Biden tough on China.....lol!

As Seahawk eluded to the biggest weakness of China is their prolific theft of IP. I work in aerospace and their exploits are very well known. Unfortunately for them their habit of stealing IP and then reverse engineering it has limited their ability to innovate, which is a key difference between China and the rise of Japan as an engineering and manufacturing powerhouse post WW2.

As for carrier landings, let’s see them do it at night in weather under radio silence and then I’ll be impressed. Right now they are playing catch up in a big way.

Also one other point, you guys that drool over China seem to be glossing over the massive genocide, slavery, and massive human rights violations occurring there every day. Maybe do a little research before you talk about how China is some sort of shining city on the hill.

And guaranteed there's an SSN parked right underneath that garbage barge.

Then other countries next. Quite a few, including New Zealand, they don't need to invade as they half own us already.

In a full on war how long would it take to sink every aircraft carrier on the planet?

I think I'd much rather be on a submarine.

Off to parf we go!
:-)

https://media.tenor.com/images/de3ba...593b/tenor.gif

Quicker than it would take to deploy replacements

I think I'd rather be on a small Caribbean Island than a sub, would rather have a Tequila Sunrise in my hand when either side start throw nukes about

Are aircraft carriers still relevant? Isn’t drone warfare a thing now? Do you need a carrier in the area to launch a drone?

I’m asking because I don’t know.

Does China view the nuclear option as survivable?

I've been thinking about this and typed some ideas before.

The domination of conventional warfare has been getting smaller and smaller into nodes recently. It once was a race to who was bigger in the last century. The metal battleship became the dominant game-changer of the world. The king of the seas. In WW2 it was surpassed by carrier based aircraft which ascended the throne and took the title. One carrier could dominate a region by itself. The carriers then were surpassed by long range anti-ship missile technology. A few tons of material replaced the dominance of millions of tons of materials with the thousands of personnel and especially the supply chain to maintain it all. One break in the chain could break the machine. So everything got miniaturized.

But those micro weapons are dependent on being able to get to distant targets, which also requires increasing bulk. And they are entirely dependent on the information and sensors to be accurate. Right now much of this is guided by GPS and visual satellite data, which is also a dependency chain.

Countermeasures can completely break those structures such as a anti-satellite weapons and electronic warfare technology. A 'space force' if you haven't read the papers recently. Without the God-Eye data, everything based on that that becomes blind. I've read reports of the USA GPS system going down a few times probably as a test by some entity either friend or foe. Read into that whatever you will.

Most importantly, any weapons system is dependent on targeting data. And that can be blinded by countermeasures such a projectile defensive systems, lasers, radar jamming etc. Defense can be hardened but weapons will always advance faster than armor. That requires bulk and bigger again. And the supply chains to support it. It turns into a cycle.

Finally there is the human element maintaining every link in the chain. Big or small. That is empirical at the end of the day. And mission goal determines everything. A conventional war can be fought between armies, and an area 'controlled' at a heavy cost in men and equipment, but without the consent, or total control, of the populous the pieces gained will wear down eventually for naught through subversion. That is the way of human nature.

For many years only the USA had the GPS system, and the military could indeed encrypt it at the flip of a switch. Now Russian, China, India, EU, Japan all have systems. Shutting down ours will not help much when they can use the signals of multiple other systems.

For sure a jamming signal can block the signal, but you can't jam a signal over the horizon. I can only hope the US Navy has plans to defend our carriers from high speed weapons of the other countries. Subs will be one option, and stealth aircraft like the B2 bomber will be a bigger deterrent.

Hopefully MAD will prevail and mutually assured destruction is a major real deterrent. It will not stop a true madman or terrorist organization.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/a7tY1ZSs9bM" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

^^^ That video is propaganda... because IMO that ship was not a sea. Note how flat the water is and there's no movement of the horizon.

Also, it's interesting how they don't use a steam catapult and they have a ski jump at the end of the runway. The last time I saw that was on a British WW2 carrier.

past tense: eluded; past participle: eluded

evade or escape from (a danger, enemy, or pursuer), typically in a skillful or cunning way.
"he managed to elude his pursuers by escaping into an alley"
past tense: alluded; past participle: alluded

suggest or call attention to indirectly; hint at.
"she had a way of alluding to Jean but never saying her name"

Carriers are not hard to hit, much harder to sink...anyone with naval experience has seen the "green flare" during naval exercises, meaning the sub has completed their mission and launched torpedo's at the CV. The "green flare" is simply the sub way of telling you buenos días.

I did two what are called "PassEx's" (at least in the 80's and 90's) with the Australian Navy. The premise of the PE's were to work out tactics and procedures in a realistic, at sea environment.

So, US Navy is going to attack Perth with the Carrier Battle Group, they were going to defend themselves.

The Australian Navy had, at that time, some really fantastic diesel electric submarines with complete professionals onboard, the finest kind.

They still might: https://www.navy.gov.au/fleet/ships-boats-craft/submarines/ssg

Anyway, anti-submarine warfare is hard, especially against SSG's.

When the PS was started we sank all their Frigates, other stuff, shot down all the incoming aircraft since we had two Aegis boats snuggled up.

Then the green flares started popped in just a few hours. If you know the ships are coming, and you are a competent sub force, it gets ugly early for the aggressor.

That is why the Chinese invested so heavily in the Spratly Islands developments...hard to sink an island.

Concerning UAS: They need a lot more care and feeding than people think. As well, they need instructions, even a "swarm" of autonomous UAS: That and the absolute tyranny of distance in SEA means they need either a base to operate from or a ship unless they are expendable. Even then, they need a launch point.

All that trouble and what are they really going to do? Bomb something?

China is SEAD hell. Best of luck.

More as this unfolds.

BTW, aircraft carriers are as relevant as Canaries in a Coal Mine: critical indicators of intent should they be attacked.

Thanks Paul. That totally makes sense.

Thanks for the English lesson via Google, do you have something of value to add to this conversation?

I am surprised the Seabird didnt mention this.

The Russians sold the Chinese that hunk of junk they call a CV. The Chinese have been playing the long game..patiently waiting for the American sundown since 08..doing what it takes to survive the end of the American empire. To that end they have built a blue water navy to.protect their far flung sources of resources. Secondly American will has shrunk away where the US is now so weakened that the Chinese can now flip the US the bird and exert their own will and pursue their own ambitions.
Americans like to think of themselves as being winners when in fact Ameticans are corrupt losers.

^ oh come on now, you're coloring with a mile long brush.

Americans are not corrupt losers, and "the Chinese" are not concerned with flipping the bird. That's not why they spend decades and billions on building a navy. You are 100% correct that they play the long game. But it is not defense from the West that is their goal. They are building toward expansion of their area of taking of natural resources such as oil, food grain, water, and oceanic biodiversity. They are also looking to exploit ground and fauna as food resources. They will deplete wildlife and need to expand land claims in order to be able to export waste also.

You say "tomato " I say "tomato ".
You two are really saying the same thing, but with different language.
The only reason to field a carrier is to project your influence. The the USA has done that for decades to protect resources and friendly governments. Some liked it, some didn't.
The Chinese now feel it is their time. Some will like it, some won't.

My gosh, the old Kiev. I remember keeping track of her in the fall of '76 as she left the Black Sea to join the Northern fleet. The Soviets first carrier.

Best
Les