PLAN and USN 2006 and 2007 comparisons
- Thread starter alwaysfresh
- Start date
The super Hornet, AIM-120D combo is, for now, an acceptable solution for me. It would be nice to have the range of the F-14 and the AIM-54...but the Superhornet has good range, and as I have said, the AIM-120D is approaching the AIM-54 range but will be more lethal and more flexible.
I still hold out hope one day for a ALRAAM, but the AIM-120D AMRAAM is getting close to being just that.
What I would really like to see is an A-6 replacement (like the A-12 was going to be) to give the carriers the heavier punch they used to have, and an S-3 replacement (like and ASW V-22) for long range and high endurance, high capacity aircraft ASW.
Ok, guys, no more talking about USN aircrafts in Chinese Navy forum!
ff
ffPLAN capabilities
Surface Strike - Excellent with large surface combatants equip with numerous Anti-ship missile batteries. On a ship for ship basis, I would argue, that they are on par with the latest USN ships in anti-surface warfare. However, as a whole, the entire PLAN can't still match the anti ship firepower of a carrier.
AAW - Improving but still not that great. Approximately 5 ships have area AAW capabilities. It is still a great improvement from the Crotale base point defence systems of the 1990's. In comparison, of all the surface combatants of the USN only the FFGs does not have Area AAW. Plan ships will still have trouble against mass saturation attacks though.
ASW - (defined as ability to hunt and prosecute submarines) Not that great. Obsolescent SSN's (Victor III is an obsolete design), sonar, lack of dedicated ASW ships, and heavy reliance on SSKs, (whose ideal targets are normally surface ships) will really hamper the PLAN against a first class opponent submarine opponent.
Strike - No capability to attack land targets more than gun range. To my knowledge, PLAN ships are not equipped with land attack missiles.
Amphibious - Limited to short range. PLAn has zero capability to support a battalion size "marine force" further than its perephirals and keep it supplied for 30 days of combat.
IMHO
Surface Strike - Excellent with large surface combatants equip with numerous Anti-ship missile batteries. On a ship for ship basis, I would argue, that they are on par with the latest USN ships in anti-surface warfare. However, as a whole, the entire PLAN can't still match the anti ship firepower of a carrier.
AAW - Improving but still not that great. Approximately 5 ships have area AAW capabilities. It is still a great improvement from the Crotale base point defence systems of the 1990's. In comparison, of all the surface combatants of the USN only the FFGs does not have Area AAW. Plan ships will still have trouble against mass saturation attacks though.
ASW - (defined as ability to hunt and prosecute submarines) Not that great. Obsolescent SSN's (Victor III is an obsolete design), sonar, lack of dedicated ASW ships, and heavy reliance on SSKs, (whose ideal targets are normally surface ships) will really hamper the PLAN against a first class opponent submarine opponent.
Strike - No capability to attack land targets more than gun range. To my knowledge, PLAN ships are not equipped with land attack missiles.
Amphibious - Limited to short range. PLAn has zero capability to support a battalion size "marine force" further than its perephirals and keep it supplied for 30 days of combat.
IMHO
Last edited:
Ok, guys, no more talking about USN aircrafts in Chinese Navy forum!
oh i am sorry about that. :coffee: