A bit of a fail that they didn't give it the canards the J-15 is supposed to have.Emblem for the 10th carrier aviation brigade.
PLA Navy news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Could that be a laser?New measurement and tracking equipment have recently been handed over to a certain naval weapons test establishment.
.........
by78
General
No, it’s an optical tracking device.
Incredible, and the entire base is containerized and truck transportable. I think this is the kind of BASE that can be opened in other countries.New measurement and tracking equipment have recently been handed over to a certain naval weapons test establishment.
Regarding the telescope above, If China coordinates with BRICS+ and BRI countries and others, to share space situational awareness, help detect satellites and asteroids that could cause damage, as well as providing host countries a fantastic ground station for anything they want to do with it, then I think these can proliferate. Friendly countries already cooperating with Chinas space station plans would be good candidates because they would have skin in the game which needs protection.
There seems to be a lot of radars and domes there, I’m not sure what its all for but you can imagine powerful laser/microwave weapons systems being added to these sites in future (rapidly).
Lethe
Captain
Maintenance of existing combatants is done at different yards. FFG(X) will be built at a different yard (Fincantieri Marinette Marine). Neither has any relation to the ability of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) and Bath Iron Works (BIW) to build large combatants. The Jones Act has been in place for over a century.
In any case, we will simply have to wait and see what happens. But I would certainly caution against underestimating the American military-industrial complex.
Yea I think we should assume that the US MIC can actually produce 3 burkes a year.
Although, looking at its state (specifically ship building), I think we might also see some problems (might not be on the actual burkes, but other problems such as costs and budgets).
Lethe
Captain
American defence spending as a proportion of GDP is currently fairly low by historical (i.e. Cold War) standards. My assumption is that as America's threat perceptions continue to increase, budgets will follow suit.
The other aspect of this discussion that has been lost is that this mooted shift to building three Burkes per year is offered as an alternative to ramping FFG(X) to two units per year. Essentially, it is agreed that USN should build four combatants per year in the near-term, and the debate is over the appropriate mix. The case for three Burkes is in large part about favouring a proven design and production process, on the basis that USN cannot afford further production shortfalls. The attitude is that FFG(X) should first prove itself at one yard and one ship per year before more resources are allocated to the program. Given the Zumwalt and LCS debacles, one can certainly understand this argument.
Last edited:
I would agree that US defense spending still has room to increase, particularly when measured in terms of percentage of GDP, compared with those in the Cold War era.
But I also want to caution against going too far using this yardstick, because it can be misleading and confusing. Defense industry is mostly manufacturing and industrial scale and capabilities. In that sense, the US manufacturing and industrial capacity and capability have declined significantly in relative terms compared with those in the '50s, '60s, '70s and even '80s. Looking from a different angle, during the Cold War, the US's chief geopolitical rival, the USSR's industrial output and capacity were far below those of the US (<50%). Today, as the US's primary geopolitical competitor, China's industrial value-add is equal to the combined industrial value-add of the next three largest industrial nations: the US, Japan and Germany.
Put it simply, all GDP are not created equal, at least when it comes to defense spending. GDP of today's US is more service-driven, much de-industrialized and substantially inflated by dollar's reserve status. It's not immediately clear that the US has a clear edge should it plunge into an arm race against China.
Depends on the sector. The Soviets far outproduced the Americans in simple equipment like armor and arty. The Americans were much better at mass producing high end, quality stuff. It's not just about producing the best individual unit or the most units, but finding a balance between quality and quantity.
And your assumption about China and its threat perceptions?
Technically, any defense spending short of 100% has room to increase.
You mean to tell me lawyers and real estate flippers aren't equivalent to naval engineers and machinists? Let me tell you a little anecdote that might be instructive - I know of a guy (a former convict) without any qualifications or skills who makes $90 per hour on a military base installing and fixing air conditioning. If you ever find yourself wondering where the Pentagon money goes, think about that guy.
I always have a chuckle at the SDF jargon. As if understatement lends more credibility.