Advertisement
by Allanea » Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:56 pm
by Gallia- » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:00 pm
by Allanea » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:15 pm
e: Anyway the Chinese have an exactly 1:1 ratio of carriers with the U.S. Navy. The USN wouldn't be able to commit more than two, very much maybe three, aircraft carriers to the Pacific. It has to police the Indian Ocean, Atlantic, and Mediterranean as well. China only needs to match what the U.S. Navy is willing to put down, in the Pacific, which is far short of its full tonnage. And at the moment, the Chinese are going up and the USN is going down, and it looks like America might meet the Chinese on the way to the bottom. It will definitely meet sometime before 2030, and the Chinese will surpass it before 2040. Not in numbers at sea, but in technology and readiness definitely.
by Gallia- » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:19 pm
Allanea wrote:e: Anyway the Chinese have an exactly 1:1 ratio of carriers with the U.S. Navy. The USN wouldn't be able to commit more than two, very much maybe three, aircraft carriers to the Pacific. It has to police the Indian Ocean, Atlantic, and Mediterranean as well. China only needs to match what the U.S. Navy is willing to put down, in the Pacific, which is far short of its full tonnage. And at the moment, the Chinese are going up and the USN is going down, and it looks like America might meet the Chinese on the way to the bottom. It will definitely meet sometime before 2030, and the Chinese will surpass it before 2040. Not in numbers at sea, but in technology and readiness definitely.
The Chinese have one aircraft carrier, and another under construction.
The US has 11 'true' aircraft carriers, and additionally about a dozen landing ships which are only not called áircraft carriers'for political reasons. (these are 'non-aircraft carrier's that carry about as many aircraft as the Chinese aircraft carrier).
by Allanea » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:25 pm
The Chinese only need 3-4 carriers to match the USN's maximal commitment to the Pacific. If a war were to happen toomorrow the USN would probably be able to get 1-2 carriers and their escorts mustered, so that might be optimistic.
by Gallia- » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:28 pm
Allanea wrote:The Chinese only need 3-4 carriers to match the USN's maximal commitment to the Pacific. If a war were to happen toomorrow the USN would probably be able to get 1-2 carriers and their escorts mustered, so that might be optimistic.
3-4 aircraft carriers that do not exist and for which no plans exist for building them, no budgets and no blueprints.
Allanea wrote:The Chinese have one aircraft carrier, and another under construction.
Allanea wrote:The US right now factually has 3 aircraft carriers off North Korea's shores, and in addition to this an LHA that's 'not an aircraft carrier' but is carrying more F-35s than the Chinese carrier has combat aircraft on board.
Allanea wrote:If war would happen tomorrow, the US navy has three aircraft carriers deployed right now.
by Gallia- » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:32 pm
Allanea wrote:It doesn't matter. The Chinese can do all of this in ~20 years.
At this point you're basically worldbuidling a future cyberpunk universe about which we know little.
Both China and Russia are able to
compete on a global scale, in all domains, and at competitive speed. They both possess
considerable space, cyber, and nuclear forces. Both are challenging U.S. influence and
interests in expanding areas of the world, often in maritime spaces. They have been very
explicit about their maritime intentions, and have moved out smartly to advance them. China’s
2015 white paper asserted that “[t]he traditional mentality that land outweighs sea must be
abandoned...It is necessary for China to develop a modern maritime military force structure
commensurate with its national security and development interests...so as to provide support
for building itself into a maritime power.” This goal is reflected in China’s shipbuilding efforts,
which analysts recently characterized as proceeding at a “frenetic pace,” with the fleet
“modernizing at an incredible rate [that] shows no signs of abating.” As just two examples, until
2009, China had a single ballistic missile submarine; it has added another three since. And the
Chinese Navy commissioned 18 ships last year. China has used this growing and modernized
fleet to sail all over the world, visiting ports across the globe and establishing new overseas
bases.
The pace at which potential competitors are moving
demands that we in turn increase the speed at which we act. Our advantage is shrinking -- we
must reverse this trend.
To support this capability evolution and deploy the air wing to
relevant places in the world with sufficient capacity, the Navy will need 12 aircraft carriers to
enable deployment of 5-6 carrier strike groups within relatively short time frames.
by NeuPolska » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm
Kar-Esseria wrote:Who is that and are they female because if not then they can go make love to their hand.
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Go home Polska wins NS.
United Mongol Hordes wrote:Polska isn't exactly the nicest guy in the world
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Hurd you miss the point more than Polska misses Poland.
Rhodesialund wrote:when you have Charlie ten feet away or something operating operationally.
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:Gayla is living in 1985 but these guys are already in 1916
by Gallia- » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:40 pm
NeuPolska wrote:@Gallia little late but I certainly wasn't opposed to anything you said about SS being normal people, I'm sorry if it didn't seem to be so, but what I was trying to imply was that they stopped herding prisoners to their deaths and went back to doing "normal" jobs and being decent people.
NeuPolska wrote:@Kassaran might as well take care of the ones we know the identities of, for justice, but as for the ones that get away without leaving much of a trace that they were ISIS members, who cares, especially if they go home to their families or wherever and don't kill people anymore?
by NeuPolska » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:42 pm
Kar-Esseria wrote:Who is that and are they female because if not then they can go make love to their hand.
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Go home Polska wins NS.
United Mongol Hordes wrote:Polska isn't exactly the nicest guy in the world
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Hurd you miss the point more than Polska misses Poland.
Rhodesialund wrote:when you have Charlie ten feet away or something operating operationally.
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:Gayla is living in 1985 but these guys are already in 1916
by The Manticoran Empire » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:03 pm
by Husseinarti » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:05 pm
by Purpelia » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:09 pm
by The Manticoran Empire » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:29 pm
Husseinarti wrote:navies never won a war
Purpelia wrote:All this is irrelevant because the next war between great powers will not be fought by men, tanks aircraft or navies. It will be fought by missiles and last roughly 15 minutes at best.
by Purpelia » Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:32 pm
The Manticoran Empire wrote:Can we please assume best case?
by -AlEmAnNiA- » Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:58 pm
Husseinarti wrote:navies never won a war
by The Manticoran Empire » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:12 pm
Purpelia wrote:The Manticoran Empire wrote:Can we please assume best case?
That IS the best case. America and China genocide one another quickly in an atomic conflict, the rest of us pick up and move on to a slightly irradiated but still tolerable future.
Worst case is that we get another several decades of cold war with minor unimportant countries nobody cares about (other than the millions of innocents living in them) getting dragged through the mud and blood of imperial politics culminating in a big one down the line which than proceeds to be a conventional war (got to murder those millions of innocents somehow) and only escalates into atomic when one side is driven into a corner (maximum linger time ensures maximum horrible suffering). Oh, and Europe gets dragged into it because these big ones tend to have that sort of effect.
by Arkandros » Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:39 am
by Purpelia » Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:07 am
The Manticoran Empire wrote:Purpelia wrote:That IS the best case. America and China genocide one another quickly in an atomic conflict, the rest of us pick up and move on to a slightly irradiated but still tolerable future.
Worst case is that we get another several decades of cold war with minor unimportant countries nobody cares about (other than the millions of innocents living in them) getting dragged through the mud and blood of imperial politics culminating in a big one down the line which than proceeds to be a conventional war (got to murder those millions of innocents somehow) and only escalates into atomic when one side is driven into a corner (maximum linger time ensures maximum horrible suffering). Oh, and Europe gets dragged into it because these big ones tend to have that sort of effect.
Best case is not mass genocide. Honestly, best case would be a Cold War, since the death toll would be far lower than a short nuclear exchange.
by The Manticoran Empire » Thu Oct 12, 2017 6:10 am
Purpelia wrote:The Manticoran Empire wrote:Best case is not mass genocide. Honestly, best case would be a Cold War, since the death toll would be far lower than a short nuclear exchange.
Except that we are explicitly working under the assumption that a war does eventually break out. That is the whole premise of this conversation. Therefore a cold war without a proper war at the end is not compatible with the scenario as outlined.
by Crysuko » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:44 am
by Allanea » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:50 am
Crysuko wrote:not sure if this is the thread for it, but I have a question regarding air forces.
is an aircraft carrier capable of carrying and servicing at least one heavy bomber aircraft (think B1 lancer or similar). for purposes of strategic bombing missions
by The Akasha Colony » Sat Oct 21, 2017 10:42 am
Crysuko wrote:not sure if this is the thread for it, but I have a question regarding air forces.
is an aircraft carrier capable of carrying and servicing at least one heavy bomber aircraft (think B1 lancer or similar). for purposes of strategic bombing missions
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement