The Chinese Cruiser, forget the carrier...

Thank you...

My speculations of the future Chinese cruisers:

general features expected:

-application of APAR or PAR: since the PLAN wish to control the airspace near Taiwan, also have the ability to coordinate hundreds of units in operations, the new cruisers are likely to feature improved PAR or APAR from the original 52C DDGs. Better supercomputers are needed to process more information, to track more targets, coordinate more units, and serve as Command and Control center for fleet ASW and AD center. Also the future application after the unification of Taiwan would be to challenge the control for the Middle east, West Pacific, and trade routes to South America. Those regions are vital to ensure that sufficient amount of oil are "flowing" to China.

-standardization of hot launch systems with the rest of the fleet

-new short range missile systems similar to ESSM and Sea Ram. Currently such system has not yet had its debut. However, we know that PLAN is studying the USN closely, and the current trend is clearly demonstrated by the new Arleigh Burke Flight IIs which lack CIWS and rely its close in defence on VLS ESSM. It is crucial for PLAN to develop such systems.

-VLS medium range missiles (<100km) might also be operated to save space
and thus carry more missiles.

-cruise missiles would definitely be incorporated if land strike is necessary. However, if the PLAN doctrine requires such cruiser to have substancial capabilities against enemy surface combatants, then the limited space would be used for VLS antiship missiles capable of ripple firing.

a blue water navy does not have to have a carrier. the soviet navy had world projection ability without carriers for the 80's. the british navy was a blue water one for hundreds of years with no carriers.

Click to expand...

Now this is defenetly stubidiest comment that ive read for a time...(I hope sincirely that you ment to be ironical on that last sentence )

Soviet navy aquired carries to be a blue water navy. The soviet navy was large but its effectivenes on high seas agaisnt USN was very questionable up untill the latest parts of 80's when Kuznetsov begun seatrials. After WWII modern naval combat is been determed by the aviability of airpower and only practical way to bring this over the deep blue seas is carrier. British werent able to take out Falklands whitout the small VSTOL carriers, and if the opponent would have been any stronger, it would have required conventional carrier.

Even if PLAN dont want to take part in Powerprotection missions, carrier is a must in all other major task pointed to naval forces. Fleet airdefence, seacontrol, convoy escort, asw hunter-killer missions, all requires some sort of airpower to be conducted perfectly... India is blue water navy by the simble fact that it poses martime airpower in shipborne form and therefore its operational capapilityes in pure naval aspect suprass PLAN. Brazil may not have the most effective AAW ships, but it can still poses formitable ASW taskgroup to (hypothetically) challenge even PLAN. I would respect if memebers taking part in naval discussion would take even little look on the basics of martime strategy.

Gollevainen said:

Now this is defenetly stubidiest comment that ive read for a time...(I hope sincirely that you ment to be ironical on that last sentence )

Click to expand...

I honestly think Migleader needs to see a psychiatrist because he rarely makes any sense in his posts. Or maybe his poor English is the problem which makes him sound non-sensical.

He must have an IQ of 70 or something.

I think it got something to do whit the age...
but no personal attacks or insults, remember!

Blob said:

I honestly think Migleader needs to see a psychiatrist because he rarely makes any sense in his posts. Or maybe his poor English is the problem which makes him sound non-sensical.

He must have an IQ of 70 or something.

Click to expand...

my iq is 139, thank you very much.
i have know english since four, and im much more fluent at it than chinese.
why do i sound stupid? no one else seems to think so

back to the carrier
a carrier will finally let china show off. its been building a modern fleet since the 90's, and now it can sent its own cvbg on a world tour. But my point was, a blue water navy does not have to have a carrier.

But my point was, a blue water navy does not have to have a carrier.

Click to expand...

maybe before the 40's but not in modern world. I would love to hear some points supporting your opinion...

I agree that cruisers would be more fitting for the PLAN. Most of China's potential enemies are close enough that planes from mainland can easily reach them. The only potential naval enemy that is out of reach is the US and I don't think it would make a difference even if China did build a carrier, they'll lose to the USN anyway. It's both larger and more advanced.

they'll lose to the USN anyway. It's both larger and more advanced.

Click to expand...

....no country will ever base it's weapon aqustion policy to "whats the point, they are still larger than us" type of logic...Wheter US have carriers or how long they have had them is irelevant to chinese carrier aqustion plans.

Gollevainen said:

....no country will ever base it's weapon aqustion policy to "whats the point, they are still larger than us" type of logic...Wheter US have carriers or how long they have had them is irelevant to chinese carrier aqustion plans.

Click to expand...

Gollevainen i agree with you. I doubt there would be a major sino-american war in the next 10 to 20 years. The biggest battle that could happen which i believe is the sino-sino war. A carrier would definitely help mainland in a war with taiwan. If planes take off from Fujian, they would have to go back for re-fuelling 15-20 minutes after it arrives in the sky of taiwan.