Chinese Fleet 2008, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times


reply posted on 30-11-2008 @ 02:18 AM by chinawhite
Originally posted by Xtrozero
It is an interesting subject, but one reason why the US is successful with their navy is due to the fact the US rules the skies and so makes their navy somewhat safer.


Americas power is through many different forms and areas. I believe that the US has overwhelming power because they control space and thus have unimpeded intelligence and communications which are essential for modern combat as shown by the Gulf War and Yugoslav wars where the Iraqis and Serbians lost contact with its forces and thus reducing the ability to locate target and organise offense and defensive actions. The US since the battle of Mid-way has used this to monitor and deploy forces so that "hot spots" are overcome before they even start. "From knowledge comes power" is a often overused cliche which applies to Americas intelligence capability

Another form of power is the number of naval bases located globally, America is only one continent but they can refill anywhere which gives them flexibility which the Soviets and Chinese never enjoyed. Add to the combination of excellent carriers and capital ships the USN is unchalleged for power projection although I believe they could not defeat a major power with a competance military. Britain, Russia, India, China, Germany and France

It would be like saying the US would be using their Navy to patrol the areas of the coast guard.


Chinese planners are looking straight at Taiwan for now but in the corner of their eye they see Africa, South America etc who provides China with much needed raw materials. Having said that I can't see the Chinese expanding sooner rather than later and any move the Chinese make will scare smaller neighbours which will be detrimental to Chinas "soft" power and Chinas "Peaceful" rise as they put it. What the Chinese leadership will do is hopefully establish control locally and might eventually have ties with other powers. But that leads me to question Americas role as a superpower and the world order, in the future we will not see superpowers but power blocks in the sense of the Cold war, athough their will be "superpowers" in a sense their influence will be limited by regional powers like India, Brazil and possibly Russia.


reply posted on 30-11-2008 @ 02:18 AM by blowfishdl
reply to post by C0bzz


That's great good for you big guy it doesn't matter. The fact is the U.S. military technology is growing at such an alarming rate that it is impossible for Chinese engineers to keep up.

Are you two seriously to conclude that the Chinese military is more technologically capable than the U.S.?

I'll be happy when those warships are destroyed by nuclear arms.
China

[edit on 11/30/08 by blowfishdl]


reply posted on 30-11-2008 @ 02:28 AM by Chadwickus
Originally posted by blowfishdl
reply to post by C0bzz


That's great good for you big guy it doesn't matter. The fact is the U.S. military technology is growing at such an alarming rate that it is impossible for Chinese engineers to keep up.

Are you two seriously to conclude that the Chinese military is more technologically capable than the U.S.?

I'll be happy when those warships are destroyed by nuclear arms.
China

[edit on 11/30/08 by blowfishdl]



No I think the point of what Cobzz was pointing out is that you have no idea what you're talking about. Therefore your opinion should be taken with a grain of salt.




reply posted on 30-11-2008 @ 02:49 AM by C0bzz
Originally posted by blowfishdl
reply to post by C0bzz


That's great good for you big guy it doesn't matter. The fact is the U.S. military technology is growing at such an alarming rate that it is impossible for Chinese engineers to keep up.

Are you two seriously to conclude that the Chinese military is more technologically capable than the U.S.?

I'll be happy when those warships are destroyed by nuclear arms.
China

[edit on 11/30/08 by blowfishdl]


You're damn right it does matter. You were writing off these naval vessels, for the simple fact they were Chinese, not American, and you were basing that of looks, alone - the very nature of which is absurd.

“In just a decade, the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has acquired about 25 Song, Kilo and Yuan conventional and two second-generation type 093 Shang nuclear powered attack submarines, with more Yuans and 093s to come.” Defence Today; "Australia and Maritime Power", John Armstrong and Paul Johnstone, March/April 2007, p. 12

25 diesel submarines, and 2 Nuclear subs in a decade. At this, by the way, accelerating, growth, it is conceivable the Chinese will have over fifty diesel submarines, and over ten Nuclear Submarines by 2020. Of course, that doesn't count surface vessels (skimmers), which are also being procured at an accelerated rate. Air Force, too, is quickly expanding at an accelerating rate. All of this, is some of the latest Russian and Chinese, technology. That is, infact, a capable, credible, possible threat, no matter how much you sugarcoat our own capabilities.

Are we to dismiss these huge numbers for the simple fact the technology is inferior than that of the United States? What about a war in the straits of Taiwan? That is very possible. I know little about the Naval warfare, for the simple fact it's Naval - I don't want to be kooked up in a salty, claustrophobic, slow, peice of steel; I like jets, which is usually why I stay out of Naval discussion like this. However, why don't you check out this RAND report. Scroll down till you find an ipaper with 'RAND: Project Air Force Air Combat Past, Present and Future' on the first page. Read it. Granted, it did not take into account the ROCAF, ROKAF, JASDF, RAAF, NAVAIR, AEGIS, or Patriot PAC-3, but hopefully that will give you some idea into what this thread is actually about.

As for the Nuclear arms comment. No thanks. That would kill lots of Americans, lots of Chinese; lots of civilians, while creating disastrous amounts of radiation, and could possibly lead to the fall of the West - I'd be happy with turning these machines into nice museum pieces. If opinions like yours were held in geopolitics, we would be setting ourselves up for another Pearl Harbour or World War 3. No thank you.

[edit on 30/11/2008 by C0bzz]


reply posted on 30-11-2008 @ 05:03 AM by C0bzz
reply to post by blowfishdl


Originally posted by blowfishdl


This dude looks like he's rockin out with Windows 95!


Sorry, no dice. The simple looks of the interiors of a submarine tell us very little about the capabilities of such a vessel.

The most capable Nuclear Attack Submarine, the American Seawolf class, has an interior that looks like this...:


The most common, in service Nuclear Submarine, the American Los Angeles class, has an interior that looks like this...:


Computers themselves, have little to do with anything. The F-22 is ran by a grand total of 76 CIPs (Common Integrated Processor), water cooled. CIPs are the central, networked computers that enable the integration of radar, electronic warfare, and identification sensor data, as well as merge communication, navigation, weapon, and systems status data into coherent, fused information for communication to the pilot via multi-function displays. The F-22's Common Integrated Processor main mission computers (Plural) operate at 10.5 billion instructions per second and have 300 megabytes of memory. Pretty pathetic. Playstation 3 is 2 Trillion floating Operations Per Second... right? Yet, without a doubt, it is the most advanced aircraft in the sky, even for the foreseeable future.



I would suggest you actually look up the specifications and capabilities, not just skimming over a couple of pictures, all while justifing the whole delusion with the vessel being Chinese, not American. The pictures posted by Chinawhite, themselves, show designs relatively similar to existing highly capable, Spanish, German, American, French, and Russian designs. Anyone who actually disagrees with you is not a communist, by the way - we have discussion like this, to in part, keep us safe, and aware, of any threat and the current political tempo.

For the record, 'We see, we strike', in my custom title, first line, is the motto of 1st squadron, RAAF. Once I finish tertiary education, that's where I'm going - communism is the last thing I stand for. Keep that in mind. By the way, it would probably be best not to draw me into the other thread.

[edit on 30/11/2008 by C0bzz]


reply posted on 30-11-2008 @ 09:33 AM by imdeceived
Originally posted by blowfishdl
reply to post by C0bzz


That's great good for you big guy it doesn't matter. The fact is the U.S. military technology is growing at such an alarming rate that it is impossible for Chinese engineers to keep up.

Are you two seriously to conclude that the Chinese military is more technologically capable than the U.S.?

I'll be happy when those warships are destroyed by nuclear arms.
China

[edit on 11/30/08 by blowfishdl]


Blowfish I've been reading this whole post and I truly admire your skill at evalutating a warship capabilities just by looking at a picture. It's true that the prettier the better.

Now that you've been exposed , I would suggest you stop posting here. You're just discrediting yourself more and more with post like this. The goal of this thread is not a USA vs CHINA battle. Hell, there would be so many variables and factor to take in account in a scenario like this that no one can really predict what would happen.

As for communist, we are not in the 60's anymore. If you were a bit educated on China, you would realize that they are not quite the communists you claim they are. And by the way, the US is pretty much nationalizing the banking system right now, so i guess you are a communist (sarcasm).

True, China have been reversed engineered US techonology. If China was the technology leaders, USA would do the same thing.

So blowfish, I suggest you go back to playing Amerca's Army and come back when you're able to discuss objectively.


Oh, and that comment on using nuclear weapons ...
Really, what are you trying to achieve with comments like that? That's the argument of someone who doesn't have any arguments.

BLOWFISH, YOU DON'T NEED ANYONE TO DISCREDIT YOU, YOU CAN DO THAT BY YOURSELF.


[edit on 30-11-2008 by imdeceived]


reply posted on 30-11-2008 @ 09:55 AM by imdeceived
Originally posted by Chadwickus
Originally posted by blowfishdl
reply to post by C0bzz


That's great good for you big guy it doesn't matter. The fact is the U.S. military technology is growing at such an alarming rate that it is impossible for Chinese engineers to keep up.

Are you two seriously to conclude that the Chinese military is more technologically capable than the U.S.?

I'll be happy when those warships are destroyed by nuclear arms.
China

[edit on 11/30/08 by blowfishdl]



No I think the point of what Cobzz was pointing out is that you have no idea what you're talking about. Therefore your opinion should be taken with a grain of salt.



Exactly my point! àim not an expert on the matter, but im not tryin to be either!
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>    ^^TOP^^



Nano Drones Flying in Formation
  Posted 9 days ago with 15 member flags
FPS RUSSIA
  Posted 14 days ago with 7 member flags
Spinel Thin Transparent Ceramic Armor defeats Barrett .50 Cal BMG
  Posted 13 days ago with 6 member flags
Self-steering Bullet Researched
  Posted 10 days ago with 5 member flags
Shockrounds take out three of your five senses.
  Posted 3 days ago with 5 member flags
Defective Ammunition Warning
  Posted 2 days ago with 5 member flags