Nilgiri
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 24,797
- Reaction score
- 81
- Country
- Location
China's Sovremennyy-class has been given modern sensors and control systems.
According to? Chinese standards and performance are unproven and insulated. (This goes for most non western/allied nations).
However, while it is carrying more, it's structure cannot be altered to such an extent, at least not practically, that it can match the efficiency and capabilities of a modern 054A.
Again these efficiencies and capabilities have not been proven like they have with US/NATO. There is no real way to say this Chinese power level registers X on American power level. There is a reason why US maintained a decisive and significant qualitative edge over the USSR tech in the 80s (highest water mark of the cold war tech wise) in every field. China at best is a smaller less powerful legacy version of USSR today....till you prove your tech (even with client state in a smaller scale would give some indication) like say US did in gulf war 1 decisively against large formations of Soviet equipment (which shocked Chinese war planners)...it remains an exercise on paper...and paper does not win a war. On paper the French should have crushed Germany quite easily in fall gelb.
@jhungary @AUSTERLITZ
It can use it in any role it wishes, but it still cannot act as effectively as a Burke or Atago can. The Kidd class is old. It cannot engage in a way that a 054 with a 052 or 055 can. It is at most a glorified missile launcher.
Refer to above. You will very much have to prove the capability than write and extrapolate about it. That can only be proven in a conflict....China wisely stays away from it.
Defensive navy? What in your view is defensive about it? The Submarines that carry VLS land attack missiles? The second largest fleet of modern replenishment ships? The largest modern destroyer outside of the American Zumwalt? The carriers? The LHDs? The LPDs? (BTW, the LHDs are confirmed via photo, it will be assembled within a reasonable time, his year or early next)
Again these are technologies, specifically their networking integration with C4I that remain to be calibrated in effective power level versus the NATO system. You will need to demonstrate somewhere on the relevant scale at least. Till then how is anyone to judge effectively?
China already has the second largest fleet of LPDs, in less than 5 years, the second largest LHD fleet as well. We will pass Japan for second largest modern destroyers fleet this year and then the difference will get bigger as time goes by.
So tell me how many troops these LPD's can deploy at maximum rate over say the Indian Ocean even in your best case scenario? From that you can ascertain what is the largest kind of country you can project their power on reasonably to make some difference in some conflict....it wont be anywhere close to India's size.
What, in your mind, limits our ability to project power far from our shores? If we are limited, then who today can do so? Not named the USN.
Thats why I said the USN is the only true blue water navy. What limits China big time is its hemmed in maritime geography. You have no clear broad access to open ocean....and your opponents have significant advantages because of that...allowing them to maintain good deterrence at much less raw tonnage. It will take a huge amount of time to overcome that if ever you can... probably 1 - 2 full technological revolutions...it simply cannot be reasonably done in todays military tech environment.
It isn't that, it is the complete lack of understanding on roles that is astounding me. The 056 corvette, or any corvette is not a front line ship, it's main job is to be numerous in number and sufficient in capability. That is the key when discussing this class of ships.
The current discussion is centering on how powerful it is, which is completely beside the point. This is like Hyundai making an Equus, yes it's a good car, but it's still a Hyundai. Let's not kid ourselves. That's not your role, don't even try.
Look buddy, China has to prove in the first place what its actual tech level/realised power level is for its assets (given the significant sensitivity to sensors, networking and C4I in modern warfare). This is similar to the USD nominal superiority to PPP argument your fellow Chinese members love to use for macroeconomics. Simply saying this modernised destroyer == US/Japanese one, but outclasses a Taiwanese or some other one is like over-relying on PPP for argument from the Chinese perspective there. Chinese members have to be consistent on this philosophy to gain credibility....rather than changing tack to suit an underlying narrative. So far China has not engaged even with much smaller countries since the 1979 border war with Vietnam where it accomplished zero objectives....so how are we supposed to calibrate to the extent of modelling war scenarios heavily reliant on things China has not proven on the ground?
The topic at hand should be how many ships can Bangladesh get in what time frame. Can it accomplish the mission it is set to.
Problem is it diverted to BD being a blue water navy simply proposing long term acquisition of 6 frigates.