If you look at their training infrastructure, I think the PLANAF is going very big in a very methodical way.
They had are reaching into high schools and creating a potential pool in the thousands.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
If you look at their training infrastructure, I think the PLANAF is going very big in a very methodical way.
They had are reaching into high schools and creating a potential pool in the thousands.
Only if you can really compel your enemy to submit to you. The issue with both Taiwan and Philippines is that they have the US backing them. And with the case of Taiwan, there is also the will the fight even without the US. Deterrence and coercion only work if your enemy is not fully determined. From Taiwan’s perspective, it is a matter of state survival, especially the pan-green occupiers. For them, reunification - regardless whether it it were peaceful or violent - means losing their privileges and status (as well as the lavish welfare handed out by the DPP). So even with 9 CVNs and a fleet of 500 ships, the PLA would still need to be able to conquer a territory piece by piece against a people determined not to lose their privileges.
Again, I don't think you need to take the island if you control the seas around it.
The biggest issue with Taiwan is a geographical one where it is used to block China from the Pacific. Once you have nine carriers and you are operating with impunity on the eastern seaboard of Taiwan (and Japan), you've have already broken out of the First Island Chain.
Taking Taiwan physically is no longer necessary.
Does China have the: (money, manpower, machinery, and materials) the "capacity" to go for 9 carriers by 2035? = Yes
But...
This is Not a forum to talk about what China has the "capacity" to do.
If that were the case we could talk about a 13,000 km railroad that runs from China all the way to the USA via an underwater tunnel across the Bering strait.
China also has the "capacity" to build the Trump battleship.
We live in "interesting times" who knows what the future holds?
Perhaps we should limit our conversations to what the Chinese leadership is actually committing resources to rather than what China technically has the "capacity" to do.
It's more a discussion on what the Chinese carrier construction plan is.
Well, we don't have anything official or publicly available from the Chinese side.
The only "official" statement is from the recent Department of War report to Congress, which says “The PLAN aims to produce six aircraft carriers by 2035 for a total of nine”
And to test that assertion, it does look like Chinese shipyards have the capacity to do this, along with valid reasons why they want to do this.
lcloo
Major
To make it more clear to other members who are less focus...
"The only "official" statement is from the recent USA Department of War report to Congress, which says “The PLAN aims to produce six aircraft carriers by 2035 for a total of nine”
Nothing official or non-official from China side.
And to go one step further.
If it hasn't happened already, Pentagon officials will be questioned in person by the relevant Congressional Committees on the assertion that the Chinese Navy plans to build 6 additional carriers by 2035. Presumably they will be told it is from confidential intelligence sources with a high degree of confidence. Note that there would be over 10K people involved in building Chinese aircraft carriers, so it can't be a closely-kept secret. For comparison, the US makes its 30 year shipbuilding plan public
---
And if the report had said 4 additional carriers by 2035 (the current construction pace), it would have the same effect.
Which is to make the point (to Congress and elsewhere) that the US has to fix its naval shipbuilding mess, because China is outbuilding the USA.
So I don't see any reason for the Pentagon to exaggerate the Chinese aircraft carrier construction plan either.
Last edited:
Update, should be from yesterday or a couple days ago
The reason that I doubt the claim about the carrier construction in the CMPR is not the shipbuilding capacity. That part looks doable, but if PLAN wants to rush the carrier construction like this, then it is likely that they would want them to be operational in a relatively short time period also. It does not make much sense with carriers floating around empty. That brings us to SAC, which would need to produce a large number of J-15Ts and J-35s for these carriers, plus land-based fighters for pilot training and whatever the PLAAF would require of the J-35A and J-16. I am dubious about SAC's ability to handle that in such a relatively short time.