10 carriers in total by 2035 is a monumental task and a monumental cost. I hope this isn't coming at the expense of other developments in the military field. Arms race for sure if China pursues this path. Seems like the leadership sees no other real alternative. I wonder if it's all for Indian ocean plans. BRI/OBOR need sea route alternatives and there is a strait and an unfriendly and powerful navy currently threatening Chinese access to the Indian Ocean.
PLA Navy news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
The dollar's dominance in world trade is by and large supported by American military supremacy. This brings benefits to the US economy on the scale of trillions (I am making the simple assumption that if USD is not dominating the world trade, the US economy should revert to a level of GDP per capita that is comparable to the Europeans and Japanese, considering that these other countries actually have higher living standard than the US, as measured by longevity, quality of education (PISA test scores), etc. This means a potential shrinkage of 35%+. Multiply that by the US GDP of $20.5 trillion in 2019, that's $7 trillion a year.). Hence, US is happy to continue spending billions upon billions to maintain and upgrade said military because the return is vast (10x if measured by the latest military budget of around $700B).
From the Chinese standpoint, if they can successfully counter American military prowess around the globe, then it will mean the internationalization of RMB can go more smoothly. The benefit here is also measured on the scale of trillions. Hence, this would seem like a pretty sweet deal to them.
Not at all, it's well within China's capacity, it wouldn't even break a sweat. It's difficult for America because of its absolutely crippled shipbuilding industry. If there's anything that's going to be a serious lift for China then it's the air force buildup since it doesn't have a deep civilian aerospace industry it can draw on.
The same "crippled industry" that has given the USN over 70 AB classes and 10 super carriers? The same one that has given the USN Seawolf and Virginia classes in numbers that will make any navy worried? I think at best, China's got a long and difficult struggle ahead if the vessel number catch up is intended. I understand the pressing need to counter an overwhelming force of USN fighters but subs and anti-sub are probably what PLAN should be also focusing on. We don't hear much about the subsurface developments and plans.
Yes, that one. The one that can't build a rubber dinghy for less than five billion. If a crippled industry like that can do what you said, just imagine what China's shipbuilding industry can do. Give it time.
I have immense respect for China's shipbuilding industry and its leaders who managed to make it a reality. Underestimating the Americans is just dumb though. Calling their shipbuilding industry crippled is trivialising and underestimating it. Particularly when it is China that needs to build up for at least 15 years at this incredible pace just to get to where the US is at today. I wonder how much of the leak about 10 carriers by 2035 is meant to send a certain message.
You're asking me to respect and not underestimate the equivalent of a teenager who inherited his father's money and is in the middle of squandering his inheritance. I'm sorry, I simply can't do that - perhaps that's a failure on my part, but there it is. There may have been a time when American industry was something of stature, but those days are long past. It is impossible to underestimate America today.
While this might be fair, you forget what this spoilt useless teenager can still do with that inherited wealth. So let's say that the US not only has a crippled shipbuilding industry, let's assume it doesn't even exist and will not re-emerge ever again. Even if this were the case, that's still 10 super carriers, lots of F-35s, 67 destroyers, 22 cruisers, and a lot of superior nuclear powered attack subs and everything in between holding it all together and strengthening their capabilities. PLAN has some way to go and bragging about having 10 carriers, 15 years before the job is done is Indian caliber arrogance.
I never get this insistence to dismiss the US, even if its industries are currently relatively weaker than before. It's the most idiotic thing possible to dismiss your opponent. Just remember what happened to the Germans on the Eastern Front. What a bad take lmao
The trough that you're witnessing in the military production capabilities in US, be it shipbuilding, aviation or ground force elements is born out of absence of a near peer adversary for almost 3 decades.
That may lead one into thinking that the US capability to out produce and outfight an adversary has reduced but it puts a veil on the underlying technical expertise and economic wiggleroom it has to ramp up its combat forces in time of crisis.
Time and again we have seen it change and augment its forces to meet combat demands in a rather rapid fashion, like WW2, cold war etc.
The force structure, and inherent support, production you see now is based on world policing/threat deterrence needs and not direct combat with peer adversary. This docile behaviour should not be mistaken as an inability and rather a conscious decision taken by the lawmakers.
Once a direct threat or casus belli is instilled into the US power structure, the initial stages of which is pretty much showing itself now, thats when the real picture will emerge.