lcloo
Captain
You replied to wrong person, it was the IISS.Org that stated the US VLS, not me. I only gave breakdown of PLAN's VLS percentage related to that of USN as given by IISS.Org.
PLA Navy news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
lcloo
Captain
Care to give the breakdown of VLS to support your 4480?
Last edited:
Hi,
is it possible to add number if USN ships also in your tabulation, while
counting the VLS this way we come to know about % of ships too &
how many more China has to build to reduce the gap
thank you
Where did you obtain the information where:
1. The 054A/AG and 054B FFGs have 36 VLS cells?
2. The MLU-ed 051B, 052B and two of the 956E DDGs have 36 VLS cells?
3. The 052C DDGs have 64 VLS cells?
No there isn't.
Last edited:
CSSC Discovery No.1 flat-bed research and testing platform ship at pier. Same as the bow, her name at the stern has also been updated.
According to the poster, the platform ship has changed her port of registry to Tianjin.
Posted by @Jsport_三汽 on Weibo.
According to the poster, the platform ship has changed her port of registry to Tianjin.
Posted by @Jsport_三汽 on Weibo.
Yeah, plus 2 Ohio SSGNs going in just over a year and 2 more in 2028 adds yet another massive drop.Mk41 is not very comparable to HT-1 either. VLS counting is just a penile measuring contest alive and well in naval tradition
Also USN is doing its level best to reduce VLS count to meet PLAN halfway too lol. Ticos retiring is taking huge chunks out of its total count while DDG(X) continue to not be a thing. Flight III will pretty much be the only source of reliable income at about 1~1.5 hulls per year. Constellations at this point are almost 3~4 years late while only providing 32 per hull and a rate of production no greater than single hull per year either.
Not to mention the upcoming wave of Burke retirements, delayed by making some Burkes serve an extra five years, but wouldnt matter either way if USN can't fill in with new ships fast.
Also I can't help but lmfao reading about some of these unfortunate American tofu dreg tribulations:
"But even before its current deployment — with the Harry S Truman Carrier Strike Group in the Middle East — the crew reported issues with parts. The crew also reported propulsion and electric systems have been a concern, the GAO said.
The Navy now says it plans to retire the ship by 2026, according to the GAO, meaning the overhaul failed to extend its service life.
Poor contractor workmanship was pervasive “across the cruiser effort,” the GAO said. The Navy directed the agency not to disclose the names of the contractors who performed the upgrade work at Norfolk, Virginia, and San Diego, California."
While VLS counts may be useful as a thought experiment, it is so only when the VLS systems between the US and China are comparable. They are not.
The Type 052C, 051C, 054B, 054A, and Sovremennys use VLS that are specific for one type of munition (two in the case of the H/AKJ-16), which are far less versatile than the Mk 41 & Mk 57 VLS that dominate the USN. On the other hand, the Mk 41 itself is somewhat smaller than the GJB 5870-2006 seem aboard the 052D & 055, allowing the latter to quadpack missiles that would otherwise be unavailable for a Mk 41-style VLS.
Additionally, this chart doesn't account for the differences in VLS cell lengths between the USN/PLAN and even within the USN/PLAN. We don't know how many "strike length" cells each 052D/055/Arleigh Burke/Tico has nor have we quantified the versatility that each length confers compared to other lengths. The Mk 41 VLS are generally longer than the GJB VLS.
Plus the H/AKJ-16 VLS should have a count of 32 per vessel, not 36.
