Cambodia, Laos and Thailand can breathe a little easier if Vietnam is 'contained' by the PLAN. After all, India, Russia, and the US all seem to want warmer ties with Vietnam, precisely because they see it as a sort of counter to China. For these three countries, under these conditions, China becomes there most reliable ally. I think also that Indonesia will see the PLAN as kind of insurance against the Indian navy eventually, if it doesn't already, because Americans and Russians both prefer India. Even Singapore will come to see China as a guarantee against Malaysia and Indonesia. China is developing very strong, all round ties with every country in the region.
Strategically, this means China is gradually moving into the position of being the principal GUARANTOR OF PEACE in Southeast Asia (and eventually, all of East Asia). Naturally, all of the larger powers in the region, starting with the US, but also including Japan, India and Australia, will feel uncomfortable with this, but this does not mean that a confrontation will take place. It will simply means that any other power has to think much harder about any intervention in the region. Even for the US, a single Chinese aircraft carrier (along with LHD's an whatever else) alters the equation by a huge margin. It is useless to discuss "who will win", however. For China, the whole point is to avoid such a confrontation. Of all the powers in the region, indeed in the world, it is China that will suffer most if there is instability or war in Southeast Asia. I think everybody can see this as a fact: even Vietnam.
Sorry, mods, if this is too "political".

China should build a carrier and all it's escorts just for the experience. Critics are always talking about how China is inexperienced and shouldn't build carriers. Well experience has to start somewhere. China should build them for just all the experience and know-how that it takes to produce and operate. That's more valuable than not having them in the first place. Plus China has to protect its interests growing internationally. For emergency purposes the fastest response will be through aircraft on carriers. So they are about something beyond battling it out with another rival's navy.

Fighting the USN should not be an option for the PLAN. Plain & simple. War with the US is not an option either. Far too much between China and the US is now intertwined that some economists now refer to as the great Chimerica economy.

Best option for the PLAN is surface ship development for power projection, peacekeeping, anti-piracy, & relief efforts. So a carrier, along with helicopter carriers, destroyers, frigates, LPDs, hospital ships, are the best option for the PLAN, along with openness, and communication with the USN and other navies.

In other words, construct a navy that appears and acts more like a world citizen than a Soviet Navy successor.

One of the greatest strategy that the Chinese had devise is to win a war without a fight. Thus in present day context, submarines might be very useful against any adversaries and multiple adversaries, but they are invisible and nobody know where there are and when they will be there.

That is not what the chinese wanted. Same thing with the nuclear missiles, when developed and deployed, these are not offensive weapons in a sense but something to intimidate enemies so that they will not attack Chinese soil.

Thus an aircraft carrier in the hand of the Chinese might not really be the Ace card... but it sure is a card to tell potential opponent to think twice before launching an offensive against the Chinese.

Sure, submarines will do the same but they are less intimidating, especially in patrolling missions to faraway disputed islands because potential enemy didn't get to see them.

rhino123 said:

One of the greatest strategy that the Chinese had devise is to win a war without a fight. Thus in present day context, submarines might be very useful against any adversaries and multiple adversaries, but they are invisible and nobody know where there are and when they will be there.

That is not what the chinese wanted. Same thing with the nuclear missiles, when developed and deployed, these are not offensive weapons in a sense but something to intimidate enemies so that they will not attack Chinese soil.

Thus an aircraft carrier in the hand of the Chinese might not really be the Ace card... but it sure is a card to tell potential opponent to think twice before launching an offensive against the Chinese.

Sure, submarines will do the same but they are less intimidating, especially in patrolling missions to faraway disputed islands because potential enemy didn't get to see them.

Click to expand...

Submarines can't do much with the faraway disputed islands either, no fleet area protection, no command of the air, no mass power projection ability. Also current Chinese submarines are nowhere close to USN submarines in terms of quietness, which is especially important for PLAN.

It should still be developed to deter other fleets from quickly getting close to attack Chinese soil. Submarines and aircraft carrier should both be developed, and China surely has the ability to do that with a tiny fraction of their GDP

submarine without suface warship help, be subject to anti-submarine forces of the enemy siege - from the surface anti-submarine warfare, enemy submarines, and thus difficulty in activities.the surface ships must have a cover of air power to be able to enhance combat capability at sea.
without aircraft carrier, china airforce combat range only extends out of the sea about 1,500km,in other words, PLAN activitie limit in the sea from China coast about 1,500km,include sumarines.
China's naval mission to the Somali waters, China's warships can go to so far ocean because now is peace time, not with an enemy naval operations.
in the future, China must have aircaraft carrier,then the Chinese navy able to the far ocean-going operations, in case war coming, China will be able to defeat the enemy's sea blockade, to ensure that China's sea trade,supply,sea transportation.
China priority to develop submarine before, Because of historical reasons, China's national strength is not enough, technological, economic backwardness, as China's strength of the country, economic, technological upgrading, the construction of aircraft carriers, is imperative.
However, the military should be an overall balanced development,to build aircarrier also need to develop submarine.
Former Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev on the mistake, he thought the aircraft carrier does not work, it's dead sea raft, it's the missile's target, he considered that priority should be given the development of nuclear submarines, the results lead to the former Soviet Union navybehind the U.S. Navy.

you make china sound like it can only afford one option. PLAN doesn't lack money. It just needs time and experience to develop and man the systems. In the long run, it doesn't do China a lot of good to have defensive force when all a hostile nation needs to do is to choke malacca straits to bring China to its knees. Having a carrier force is absolutely needed.

tphuang said:

all a hostile nation needs to do is to choke malacca straits to bring China to its knees.

Click to expand...

what hostile nation, barring the USA, have the political/military/economic capability to blockade the malacca straits?? that nation would become overnight into an international outlaw, even subject to use of force. Sorry, but i think thats just nonsense.