China to have 4 aircraft carriers, 18 Type 055 destroyers, and 300 J-20 by 2025

[F-22Raptor]

It is normal.

Tico by 2025 will all be over 30 years old, therefore it should all be retired under the normal circumstance.

Many of your Burke are also obsolete Flight I and Flight II.

And your Flight IIA is also quite obsolete.

Your Flight III probably will end up like another failure like the DDG-1000.

Apparently you weren’t paying attention in the other thread. Those Burke’s are continuously upgraded with the latest radar, software, EW, and suite of weapons.

China has nothing that approaches the NIFCA-CA battle network. Nothing...Nor the Spy-6, or the defensive suite of weapons the Burke’s possess.

China’s ships will be outranged by Maritime Strike Tomahawk and SM-6 Block 1b.

I am just going around in circles with you. You have your head buried in concrete.

China is never going to attain overmatch against the US military. Learn to accept it. There’s nothing wrong with 2nd place.

 

[Beast]

Having the nuclear supercarrier will not solve all replenishment problems, but it will significantly abate those problems.

Imagining when our 90,000+ tonnes supercarrier is conventional, it gonna be an even worse nightmare for our replenishment.

Not neccessary... Even its nuclear, you still need to replenish foods and aircraft ammo which deplete very fast in wartimes. The USN CVN despite bragging with nuclear power with unlimited range, still need replenish in 30 days for food and in wartime, every week once the guide bomb and missile are used up by bomber jets in high tempo ops.

In modern era, modern replenish ship are very efficient. They can do fuel, food and ammo replenish at the same time once everything is hook up between replenish ship and carrier.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Apparently you weren’t paying attention in the other thread. Those Burke’s are continuously upgraded with the latest radar, software, EW, and suite of weapons.

China has nothing that approaches the NIFCA-CA battle network. Nothing...Nor the Spy-6, or the defensive suite of weapons the Burke’s possess.

China’s ships will be outranged by Maritime Strike Tomahawk and SM-6 Block 1b.

I am just going around in circles with you. You have your head buried in concrete.

China is never going to attain overmatch against the US military. Learn to accept it. There’s nothing wrong with 2nd place.

Burke's hull design has its limit, you cannot upgrade it endlessly.

By your own logic, you can keep upgrading the fourth gen aircraft, why bother to build the fifth gen aircraft?

 

[F-22Raptor]

China has its own NIFC-CA as well.

For example, the Type 052DL with its anti-stealth radar will track down the adversarial stealth fighters, then guide China's own aerial force to launch attack on the targets.

This integrated versatile battle network is not something new and fancy for China.

Definitely easier to build than the 5G network & Quantum network.


View attachment 595370

No, China doesn’t have its own NIFCA-CA. That’s a load of crap and you know it. You can’t even name it. And China is nowhere near having the naval aviation component for such a network. Your pulling things out of your *** now.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Not neccessary... Even its nuclear, you still need to replenish foods and aircraft ammo which deplete very fast in wartimes. The USN CVN despite bragging with nuclear power with unlimited range, still need replenish in 30 days for food and in wartime, every week once the guide bomb and missile are used up by bomber jets in high tempo ops.

In modern era, modern replenish ship are very efficient. They can do fuel, food and ammo replenish at the same time once everything is hook up between replenish ship and carrier.

As I said in my previous posts, the CVN will still face the replenishment problem, but the replenishment problem for the CVN would be far smaller than the CV.

Most likely that China might have faced some problem to integrate the EMALS & AGG into the conventional powered system, that's why the Type 003 is so massive and most likely being a CVN.

 

[F-22Raptor]

Only a real war between the two can convince him that China is the more powerful one. As long that is not going to happen he will refuse to accept the new reality.

This....coming from the same guy who posted that Russian airplane blinding a US ship story that was debunked years ago?

What are you 12? It’s obvious you don’t have a clue. But your an excellent bootlicker, I’ll give you that.

 

[Beast]

As I said in my previous posts, the CVN will still face the replenishment problem, but the replenishment problem for the CVN would be far smaller than the CV.

Most likely that China might have faced some problem to integrate the EMALS & AGG into the conventional powered system, that's why the Type 003 is so massive and most likely being a CVN.

I believe nuclear is more suitable for attack sub becos they need to lurk long time underwater to ambush enemy and has little crew to feed. Aircraft carrier with a huge number of crew plus its huge size need not try to hide but more of projecting its power to overwhelm its enemy. Unlimted range travelling is not that important since it need replenish every short period. The only reason why the American keep braggin about nuclear for carrier is important is just to feed their ego.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I believe nuclear is more suitable for attack sub becos they need to lurk long time underwater to ambush enemy and has little crew to feed. Aircraft carrier with a huge number of crew plus its huge size need not try to hide but more of projecting its power to overwhelm its enemy. Unlimted range travelling is not that important since it need replenish every short period. The only reason why the American keep braggin about nuclear for carrier is important is just to feed their ego.

The world believes that the CVN is the symbol of might.

That's why building the CVN has more strategic meaning than the CV.

I know that our ASBM is powerful enough to decimate all US carrier battle groups, but by reaching into that point, we would be at the brink of a global nuclear war.

That's why I start to think that the benefit of building the CVN would be an important symbol to boost China's military technology, and more countries will feel safe to trade with us.

 

[riscol]

Anything that would tarnish the US military invincible image should be automatically debunked or else they are bootlickers. Classical example of denial as we all come to expect

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

No, China doesn’t have its own NIFCA-CA. That’s a load of crap and you know it. You can’t even name it. And China is nowhere near having the naval aviation component for such a network. Your pulling things out of your *** now.

It is just an integrated fire control system.

Our navy just doesn't have that fancy name.

Our naval ships and aircrafts/drones can easily guide for each other.

 

[F-22Raptor]

Anything that would tarnish the US military invincible image should be automatically debunked or else they are bootlickers. Classical example of denial as we all come to expect

That Russian propaganda story was debunked years ago. And yes you are a bootlicker.

 

[riscol]

I am not for sale so i will not be bootlicking anybody especially the Americans. As i am not the only who believe the story plenty out there share the same view.

 

[F-22Raptor]

It is just an integrated fire control system.

Our navy just doesn't have that fancy name.

Our naval ships and aircrafts/drones can easily guide for each other.

China doesn’t even have the advanced naval aviation component to complete such a network. The US has the F-35 B/C and E2-D. China has no such network.

I am not for sale so i will not be bootlicking anybody especially the Americans. As i am not the only who believe the story plenty out there share the same view.

Fake Russian EW attack unmasked

Since its origins over the skies of Europe during World War II, electronic warfare has always been a cat-and-mouse game. Now, it appears, Russia is adding another key element: Dezinformatsiya.

According to a detailed post-mortemreleased this week, the alleged April 2014 "electronic bomb" attack by a Russian fighter aircraft on the Aegis-class destroyer USS Donald Cook was a hoax. The Digital Forensic Research Lab, an arm of the Washington-based Atlantic Council, unmasked the apparent deception as part of a Russian information warfare campaign.

At issue in the days after the incident in the Black Sea were unsubstantiated claims in Russia print and social media that a Su-24 aircraft "equipped with the latest electronic warfare complex, Khibiny," had managed to jam and shut down the Cook's radars along with other electronic systems. Among other findings, the researchers discovered that the Khibiny is not installed on Russian Su-24 aircraft.

According to no less than the manufacturer of the Russian EW system, known as the Concern of Radio-Electronic Technology, which is part of state enterprise Rostech, the system is only installed on Su-30, Su-34 and Su-35 aircraft.

"The Khibiny manufacturer itself had already debunked the story," the U.S. researchers concluded. "This is either a disastrous failure of due diligence, or deliberate deception." Most experts agree it was the latter.

Indeed, U.S. military analysts had earlier cast doubt on claims that the Russian EW system had disabled the U.S. ship's radar and electronics.

While expressing skepticism about the buzzing incident, the Army's Foreign Military Studies Office noted that Russia "does indeed possess a growing EW capability, and the political and military leadership understand the importance of technical advances in this type of warfare."

However, the Army’s analysis also suggested the Black Sea incident was part of a larger Russian information warfare operation. The title of the Army analysis was: "Russian EW or IW?"

Based on the latest findings that the Russian EW attack was a hoax, the majority of western military analysis indicates information warfare. Moreover, the apparent Russian electronic bomb deception may be more accurately described as maskirovka, or military deception, another Russian specialty.

The researchers led by Ben Nimmo, a senior fellow for information defense at the Digital Forensic Research Lab, stressed that the "electronic bomb" ruse underscores how Russian state media "deliberately reported a total fabrication in order to glorify Russia (and its electronic warfare specialists) and mock the United States" even after the story was debunked.

Illustrating the growing use of information warfare, the researchers noted that the fake news story also "suggests that the Kremlin may not be as confident in its high-tech military as it frequently boasts," the researchers added.

The incident also highlights the role of western media in spreading fake news that serves Moscow's information warfare aims. Reports from British tabloids, they concluded, were "the main driver of the recycled fake’s penetration in the West."

(Our report on the 2014 Black Sea incident noted that the original reports were first published in a Kremlin-sponsored newspaper and that the Army's Foreign Military Studies Office viewed those and western reports with considerable skepticism.)

https://defensesystems.com/articles/2017/05/12/fakeew.aspx?m=1

Debunked, years ago. You aren’t even capable of conducting basic research. That tells me everything. You bring nothing to the debate except to *** kiss the Chinese.

 

[riscol]

You call it the Russia propaganda, i call it the American propaganda.

 

[F-22Raptor]

You call it the Russia propaganda, i call it the American propaganda.

The Khibiny EW system is not even installed on Su-24 aircraft. Russia debunked its own propaganda story.