China will eventually have 12+ aircraft carriers as a world power

[cloneman]

You guys talked too much.Firstly finish the Vayarg seal trial,construct another 2 in Shanghai and form two effective carrier battel groups then talk about the whatever on paper eight,ten or twelev aircraft carriers.Untile 2020,the PLAN only has two ACBGs and one for trainning.

 

[Bhairava]

China does not need 12 carriers. None of the Chinese members here stated China needs 12. You invented that one. On top of that, United States having 12 + 10 is reality, while China has one in construction. Somehow China is the threat to world peace? Indian logic acting up again?

However, China needs at least half the number of US carrier groups in order to form effective deterrance in safeguarding its interest in the Pacific. In addition, the sea lanes in Indian Oceans will need to be looked after.

So am I the only one seeing the thread title as China will eventually have 12+ aircraft carriers as a world power ?

We need at least 9 carriers to defend against US, Korean and Japanese aggression.

Are you kidding ?

 

[S10]

So am I the only one seeing the thread title as China will eventually have 12+ aircraft carriers as a world power ?

First of all, that guy was quoting a Chinese news source is that is known to be a questionable as most Indian media. Second, find one Chinese person in this thread that stated China needed to match USN.

Are you kidding ?

That's his opinion.

 

[gambit]

Why don't you ask United States why does it need so many? 12 super carriers plus 10 mini carriers. Since they're bordered by Canada, Mexico and Carribean states, they don't even have real enemies in their neighborhood to speak of.

To hold off the commies. The majority of US aircraft carriers on active duty are built before the spectacular collapse of the Soviet Union. And given the fact that the world is no less than peaceful than when the communist bloc existed, there is no need to decrease our superiority in this area.

 

[Bhairava]

First of all, that guy was quoting a Chinese news source is that is known to be a questionable as most Indian media. Second, find one Chinese person in this thread that stated China needed to match USN.

I replied to the thread, not to any member. Cant you see ?

That's his opinion.

Well then that is absurd.

 

[Akasa]

They cannot send all of their ships, and doing so would destablize the world order they have maintained. The trick is to have enough ships to counter the maximum number they can deploy to Pacific, which is about 8 to 9 CSGs without counting the ESGs. They don't have infinite number of ships they can send. The world is not a video game and United States is bound by limitations just as China is.

Then how does the PLA predict how many ships they are willing to send? As you know, the benefit of the doubt is on their side.

 

[below_freezing]

Then how does the PLA predict how many ships they are willing to send? As you know, the benefit of the doubt is on their side.

They also have our land based aircraft and missiles to deal with.

 

[S10]

Then how does the PLA predict how many ships they are willing to send? As you know, the benefit of the doubt is on their side.

Hence you need to maximize your naval strength as much as possible within budget constraint. China is due to surpass US economically within 20 years, and it's naval strength should reflect that. In addition, as China's influence grows, so will the need for protection of its assets. As of now the Americans are living beyond their means on debt, which should not be repeated.

That's why I advocate for more than 6 to 7 CSGs.

 

[paritosh]

Why don't you ask United States why does it need so many? 12 super carriers plus 10 mini carriers. Since they're bordered by Canada, Mexico and Carribean states, they don't even have real enemies in their neighborhood to speak of.

did you read my post?
I said that only a country like USA which has it's interests off-shore in other continents...needs extremly potent maritime force...not countries like India and china that have theirs in their vicinity.