The Five Most-Powerful Navies on the Planet

[Steakhouse]

Do me a favor. Google "trireme." Then come back and determine if I was being serious or not.



Please stop posting. Thanks.

You the one mention trireme, shouldn't elaborated on it and not me spending on Google to find out what it all about?

 

[Shotgunner51]

1 J-20 carries 2 YJ-15 anti ship missiles Mach 4 range 400 km. 1 J-20 can sink 2 aircraft carriers on 1 sortie. 5 J-20s can sink 10 aircraft carriers on 1 sortie.

J-20 serial production in 2016. Gerald Ford commission in 2016. Same year military hardware.

Alright naval warfare is as simple as that, and if you are true than PLAAN and Russian navy can happily retire ... each just buy 5 J20 and 5 T50, isn't that perfect my dear?

BTW if guys wanna talk about NATO+Japan+Australia vs SCO/BRIC + Iran etc, big topic, let's start a new thread (e.g. 2025 War between Geopolitical Blocs) and play strategist, cool?

 

[Superboy]

Alright naval warfare is as simple as that, and if you are true than PLAAN and Russian navy can happily retire ... each just buy 5 J20 and 5 T50, isn't that perfect my dear?

BTW if guys wanna talk about NATO+Japan+Australia vs SCO/BRIC + Iran etc, big topic, let's start a new thread (e.g. 2025 War between Geopolitical Blocs) and play strategist, cool?

Modern naval warfare can be won by having 2 things: big fighter jets and maritime patrol planes. The former hunt aircraft and ships and the latter hunt subs. J-20 is bigger and faster than F-35C. Remember how Zeros were destroyed by Hellcats which were bigger and faster, same thing applies here. Bigger and faster planes can choose to engage and disengage smaller and slower planes at will, smaller and slower planes cannot do the same and get destroyed.

20 J-20 fighter jets and 20 Y-8 FQ maritime patrol planes can take down the entire US navy.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Modern naval warfare can be won by having 2 things: big fighter jets and maritime patrol planes. The former hunt aircraft and ships and the latter hunt subs. J-20 is bigger and faster than F-35C. Remember how Zeros were destroyed by Hellcats which were bigger and faster, same thing applies here. Bigger and faster planes can choose to engage and disengage smaller and slower planes at will, smaller and slower planes cannot do the same and get destroyed.

20 J-20 fighter jets and 20 Y-8 FQ maritime patrol planes can take down the entire US navy.

I hope PLA brasses share your optimism ... or actually I sleep better if they think otherwise.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

I hope PLA brasses share your optimism ... or actually I sleep better if they think otherwise.

I too hope they think like Superboy does. In all seriousness though, Superboy isn't the best source of information on military matters... that the PLA is doing exactly the opposite of what he suggests is possible and necessary is all the validation one needs when determining the necessity of large numbers + technology when faced with equally technological and numerous competition. If 5 or 10 or even 20 aircraft was all that is needed to destroy an enemy nation, we sure wouldn't be spending time building over 1500 F-35s for our armed services (2500 total for all partner nations).

He's wrong, you are right.

 

[Superboy]

I hope PLA brasses share your optimism ... or actually I sleep better if they think otherwise.

Me. Personally I'm a terror from the skies kind of guy. Everything that floats on the sea or beneath the sea is vulnerable to terror from the skies.

we sure wouldn't be spending time building over 1500 F-35s for our armed services.

F-35 is technologically on par with J-20, but it's single engined, small and slow. Should have never killed F-22 program. J-20s can slaughter F-35s like Hellcats slaughtered Zeroes. Read up on Mariana Turkey Shoot.

No matter how many ships or subs, without air cover, they are only target practice of aircraft

 

[Shotgunner51]

I too hope they think like Superboy does. In all seriousness though, Superboy isn't the best source of information on military matters... that the PLA is doing exactly the opposite of what he suggests is possible and necessary is all the validation one needs when determining the necessity of large numbers + technology when faced with equally technological and numerous competition. If 5 or 10 or even 20 aircraft was all that is needed to destroy an enemy nation, we sure wouldn't be spending time building over 1500 F-35s for our armed services (2500 total for all partner nations).

He's wrong, you are right.

Hey dude didn't know u r on-line. U didn't @ me on that Kirov post, I wasted almost half an hour googling when asked by Superboy about its radar vs Tico's in another thread.

And yeah I was so excited almost wanna wake up the brasses to tell them the best news of the year ...

Me. Personally I'm a terror from the skies kind of guy. Everything that floats on the sea or beneath the sea is vulnerable to terror from the skies.

Yes I begin to see your point

 

[Screambowl]

You can't fight your boss, or ex-boss



Who care whether IN dance Bharatanatyam or cook curry on decks or whatever 1000 years ago?
Just not in the league.
See the rank.

i was eating chowmene and what i found in it ... chow chow

 

[Superboy]

Wow.
The level of stupidity is worrying.

On paper, it is possible. J-20 can strike a carrier from about 400 km away using YJ-12, beyond the range at which F-35C can engage to defend carrier.

 

[Shotgunner51]

i was eating chowmene and what i found in it ... chow chow

Good girl, now wash your left hand, take a dump, wipe your behind, OK? Its bad bad to use the wrong hand like always my dumb dumb little girl.

 

[Screambowl]

Good girl, now wash your left hand, take a dump, wipe your behind, OK? Its bad bad to use the wrong hand like always my dumb dumb little girl.

okay my chowmene

 

[Shotgunner51]

okay my chowmene

Good my incredible girl ...

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

okay my chowmene

Good my incredible girl ...

LOL, what is going on here?

 

[Echo_419]

1) their nuke sub's SLBMs can hit us from anywhere in the world
2) sub's

We have Nukes too

Hmmm...currently the British have zero operational carriers and either zero (or soon to be zero) fighter aircraft that are capable of operating from carriers. If we're talking about naval rankings currently, then Britain definitely drops out of the top five both in capability and numbers.

IMO, Japan should be number 2 or 3. Japan has a strong naval tradition, is very professional, and has a ton of experience from joint ops/training with the USN as well as tracking Soviet subs during the Cold War.

I'd probably rank the PLAN as 3rd or 4th. But out of all the countries mentioned (excluding the US for obvious reasons), China is the only one with the political will, military budget, and technological base to jump to a solid number 2.

Just my two yuan.



This is a good list. Close to how I'd rank things but I'd put China as 4th and Russia and Japan as 2nd and 3rd respectively.

My rationale for ranking Japan ahead of China has to do with mission profile.

China aspires to be able to protect its shipping lines and needs a force capable of projecting power globally to do this as in times of conflict, China doesn't have the luxury of depending on American largesse as is the case with Japan. Therefore, how close is China to achieving that goal as of 2015? Not close at all, though it hurts my Chinese pride to say so.

On the other hand, the sole purpose (unstated of course) of the Japanese navy is to fight and defeat China in defense of its home islands. Japan is also a great trading nation but being buddies with the US has its advantages. Therefore, in a hypothetical conflict between China and Japan, the Japanese navy can muster its full strength whilst China would have to leave some naval assets behind to maintain a presence in the SCS, lest there be a banana boat revolt while the warden's away.

Obviously I'm leaving out the contribution of land based aircraft, which IMO, would be the ultimate deciding factor in any Chinese/Japanese naval duel.

You are right even India has more carriers than UK at this moment & Chins with its massive economy & Industrial strength has what it takes to be no 2 & a potential challenge for no 1
Japan has a very good navy but they lack in carrier area & India too has a good Naval modernisation plant which will at least put us in Top 5

See that's good girl, tamed like a kitty ha ... so cute

First question, RN ranks 4 (1st post of this thread, i agree with it), IN can't be found anywhere, go check it out.

Second question, PLAN ranks among Asia's top 5 mostly deadly navies comparing professionalism within Asia (The 5 Most Deadly Navies in Asia , i agree with it), and PLAN ranks 2 here too (details in 1st post of this thread), but OMG still IN can't be found anywhere, please go check them out.

Any more comprehensive article you can find with IN appears on it and show how mighty it is, feel free to post on PDF or reply here. Now go try my good girl will you? Remember to alert me.

Boy do you know what you are even saying
What you just said was-
Hey here is my list created by me & it is mentioned here than RN is above IN so it will defeat IN in its own backyard
& in the 2nd thing you post the same BS

Let me ask you again
Why do you think than RN with no carriers & a handful of frigates & destroyers will be able to defeat IN in Indian Ocean

& why do you think PLAN has more experience than IN in carrier operations

 

[gambit]

Gents,

Stupidboy is just glad to be on this adult forum, deluding himself that the diarrhea he spews means something. Leave the kid alone. No need to step in his sh it.