SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - China's navy battle force has more than tripled in size in only two decades

Kapitan · 03-11-21, 01:56 PM

I think we are missing one huge point and a few small ones here and it is something both the USN and PLAN are very aware of.

While China in terms of hull count does have the largest navy in the world it does not have the largest logistics network.
Ultimately NATO has the largest logistics network spanning the entire globe with members and associate members (Sweden Singapore India Malaysia Thailand Japan South Korea Australia and New Zealand to name a few)

With the current incapability to keep multiple battlegroups supplied on an indefinite time frame away from friendly ports this means the only thing china has actually built is a blue water capable navy that's very strong regionally (Similar to Russia), Basically what we are looking at is a sea denial force.

The other pressing matter is the USN even with having less numbers in its fleet can overwhelm the Chinese in the use of battlefield missiles, the USN is capable of sending more ordinance down range than china, the gap is substantial.

The type 055 DDG for example fields a 112 cell VLS in theory at least that's 112 missiles it can use offensively (you never would because you need some for defense).
16 are planned and 2 are built and either active or on sea trials, this doesn't hold a candle to what the USN has.

The Ticonderoga class which would be considered its peer competitor, has 122 VLS cells and theres currently 22 of them active (yes i know a few will retire soon) but even if you cut the fleet down to 16 to match the type 055 plan you still have 160 more missiles than your opponent.

The current 67 active Arleigh burkes also field 90 VLS cells (Batch 1) and 96 VLS cells for newer Batches, China is reliant on its corvettes and frigates to bridge that gap.

Currently the ratio of missiles to field in battle between the USN and PLAN is a factor of 2 to 1 in the USN favor.
Oh and we haven't even got to the carriers or submarines !

A friend of mine Commander Keith Patton wrote this article it may interest some of you.

http://cimsec.org/battle-force-missi...rOUeKYxpTDXtfc

03-11-21, 01:56 PM	#6
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,090 Downloads: 68 Uploads: 7	I think we are missing one huge point and a few small ones here and it is something both the USN and PLAN are very aware of. While China in terms of hull count does have the largest navy in the world it does not have the largest logistics network. Ultimately NATO has the largest logistics network spanning the entire globe with members and associate members (Sweden Singapore India Malaysia Thailand Japan South Korea Australia and New Zealand to name a few) With the current incapability to keep multiple battlegroups supplied on an indefinite time frame away from friendly ports this means the only thing china has actually built is a blue water capable navy that's very strong regionally (Similar to Russia), Basically what we are looking at is a sea denial force. The other pressing matter is the USN even with having less numbers in its fleet can overwhelm the Chinese in the use of battlefield missiles, the USN is capable of sending more ordinance down range than china, the gap is substantial. The type 055 DDG for example fields a 112 cell VLS in theory at least that's 112 missiles it can use offensively (you never would because you need some for defense). 16 are planned and 2 are built and either active or on sea trials, this doesn't hold a candle to what the USN has. The Ticonderoga class which would be considered its peer competitor, has 122 VLS cells and theres currently 22 of them active (yes i know a few will retire soon) but even if you cut the fleet down to 16 to match the type 055 plan you still have 160 more missiles than your opponent. The current 67 active Arleigh burkes also field 90 VLS cells (Batch 1) and 96 VLS cells for newer Batches, China is reliant on its corvettes and frigates to bridge that gap. Currently the ratio of missiles to field in battle between the USN and PLAN is a factor of 2 to 1 in the USN favor. Oh and we haven't even got to the carriers or submarines ! A friend of mine Commander Keith Patton wrote this article it may interest some of you. http://cimsec.org/battle-force-missi...rOUeKYxpTDXtfc __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/