It's common practice to take a report at face value until better evidence says it's not. So far you have given us literally nothing but conjecture. Your personal opinion does not constitute "better evidence" no matter how many times you state the same opinion, as if that one additional time will somehow turn vinegar into wine.
PLAN Naval Helicopter & ASW Capability II
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
At least I'm consistent. You went all over the place including digressing from the point being discussed because you realized that was a bold statement that couldn't easily be reversed. That's called trying to change the subject because you knew you were wrong. Your diversion tactics didn't work on me.
You were consistent in having no evidence to speak of? And you take that as a badge of honor or something? And I'm sorry, what are you now claiming that I'm guilty of? Changing the subject? YOU are accusing me of changing the subject? Wow, that's pretty funny. Because the subject was the size of the YJ-9 until YOU changed the subject into how CIWS conspiratorially was active and failed to protect the Sa'ar-5 from being hit by an antiship missile, something which you have absolutely no evidence for (except that the NYT was wrong about WMDs LOL). No, none of that. Instead, I am apparently changing the subject from what to what, exactly? Oh, I see, you think that I think CIWS laughing at a YJ-9 was too "bold" of a statement and I tried to talk about something else. Oh, I don't know, like how you have absolutely no evidence that the Sa'ar-5's CIWS was turned on? Was that what I was changing the subject into? I'm pretty sure the Sa'ar-5 was ALL you, sport. So really what we have is this: I made a joke about CIWS laughing at a YJ-9 and then shooting it down. You thought it was too "bold" and tried to prove me wrong by saying an active CIWS failed to shoot down a missile. I then said you have no evidence of this in any way, shape or form. You then said NYT was wrong about WMDs. I then said LOL a bunch of times. Did I miss anything here?
ASW capability, both from really good helos and MPA with top of the line sensors, and through competitive SSNs is the PLAN's greatest weakness.
The US sailing FON through the SCS I know seems provcative...but the US is going to continue to do so, just as the PRC is going to continue to improve its new islands in the SCS.
But the gravest threat for the PLAN comes not from the Burkes or the new LCS or any of those. Although the Burkes are top line and dangerous.
Having the US send several Virginia class or Sea Wolf class SSNs si the greatest threat and the although the PLAN is making progress, it is the one area that they are much much further behind despite more recent progress.
It is the riddle that they have to solve.
The US sailing FON through the SCS I know seems provcative...but the US is going to continue to do so, just as the PRC is going to continue to improve its new islands in the SCS.
But the gravest threat for the PLAN comes not from the Burkes or the new LCS or any of those. Although the Burkes are top line and dangerous.
Having the US send several Virginia class or Sea Wolf class SSNs si the greatest threat and the although the PLAN is making progress, it is the one area that they are much much further behind despite more recent progress.
It is the riddle that they have to solve.
I think the major reason why the PLAN continues to build more 054A+ is to make up for their ASW weaknesses you described. It is the most economical and effective stopgap they have, though I think they made a mistake underarming the 056.
Giving 056As the same TAS and VDS suite as 054A+ and 052D, as well as seemingly replacing the AShMs with long range ASROC, and mass producing 056As is probably one of the most significant decisions in improving their regional ASW capabilities over the last few years.
Remember what the 056s and 056As are replacing (037 variant subchasers) and they will be supported by 022 FACs, land based air power for air cover and maritime strike, as well as probably a number of frigates during operations, not to mention ASW MPAs as well. 056As will not merely be a stopgap, but will operate in conjunction with currently developing and early fielding ASW capabilities and will likely remain a key role in the Navy's regional ASW forces, at least within green water range.
The requirement for heavily arming a ship of 056/As size with AShMs is simply not there given the way they will probably be operated. But giving them a potent ASW sensor suite, and then mass producing them in large numbers OTOH is a capability that will significantly enhance the Navy's overall capability. In context, 056/As AShM armament is barely a criticism worth noting IMO.
