asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Check the warship tonnage ! Wow
Plus the two LCAC are there too with one a painted pennant number
Plus the two LCAC are there too with one a painted pennant number
052C/052D Class Destroyers
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
These six ships alone probably possess more firepower and jamming capabilities than the combined Vietnamese, Philippine, and Malaysian navies.
Last edited by a moderator:
I would not go that far. When you limit it to those six surface vessels, deplying together into the SCS against the combined fleets of both Malaysia and Vietnam, I would not count the other two out in the least. Even right now, but more so not when their modernization is complete.
As it is, right now Vietnam has:
4 x Very Modern, new Kilo SSKs (two more coming soon)
2 x Very Modern Gephard FFGs w/8 SSMs each(two more ships will launch next year)
6 x Very Modern Molniya missile ships w/16 ASMs each (4 more ships coming)
Vietnam will also add 4 very modern Sigma stealth frigates over the next few years.
Malaysia has:
2 x Very Modern Scorpene SSKs
2 x Lekin Frigates w/8 Exocets each
2 x Katsuri class w/8 Exocets each
4 x Laksaman class w/6 Ottoman each
And in the next few years they will add six SGPV stealth frigates with 8 NSM each.
So, today, the six PLAN vessels would face off against a combined fleet of 22 modern vessels (some very modern) and I would not call it a slam dunk at all...in fact with those six subs, the PLAN would be in trouble.
Of course, the PLAN could send a much stronger mixed surface and sub-surface force and clean out the SCS which is why those two countries are adding another 12 modern firgates between them. But you limited it to those six vessels.
The Philippines...right now? Errr...not so much.
Last edited:
steve_rolfe
Junior Member
Very true one must not forget about the subs!................btw Whats a 'Firgate' Jeff?...........
A firgate is called a fat fumble fingered typo. FFT. LOL!!................btw Whats a 'Firgate' Jeff?...........
...which I have now fixed!
As Jeff already illustrated I'd have to say Josh you need to do some homework.
China's navy has developed much in the past two to three decades and does have a significant naval capability but in a neighborhood full of mid- and top-tier navies surrounding its boxed-in coastline China has merely accomplished building a mid-tier one in relative and contextual terms.
It is also important to note that there are plenty of willing arms exporters who can upgrade any of China's neighbors from even a no-navy to at least a mid-tier one in short order.
Which is why I believe China will focus on building out its multi-role fleet to thoroughly dominate its near seas with more corvettes, frigates, destroyers, and attack submarines while just trying to keep pace in R&D with important but niche areas such as carriers and SSBNs.
It seems that China is catering its amphibious capabilities to near seas operations, including Taiwan, with its Zubr program, continuing the 072 series, while keeping the number of 071 small. I do think they will build a first "training" LHD in parallel to the Liaoning "training" carrier sooner rather than later as a LHD's niche capabilities are valuable to China's core interests in its near seas.
I mean, in terms of firepower those six ships have between them 1x32 VLS for MR SAM and VLASROC and 1x8 AShMs, 2x48 for LR SAM and 2x8 for LR AShM, and 3x64 common VLS that can be loaded with a combination of weapons -- in other words 32 MR SAM or VLA + 96 LR SAM+ 24 AShM + 192 VLS for any variety of weapons.
Technically speaking I think that is a greater warload than what the combined surface combatants of the Philippines, Malaysian and Vietnamese navies at this time can field, and is also greater than the firepower than can field even if we include submarines.
But "firepower" doesn't mean one force can "defeat" the other, it just means it carries more weapons. It doesn't mean one can engage the other and deploy all their offensive and defensive weapons in an effective way in all kinds of conditions.
Technically speaking I think that is a greater warload than what the combined surface combatants of the Philippines, Malaysian and Vietnamese navies at this time can field, and is also greater than the firepower than can field even if we include submarines.
But "firepower" doesn't mean one force can "defeat" the other, it just means it carries more weapons. It doesn't mean one can engage the other and deploy all their offensive and defensive weapons in an effective way in all kinds of conditions.
antiterror13
Brigadier
deleted
