Take their aircraft carriers. Not only are they not nearly as good, even if they were, the US has decades of experience and can launch sorties at an insane rate, while China is still writing the training manuals as they go.
I feel compelled to point out that in simulations, a single danish diesel sub killed the uss ronald reagan while completely undetected by her escorts, and the Chinese navy has subs with the same propulsion system
has some assumptions that probably wouldn’t be true during a US/China conflict
Could you elaborate on that?
The bigger danger would be anti-ship ballistic missiles like the DF-26.
I was under the impression that US ship-based anti-missile systems were top of the line, or is the phalanx CIWS not great against intermediate range missiles?
I think it’s one of those things you wouldn’t know unless it came down to it, and the US Navy seems to think they’re a threat.
Pretty much the idea of an arms race I guess, if the missiles get through consistently, build a CIWS better able to deal with them. If they don't, build missiles better able to deal with the CIWS.
In a huge ocean with a fast-moving carrier group operating far from shore, the subs would be less effective.
In the south china sea, can you ever be truly far enough from shore and still be useful? I know a carrier obviously projects power over an enormous range, but if you want to hit targets in mainland china with F-18s you have to be fairly close to a landmass because of the geography of the area and China must have sub pens and/or naval bases in places that aren't China
maybe, but within a decade, american politics will preclude the 'modern' mobile warfare doctrine from being even remotely viable in their armed forces. and without that they are well and truly fucked against any modern force.
deleted by creator
I feel compelled to point out that in simulations, a single danish diesel sub killed the uss ronald reagan while completely undetected by her escorts, and the Chinese navy has subs with the same propulsion system
deleted by creator
That'll teach me not to go purely off memory
Could you elaborate on that?
I was under the impression that US ship-based anti-missile systems were top of the line, or is the phalanx CIWS not great against intermediate range missiles?
deleted by creator
Pretty much the idea of an arms race I guess, if the missiles get through consistently, build a CIWS better able to deal with them. If they don't, build missiles better able to deal with the CIWS.
In the south china sea, can you ever be truly far enough from shore and still be useful? I know a carrier obviously projects power over an enormous range, but if you want to hit targets in mainland china with F-18s you have to be fairly close to a landmass because of the geography of the area and China must have sub pens and/or naval bases in places that aren't China
deleted by creator
Lol, fair enough
maybe, but within a decade, american politics will preclude the 'modern' mobile warfare doctrine from being even remotely viable in their armed forces. and without that they are well and truly fucked against any modern force.