PLAN Carrier Construction

foxmulder said:

Our main difference is you think that COTABAR studies will start 6 years from now, I think it is already in design stage. That is why I am pretty sure we will see COTABAR much earlier than your guess.

Click to expand...

But that is not what you said in your first post to me. You said "Divide all the time scales you gave by 2." And THAT is what I responded to.

If they are already building a CATOBAR, then simply substitute that in for the STOBAR I mentioned and all the numbers I gave will remain roughly the same. But I seriously doubt that their first indigenous carrier will be a CATOBAR.

Of course they are in the design phase for the CATOBAR now, but I believe they will settle on that design in the time frames I have mentioned. If they do so earlier, they may start building it a year or two earlier, but then you simply apply the type of time line I mention to whenever it starts, not divide it by two.

Eventually China will have to face two carrier strikes group or maybe even three

One from East coast of India and one or two from Japan, this means all three Chinese fleets must be able to deploy a carrier at any one time meaning each fleet need two carriers, I would say a CV and CVN for each fleet and Liaoning as the 7th "training carrier"

CV should have 36 fighter aircraft and CVN 48 aircraft, Liaoning with the standard 24, meaning China will need 23 x 12 naval carrier fighter air wings, that's the carrier fleet

They should add a amphibious ready group to each fleet with the intention to lift both 1st and 2nd marine brigades of full strength of 12,000 marines from the South China Sea

To lift 12,000 marines not all at anyone time they would need 9 x Type 071 LPD and 3 x LHD, LHD is in the class of the USS Wasp which can carry 1,000+ marines is 40,000+ tons

So I would say a amphibious flotilla in each fleet consists of 3 x LPD, 1 x LHD and rest made up of those Type 072 III LST

Add to each fleet 3 x DDG Flotillas, 3 x FFG Flotillas, 1 x CG Flotilla and 3 x Corvette Flotillas to each fleet that's 10 Flotillas per fleet or 40 warships

Add three oversea naval Flotillas consisting of 1 x DDG, 2 x FFG and a replenishment tanker

All this would keep Chinese shipyards busy until 2025 with all carriers constructed beyond that, this is just my vision but what a fleet that would give China

I think so long as US and China do not become overtly hostile, then for the foreseeable future china will only seek and maintain numerical superiority over Japan or India individually, but will not seek numerical superiority over both combined. China being in the middle, will have an easier time relying on interior lines of communication and movement to meet each threat in turn with superior individual might than India or Japan would have relying on exterior lines of movement to meet china with superior combined might.

If US and China becomes hostile, then china would be in a very bad situation, both militarily and diplomatically.

chuck731 said:

If US and China becomes hostile, then china would be in a very bad situation, both militarily and diplomatically.

Click to expand...

Actually if the US and China become openly hostile, the entire world will be in a bad situation! the economies of the two countries are too tied together that any serious fracture will cause very serious problems.. there would'nt be a cold war vis a vis NATO/WP like in the 60s, 70s and 80s.. it would be very very different.

kwaigonegin said:

Actually if the US and China become openly hostile, the entire world will be in a bad situation! the economies of the two countries are too tied together that any serious fracture will cause very serious problems.. there would'nt be a cold war vis a vis NATO/WP like in the 60s, 70s and 80s.. it would be very very different.

Click to expand...

Yes, but if it were to come to an open breach, the US in the foreseeable future would be in a much better position to weather the consequences. The US is expected, not merely wishfully hoped to be, energy independent before 2020. The US has a far stronger system of alliances. The US is not bordered by any significant country likely to be responsive to chinese entreaties, unlike china. The US is at a greatly superior geographic position for the purpose of home defence. The US is far less susceptible to crippling internal ethnic and regional tensions than china for the foreseeable future. For china open breach with the US in the next 10-15 years would be Gottendammerung. For the US, open breach with china is survivable.

Given the asymmetry in the ability of china and US to weather an open breach, I think the current equilibrium is not as stable as you think.

asif iqbal said:

Eventually China will have to face two carrier strikes group or maybe even three ...

Click to expand...

Sometimes in the future, when the Chinese carrier force is ready to fight, it will be a very different situation than now.

chuck731 said:

I think so long as US and China do not become overtly hostile, then for the foreseeable future china will only seek and maintain numerical superiority over Japan or India individually, but will not seek numerical superiority over both combined. China being in the middle, will have an easier time relying on interior lines of communication and movement to meet each threat in turn with superior individual might than India or Japan would have relying on exterior lines of movement to meet china with superior combined might.

If US and China becomes hostile, then china would be in a very bad situation, both militarily and diplomatically.

Click to expand...

Au contraire, I think that China's carrier ambitions will be dictated far more by power projection needs than defensive ones. For now, I think China's focus is on establishing itself as another global power. If they can strike major alliances around the world they can establish bases that alleviate concerns of being surrounded. So long as we assume that there's no near term tensions that could explode into a conflict, I think that makes far more strategic sense.

Breaking news, Breaking News !!!!!

Chinese aircraft carrier under construction at Dalian:

1. It is 5% larger around 72,000 tons.
2. It has a 10% larger flight deck than Liaoning.
3. It has a 40% larger hanger than Liaoning!!

Here:

Post an link to an actual article and translate it it..thank you.

latenlazy said:

Au contraire, I think that China's carrier ambitions will be dictated far more by power projection needs than defensive ones. For now, I think China's focus is on establishing itself as another global power. If they can strike major alliances around the world they can establish bases that alleviate concerns of being surrounded. So long as we assume that there's no near term tensions that could explode into a conflict, I think that makes far more strategic sense.

Click to expand...

The pride comes before the fall.

Seriously, a navy needs to meet the defensive needs of the state first, only when its resources are more than required for defence, could it embark on the luxury of strategic offensive mindset.