USMC 0802 locked onto something in my previous post that I totally missed. The Chinese goal of building a 50,000 ton LHD will produce an amphib that rivals the size of the UK's Queen Elizabeth Class carrier AND will be larger than most nation's carriers...not to mention being twice to four times the size of most other amphibs roaming the seas.
You're looking at ship that will be a one ship Amphibious Ready Group and will be able to put a Battalion of Chinese Marines on most shores by LCAC, swimming IFVs or by helicopter.
And that's just their LHD.
They're also building LPD's that rival the San Antonio class in capability, have solid attack helicopters, have the schematics of our Black Hawks, still build the French Frelon and have access to an array of Russian birds.
Dump your normalcy bias and take a real look at what China is doing. They're attempting to rival the US and overwhelm our allies.
Sidenote: Below you see a pic of China's Mistral class LHD designed for export. Marine Corps are becoming increasingly popular. I'd bet body parts that it'll be a best seller.
The Chinese are surrounded by the USN and allies so it's hardly surprising that they want to be able to rival them.
ReplyDeleteChina is surrounded like Germany is surrounded. it could have great relations with the other powers in the region but chooses supremacy instead of relations. they could easily be a benevolent leader in the region but instead want conquest. get over your bias, stop trying to equivocate on every issue and look at this realistically.
Deletea major war is going to occur and because you fail to see it (along with many others) we're going to be behind the 8-ball.
Interesting... I would like to know HOW China is surrounded by USN and it's allies. Just for the sake of discussion, I look now on the map and wonder... what are you smoking, and why you are not sharing this good stuff with us?
DeleteWell, to be fair, there is the TJK barrier (Taiwan/Japan/Korea). One good blockade and the Chinese economy grinds to a halt.
DeleteAs for "conquest" though, I think Sol has been focusing too much on military hardware, the Chinese are playing the "influence" game, bribes and economic incentives. Why invade when you can make them so dependent on your largess that they can't get away from you? Saves having to run around fighting insurgencies.
Their military is a shield to protect from military intervention when people finally wake up and realize that the Chinese have bought the carpet out from under them.
Their military is a defensive weapon. Their economy and bribes are their offensive weapon, and one that the US is hard pressed to counter, with the current economy.
bullshit. i haven't called you on it because you contribute to the conversation but be advised. i've noticed a disturbing trend with many, yourself included. if the US in particular and the West in general does anything, its always with the most evil intentions. if China does the same then its obviously a benevolent action that is simply misunderstood by the unintelligent that make up the readers of this blog.
Deletei don't know if you've ever been to Asia but rest assured, they don't operate the way that we do. old grudges last centuries, racial hatred is ingrained and encouraged. the idea that peace could exist between two nations that were at war only 50 years ago is unthinkable....all this applies to China but you think that because they're using our own greedy capitalist against us that they've suddenly become democracy loving? really? seriously! dude. get a grip. they aren't building these ships for home use. 1st island chain use. did you read the article? this is to protect investments in Africa and eventually the Middle East and S. America.
i can't help if you insist on staying dazed and confused but don't try and correct me when i know i'm right about this.
@Owl
DeleteSurrounded means that you have enemy on every side of the world, for now the only US and it's allies presence in on the south... and when you are surrounded from the one side... you are not surrounded at all.
Just like you hear from time to time how Russia is surrounded by NATO... and that just make mu laugh, every single time.
Sol, you following my convo with Don Bacon?
DeleteWhen the F did I ever talked bad about the US in the last fucking week? Hell, I'm even being moderate on the F-35, you're the one who's even harder on it than I am. Are you anti-US then?
I SAID SPECIFICALLY that they are using their economy as an offensive weapon, with bribery and economic sweetheart deals. The US is currently strapped for cash, you think you can outbid them in a bribing war?
@Shas
Ok, ok half surrounded. Pedant. :)
But on the side that matters. Most of their shipping goes by sea, not many land routes, so the sea is the more important, I can even say critical frontier to them. There was a proposal for an oil pipeline from Thailand to China, but that fell through because a whole year of pumping only got as much oil through to China as it took to deliver in a single day by sea. That is about 360x more by sea than land.
Blockade China by sea and you'll get Japan number 2. Straight out to war. They can't afford to get cut off there. Do it and it instantly goes critical for them.
Sol , you sounded like a strong china with military parity to USA is a bad thing ... china helping many countries right now with their yuan diplomacy.. they are traders in their core not warmongers , that's the mongols..
Delete....
Delete.......
bunt, wait till you are next door to them. China serves only one interest. Theirs.
And someone obviously has never read Chinese history. Besides the war of the Chinese states, the Mongols ARE the Chinese, they were absorbed into the population.
DeleteWell said. Also holy cow that like the size of their current carrier isn't it(just off the top of my head with out googling it)? It seems like a ship that large could do Sea Control as easy as any of our large amphibs have done. I guess they do mean it for landing ops though, I mean they don't have any reason to be building "back door" carriers like they accuse Japan of doing right?
ReplyDeletethey haven't built a full size carrier of their own design yet. i wonder how big that monster will be! think about it. they took what we thought was a freaking HUGE LHD in the America class and plus'ed it up. are we looking at 150,000 ton full size carrier in the future? are they looking to be able to carry upwards of 200 aircraft?
Deleteif they were it wouldn't surprise me. China is a beast. we need to figure out how to put it back in its cage.
At this point I dont think you cant, not without blood. "a major war is going to occur." every century has a couple of this, I agree with you we are witnessing the road to one of them.
Deletechina is a beast ? put it back in cage ?
Deleteand pray tell me then what is america then ? beast with 7 horn as described in the book of Revelation ?
no, the USA is such a "ruler" that its given away its wealth, attempted to aid other nations at the risk of the lives of its sons and daughters and hasn't established a colonial system even though its hellped rescue over half the planet. yes. China is a beast. its growing larger and we're feeding it. my only satisfaction will be that when it eventually consumes your nation that we have leadership smart enough not to interfere.
Deletesuch a noble american history you read from the history book.. im sure the 3rd world countries should pay tribute and respect to all american citizen and soldiers who gallanty give away their treasures for the sake of us the poor and destitute asians..
Deletemy thanks to you mr solomon for your service and your country's generousity toward us , as without you and your country , i will be enslaved by the japanese empire. im content and happy to be under the yoke of american hegemony , they treat my country in the most kind and gentle of way..
thank you sir
bunt, I got a few Singaporean friends who love to ask you about your country's conduct during the Confrontation.
DeleteCompared to the America Class these proposed Chinese LHDs aren't that much bigger, 45kt vs 50kt. The Queen Elizabeth class on the other hand are 70kt whihc is a lot larger than both an the Sino-LHDs are not really 'rivaling' them in size. (in capability however...)
ReplyDeleteI doubt the PLAN would go for a 150kt carrier. There are several reasons for this; firstly the current maximum USN air wings are really the largest that can be maintained and launched as an effective alpha strike. Thus there is not really much point building a carrier bigger than 100kt.
Secondly even on current USN carriers the routinely carried airwing is nowhere near the maximum, in fact they usually carry an aircraft complement that would fit on a 70kt carrier. Large airwings at sea for long periods are expensive.
And building such a large hull in the first place would be very expensive not just in material, but in shipbuilding infrastructure and the development work needed to build such a large warship. Not to mention maintenance of such a behemoth.
No, the PLAN is likely to pursue a series of 60-70kt carriers, probably carrying around 40 to 50 aircraft each. Exactly how many is uncertain, but is likely to be at least two.
i think you're wrong on several notes. first US aircraft carriers once carried 100 plus airplanes at sea routinely...for decades. the neck down strategy did as much to limit the size of the wing as strapped finances. the Chinese don't have those issues so to think that they would put 200 plus planes on deck is not far fetched. additionally the Chinese have shown an affection for bigger. the LHD applies and so too will the future aircraft carrier. as far as the ship being expensive to build...why? steel is cheap. the chinese routinely build super ships to haul cargo between ports. sweitching to build a super carrier would be no problem at all.
Deleteput aside your bias. don't assume that we have been doing it right. we've done things the way we have because we've HAD to. no one ever said that these were optimal solutions. the Chinese will go there own way while operating off our theme.
Think James is right, they'll go dispersed air wings. For one, they can actually bring more to the party with 2 smaller carriers vs a single large one, secondly, their defensive tech is not as good as the US's, which might make sense for them to spread out instead of giving others a single target. It also allows them to disperse and cause more trouble in more areas than a single carrier would. This is in addition to the construction problems. Why butt heads with a design problem? Keep it small and bypass it all together.
DeleteAnd with this ship the Chinese will fall victim to the same "carrier killer" and "ship killer" missiles that they keep showing off to us. What are the US and Japanese and South Korean equivalents of these missiles?
ReplyDeleteAt present India doesnt have a program testing the viability of Ballistic Missiles targeting ships. But we have taken the first step in the 300KM Brahmos. More steps to follow in the750KM extended range Brahmos and the Air/Submarine launched versions of the Brahmos. But, is the US and its other allies making same kind of anti-ship weapons that the Chinese threaten us with?
we don't need to develop one. we can simply exchange tech with India! we help with India's carrier and give them electromagnetic launch, they give us some Brahmos tech. done deal.
DeleteWell, you got 100 problems with that. They're wearing suits and sitting in a white building on a hill.
DeleteIt makes sense to you and me, but once you hit a politician with a pork barrel or an agenda it's logjam time.
Look at the MPC, all off the shelf and still no decision, it's almost like the British FRES, all the money swallowed up by "test" after "test" and nothing to show for it.
On the EMALS front, I was pleasently surprised when General Atomics was authorised to make a detailed briefing on the EMALS to India and allow us to join as project partners should we go in for an EMALS in the future.
DeleteSingh , would love to hear your opinion on this piece of indian related article by an indian blogger
Deletehttp://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2015/01/27/obama-ticks-off-indias-sangh-parivar/
Obama ticks off India’s ‘Sangh Parivar’
Trust a high-level visit to throw up surprises when least expected. President Barack Obama’s visit to India has concluded on controversial note. Just before he departed from India on Tuesday, in his town hall address in Delhi, Obama waded into a topic that even India’s brave-hearted prime minister, Narendra Modi fears to tread – freedom of religion in India.
Obama said, “India will succeed so long as it is not splintered along the lines of religious faith, as long as it is not splintered along any lines, and it is unified as one nation.” On the face of it, it is such a noble thought. But Obama said this in Modi’s India, “a country with a history of strife between Hindus and minorities.” (Reuters). These are extraordinary times in India with Modi’s government tacitly acquiescing in the campaign by Hindu nationalists (Sangh Parivar, as they are popularly called in India) that India is a “Hindu Rashtra”. Modi himself has kept a deafening silence on the issue, refusing to criticize the Hindu zealots.
Obama Specifically mentioned Atricle 25 of our Constitution which says all that needs to be said about India and Religious Freedom. Do give it a read. All the stuff from bloggers and journalists is hogwash because when it comes to laying down the law and controlling "zealots" the legal system bases its decisions on conversions on Article 25. Obama has mentioned nothing controversial in India. He has just qouted the Obvious and mentioned its source as well.
DeleteAs of this moment and for the forseable future, India fully intends to be one of the few countries where full religious freedom is granted.
We also thank Obama for recognizing the obvious and stating it in no uncertain terms.
However there are exceptions. Google up and read "The Shah Bano Case". Full marks to 2 of the pillars of Democracy (Bureacracy and Judiciary) and Zero marks to the third pillar of democracy (Executive) for mucking it all up.
DeleteThe QE's are strike carriers, with a secondary role as Commando/assault carriers. They have an overload
ReplyDeletecapacity of 50 aircraft, of which 40 can be F-35s eg 20 in the hangar and 20 chocked and chained on the
flight deck, plus a dozen Merlin Mk2 AEW & ASW helos. The QEC hangar is the same size as a Nimitz hangar
and the flight deck is only half an acre smaller.
Though obviously the size and capability of their air group will not be comparable with a Nimitz, but never
the less they will be more than adequate for the UK, and a quantum leap over the force projection capability
of the Invincibles. The two main tasks of the QEC carriers is to increase the UK's capacity to protect it's overseas territories and interests, two of the latter being off shore oil in the Falklands, and the vital LNG imports form the
UAE, hence the new RN base in the Gulf which will be able to accommodate a QE, the second task is for
NATO to have another large carrier regularly deployed in the Med and Gulf, especially in light of the
US "Asia pivot".
Forget all that nonsense about 12 F-35Bs, the RN are already distancing themselves form that, as they
realized the spastic UK media could not grasp the difference between a routine RFTG deployment or exercise,
and an operational/war time deployment,
when the QE's would have two squadrons of F-35s aboard (24 fast jets), plus a Maritime Force Protection
Package of 14 Merlins, so a total of nearly 40 aircraft. The difference between the QEC carriers and an
LPH/LHD, is that the primary role of the QE's is as a strike platform, hence the ability to carry a large air
group, with a secondary role as an assault platform, with the Wasp/America class, it's completely the other
way around eg smallish number of fast jets but large number of troops & vehicles. With two QE's in service
that means the UK will always have one "on call" carrier available for deployment, so will not be in the same situation as France with no carrier available when CdG is in refit, as she will be from 2015-2018.
Some will no doubt say that with an initial order of only 48 F-35Bs, the RN could not deploy both at once with
full air groups, but that is not the point anyway, the point of having two carriers, as I said above, is so that one is available all the time. The French Navy will also only have 42 ish Rafale Ms, although the Rafale is more capable.
For a major operation, like Telic, the RN could surge both carriers, perhaps with one in the strike role and one as
an assault platform eg
Queen Elizabeth
24 F-35Bs
14 Merlin Mk2 (AEW & ASW)
Prince of Wales
Small number F-35Bs
Plus Littoral Manoeuvre package of:
12 heavylift Chinooks (RAF has fleet of 60)
18 Merlin HC3/4s
8 Apache AH1s
1000 Royal Marines can be launched off the deck of a QEC.
The first UK F-35B squadron 617 Sqn Dambusters RAF will stand up and Marham by 2018, and also an OCU
with 5 aircraft, no UK F-35B pilots will be trained at Beaufort after 2018.
The second UK F-35 Squadron will be 809 NAS "the Immortals", and a third FAA or RAF squadron will follow.
Of course the UK may order a second tranche of F-35s after the initial order of 48.
Not sure why lines are wrong in above comment, maybe because posted on my phone.
Delete