3 ms·

The PLAN has been building up its navy and is expected to handily exceed the USN in the next 5 years. Basically, in a short period of 5-10 years, the PLAN has g

by rmk 6y ago

The PLAN has been building up its navy and is expected to handily exceed the USN in the next 5 years. Basically, in a short period of 5-10 years, the PLAN has grown from insignificance into a serious adversary that builds capable ships that can give the USN serious headaches. Most of the PLAN's numbers are in corvettes and attack craft, to US's heavier and larger vessels (PLAN has something like 2 or 3 aircraft carriers to USN's 11 something). The PRC has also invested heavily in missile technology and is perhaps ahead of the US in anti-ship missiles. It has also built up small positions that can be built up easily on the disputed reefs etc. in the South China Sea in anticipation of getting blockaded. I say all of this in support of the thesis that drones will play a less decisive role than the navies of the two countries.

jonnybgood 6y ago
Most of what you state about China doesn't mean anything in modern warfare. It's not about who has the bigger gun or most guns, but who can use their guns most effectively. Consider that China has no experience in modern warfare or large scale conflict. How effective do you think China will be against a highly experienced adversary?
- rmk 6y ago
  Most of what I state does mean a lot. You can't project power without a world-class navy. Both world powers (in fact almost all) have/had the best navies in the world. The two parts to a world-class navy are the ships and the men. China has already done the first part. I agree with you on the second part: the Chinese have not participated in large-scale armed conflict, so they don't have experience. But it must be borne in mind that the US has also not fought any big naval war in recent times and morale is very low because crews are being worked to the bone. Unless the USN addresses these challenges effectively, they don't hold a huge edge.
  - hollerith 6y ago
    >Most of what I state does mean a lot. You can't project power without a world-class navy. I agree. And China has never fought a major naval war or even a major naval battle. >The two parts to a world-class navy are the ships and the men. Part 3 is competent leaders. The US has admirals that have been taught by admirals that have been taught by admirals that have fought a major war in the Pacific. (Japan has them, too.) And China does not. George Friedman says that that is an important factor.

by rmk 6y ago

jonnybgood 6y ago

Most of what you state about China doesn't mean anything in modern warfare. It's not about who has the bigger gun or most guns, but who can use their guns most effectively. Consider that China has no experience in modern warfare or large scale conflict. How effective do you think China will be against a highly experienced adversary?

rmk 6y ago
Most of what I state does mean a lot. You can't project power without a world-class navy. Both world powers (in fact almost all) have/had the best navies in the world. The two parts to a world-class navy are the ships and the men. China has already done the first part. I agree with you on the second part: the Chinese have not participated in large-scale armed conflict, so they don't have experience. But it must be borne in mind that the US has also not fought any big naval war in recent times and morale is very low because crews are being worked to the bone. Unless the USN addresses these challenges effectively, they don't hold a huge edge.
- hollerith 6y ago
  >Most of what I state does mean a lot. You can't project power without a world-class navy. I agree. And China has never fought a major naval war or even a major naval battle. >The two parts to a world-class navy are the ships and the men. Part 3 is competent leaders. The US has admirals that have been taught by admirals that have been taught by admirals that have fought a major war in the Pacific. (Japan has them, too.) And China does not. George Friedman says that that is an important factor.