China vs the world: Here's a look at Naval power in the Pacific in numbers

[beijingwalker]

China vs the world: Here's a look at Naval power in the Pacific in numbers
AFPLast Updated: Sep 17, 2021, 12:10 PM IST

Australia's decision to acquire nuclear-powered submarines under a newly announced alliance with the United States and Britain has highlighted regional concerns over China's growing maritime might in the Pacific.

Justifying ditching an earlier deal with France for conventional submarines, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said it was "not a change of mind, it's a change of need".

AFP takes a look at how the military balance of power in the region stands.


Total battle force
In terms of number of ships -- surface vessels and submarines -- China has the largest navy in the world, according to the US Department of Defense.

At the end of 2020, the size of China's navy -- or its "battle force ships" -- was approximately 360, compared to the United States' 297, according to the US Office of Naval Intelligence.

It also projected that China's navy will increase to 400 ships in 2025 and 425 in 2030.

Rate of expansion
Five of the United States' 11 aircraft carriers are based in the Pacific.

But China has already started construction on its third aircraft carrier and is also building more destroyers.

According to defence experts Janes, between 2015 and 2019, China built 132 vessels -- compared to the United States' 68, India's 48, Japan's 29 and Australia's nine.

France built 17 new ships in the same timeframe, while Britain manufactured four, two of which were aircraft carriers.

Or to put it another way, in four years, China launched the equivalent of the French naval fleet, according to Admiral Pierre Vandier, Chief of Staff of the French Navy.

He said the "historic Chinese naval effort" represented 55 percent of China's defence budget.

Submarines
Beijing has six nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) that are armed with nuclear missiles, as well as around 40 attack submarines, of which six are nuclear-powered, according to Military Balance, the International Institute for Strategic Studies' annual assessment of military capacity around the world.

For its part, Washington has 21 attack submarines and eight SSBNs in the Pacific, mainly operating out of Pearl Harbor, according to the US Navy.

Australia has six Swedish-designed diesel-electric Collins-class submarines that have been in service since the mid-1990s.

It had been due to refresh its fleet with 12 French-made state-of-the-art attack vessels; to Paris' fury, that multibillion-dollar deal has now been scrapped in favour of building a nuclear-powered fleet with US help.

As well as Australia, other regional stakeholders have beefed up their naval capabilities, most notably in terms of acquiring their own underwater vessels.

Vietnam has six Russian-designed submarines; Malaysia has two submarines; Indonesia has ordered six from South Korea; and the Philippines is thinking of building its own fleet as well.

China vs the world: Here's a look at Naval power in the Pacific in numbers

In terms of number of ships -- surface vessels and submarines -- China has the largest navy in the world, according to the US Department of Defense.At the end of 2020, the size of China's navy -- or its "battle force ships" -- was approximately 360, compared to the United States' 297, according...

economictimes.indiatimes.com

 

[zectech]

Australia ditching French subs is a tip of the hand exposure that not only Australia is preparing for potential conflict with China in the need for subs. Australia ditched the defense deal and went with a war deal. That AUKUS is on a war path. The French submarine package was enough for Australia for peacetime force. Australia wants war. This could be the preparation for the neo-nazi return of trump in 2025. Racists in Canberra. Racists in London and the racist in chief donald back in the the WH.

China needs not only a larger military than the rest of the world combined, China needs 10X that. First focus on EW, ECM, ECCM, and so on. Also with DEW and other high tech weapons. Then build and build and build. And a nuclear arsenal that makes usa cry for mercy. usa is not afraid of Russian nukes. Expand not only numbers of nukes, but also nuke delivery methods, and effective means of delivery.

The subs won't be had for years, though this does show the anlgo mission to get rid of the Chinese. Even more substantial than the elimination of the German competition of 1900.

Germans were a threat to anglos because Germans were successful:

A Manufacturing War Between the UK and Germany in the 19th Century Set the Stage For Today's Trade Crisis - History Collection

Today, the word “globalism” is on everyone’s mind. Some fear a world increasingly dependent on foreign trade. Others worry about domestic industries dying due to overseas competition. Many are anxious about what a changing economy will mean for their material prospects. Do we allow free trade to...

historycollection.com

This policy is nazism: America’s political and military mission in the post-cold-war era is to ensure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or the territories of the former Soviet Union..The classified document makes the case for a world dominated by one superpower whose position can be perpetuated by constructive behavior and sufficient military might to deter any nation or group of nations from challenging American primacy. US Department of Defense, The New York Times, March, 1992.

 

[Oldman1]

Australia ditching French subs is a tip of the hand exposure that not only Australia is preparing for potential conflict with China in the need for subs. Australia ditched the defense deal and went with a war deal. That AUKUS is on a war path. The French submarine package was enough for Australia for peacetime force. Australia wants war. This could be the preparation for the neo-nazi return of trump in 2025. Racists in Canberra. Racists in London and the racist in chief donald back in the the WH.

China needs not only a larger military than the rest of the world combined, China needs 10X that. First focus on EW, ECM, ECCM, and so on. Also with DEW and other high tech weapons. Then build and build and build. And a nuclear arsenal that makes usa cry for mercy. usa is not afraid of Russian nukes. Expand not only numbers of nukes, but also nuke delivery methods, and effective means of delivery.

The subs won't be had for years, though this does show the anlgo mission to get rid of the Chinese. Even more substantial than the elimination of the German competition of 1900.

Germans were a threat to anglos because Germans were successful:

A Manufacturing War Between the UK and Germany in the 19th Century Set the Stage For Today's Trade Crisis - History Collection

Today, the word “globalism” is on everyone’s mind. Some fear a world increasingly dependent on foreign trade. Others worry about domestic industries dying due to overseas competition. Many are anxious about what a changing economy will mean for their material prospects. Do we allow free trade to...

historycollection.com

This policy is nazism: America’s political and military mission in the post-cold-war era is to ensure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or the territories of the former Soviet Union..The classified document makes the case for a world dominated by one superpower whose position can be perpetuated by constructive behavior and sufficient military might to deter any nation or group of nations from challenging American primacy. US Department of Defense, The New York Times, March, 1992.

The French made subs are limited and waaaaaay too expensive for the cost. 90 billion for a dozen diesel electric subs. Even the Aussies knew that nuclear powered subs was the way to go in a vast ocean. Its not just for war, its a deterrence and if that fails, Australia has a very powerful force with 8-12 nuclear submarines. I don't know what specifications the Aussies want, maybe VLS capability to fire SLBM like South Korea did in recent test. Cruise missiles and torpedoes obviously.

 

[FuturePAF]

If China is going to 425 by 2030 @beijingwalker , they should check out the US navy plan to go to up to 512 ships! A third of which will be unmanned.

China might have to field corvette or even frigate sized unmanned ships to keep up. As well as unmanned submarines. then you have to account for the increase in the size of the Japanese, South Korean, Australian, Indian and ASEAN navies.

combined China maybe facing the “1000 ship Navy” the US always wanted to form .

An Analysis of the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2022 Shipbuilding Plan

CBO estimates that the Navy’s total shipbuilding budget would average between $25 billion and $33 billion (in 2021 dollars) per year through 2052 to build a force of between 398 and 512 manned ships and unmanned vessels.

www.cbo.gov

 

[tower9]

China is by far the worlds biggest shipbuilder and has the greatest industrial capacity. This production is only catching up with that reality. In actuality if China shifts to war footing, it should be able to 3x this production if necessary.

 

[nahtanbob]

China is by far the worlds biggest shipbuilder and has the greatest industrial capacity. This production is only catching up with that reality. In actuality if China shifts to war footing, it should be able to 3x this production if necessary.

The Pacific Ocean is vast. the bottom can hold take all those ships

 

[tower9]

The Pacific Ocean is vast. the bottom can hold take all those ships

You can say the same thing about any of the other navies opposing China. Who do you think has the most hypersonic missiles in the region?

Of course the best outcome is that war is avoided.

 

[hualushui]

The Pacific Ocean is vast. the bottom can hold take all those ships

DF-21D, DF-26, DF17
They agree with you

 

[nahtanbob]

You can say the same thing about any of the other navies opposing China. Who do you think has the most hypersonic missiles in the region?

Of course the best outcome is that war is avoided.

It is not about missiles. It is about air power, submarines, ASW capabilities

 

[tower9]

It is not about missiles. It is about air power, submarines, ASW capabilities

China has the upperhand in its neighborhood. Not globally but certainly in East/SE Asia.

 

[nahtanbob]

China has the upperhand in its neighborhood. Not globally but certainly in East/SE Asia.

Not if countries align with USA

 

[tower9]

Not if countries align with USA

China is effectively allied with Russia, and strategically they control the massive Eurasian continent. India already tried to take advantage of China and failed miserably. The other “allies” are even less significant.

 

[zectech]

Wow, the usa has 30 attack subs incapable of operating in the Pacific! Gasp!.

If conflict breaks out between China and usa-ians... putin would make a deal with Washington, that Russia would stay out of the war if putin can make a move on former Soviet territory.

putin is a neo-liberal/neo-nationalist/neo-banker nazi agent and is allied with the Entente of UK, France, usa and isreal.

UK operates out of WWI Entente goals and perspectives.

Russia wants the Russian Empire back, and has zero concern for defeating the Entente of UK, US, France, Australia, India, etc - WHICH RUSSIA IS APART. The Soviet Union of the 70s and 80s wanted to defeat the Entente and China did not side with defending the old Soviet Union. Now China is encircled with Entente to the north, south and east.

The Kissingers and Rothschilds and other zionists got China to oppose the Soviet Union, facilitated China to support the cia plot to end the Soviet Union. Neo-con PNAC trolls cry about not taking out China after the take out of the Soviet Union. The survival of Iran and other places is to the advantage of China. The focus on destroying the Soviet Union was good for the security of China. The defeat of the Soviet Union was devastating to China. See the difference.

We are fighting a post-WWI global situation. Those who fail to see this are at a disadvantage, Russia is not gonna hold off divisions and armies for China. Those 30 attack subs are going to the pacific in case of war. Russian wants the empire of genocide again.

If China could get surrogate ally nations to warn Europe of this, particularly warn Germany, then the chance of a hot war would lessen.

The EU is living in a post-WWII era, in fact, a post-post-WWII era and the cia is anti-eu from the eu inception. That is major competition to Washington. Russian expansionism is not. Russian expansionism is less important to the usa than remaining in Afghanistan, and usa does not care much about Afghanistan. putin is only Oligarch INFIGHTING between factions within the allies of the Entente. putin is the designated bad dude of the entente, a two sided war between factions of the cia. cia vs cia... and cia wins. That China is this strong today and Washington wants war with China is a major headache for the trolls at Washington.

cia Russia is of no concern. Washington would get European allies to isolate Russian navy during a conflict with China, which is the big last war to usher the globe into a new dark age.

This is how bad things are now:

How Chevron Used the Law and the FBI to Target Whistle-Blowing Lawyer Steven Donziger

"I'm being prosecuted by a Chevron law firm that has locked me up, deprived me of my liberty," Steven Donziger says.

www.mintpressnews.com

The plan was trump starts the pull out of Afghanistan to pivot to weekly attacks on China to ruin the Chinese economy and start a war. The Afghan war end was supposed to be a mere footnote in the stories of 2021, everything that is the disaster of Afghanistan would have happened with trump, and trump would have had press conferences to say Washington does not care about Afghanistan, the China threat is the main story.

The AUKUS starting a new cold war has begun - an alliance to stop the rise of China.

Russia isn't gonna do sh*t to help China. And would even invade China for more territory. Russians get "Russian" land from genocide, so are completely opposed to the peaceful world of China. And therefore as a continued member of the triple Entente, is a threat to the existence of China.

I said China needs to make 1 million towed artillery to defend from an invasion from the east. SPH is a key weapon ground weapon to use to defend from traitorous Russia.

China has to prepare for a northern front war with Russia, if war erupts. What Italy did to Germany in the First World War, is the planned repeat. Italy was promised this and that and never delivered. And Italy threw the balance of the war in favour of the Entente. usa did not win the First World War. Italy breaking their alliance with Germany did win the war. And so China has to be 10X more powerful than global militaries, including Russia, because Russia is on the side of the UK and US.

I am not the only person pointing out that putin is in on it with the cia, it is so obviously to any observer:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1426510770058276865

putin is not going to hold half of usaian military from attacking China. putin could invade China to side with allies.

Those 30 extra attack subs are headed for the Pacific if needed.

If the Russians find out that putin and yeltsin were cia stooges to faciliate the looting of Russia and the depression of the Russians, there will be a revolution in Russia against the cia trolls owning much of Russian oil and other industries. Then Russia is on the side of freedom. putin is a cia mannequin in the Kremlin.

putin is the cover-up of yeltsin; and putins replacement is gonna be the cover-up of putin. cover-up, as in cover-up and keep from the public that these are cia stooges.

 

[nahtanbob]

China is effectively allied with Russia, and strategically they control the massive Eurasian continent. India already tried to take advantage of China and failed miserably. The other “allies” are even less significant.

Russia will dump China just like China dumped USSR in 1969. Putin is waiting to stab you

 

[tower9]

Russia will dump China just like China dumped USSR in 1969. Putin is waiting to stab you

Not really. Both countries' long term interests are very aligned. I think your understanding of the situation is very superficial.