If you think a naval forces of 2 active carrier, 6 LPD, 30 plus ocean going destroyer and 50 frigate are called defensive then french or Royal Navy shall be called coastal defence navy, right? Fact is all those who post article or write up of China navy as weak or cant project power are nothing but biased or China hate agenda behind.i pointed out they have aerial refueling. but it not enough is the point. to understand what i mean. the USA has over 700 Aerial refueling planes. and they have a vast network of allies that allow them to use their countries for bases and staging area. China has none of that going towards the USA.
and correct they have the good navy with great Destroyers, Frigates. but their current Jump jet carriers greatly hurt their ability to project their forces far vs the USA. also their lack of allies for forward bases also hurt that ability. they would have to either make a military alliance with the Philippines (Allow large bases) or defeat/conquer (Taiwan/Japan/Philippines) so they can have large bases there.
China current Naval forces are clearly built as a Defensive forces. they are now working on expanding their offensive capabilities. STOBAR Carriers are used for fleet defense and local air supremacy. not power projection/deep strike missions. Now China is upgrading to CATOBAR type Carriers (building 2). These will allow them to expand their power projection power.
remember currently once the PLAN leaves more then 1800nm away from China they will have almost no PLAAF air support. none of their vast coastal ships nor most of their ground base anti ship missile will help them.
remember the US 7th/3rd Fleets alone have
6 Virginia (SSGN)
2 Ohio (SSGN)
19 LA (SSGN)
3 Seawolf (SSN)
5 Aircraft Carriers (CVN) (combined 200 Fighters, 25 EW Jets, 25 AEWC planes, 60 ASW hel, 60 MR Hel)
2 Landing Helicopter Assault (LHA) (combined 40 Fighters, 14 ASW Hel, 36 MR Hel)
4 Landing Helicopter Docks (LHD) (combined 160 Fighters, 16 ASW Hel, 52 MR Hel)
12 Guided Missile Cruisers (CGHM) (24 Hel)
39 Guided Missile Destroyers (DDGHM/DDGM) (78 Hel)
2 Guided Missile Frigates (FFGHM) (4 Hel)
11 Guided Missile Frigates (FFHM) (22 Hel)
75 Total Ships. 400 Fighters, 90 ASW Hel,
the AEWC and EW planes would be the difference in the open ocean. Giving the USN vastly better intel/situation awareness.
and because of the USA's huge Aerial Refueling and it islands in the pacific it would have large air bases set up for the defense of Guam. which would also mean more Ground Base ASW, AEWC, ELINT, ISR, C2 Planes, Bombers (armed with Cruise Missiles) and more fighters.
now on the flip side. If the USA attacked China it could do more damage to china coast. and possibly embargo Chinese shipping. but it couldn't invade and win on mainland China. and anything more then missile attacks on China's coast would be paid for in heavy US losses.
neither side could attack and invade and have success. the USA could do more damage to China. but that only because of Allies bases, and long range aerial Capabilities.
Then your theory is even more ridiculous becos US by putting so many asset within range of Chinese precision strike ballistic missile are nothing but sucide. US defense shield has never demonstrated to pick out swarm of balliistic missile attack. China will never be kind enough to attack one target with one missile. Once those precious asset is pick out. There is virtually nothing can stop Chinese projection forces.Well the Chinese have shown a capability to crank these Y-20s out in massive numbers (there are over 40 Y-20 transports now and counting). I'm sure they can do it with their tanker force as well. But in the short term, the Chinese will never match the US in comparable tanker numbers, but I believe that is one of the highest priorities for their air force right now.
He is not saying the PLAN does not have power projection, he is saying that it is currently limited due to the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd island chains with a massive USN presence and many US bases. Do you really think the PLAN would project power against the US 4000 km away when the nearest US presence is just several hundred kilometers away? But the Chinese are definitely increasing their power projection that is for sure.
tanker and replenishhment ships are sitting ducks for the US NavyIf you think a naval forces of 2 active carrier, 6 LPD, 30 plus ocean going destroyer and 50 frigate are called defensive then french or Royal Navy shall be called coastal defence navy, right? Fact is all those who post article or write up of China navy as weak or cant project power are nothing but biased or China hate agenda behind.
Not enough forward base is not a problem if u build enough ocean going tanker and replenishhment ships and we are doing that exactly. How did Japan strike pearl harbour if by your theory of lack of forward base? They had a huge fleet and many tanker and logistic support.
Most of Japanese ships in WW 2 were sunk by American submarinesSubmarine are sitting duck once discovered and they do not have the speed of aeroplane. And nuclear sub are prove to be more noisy than electric sub. Breach Chinese sub defence first.
This is true but the Chinese I don't think will venture their navy too far out to where they will be vulnerable to USN subs. They will most likely stick as close to the coast as possible, where the waters are relatively shallow and thus sub detection is pretty easy.Most of Japanese ships in WW 2 were sunk by American submarines
Good luck defending your ships from American subs
that would make an invasion of USA close to impossibleThis is true but the Chinese I don't think will venture their navy too far out to where they will be vulnerable to USN subs. They will most likely stick as close to the coast as possible, where the waters are relatively shallow and thus sub detection is pretty easy.