| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| The Rising Sea Dragon In Asia |
| 2007-02-25 |
| Throughout 2006 and into 2007 the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has continued its unprecedented modernization and buildup, adding two entirely new classes of major combatant warships to its inventory, along with the other twelve new classes they have been working on. Large numbers of new guided missile destroyers, guided missile frigates, fast attack craft, very modern and quiet diesel/electric attack submarines, nuclear attack submarines, nuclear ballistic missile submarines, logistic support craft, amphibious assault craft, and the infrastructure and aircraft to support them are coming online and being trialed and tested at sea and in the air by the PLAN. The major new classes include the improved Type 054, or Ma'anshan guided missile frigates (FFG), called the Type 054A. These vessels represent a significant improvement of the first two frigates which had been launched and commissioned earlier. The craft appear to have a larger displacement and include a VLS system for their anti-air missiles. Two of these were built and launched in 2006 and the next two are nearing completion with a fifth and possibly a sixth already under construction. It is clear that these vessels will be produced in significant numbers, perhaps up to 25. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #26 My Bad! Make that choke vs. chock. How humiliating... |
| Posted by: Asymmetrical T 2007-02-25 21:49 |
| #25 Insightful, JAB; as were your previous comments. Lack of a unified national defense resolve, plus the paucity of anticipated petroleum availability, puts us in a precarious position. We can't let 'em chock us off! Asymmetrical Triangulation (T) |
| Posted by: Asymmetrical T 2007-02-25 21:44 |
| #24 CHINESE MIL BOARDS/FORUMS > Many Chin Posters already have the view that, unless something changes, INDIA IN LT WILL INEVITABLY COME UNDER CHINESE OR MOSTLY CHINESE CONTROL, IFF NOT PC DOMINATION. China is already trying to establish Chin-controlled "dual/multi-use" commercial and military-capable naval and air ports, and rail networks, on all sides of India. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-02-25 21:32 |
| #23 Folks, there will be NO hostilities with China because China will do nothing to push us over the brink. Just war-game the post-war situation. China won't conquer the US and the US won't conquer China. Various Asian territories may go one way or the other. More like 'one way'. The objective will not be to take the US head-on. It will be to secure as much territory as possible. 'Go', not 'chess'. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-02-25 21:24 |
| #22 The issues about the de-indistrialization of America that USN brings up are right on point, and the Chinese focus on asymmetical stregthening of the submarine attack capability point to where they think the conflict will go. The more fundamental question is not the competence of our military, I was in it for 29 years, I have confidence in the skill and capability of the sister services (I was Marine Corps and Army). My fear is the erosion of WILL at the leadership level and of the country as a whole as we become more and more fragmented. Couple that with erosion of the forces after Iraq (remember the Army of the late 70's and early 80s that we all had to clean up and re-equip?) That legacy of the current Iraqi war, coupled with the massive expenditures on Homeland Security at the cost of the budget, makes us unlikely to maintain the 10-13 CBG's or the spares and other things to confron the Chinese. |
| Posted by: JustAboutEnough 2007-02-25 21:06 |
| #21 What I'm hearing is that American manufacturers are diversifying away from China -- just the simple all-eggs-in-one-basket risk, not necessarily anything deeper than that. If in a decade war with China severs our interactions, our suffering will be much, much less then theirs, I think. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-02-25 20:52 |
| #20 What happens when they shut off the tap? You've got it backwards. The proper question is what happens when we shut off the market? They aren't going to ship their junk to Europe! We can build new factories anywhere there is cheap labor. That's why we built them in China. It's not hard to do, if it comes to that. It'll just take time and doing without for a few years. The sacrifice everybody wants us to share. But then we'll be back in business. But the Chinese will never gain access to the largest, freest, most open market in the world. They will be consigned to poverty, because no one will invest there again and they won't get into the U. S. market again. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-02-25 20:48 |
| #19 You notice that the Chinese are sniffing around for oil in Sudan, in Venezuela, etc. Their economy is becoming more and more dependent upon imported oil. It's one thing to jump the straights to Taiwan, it's another thing to keep sea lanes open to sustain the life blood of one's economy. The locals are not going to be happy when their economy tanks. The Commies haven't had to deal with a real recession, let alone a depression, yet. It's not going to be pretty. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-02-25 20:41 |
| #18 With our obsession to cut manufacturing costs, the entire US manufacturing sector has transitioned to that of an 'integrator' or assembler rather than a producer. Look at Boeing; the 787 is going to be 'assembled' in Everett from components produced all over the world, and while these guys right now are friendly, that could change. Take a look at the domestic steel industry; a mere shadow of it former self. Yes, you can make the unions killed it argument, but regardless of the cause, when we have to import almost all our parts and pieces to build anything, it doesn't bode well. China is right now taking the lead in building our 'stuff.' What happens when they shut off the tap? |
| Posted by: USN, ret. 2007-02-25 20:26 |
| #17 A war of China with India? Another matter right NS - in fact there's a |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-02-25 20:03 |
| #16 Folks, there will be NO hostilities with China because China will do nothing to push us over the brink. Just war-game the post-war situation. China won't conquer the US and the US won't conquer China. Various Asian territories may go one way or the other. China will lose it's access to US capital and product markets. A big chunk of U. S. debt will be frozen, if not repudiated. Whatever territory they conquer will become suddenly non-productive festering sores with plenty of guerilla movements to be put down. Sort of Nork Lite. The U. S.? We'll have to rebuild those factories in India , Africa or South America. It'll be inconvenient for 3 or 4 years but then Wal*Mart will be back in business like nothing ever happened. Ain't gonna happen. A war of China with India? Another matter. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-02-25 19:58 |
| #15 right, Shieldwolf - more like a turkey shoot of the amphib transport they would have to ferry their troops to Taiwan with. The sharks would be fat and happy |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-02-25 19:41 |
| #14 Actually, if the Red Chinese and Soviet experiences with naval exercises is any indication of competence, the first Sino-US naval war will last a day and end with the complete destruction of the Chinese Navy. It has taken the Red Chinese 20 years to master building by themselves an improved Romeo class submarine that the Soviets stopped building decades ago. Also, they still do not have an actual functioning carrier with carrier fighters embarked and training, which means they will need 5-7 years to have any competent crews. Also, the entire modern aircraft total of the PLAAF is less than 400, almost all of which are imported. The offset agreements with the Russians have NOT resulted in the Chinese producing the aircraft for themselves, Chinese quality control is simply too bad to permit that. Now, compare that to what a single Nimitz class carrier has on it : 90 combat aircraft by itself. Add in the weapons and equipment of the standard Carrier Battle Group, especially if a MEU is aboard one of the Wasp class LHD, and you have 20 more fighters and 6 ASW helos to operate in the area. Plus, you have Aegis destroyers, attack subs, and assorted defense picket ship in the CBG. Each CBG has around 60-70 modern jet fighters in it, or 1/5 of the total modern aircraft that China possesses. We have ELEVEN CBGs in the US Navy, with the ability to support up to 13 in emergencies. Assuming any prior warning at all, and the US Navy can have 3 CBGs operating in the East Pacific : so 180 to 210 fighter aircraft available, along with all the attack subs, Aegis ships, Hawkeyes, and sundry other weapons. Only if the US decides to unilaterally cut the carrier fleet below 10, with no CBGS on call in the East Pacific, do the Chinese have a snowball's chance in hell. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2007-02-25 19:18 |
| #13 Old Patriot, do you actually think we will have the resolve to go nuke in 2020. Hillary, Barak or some other democrap will likely be in charge, maybe even nancy p., although by then her eyebrows will be over her ears from the facelifts..... |
| Posted by: JustAboutEnough 2007-02-25 15:55 |
| #12 Has a power, empire etc. ever been built on sheer mass? I think maybe the short-lived Zulu empire was, any others? Maybe not built, but sustained perhaps. North Korea, for one. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-02-25 15:46 |
| #11 All this means is that any war with China will go nuke, faster. China can have all the navy it wants, but if they have no ports, they have a serious problem. China cannot defeat the United States in a nuclear situation. The United States will have to decide rather quickly whether to go nuke or lose Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines to the Chinese. Doing that would be equivalent to a crushing defeat for the US. Hence, we'd go nuke, and China would become a nation with a deadly coastal zone and total destruction throughout the interior. Watch to see if China begins to try to create a missile defense system in depth. That will be the indicator that someone in China has suddenly discovered their vulnerability. Just to shake the Chinese up, the US should decommission the Kitty Hawk and give it to Japan, along with a few squadrons of aircraft. The Japanese can claim it's for the defense of Okinawa - it's reasonable enough on the surface. China, of course, would have a whole litter of cows - at once, especially since China KNOWS Japan can "go nuclear" with very little warning. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-02-25 15:23 |
| #10 What about our precious bodily fluids? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-02-25 14:54 |
| #9 The more interesting discussion continues to be on several strategic fronts. The confrontation with China is coming, a naval war first about Taiwan, where they will literally talk us out of the fight I think, and then a later confrontation over oil in the Northern Phillipine Sea where we will be joined by elements of the resurgent Japanese and indian Navies in the 2020 timeframe. The problem is tha the Chinese are stealing generational technological improvements across the entire military/industrial spectrum, are gearing up to defeat us asymetrically in the cyber environment, with huge consequences on our economy and governance structures, and their build up, while lesser qualitatively is enhanced by our material build down coupled with the collapse of will by our leaders. The collapse of will reflects the internal dilution of American culture with a massive infusion of 20-30 million foreign born individuals whose commitment to America ends with their bank account and lifestyle comforts. Creeping Euro socialism is quickly sapping our moral fiber, and the prospect of renewing our military after Iraq's costs in time to confront the Chinese hegemonic growth is very problemmatic. The unknown is the commitment of India and Japan to offset the Pacific Empire China envisions. |
| Posted by: JustAboutEnough 2007-02-25 14:28 |
| #8 'Moosey. Interesting. Has a power, empire etc. ever been built on sheer mass? I think maybe the short-lived Zulu empire was, any others? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-02-25 12:54 |
| #7 There should be a ratio of quality vs. quantity in a given class of ship or boat. That is, if one side has half a dozen several mediocre destroyers, and the other has one good destroyer, when do they balance out in combat capability? It applies even more so with submarines. For example, if one side has four low quality diesel boats and the other has one good quality nuclear boat, if the former is willing to sacrifice two or three of its boats to take out the good quality boat, and can technically do that, then perhaps they are about in balance. It is a cardinal rule of fighting that no matter how good you are, you will suffer damage. The very philosophy of arming for quantity is that the enemy can sustain less damage that you can sustain. And while the Chinese might like to move to quality, their strong tradition is for quantity, so this is a very important equation to know right now. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-02-25 12:45 |
| #6 Japan built a world-beater of a battleship less than 20 years after the launch of the Dreadnaught. I don't see any world class Peoples Liberation Army Navy Airforce and Pizza Emporium coming up with anything. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-02-25 11:58 |
| #5 Lot's of nice pictures of very threatening ships. USN must be hurting for appropriations. Better fix the ship builders first. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-02-25 10:52 |
| #4 Good luck with that goal, Quantity is NOT quality, that way lies defeat and bankruptcy. Get going, the quicker you go bust, the better. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-02-25 10:19 |
| #3 Let's not confuse the possession of fine ships with the ability to to use them effectively. The Sov's had a large navy but in my mind it would not have been effective after a short time due to the heavy maintenance problems brought on by combat. To misquote Admiral Yamamoto, "(they) could play havoc for a few months, but after that there's no guarantee." |
| Posted by: Threrelet Flavins8995 2007-02-25 10:19 |
| #2 Seems to me, after reading the article, they are gearing up for the invasion. Of course Pentagon White Papers have stated the goal of Chinese Military is to have a force capable of defeating the US by 2020. |
| Posted by: ArmyLife 2007-02-25 04:42 |
| #1 To succesfuuly seize Taiwan, the Chicoms need to have a robust naval force isolating the island. Across the global seascape, US attack subs could basically take out anything that annoyed us. My money is on a build-up specificlly designed to support a "resolution" of the Taiwan problem. |
| Posted by: Lone Ranger 2007-02-25 01:16 |