China leaves US trailing in race to build warships，Beijing’s shipbuilding capacity 230 times greater than American yards, US intelligence admits

[FuturePAF]

It's already happening, ASEAN now is China's top trading partner. besides, before the west can cut trade ties with China, they need to find an reliable alternative first, many products now are only being produced in China, trade decoupling hurts the west more than the other way around.

It won’t stay that way for much longer. Hence why China need to diversify its suppliers and its markets, and help these markets grow so they can absorb ever more product and ship ever more percentage of China’s needs, creating a Virtuous cycle outside of the western block.

 

[FuturePAF]

oh my god........

Sea Control is not a ship's goal, as in the ship want to control the sea, it's an operational goal, the reason why 076 is not used for sea control is because it lack the capability, but does that mean your operation, any combat operation does not need sea control?

Again, it go back to my original question, you either task a fleet to protect 076 when you deploy them, which drawn resource out form your navy, and hence the NEGATIVE EFFICIENCY, because you need to do more than just sitting outside Taiwan (I am going to use the Taiwan example direct) and launch and recover sorties, some part of your navy would need to be in ground support, some part of your navy are going to do air interdiction, you are going to thin out your navy by protecting these 076 that cannot protect itself, and that's a waste of resource, and why not build one that can do both.

That's my point.



I never said I could, @FuturePAF said that ask him


That is the problem.

If the Type 076 is a modified Type 075; longer with only a slight increase width-wise for just the landing section then it figures it will be a little more then proportional larger then the type 075 in relation to the length increase (I.e. if it’s 30% longer it’s probably only 30-35% heavier). To go from 30-40,000 tons of the type 075 to 65,000 tons for the Type 076 assumes it is around 50% longer.

China already has a tried and tested carrier design in the 65,000 ton range; the Type 002. So will the type 076 be more of a modified Type 002 then a lengthened Type 075?


Page 61/94 on the trend of tonnage of the PLAN

https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/CSBA8310_(Chinas_Choices_report)_FINAL_web.pdf

If the USN’s total tonnage is in the 4.6 million ton range and China was around 1.4 million tons expected to go to 2 million tons by the end of the decade, this trend will accelerate as larger ships like the Type 054B, Type 095, Type 055 and Type 003 come on line. By 2035-2040 the PLAN maybe in the 3 million ton range, and still expanding.

 

[Han Patriot]

Sure, Taiwan is well within China AD range which mean land base Chinese AD structure can protect the fleet, lol Area Dependent? REALLY....so let me get this straight, you are saying you either need to know what kind of threat you are facing before you deploy AND MORE IMPORTANTLY no new threat can ever materialise, or as I said you don't really care about what the enemy can do to you, right? Either that or you can somehow change mission profile of a deployment mid-sea......

Yes, that sounded like someone who know what does it mean by sea control will say LOL


The concept is simple.

You have a ship that can do more than 1 thing, then you don't need other ship to do that thing for you, and that in turn mean you have more ship to do stuff that other than sitting up your arse and do nothing. It doesn't matter if you are talking about sea control, land base support or air suppression,

If you don't understand this concept, I can't help you bud.



And finally, show me where i said I know how the tonnage of a ship just by looking? Show me exactly where I said this and I will answer your question

Yes it is area specific mate. You can't cure stupidity.

So how do you know just by looking? And sea control by a single ship? Lolol

 

[jhungary]

View attachment 950883
Yes it is area specific mate. You can't cure stupidity.

View attachment 950884
So how do you know just by looking? And sea control by a single ship? Lolol

And where did I say I can see it? I said it would MOSTLY wouldn't be over 40K and that's not from looking, it's because of the aforementioned reason.

And seriously, I have problem looking at you seriously now after you missed AN ENTIRE CLASS of ship in the US Navy and then you tell me you are good at naval Knowledge?

Well, not being an expert on PLAN, but I do know China does have 053 Frigate between the 80s to 00s......And then you missed an entire Oliver Hazard Class Frigate the US were using between the same timeframe. I mean that's 70 ship for crying out loud.

If the Type 076 is a modified Type 075; longer with only a slight increase width-wise for just the landing section then it figures it will be a little more then proportional larger then the type 075 in relation to the length increase (I.e. if it’s 30% longer it’s probably only 30-35% heavier). To go from 30-40,000 tons of the type 075 to 65,000 tons for the Type 076 assumes it is around 50% longer.

China already has a tried and tested carrier design in the 65,000 ton range; the Type 002. So will the type 076 be more of a modified Type 002 then a lengthened Type 075?


Page 61/94 on the trend of tonnage of the PLAN

https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/CSBA8310_(Chinas_Choices_report)_FINAL_web.pdf

You quote the wrong person mate.

 

[FuturePAF]

And where did I say I can see it? I said it would MOSTLY wouldn't be over 40K and that's not from looking, it's because of the aforementioned reason.

And seriously, I have problem looking at you seriously now after you missed AN ENTIRE CLASS of ship in the US Navy and then you tell me you are good at naval Knowledge?

View attachment 950891

Well, not being an expert on PLAN, but I do know China does have 053 Frigate between the 80s to 00s......And then you missed an entire Oliver Hazard Class Frigate the US were using between the same timeframe. I mean that's 70 ship for crying out loud.


You quote the wrong person mate.

My apologies

 

[Han Patriot]

And where did I say I can see it? I said it would MOSTLY wouldn't be over 40K and that's not from looking, it's because of the aforementioned reason.

And seriously, I have problem looking at you seriously now after you missed AN ENTIRE CLASS of ship in the US Navy and then you tell me you are good at naval Knowledge?

View attachment 950891

Well, not being an expert on PLAN, but I do know China does have 053 Frigate between the 80s to 00s......And then you missed an entire Oliver Hazard Class Frigate the US were using between the same timeframe. I mean that's 70 ship for crying out loud.


You quote the wrong person mate.

Okay so you were just guesstimating, then just say soooo. Basically YOU DON'T KNOW. You didn't look, you based the size on your own fantasy.

 

[jhungary]

Okay so you were just guesstimating, then just say soooo. Basically YOU DON'T KNOW. You didn't look, you based the size on your own fantasy.

LOL, you really are slow, aren't you? We are all speculating here, no one know what is the actual dimension of said ship unless you are building it, and if you do, I doubt you can tell any one of us what is the exact dimension of said ship.

And you still have not answer me why you think this ship is over 60,000 tons? Or why my point was wrong. You offer nothing but some idea that wouldn't even be correct in the first place.

But yeah, whatever, US had not operate Frigate for a long time. If you buy that, you probably will buy anything.

LOL

 

[Han Patriot]

LOL, you really are slow, aren't you? We are all speculating here, no one know what is the actual dimension of said ship unless you are building it, and if you do, I doubt you can tell any one of us what is the exact dimension of said ship.

And you still have not answer me why you think this ship is over 60,000 tons? Or why my point was wrong. You offer nothing but some idea that wouldn't even be correct in the first place.

But yeah, whatever, US had not operate Frigate for a long time. If you buy that, you probably will buy anything.

LOL

I didn't say it was 60k, because i don't guesstimate based on 'sea control' whatever that means. I cannot tell a ships tonnage just by looking.

 

[jhungary]

I didn't say it was 60k, because i don't guesstimate based on 'sea control' whatever that means. I cannot tell a ships tonnage just by looking.

So, you are saying you have no answer?? but only it would not be 40,000 tons?

Glad to know

 

[Han Patriot]

So, you are saying you have no answer?? but only it would not be 40,000 tons?

Glad to know

I had never said i know the weight of an unbuilt ship, you were the one saying it was below 60k.i asked you how you know, you said sea control. Lolol. Again how do you know the weight just by 'sea control' of a FLEET.

 

[jhungary]

I had never said i know the weight of an unbuilt ship, you were the one saying it was below 60k.i asked you how you know, you said sea control. Lolol. Again how do you know the weight just by 'sea control' of a FLEET.

And Sea Control depends on location, right? lol

Again, so you don't know how heavy it is, yet you know it is not lighter than 60k?

This got to be your second post of the day after you saying US does not have a Frigate before 2005.

 

[Han Patriot]

And Sea Control depends on location, right? lol

Again, so you don't know how heavy it is, yet you know it is not lighter than 60k?

This got to be your second post of the day after you saying US does not have a Frigate before 2005.

View attachment 950925

Well that's the definition of 'sea control' which you don't seem to understand. It is AREA SPECIFIC. I already explained to you that US has no frigate since 2015 and before the Constellation is ready, if you don't get the point and divert from answering some flawed logic of yours then i cant6be helped.

I don't know the weight then how do I know anything! Are you coherent? You are the one claiming it is less than 60k and when i ask you how you came to that conclusion, you said sea control, i then proceed to correct you that sra control is fleet based not ship based. Then how could your logic be correct when your argument is flawed from tje beginning. Get it numb numb?

 

[jhungary]

Well that's the definition of 'sea control' which you don't seem to understand. It is AREA SPECIFIC. I already explained to you that US has no frigate since 2015 and before the Constellation is ready, if you don't get the point and divert from answering some flawed logic of yours then i cant6be helped.

I don't know the weight then how do I know anything! Are you coherent? You are the one claiming it is less than 60k and when i ask you how you came to that conclusion, you said sea control, i then proceed to correct you that sra control is fleet based not ship based. Then how could your logic be correct when your argument is flawed from tje beginning. Get it numb numb?

And you know what is "Sea Control" lol? From your multi year service in the Navy? LOL I mean, you know you are bullshitting when you keep saying it's AREA SPECIFIC. In fact, explain to me how it can be Area Specific when you have to do mission PROFILING BEFORE OPERATION.

I mean, you do know you can't fake military knowledge when you had not served in the Military, right? No amount of dictionary can help you understand military term, you need to be in it to know what that is.

And you did not say US has no frigate since 2015. You said US has no frigate BEFORE 2005 and for a long time no less

Lol you said this and now suddenly it become 2015 now??

I mean, you are caught red handed, it's probably easier to just admit you are wrong and move on, instead of doing this, whatever this is, it sure as hell funny seeing you try to out talk people with photographic evidence.......LOL And then you talk to me about logic and argument.

Ever wonder why no one here ask you for your opinion on just about anything?

 

[Han Patriot]

And you know what is "Sea Control" lol? From your multi year service in the Navy? LOL I mean, you know you are bullshitting when you keep saying it's AREA SPECIFIC. In fact, explain to me how it can be Area Specific when you have to do mission PROFILING BEFORE OPERATION.

I mean, you do know you can't fake military knowledge when you had not served in the Military, right? No amount of dictionary can help you understand military term, you need to be in it to know what that is.

And you did not say US has no frigate since 2015. You said US has no frigate BEFORE 2005 and for a long time no less

View attachment 951079


Lol you said this and now suddenly it become 2015 now??

I mean, you are caught red handed, it's probably easier to just admit you are wrong and move on, instead of doing this, whatever this is, it sure as hell funny seeing you try to out talk people with photographic evidence.......LOL And then you talk to me about logic and argument.

Ever wonder why no one here ask you for your opinion on just about anything?

Boy genius why do you keep insisting littoral corvettes are frigates when even the Navy says they have NONE?

I explained multiple times to you what I meant, if you still don't understand it, then what can I do? You still have not answered me how 'sea control' is done by a single ship and how does that determine it is below 60k.stop diverting the attention mate. Lol.

 

[jhungary]

Boy genius why do you keep insisting littoral corvettes are frigates when even the Navy says they have NONE?

I explained multiple times to you what I meant, if you still don't understand it, then what can I do? You still have not answered me how 'sea control' is done by a single ship and how does that determine it is below 60k.stop diverting the attention mate. Lol.

How about Because Ray Mabus - SecNAV, said so?

SECNAV unveils new name for LCS: the 'fast frigate'

New Freedom- and Independence-class ships will now be christened as "fast frigates." Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said.

www.navytimes.com

SECNAV unveils new name for LCS: the 'fast frigate'​

And then he WAS WRONG ONCE Again ( Really am not surprised)

Six Littoral Combat Ships to Deploy by Year's End as Navy Continues to Refine Operations - USNI News

The Navy will have six Littoral Combat Ships deployed by the end of the year – a record for the program, several Navy officials have confirmed to USNI News. Later this year, two Independence-class LCS will join USS Tulsa (LCS-16) and USS Charleston (LCS-18) in the Western Pacific. The two ships...

news.usni.org