What's new

PLA would lose 40% of its fleet to sink a US carrier

Status
Not open for further replies.
While Chinese SAM systems are indeed comparable to western SAM systems, it should be noted that those western systems are still vastly superior. For example, maritime SAM systems like the European PAAMS or the American AEGIS are still years ahead of anything China has. Also, Russian SAM systems like the S-400 are still years ahead of Chinese systems.

#1 Europe/USA/Russia
#2 Israel
#3 China

China will NEVER sell it's most advanced SAM system to anyone else. There is something better that China has, or is very close to be being deployed, otherwise there would be no export.

The Type-052D has the second generation AESA after the Type-052C, so the likelihood is that the system is very comparable to anything the US or EU has.
 
Only 40% of the fleet to exchange in battle for a Gerald Ford class carrier is very favorable for China.
 
Only 40% of the fleet to exchange in battle for a Gerald Ford class carrier is very favorable for China.

I would trade two carriers for the total destruction of the PLA navy. We have eleven carriers.:usflag:
 
Nine carriers vs. no navy at all ? That's a no-brainer.
 
Suppose the US navy allocates 500 F-18 jets to fight China, over 200 would be lost to accidents, as usual. That leaves less than 300 remaining F-18 jets to fight Chinese planes. A well placed C-803 hit fired by a J-10B fighter jet could potentially sink a Nimitz carrier should an ammo storage be hit.

"Twenty-one aircraft carriers conducted 86 war cruises and operated 9,178 total days on the line in the Gulf of Tonkin. 530 aircraft were lost in combat and 329 more to operational causes. Resulting in the deaths of 377 naval aviators, with 64 airmen reported missing and 179 taken prisoner-of-war."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War
 
Not necessarily. Aegis is a really old system that uses PESA radars. Type 052D already uses the latest AESA radars.
Drop the 'Super'. The 'boy' part is appropriate.

By your simplistic argument, merely giving jungle tribes AK-47s would make them the equivalent of the US Army? :lol:

A well designed PESA system, especially in terms of software, will be a better performer than a mediocre AESA system, also in terms of software. In other words, the Chinese can advertise that their ships are equipped with AESA hardware but no one knows that the hardware is supported by PESA software. An AESA system should be supported by AESA appropriate software, not merely PESA software.

I have explained many times on these differences in details that you do not know about and probably would not understand.
 
Let me know when the US army can beat the Mahdi Army in Iraq. :whistle:
 
Let me know when the US army can beat the Mahdi Army in Iraq. :whistle:
Let me know when the mighty Mahdi Army of Iraq put on uniforms and remove themselves from behind women and children and fight like real warriors.
 
Let me know when the mighty Mahdi Army of Iraq put on uniforms and remove themselves from behind women and children and fight like real warriors.

All is fair in love and war. :bunny:
 
All is fair in love and war. :bunny:
Excellent...So now we have approval from Canadian 'Superboy' that human shields are acceptable in combat and shooting through these human shields, by all combatants, are also acceptable.

And they say Americans are immoral...:lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom