Will China’s Naval Build-Up End US Navy's Hegemony?
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 06. 2024
- 🟢 Try Speakly with first 7 days for free and get 60% discount on an annual subscription: speakly.app.link/goodtimesbad...
📌 Support GTBT on Patreon! / gtbt
➡️ Paypal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/GoodT...
Production: Hubert Walas
Research & analysis: Jakub Knopp - Institute of New Europe analyst. Student of the College of Europe in Warsaw. Specializing in US foreign policy in the Indo-Pacific and military rivalry with the PRC.
Video production: Łukasz Szypulski
Voiceover: Hubert Walas
Translation: Adam Sajdak
Music: Charlie Ryan - Oscillating Form
Business inquiries:
goodtimesbadtimes@lighthouseagents.com
Channel Angels:
Prodjekt: www.prodjekt.co/
🗺️ Maps: aescripts.com/geolayers/?aff=90
⚪ GTBT Polish - / @goodtimesbadtimespl
🟤 GTBT на русском: - / @goodtimesbadtimesru
🟣 GTBT France - / @goodtimesbadtimesfr
⚫️ GTBT Deutschland - / @goodtimesbadtimesde
🟡 GTBT Україна - / @goodtimesbadtimesua
🔘 GTBT Arabic - / @goodtimesbadtimesar
🔴 GTBT Español - / @goodtimesbadtimeses
🐦Twitter - / hubertwalas_
📘 Facebook - / good-times-bad-times-1...
Disclaimer XTB:
For monthly turnover up to 100,000 EUR. Transactions above this limit will be charged a commission of 0.2% (minimum 10 EUR).
CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. *77% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. *You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.
Sources - on request: office@gt-bt.om
#china #usa #navy
🟢 Try Speakly with first 7 days for free and get 60% discount on an annual subscription: speakly.app.link/goodtimesbadtimes
📌 Support GTBT on Patreon! www.patreon.com/GTBT
➡ Paypal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/GoodTimesBadTimes
SSK are harder to detect than SSN... SSK can turn off their engine, SSN cannot just turn off their reactor. so you are wrong in detection. SSK are proven to be harder to detect in US wargame against other european states that operate SSK... to the degree that SSK manage to sink the US carrier undetected in those exercises... the issue with SSK is their defensive in nature lacking the range of SSN. however they are actually superior when near their home waters...
furthermore the claim that SSN can be a threat to China in a Taiwan scenario can only be spoken by armchair admiral that does not understand what the island chain problem actually is. the island chain create limited opening to which can be ambush, the Chinese just need to drop sonar between the island and they can find the sub, while within the china seas, the water isn't deep enough for submarine to hide against patroling anti sub aircraft... in fact the only reason why US wargame priortise the sub isn't because the sub are effective, but because the rest of the fleet is ineffective against chinese forces due to the overwhelming superiority of chinese missiles. thus the subs are the best thing USN has, however that doesn't mean they are great in a confined seas that limit where they can hide and move.
this idea that US can win in Taiwan is a mirage. the reason why westpac is reorganised to indopac was so the westpac fleet can flee to the indian ocean and threaten chinese shipping there well away from the china seas. US strategic plans against China in a Taiwan scenario is not to intervene directly but a blockade far from China, to be an itch that China cannot scratch. just like how US does not intervene directly in the Ukraine war but freeze Russia trade overseas.
the problem is any naval exchange will result in losses, and the side that can build more ship will have an advance in an attrition war, US ain't going to do that...
@@lagrangewei with Xi proving to be such a genocidal Stalin wannabe, and threatening all his neighbours, Google the missile purchases of Japan, S Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, and the Philippines in the last few years. Literally THOUSANDS of the latest anti-ship , anti-aircraft, and anti-missile missiles are now pointed at China, because Xi is clearly a Han-chauvinist dictator bent on genocidal expansion. Look at Tibet and the Uighurs. Until he is replaced, all China's neighbours are united against China, with US backing, and US NUKES! Duh.
The real question is if China can help to secure the Persian Gulf sea lanes. If they cannot project power into their source of energy, then they can only defend themselves from immediate threats.
Why would china need to do that if they have Iran as an ally?
@@erozionzeall6371that's what the chinese hope. Iran has had half its navy sunk at once in the past so they're not super promising as a naval ally
@@erozionzeall6371 most of their oil imports arrive via sea, that's why.
If they can't secure their shipping lanes in the Indian Ocean, they will have to rely heavily on Russian energy which may not be enough to sustain them during war time (or peacetime for that matter.) Plus, Russia is not really a friend. They act the part, but in reality they hate eachothers guts. Furthermore, the Russian energy industry is suffering from brain drain and the lack of western equipment to maintain their oil and gas production. 5 years from there, Russia may only be able to produce half of what they currently produce.
@@RalarconableYes that's my understanding too especially in the Frozen areas the equipment is going bad very fast and no one knows what to do about it in Russia they just don't have the training and right now without advanced chips etc coming in they're in big trouble.
Diesel electric submarines are not necessarily more noisy, unless they operate far from base. Some designs have crept up on US carriers in wargames. They turn off the diesel engine and use silent electric motors when near a target. They recharge their batteries in safer waters using a diesel engine.
Edit: Since there seems to be a lot of confusion about quiet diesel-electric AIP engines, please look at examples such as the chinese Yuan-class type 039A.
China can't even keep their submarines out of their own traps😅
Sorry, diesel subs ARE more noisy than nuclear or AIP subs. Period. Fact.
@@ericbeattie761says the navy which drives their subs into the ocean ground
@@John_Doe448 isnt that china? didnt china recently had one of its submarines get caught in a trap and all the sailors died?
But you can turn them off. You cant turn Off the cooling of a nuclear reactor, at least not for long.
Thanks for your work, GTBT! Really glad to see a new video
The PRC does a lot of creative counting when they claim to have the world's largest navy. They count ships that are part of their coast guard, as part of their navy, and also count dual use ships that are basically just freight ships. If the US counted its coast guard and government freight ships in the way the PRC does it would be the largest by total ships and massively larger by tonnage.
Americans: when China does bad the numbers are real, when they do good the numbers are fake, which is it?
@@J_X999because it 😮higher quality, more technology, meaning more time, more maintenance and more money. Shocking right?
@J-99999 Have you not even seen how the Chinese build their own buildings and projects? The Chinese people themselves literally have a term called "tofu-dreg" for shoddily-made buildings and shit made quickly to cut costs and pocket the remainder. I trust the Chinese would be cutting corners on their ships, too, at this rate.
Yea I built 5 subs, 6 oil tankers, if a crew or people are motivated to build a ship, they could if known in war time, safely build a TAO class in like 6 months. But we don't live under threat so we workers get to take our time, paychecks get cut, economy hums but at your prescription and perception to the idea that the American work force is lazy, incompetent, or weak is severely limited in scope from articles online. I lived it, I know whats capable of our people, and I'll say their is lazyness and ignorance at job sites but majoritively the crews that run those ships can and will build shit so fast if needed to. Look up aircraft carrier turnaround times after being bombed in the 40's. In times of strife with zero danger at work of being bombed, we would demolish anyone the geographical position of America is why it's so strong not it's people. It's hard to kill people who are 7000 miles away. Let alone a population who hasn't seen the hardest of times, and don't want to. Don't blame them, death and destruction are all war brings. But capacity in the U.S. if awakened again would set the world off. We're to safe, to strong to just step on and the giant sleeps.... For now.
@@ProfessorPhysics2 You're just mad that not everyone has your western world view. Maybe there are people who are fine with buildings that regularly fall over in a stiff breeze, made from bricks that crumble at the slightest touch. You just hate China!
Phillipines granting the Pentagon access to NINE bases is going a long way toward putting the brakes on Chinese naval power.
Japan doubling its military spending and promising to help the US if China attacks Taiwan also doesn't help China.
It’ll take more than that to break the largest army and navy in the world and the most factories and workforce in the world, if the Seventh fleet sails near Taiwan or Chinas coast they will be met by hypersonic missiles, costal artillery and carrier missiles. Btw China has air superiority over Taiwan and mainland China so good luck getting rid of those factories and the ports that have two hundred percent the ship building capacity America has.
@@bulkierwriter2772the USA and the Allies just need to blockade a few straits and there goes China.
@@bronzebackbassing18Oh no where can they get fuel
Russia: uh hmm 😊
@@bulkierwriter2772the USA doesn’t rely on Russian oil…
@@bronzebackbassing18China is next door to Russia so the us will only waste time blocking straits just for oil and gas to come from Russia and from the Middle East through Russia.
As Asians , prefer China look after SCS not US
Great channel, thank you very much!
Good work, thank you, everything is short and clear. ❤
It's interesting to see history in the making and the balance of global power changing. I just hope a China-USA conflict won't escalate in a full on nuclear war.
I don't expect nukes will be used in any way greater than tactical as china has significantly less nukes than the us thus they would not be able to complete a total and strategic attack, and the us would likely be unwilling to launch a strategic attack
I honestly dont expect either the US or China to be nuke happy, especially since both China and the US only maintain stockpiles to use as a deterrent from other nations from using nukes against them (or in the US's case, their nuclear defense umbrella too)
Even Nuke War. All Out War. Okay. ❤💙👍
Depends what China does, but I believe there will be war over Taiwan. China is also not a global power even by 2030, their are too reliant on the west economically, and have few alies and even fewer competent ones. They will be strong in their military, but won't be able to extend their power projection.
Looks like the Imperial German Navy building up from whatever coastal naval force the Prussians had. Building up so much that they began to rival the premier naval power of the time; British Royal Navy.
To be fair, the taiwan strait seems not to be a good place for US nuclear subs to have a battle. The US subs are powerful indeed, but the strait would be simply too shallow to operate for the subs. So in the imaginary head-on battlefield, which is to say the vast plains on the western island, the PLAN would easily choke the strait in both side of the strait with the small brown-water ships that all equipt with anti-sub kits. Then the only filed that might seem possible should be the deep ocean between taiwan and the second island chain. Just for information.
There is probably no need for the modern US nuclear powered submarines to get into torpedo range in order to attack marine targets anyway. They can stay comfortably outside the Strait and launch their Tomahawk cruise missiles and then slip away afterwards. The Ohio class can carry up to 154 Tomahawks. The Virginia class (Block V) can carry up to 40 Tomahawks. The anti-ship version of Tomahawk has range 500-700 km. It makes no sense for nuclear submarines to risk against mines, surface warships and diesel electric submarines in the relatively shallow waters of the Taiwan Strait.
Thank you guys!
One of you best!🎉
"Will china finally-"
Heard the same questions about russia surpassing the US, and look where russia is now
Shhh, you're going to trigger the russki sympathisers.
No one ever said that, least of all USA. Russia isn't China, neither is Japan or anyone else. China is incomparable to anyone. India included.
I’m pretty sure plenty of Englanders had once said the same of the US, pointing to the defeat of France and Germany as examples.
Я из России, могу ответить по существу, Россия находится там, где и всегда находилась, т.е, на своем месте, и да у нас все в порядке, если вы имеете виду конфликт с Укроинной который вы нам устроили, то да, должен признать,это неприятно, приходится убивать "братский" нам народ, ни Россия ни Украинцы, ни когда, вам этого ни простят!.... Это вяло-текущая сво, даже не война.У войны другие законы.Если считаете что, призедент В.В Путин блефует, говоря о превосходстве России, в плане военных технологий, тогда для чего вообще нужен был проект Украина?...
Surpassing does not mean that one party grows stronger, perhaps it may mean that the other party becomes weaker
Thank you for this very thorough and insightful analysis. 24:18 regarding the US submarine superiority posing a lethal threat to a hypothetical Chinese landing operation in Taiwan, Prof. Lyle Goldstein has pointed out that the Taiwan Strait is very shallow and narrow and therefore is not conducive to submarine warfare. The area could be easily and effectively mined, etc. to greatly hamper US submarine operations in the Taiwan Strait. The significant US submarine superiority is important in other contexts, but not so much with respect to a Chinese landing on Taiwan.
Is Prof Goldstein a military analyst or someone who read an ocean map with topography lines? Lots of people with uninformed opinions out there. Did they also note how few Chinese transports there are, which reduces the number of possible invading troops so low it's laughable to assume they could defeat the large Taiwanese Army?
Did they note that the Taiwan Strait is barely 100 miles across and the US Carriers would hide behind the Island and launch fighters OVER Taiwan, not around it? Which gives them the benefit of Taiwan's excellent anti air defenses to thin out any Chinese attacks against the fleet?
I'm not sure any reference to submarines really changes the difficulty China would face in trying to actually land troops on Taiwan.
@@markpukey8Prof. Goldstein of was the Chinese military expert for the US Naval War College for 20 years. He has obviously studied the issues in great detail.
@@markpukey8 Taiwan is within helicopter range of the mainland. it not a D-Day style attack. they are going to flatten the island with missile and land by air. and this idea that Taiwan has a "large army", Taiwan ended conscription years ago... there is no "grand army" left. what is worst is alot of their retired pilot and specialist is now working in the mainland due to higher pay in the civil sector of China, this greatly deplete Taiwan reserve manpower who are trained and skilled.
it like you didn't watch this video, the first belt of anti ship missiles can hit 1800 km out, if you think the US carrier would hide behind Taiwan.. well that's why there are 2 sunken carrier in those wargames, they were hiding there and got rekt. the whole reason why US resort to arguing about using submarine is because its carrier can't enter the area of control... China's A2AD is too strong.
@@lagrangeweiIt's a war. Ships get sunk. That's why you have MORE SHIPS! Did you learn that the US alliance wins every single war game against China? Sunken carriers are bad (if you are American) but that sort of thing happens in a war.
Did you read the part about all the Chinese losses while they fail to take Taiwan? And again... the part where they FAIL?
Did you see any war games that allow US Stealth Bombers free rein to destroy large numbers of missile launchers and stockpiles of missiles? Reality will always be different from war games because the GAMES always have artificial limitations and arbitrary rules.
By the way, what will our Asian allies be doing while China heroically launches all its missiles at our carriers?
@@markpukey8 First off, what country are you from and what do you actually know about US military or Chinese military? Not sure what war games you've been reading but all the war games conducted by the pentagon since 2017 shows the US losing every scenario. The latest war games ran by some think tanks showed the US losing 2 carriers and the Chinese losing many ships. However they did say that was under certain battlefield conditions that didn't allow the Chinese to use their full capabilities. I guess if you want to show a victory you can always handicap your enemy.
Great video!
well said excellent assessment
The number one thing we have to remember is COMPETENCY. Not to rag on Chinese Navy veterans, but the US Navy has been tried and tested since before WW2 era.
You cannot copy and paste a blueprint of competent sailors, combat engineers, fighter pilots, electronic technicians.
The US was a largely unexperienced force at the beginning of WW2 (minus Great War veterans), but they managed pretty good against the Nazis and Imperial Japan
I am sure a swarm of people will shill about how china has the most competent sailors in the world then make some claim about transgenderism ruining the u.s military.
on the first point is that no plan survives contact with the enemy and no military is proven until it cuts its teeth on something, look at Ukraine where Russia was expected to roll over the country in a few weeks at most even with western aid.
on the second claim which is a red herring regarding trans genders ruining the military these claims seem to come from either the lowest IQ members of the conservative public who think that anybody who is anti western is somehow on their side or these people are foreign nationals of usually China, Russia or India though a few others tend to jump on the bandwagon too. they simply regurgitate stuff their own state media tells them on mass. I would like to state that I am a conservative and right wing + an american but I am getting tired of the grifters on the right that latch onto any enemy of whoever they don't like then pushing them as some sort of savior of the west.
Experience doesn't make a difference if missiles have put most major vessels to the bottom of the sea
@@sgufanboy you forget the extensive training and war games the sailors go through, which are extremely expensive to do in the volume that the US does them and most navies straight up skip them save one or two once in a blue moon.
@@sgufanboy yes, but you’d be comparing a relatively inexperienced US with a relatively experienced Japanese navy (US had the UK to help them A LOT with the Nazi threat).
Whereas, today, you have a VERY experienced US navy against an inexperienced Chinese navy.
The Republic of China wasn't established in Taiwan, it was established on the mainland in 1912 when it overthrew the Qing Empire. It relocated the capitol from Nanjing to Taipei in 1949.
I think the misconception stems from how some of the Taiwanese define Republic of China (ROC). If you pay close attention, you will notice that in the Minguo Calendar which the Taiwanese refers to, some of them will claim that they are currently in Year 74, which is the number of years since the founding of ROC. If you go back 74 years, it is 1949, the year where the capital is established in Taipei after the Nationalists lost the Chinese Civil War and had to escape to Taiwan island. By saying that they are in Minguo 74 instead of 112, it appears that there is a good amount of Taiwanese that considers the ROC period from 1912 to 1949 to be a separate entity.
the same crowd that yearns for independence ofc. But nontheless, the ROC is born in 1912 as a historical fact, this fact cannot be changed by whatever is trendy,@@bestwl
@@Xind0898 Yes, exactly.
@@bestwl Whether in mainland China or Taiwan, the President of the Republic of China is Chiang Kai shek。
@@wingchouchou3174 Yes, I am aware of this. Pro-independence Taiwanese would like to ignore this though.
Excellent work 💯 thanks
GTBT really has some of the best maps on YT. May I know where can I get maps like the one at 0:37?
We should stop sidelining the local actors. Taiwan and Japan in particular.
When the drums will start beating, I don't see Japan sticking with its current constitution. Rearmement is already happening behind the scene.
A video should be dedicated to this topic, because war in Taiwan will not just be a US/China clash in the Pacific.
All the local countries will eventually have to take a side. None of them are Switzerland.
And everybody will be Belgium...
Exactly and I think that's the point a lot of these China Hawks don't get. The Japan defense Force is probably all I shouldn't even say probably is definitely more advanced than anything China has. They basically have aircraft carriers but they're smaller than regular aircraft carriers they're more like our helicopter carriers. But they have f-35s submarines and very well trained military they are the fourth largest economy in the world and have amazing manufacturing powers themselves. It would be very quick and easy for them to expand their Navy and they are actually focused on that right now because of China. China has caused an arms race in the region. Vietnam has upped its game and Philippines has just starting to as well as Australia. Plus the UK and probably many NATO countries would support the US. So if it were only the US against China especially if the US were dumb enough to keep it ships too close to the Chinese shores than China might win. But the aircraft carriers will be probably on the other side of Japan but definitely on the other side of Taiwan not inside the straits of Taiwan. On top of that as people imagine there's many US military bases all over the world that could be used for staging and help with assisting. On top of that knee immediate solution would be to cut off the streets of mullica from any oil tankers getting through to China first step. Second step use submarines and stand off weapons to help the Taiwanese to destroy the Chinese Navy. Remember Ukraine has been training heavily since 2014 for this conflict with the West and been equipped by the west since about the same time. Taiwan has been preparing for a conflict with China for 80 years now. They call it the porcupine theory meaning when China tries to get their dirty little hands on this porcupine they're going to get poked very badly. Of course Taiwan could not beat China by themselves. But they have hardened bunkers with their jets on the far side of the mountain and country dug in to the side of the mountains very deeply. They keep those there So would China use this first rounds of missiles they won't lose most of their Air Force. They'll keep it intact for later in the fight. On top of that they have prepared to not only use their highways for hair strips but to actually repair their airstrips and highways very quickly to be able to use them again if they do get bombed. So they should be able to take off from almost anywhere in the country and land almost anywhere in the country. I think the US in the past is called it an unsinkable aircraft carrier. On top of that pretty much all of the beaches and landing points which there are few of have very steep mountains just past the beach. That means the Taiwanese will be in a superior position firing down on the naval ships before they even hit the shore. But on top of that they have sharp plants at the bottom of the shore as well as many other tools just to deter them from getting on the beach. The Taiwanese have trained in anti-missile defense and they have excellent hackers and computer skills on top of that. Remember to that these Chinese ships will be sailing 150 km from the Chinese coast to Taiwan that takes minimum 2 hours probably longer for each ship to get over what do you think will happen to those ships in between mainland China and Taiwan. Many of them will sink and the Chinese will wonder why they are sinking because the superior submarine force will probably be the focus of the West in the beginning. Plus like I said they have standoff weapons that could also destroy their ships. So they're not going to move an aircraft carrier in close right at the beginning of the conflict. They'll do that later after they've destroyed all the Sam sites and taken out most of the Chinese Navy. This will end very badly for China and is a big mistake. Please go talk to your Chinese government and stop them from this madness
@@Drew-sy2bn"But the aircraft carriers will be probably on the other side of Japan but definitely on the other side of Taiwan not inside the straits of Taiwan"
ABSOLUTELY! So many people just don't grasp that! You're absolutely correct. We would use the enormous Taiwanese anti-air defenses to thin out any attacks against US ships.
But paragraphs are still your friend. I got lost halfway through your post. Just saying.
Yea but I don't think japan wants either side to win, china for obvious reasons but if china is too weak the Americans will fuck them too
America won't defend Taiwan, china is a nuclear power, TSMC machines would probably just be destroyed, Nuclear powers won't go to war with eachother of at Least I hope not
@@markpukey8 I know I reply on a lot of stuff and I do voice to text so I get too lazy to break it up into paragraphs. I don't earn any money from it I just state my opinion. I should break it up but unfortunately I don't.
I really love the maps in this video. Who made them? If it's someone on the GTBT team, who was it? Can we see more of their work elsewhere?
Quality is more important than quantity in naval warfare. China is nowhere near the US just yet.
China rules it’s backyard, that includes Taiwan.
Tell that to Japan in WW2.
@@Aamirmhmd99 That is a misconception: WW2 US didn't have a quality disadvantage on a ship-to-ship basis (in some cases, they are far more advanced such as in FCS and radars). Only slight disadvantages in some experience and pre-war numbers in the Pacific.
Not always. Germans had higher quality ships than the UK in WW1 and lost the naval war.
@@jdamsel8212 That’s debatable. Whilst Germans ships were often superior in armour and protection, British ships were superior in firepower and speed. That doesn’t mean they were of better quality, they just had differing naval doctrines. The crews and officers in both navies being mostly equal in skill and capability.
Naval strategy is build strategy. Sadly the US no longer has the infrastructure in place to recreate a contemporary equivalent to their 1941 to 1945 build program.
No. USA did not have the need until now. Big difference. During WW2 USA had to mobilize as well and build up from nothing. You start teasing the monster you will get a big fight. Give them a challenge and you will see what will happen. They will find a way how to win.
@@mariajones8304 shipyards of today are in China and S. Korea. That was not the case in 1937
China has natural oil reserves in North Eastern China and Xinjiang province, I wonder why this is never spoken about. China's reliance on Middle Eastern oil is overestimated to be honest. From a strategic perspective, the Chinese buy Middle Eastern oil so they don't use up their own.
Japan in WW2 was dependant on Chinese oil fields in North Eastern China (Manchuria).
The Chinese have Russia and Iran too, both can supply enough oil to fuel their war machine.
Besides china can build Eurasian railways
Because they do not have the capacity to fuel their internal economy. Why do you think they are stockpiling COAL these days? They already did the math and know they cannot "replace" imported oil in any meaningful way.
And Russia can't build the pipelines needed to send more oil to China. Or do you imagine Putin will allow Xi to send crews into Siberia to build them? They already use small ships to move as much crude from the Arctic as they can to China.... they don't have any more ships! That supply is at peak right now. Same problems for Iran. The existing transport is maxed out. Building more capacity is not a fast or trivial exercise.
if this is the case, why do they import so much?
二战期间日本并没有在东北发现石油，所以铤而走险一路向南到印度尼西亚抢石油， 直到战争最后失败
China consumes more than it can produce, that's why they are reliant on Middle Eastern oil. Japan was not dependent in Manchurian oil fields during WW2 because there was no technology to drill for these oil fields. There's a reason why the US's oil embargo in Japan was so devastating that they had to declare war on the US and go for the oil fields in South East Asia.
guys, its not a chain, a chain is connect like a necklace, these islands are just stepping stones
You're not even wrong. Keep up the good work.
The US Replicator Initiative could have been mentioned. “. . . Attritable, autonomous systems at a scale of multiple thousands in multiple domains within the next 18-to-24 months”.
Is it just me, or does the world look more and more like a war game scenario.
Always has been.
Its called manufacturing consent
one big checkers board
the history is cyclic...
China has NEVER interrupted maritime navigation, so the US mentality of protecting freedom of navigation is absurd.
Very Great and Unbias Presentation.🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
The moment I heard “100 years of humiliation” and “opium war”, I know this CZcamsr did his research. 🎉👍
They really did give a great intro for context, didn't they? I don't agree with their conclusions, but I appreciate their lead in and honesty so much that they got me to subscribe to the channel.
Mainland China's total shipbuilding tonnage will account for 55% of the world's total in 2022
There are 735 domestic shipbuilding companies in China, with a total of 529 shipbuilding docks and slipways of over 10,000 tons, including 56 large shipyards and slipways of over 100,000 tons. Among the 56 large shipyards and slipways, there are 20 with a capacity of 100,000 to 250,000 tons, 30 with a capacity of 300,000 tons, and six with a capacity of 500,000 tons.
There are a total of 38 shipyards in China with a length of more than 304.5 meters and a width of more than 75 meters. Even taking the size of the U.S. Ford-class aircraft carrier (333 meters in total length and 77 meters in maximum width) as a standard, there are 34 Chinese shipyards that exceed the Ford class in both length and width. There are currently only five shipyards left in the United States that can build warships, and only one of them, Newport News Shipbuilding, can build aircraft carriers. Newport News Shipyard has only one dry dock that can build aircraft carriers. If war comes, the United States will not have the ability to build a second aircraft carrier in a short period of time.
China is building a brand new shipyard with a total length of 565 meters. Once this shipyard is successfully completed, it will become the largest shipyard in the world.
If China fully activates its "shipbuilding machine", it will be able to build 23.25 million tons of ships in a year. In comparison, the United States' annual production capacity is less than 100,000 tons.
Yes but you cannot deny that the Americans still has 100+ years of buildup and may still have a good shipbuilding industry and may also make alot during wartime
See ww2, this time it's like two Americas who can both pump out alot of ships
No, sorry but that's just delusional talk. China has 200 times the ship building capacity of the US. Modern warships are complex things to build, both time consuming and tech heavy. You cant just turn around as the US did in WW2 and expect to crank out destroyers in a few months. The US also does not have the skilled manpower to do this, building ships is a skilled job. All Chinese ship manufacturing has been designed as dual purpose, and can be switched from civilian to military quite quickly. In short, should China and the US both go to war production, the US would lose the race. Its not even close and US military leaders know this.@@akriegguardsman
In WW2, shipyards and factories were targets for strategic bombings. With modern precision weapons, it is inconceivable that either side of a major war would leave the shipyards alone to build warships. Even Ukraine managed to attack the heavily defended shipyard in Sevastopol, destroying warships and damaging dry dock. So the assumption that China or the US can build warships at the pace of peacetime is a bit optimistic.
Never dissapointed.. Even better than caspian report.
Just beautifull - chef kiss
Beyond outstanding.
A quick correction. The term "Island Chain" or Island Chain Strategy was first conceived by American foreign policy statesman John Foster Dulles in 1951, during the Korean War and not by the Chinese in 1980's. It was a strategic maritime containment plan to surround the Soviet Union and China with naval bases in the West Pacific to project power and restrict sea access.
The quickest response would be to dramatically increase orders for Constellation class frigates to at least 60 vessels with delivery within 10 years. 80 vessels in 10 years would be better and would be feasible with production in multiple shipyards.
Another short term solution would be to order an additional 250 new build block 3 Super Hornets to replace all block 1 Hornets and some of the block 2 Super Hornets in active service.
Reusing the Ticonderoga's and Los Angeles', as well as Nimitz and Eisenhower, would be another good step. Taiwan still uses the Kidd class ships that are very similar to Ticonderoga's, and if they can operate the 79 year old Cutlass/Hai Shi, there is no reason that the Los Angeles' can't be made to run into their 40's or beyond.
Several closed shipyards can be reopened, and as for manning the ships, if arbitrary and outdated 1990's recruiting standards designed to reduce personnel were repealed, there would be enough for crews.
Yes this might cost some money, but Congress had zero trouble printing a trillion dollars for garbage like carbon capture and electric buses. China is a bigger threat than the debt, and the boost of a major defense buildup to US industry would be worth the cost too.
A few hundred extra billion dollars can solve all of this
Recent news says Chinese ship building capacity is 200 times of American, so it is a daydream
very good idea, so pay more tax pls
@@valortradertax hike on rich woke corporations, tariffing BRICS countries, finishing the keystone pipeline, and restoring work requirements could easily fund a trillion dollar defense buildup and also cut the deficit dramatically.
Certainly it could pay for missile defense, 1 for 1 Ohio replacement, 50 Constellations, expanded F18/F15 & also 6th gen development, extra Forda, life extensions to existing platforms, reopening yards like hunters point and Philadelphia, reopening plants like Bethlehem Steel, and yes securing the US border too.
@@robruss62 The US economy has stopped growing at the unprescedented pace it once has and faced with China, the US cannot hope to win a trade war nor an arms race, the only hope which the US can pin it's hopes on is the consolidation of American influence as well as pressing advantages that are already readily available such as stealth tech and high tech manufacturing and productions.
If the money is invested in F-35s, there won't be enough for the new frigates and if too much funds are spent on frigates there are none left for the 6th generation stealth fighters and bombers and if too much is spent on money the oppositional party will capitalize on the overinvestment while if too less was spent the pentagon faction would step in as a protest. See? The problem is not the money, America has plenty and if inflation continues America can survive on albeit dirty tricks such as crashing a few markets and economies here and there for price manipulation (I mean, it's kind of an everyone thing, so... Not really anything new or nefarious really). The problem is Chinese economic growth and the internal issues Washington deals with (you've got the republican and democrat led factions but also the finance factions, pro-military factions, elitist factions, etc and etc). And they are the reason why America finds it rather difficult to consolidate and concentrate.
China on the other hand, I wouldn't need to say much. National People's Congress and Standing Committee are made up of very competent members from decades of experience and selected from a harsh meritocratic environment (if they were so corrupt and stupid or whatever as the internet claimed then I have to believe America wouldn't be dealing with such a problem in the first place). And you bet, there are of course factions in China, but overall very aligned.
Plus, the US doesn't find potential within itself to grow the economy as it did back in say the 80s due to various domestic, foreign, and social factors that China does not have to deal with, but China has their own problems to deal with anyways and some are way worse than the American ones. America can no longer outproduce China anyways, if China were to match the American desperate measures as you did propose then who would outwin the other before reaching the mutually recognized bottom line?
I only hope that the china-usa conflict is so obviously likely that the diplomatic services can prevent things boiling over.
The United States can remove the Chinese merchant fleet from the seven seas. Or even simpler: the US can leave other countries to do so.
That happened to the Japanese, 1943 to 1945.
Well china has the best railways system across Eurasian
Allegedly. Don't believe all you're told by that country . . . @@widodoakrom3938
One thing I feel the need to clarify is that China feels "hemmed in and constrained" by the island chains in the same way that Russia felt "hemmed in and constrained" by countries joining NATO.
The only manner in which they are being obstructed is in terms of being able to invade their neighbors without repercussion. Imperialism disguised as victimhood, in other words.
Mnhm yes but living under ruSSia and china regime s*cks a*s
True
Well....Every country is not innocent, at some point, all countries has been involved in criminal activities. Not a good model to apply morals too much on geo politics
You would feel hemmed in if you are surrounded by non friendly forces. And the US isn’t exactly playing nice so why wouldn’t they feel hemmed in? You treat someone like an enemy and they will act like one
@@dugowf766 That cuts both ways. China has treated the US like an enemy, and so the feeling is being reciprocated.
Number of ships, yes, weight on water, no. I think is like 2.2 million tonnes for China vs 4.4 million for the USA. Also, PLAN Aircraft Carriers are diesel carriers, easily tracked and heavily reliant on local supply ships (fuel primarily).
I agree but us carriers also limited by their fleet with fuel. Carriers never go anywhere alone.
Good to hear that US sailors don't need to eat, and that F35s are also nuclear powered.
@@elmoheadDid that have relevance to the fact that US Carriers move in a group that includes resupply ships? And that (and this is important) WE KNOW WHERE MORE FOOD IS and can send more ships back and forth with supplies!
It's almost like the US Navy has over 200 years of experience feeding its sailors and supplying its ships at sea. Go figure.
@@markpukey8 nuclear powered crafts doesn't mean no docking for 25 years. It's not the limiter to sailing.
@@elmoheadYou are the only person implying otherwise. I said our navy knows where to go to get more food and supplies. That includes the subs.
Only time will tell
China can maybe challenge American Naval hegemony 100km from its coast at best. Not much more
It is now 2023!
@@jimchang231doesn't change, China military are grossly behind US
Are you still living in the last century? Learn more about the total tonnage of the fleet launched by China, about 3 to 4 years. The tonnage of Chinese warships launched is the total of British warships.😅
@@user-pi7md5br6f Most are coastal combat ships. Would get absolutely obliterated by combined arms/tactics available from aircraft carrier battle groups. All you need is a couple anti-ship cruise missiles from F-35s to sink a ship, and Chinese jets/pilots are far worse than F-35s/American pilots. If tonnage was the only thing that mattered, China would be able to project power past the first island chain. And yet they cant.
Who cares ? The ramifications of China's naval build up can't truly be known for another ten or fifteen years, it takes a long time period for these kinds of changes to have full effect. So many different events can alter that outcome as to be incalculable, so trying to guess is just that, a wild ass guess.
"Lets hope that a similar verification does not occur in the Strait of Taiwan" - You mean let's hope CCP's calculations will be right?
The winding up at the end showed how ridiculous this analysis was. China has clearly stated that it doesn't want to be a global hegemon, so comparing its military to the U.S.'s military is ridiculous. China spends 1.4% of their GDP every year on its military, whereas the U.S. spends 3.7%. Also, submarines don't play an important role in preventing an invasion of Taiwan because the Taiwan Straits are shallow. Lastly, why is China described as having "economic troubles" when it is predicted to grow at 4.5 - 5% this year? The U.S., on the other hand, is predicted to go into recession.
Excellent work new subscriber, Question is there a way I could get a JPEG of your illustration of the Chinese Pacific "island chains" as shown in figure 4:54 ?
I want this too
Actually what you said about China's submarine are incorrect. They are conventional submarines but they are actually very stealthy and quiet. Germany’s MTU actually supplies state-of-art engines for China’s submarines.
In fact, China can make its own engines, but Germany's MTU engine technology is mature and the price is acceptable. Because Germany follows the US policy of sanctioning China. Currently, the CHD-620 diesel engine made in China replaces the German MTU-396 engine.
The German MTU-396 engine is not the most advanced engine, but it has good stability, mature technology, and a relatively suitable price.
China has a couple dozen more ships than the US does, but they don’t come close to the US in tonnage and fire Power. And the US Navy has the history and experience to back it up.
And new lgbtq generals to back it up
Chinas ships are tiny. USA can build those really quick too. It’s the big ones that count
The economy will crash before those are put to use 🤦🏽♂️
美国海军50年来的经验就是打打治安战
People forget the maintenance bill. Size alone isn't everything.
War changes as technology changes and at one time the carrier replaced the Battleship, and the missile will inevitably replace the carrier.
The key factor here is ALLIANCES. They would be pivotal in any conflict. If you look at the 4 greatest conflicts in history (Seven Years War, Napoleonic Wars, WWI, WWII) they were only won by a group of allies coming together. China has no major allies of any consequence. While the US would likely have the support of Japan, Australia, UK, Philippines and possibly others. Ultimately, I believe this would be the deciding factor.
They aren't the greatest conflicts in history and China has survived and been in top for 5000 years for a reason. They defeated nuclear superpower, sk, and 17 other UN countries in 1950 in Korea while still backwards economy n zero technology.
8 great powers/8 nation alliance when they were their weakest in dynastic collapse, Japan invaded too and still couldn't win.
Good luck today.
@@ex0duzz So which conflicts do you believe were greater in magnitude than those 4? You also say China was on top for 5,000 years, but in the next sentence say it was backward with zero technology, so which is it?
The Korean War was a stalemate hence why there are still two Koreas and a DMZ today. To suggest one nation could win what would essentially be a world war with no allies is ignorant of history.
@@justintcb5189 pick any of the thousands of battles in China and Asia over the millenia. Just fight vs mongol took over 100 years and even 'minor' battles had armies like 10x the size that European armies fielded at the same time. Mongol and Chinese basically took over most of the world. Yet you don't mention any of mongol battles or Chinese battles but 7 year war? Even just taiping rebellion had 10s of millions even 100 million dead in China alone. You don't count that as greatest conflict or war or battle, or what about battle of changping where both sides fielded armies with 500,000 each, so a million man battlefield basically. The loser "zhao" had 450,000 slaughtered just in one battle. This was when Europe could only field like 50,000 armies max.
In 1950 china was backwards and poverty. No one can stay on top forever for 5000 years, but for majority of it China was on top economic or technologically. Don't know what you're confused about. That is just natural cycle of history. Few hundreds years of prosperity, then civil war, foreign invaders, crisis or collapse, then always rise back and on top. That is Chinese history in a nutshell.
Even if you take WW2 for example, most of the biggest battles and most losses were from China and Russia, not Europe.
As for alliances, China has its own supporters and friendly countries. Like Russia, Middle East, South America, Africa, even in Europe. While they may not get directly involved, they don't need to. They just need to keep trade and supply china, China has the manpower and tech to take care of itself. This was in stark contrast to the days of qing dynasty and collapse era, and whole world's greatest powers ganged up vs China and could only get a port concession and never even attempted to invade or mess with China proper. Jt is a suicide. China by itself is more populous than USA, Europe, Japan, Australia etc all combined. China is 20% of humanity by itself already, let alone global south who will all be backing china.
@@ex0duzz The 7 Years War involved 16 nations, almost 30 other polities and states and was fought on 4 continents with over a million casualties. It was a GLOBAL conflict along with the other three I mentioned. In a contemporary context, Great Britain was more powerful than the USA and China is today relative to other powers of the time and even she couldn't win a global conflict without a network of alliances.
@@justintcb5189 Britain lacked manpower and unity. Even if you want to talk about geography and not scale of battles or deaths or length or wars(conflicts of magnitude), then surely mongol conquering half the world is most impressive.
1,000,000 deaths is just a battle for China, not whole war like eu. Taiping rebellion already had 20-30 million deaths alone. Same as WW2 losses for China and Russia but this was just inside china.
So while Chinese battles might be more localized, the magnitude is just as great if not greater. It affect Korea, Japan, Vietnam, mongol and every other civilization around.
The only difference is that China manages to keep unite and assimilate the various countries and kings back then, Europe didn't. They are all tiny states and kingdoms nonstop fighting little wars of small scales.
India is really the only big accomplishment for Britain. And rome. And Russia also in terms of geography size, but those are not big magnitude battles but just land grabbing and taken without much of a battle.
Maybe near China, but globally it isn't happening in the near future
When the G-7 all run out of money,
the Navy will be out of Gas.
Blowing away a few fishing boats doesn’t give you the experience you need to take on a massive deep water naval presence
USA has actually dialed back on naval worldwide protection of economic shipping lanes, and this protection actually *helped* China‘s exporting business. USA still has *regional* naval protection for its allies and trading partners. We obviously “lose control” of USA worldwide interests, but, as a taxpayer, if you don‘t like what the USA is doing for you, you can pay your own way out.
But everyone is a US trade partner... I agree though, the USA coming out of WW2 as the only naval power still standing after the UK economic and imperial collapse and the destruction if Japan means everyone else has been largely complacent on ships and naval tech. E.G., Here in Canada, we have only frigate-class ships, and just recently finished a round of new shipbuilding for 6 frigates capable of patrolling the Arctic Ocean. The last time we built a new ship was 1991.... a 30 year gap where we did nothing. We run 80s-era submarines that, when decommissioned, get turned into amusement rides at marine parks. We had the chance to get 3 amphibious assault vessels/helicopter carriers built by the French for the Russians (the deal was pulled after the 2014 invasion of Crimea) that would have been a game changer for us but we walked away, saying it wasn't worth it. The unspoken attitude is that we don't need to worry about military spending, the USA does that. But with the recent American swing towards isolationism, it's interesting to see how that attitude is now changing and I wonder what it will be like the next time Russian subs enter our waters or aircraft buzz our commercial flights and the Americans say, "figure it out yourself".
@@Steadyaim101 And *everyone* (all these "trade partners") keep calling the U.S. imperialistic for having a Navy to secure shipping in the first place. They can start paying for their own protection, ungrateful bastards.
"USA has actually dialed back on naval worldwide protection of economic shipping lanes, and this protection actually helped China‘s exporting business."
What a fake news when China's supposed ally like Iran is snatching their tankers
WIthout US Navy protecting the global ocean safe for commerce whereby China can import raw materials from a continent away and to export their finished product to continent away, their economic model will collapse. With US Navy pulling out of seaway patrol expect more rogue nations and pirates to pillage China's shipping. And given most of Chinese naval ships uses unreliable German engines, wouldn't be able to dispatch a ship or two in contingency.
And in aformetioned situation? Crickets from the US Navy. Why would we protect our enemy's interest?
@@chrisjackson1215 Secure shipping my ass. You don't need 300k+ troops stationed around the area to protect the lanes.
@@jin_asap What a silly thing to say, of course you do. Those 300,000 troops are what keep countries like Iran and Russia from seizing oil tankers. Given the sheer number of countries that have to be dissuaded from hostile action against ships 300,000 isn't that much. Half of that alone is support staff, not even combat staff.
Sorry but you're clearly ignorant.
The real issue is maintenance and other running costs. You can build all the ships you want, but when the people in your country get richer(and expect higher wages) and your economic growth slows down, can you afford to keep them running and manned?
Perun made a really nice episode on that couple of weeks ago. I recommend the channel, great military economics reviews
As we see in the USN, nope
China headwinds are just too strong. The maintenance bills on things like tofu dreg projects and the absolutely mad number of high speed railway lines will
be coming due just as the population starts collapsing and economic growth is slowing. This when their only answer to boost growth is still starting new and massive infrastructure projects and trying to save the housing market. Ar the same time they want to challenge the West globally, build up a navy that can take on the US, build a self reliant and cutting edge chip industry, deal with the ageing population and BRI their way out of geographic constraints. Well good luck. I mean, I think the China challenge has peaked.
Exactly, look at all the us ships that were mothballed after ww2. Ships are extremely expensive to maintain and crew. Sure you can store them but that’s expensive also. The nature of technology advancement also makes this super expensive.
@@MD97531as you are saying this, the US is having roughly 1000 derailments per year. How many does China have? Few enough that every derailment will make it onto the news. That’s because Chinese rails were regularly maintained while the US ones... were not.
I don't understand how anti-ship ballistic missiles are supposed to work. Ships rarely stay in one place. You can't shoot very the ship is going to be either because as soon as the radar sees the very high flying ballistic missile they will change course, a ballistic missile can't.
Tech and experience of navy is what matters, not just number of ships!
When USA has more ship,you will say oh yes,USA has more,of course win.
What experience the USN has? All the people who has experience fighting naval warfare are only 70+ y/o
US navy: " we are just tickled that you want to challenge us"
One thing that needs to be considered, is local superiority. China has home turf advantage and shorter supply lines. The US would fight far from home, and would need to concentrate it’s forces, living them vulnerable in other areas (Eg. Persian Gulf).
That's true, but it has been true for 200 years. That's what the US Navy is built for. They need to do it better, but that's what they do.
@@srdxxxI second this. What is exactly America's home turf? I would argue that America's home turf has extended to the second island chain with few interruptions for the past 100 years.
Can the US' "home" not be extended to Japan? I imagine it probably takes as long to transport military goods and equipment to Japan as it would for China to transport it to wherever it needs to be. As this video is about navies, it's also quite important that the US has been looking towards using Japanese dockyards for its ships (which is reasonable, as Japanese and American ships might as well be in the same navy and are made with each other in mind).
China imports massive amounts of food and fuel through maritime routes. They would need to leave their home turf to protect them. Although you are correct that in a purely military sense America's supply lines are longer, but that is planned for. How well it's planned for though, I don't know.
@@anotherboatyep thats what overseas bases are for. for "checkpoint" in logistics.
I think the US should develop cheap drone platform with a very long range capable of launching cruise missiles or dropping bombs and use them in large numbers. They need to improve protection of the aircraft carriers against saturation missile attacks.
one of the best yt chanels, always a pleaseure to watch your content bro 🫡
Hmmm… USA likes challenges it makes they stronger. Especially real ones. It’s very interesting to watch USA mobilize. Number of ships does not matter much because only big ones really count. Small ones can be built really quick. They are not the problem as they are disposable
Naval warfare had changed dramatically and not considered in this video. Such as new weapons like DEW and also use of drones 😅also cyber navigational systems are increasingly critical to future warfare.
The problem the Chinese have is they are not serious about naval power projection. The greatest fear of the USN was that the new Type 003 Aircraft carrier was gonna be similar to the Kitty Hawk or Forrestal Class conventionally powered super carrier. Though smaller than a Nimitz class and non-nuclear, Kitty Hawk/Forrestal Class carriers are still considered super carriers, carrying over 50 aircraft. With sortie rates rivaling Nimitz class carriers. At the same time Chinese industry is fully capable of pumping out two Kitty Hawk/Forrestal Class carriers ever 2 to 4 years. Meaning the USN feared that even a 6 ship fleet of such carriers China could effectively keep out the USN from the Western Pacific. But then that didn't happen, the Type 003 was made to be conventionally power sorta copy of the Ford Class. Signally to the US that China was just trying to copy and intimidate the US/West, not actually try and build a true competitor to the US Carrier fleet. Suggesting China is trying to bluff the US/West out of Western Pacific, which hasn't worked and instead have now embolden it.
Then at the same time China's reliance on ballistic anti-ship missiles demonstrates another 'bluff' on China's part. As hypersonic ballistic missiles are notoriously inaccurate (because of problems with traveling at hypersonic speeds and why the US/West has struggled to develop them) and so can only hit stationary targets. While in reality and something video doesn't say, the US/West actually rely on their nuclear attack submarines for anti-ship warfare rather than air or ship based cruise or ballistic missiles. In fact China has stated its worst fear is massive US sub force sinking or suppressing its navy and land based missile forces (with sub launched land attack conventionally armed cruise missile) at the start of any conflict.
Right now the US Navy says it at a disadvantage for two reasons, one it has to act as if China's claims are true (so as not to be caught off guard, like with Pearl Harbor) and because the US military as a whole only fights when it has considerable overmatch on an opponent. Meaning, it will never accept having any near peer or peer adversaries and will always try to many times more powerful anyone who could change them. This is how the first Gulf War happen, the US/West and its Allies thought 1991 Iraq was a juggernaut like it seemed on paper. So prepared to fight its toughest battle since WWII and tried to overmatch Iraq as much as possible. Leading to one of most one sided victories in modern warfare.
中国造的前几艘航母只是为了技术积累😅
你的复制的感念也太简单了吧 福建号航空母舰除了航母甲板布局有借鉴美国航母 其他 雷达 推进系统 电磁弹射系统 技术路线和美军完全不一样 尤其是电磁弹射技术 和美军完全不同的发展路线
@@zobenny8290 And will it work as expected? The Fujian isn't really operational yet and spends most of the time in dock...
bingo, well said. Plus, overhyping China's capabilities is another way of convincing the American taxpayers that more $$ go into the military industrial complex to develop more new toys is necessary 😂
I appreciate your details on the new 003 carrier. I don't know enough details to know if it's accurate or not, but I will add to the "hypersonic missiles" thing by noting that Russia has used several in Ukraine. But as soon as a 30 year old Patriot battery got to Ukraine we shot one down. Russia has not tried to launch a hypersonic missile at any city they know has a Patriot battery since.
Just going fast... is no guarantee of anything. Whether they are accurate or inaccurate... they can be shot out of the sky. I'm willing to assume that our carriers and escorts have been upgraded for anti-missile defenses in the past 30 years. I don't think China's hypersonic missiles would be nearly as damaging as they like to think they are.
Also, the US mostly stopped working on hypersonics back in the 90's because they decided they can always get better at shooting them down... so they figured everyone else would too. We did not stop because we failed to succeed, we stopped because we decided they were still too easy to shoot down, so we made better anti-missile systems.
Lacking anti-ship missiles? US has more than just harpoon missiles. It has LRASM & NSM. Raytheon got the license to manufacture NSM and has deployed mobile launch platforms armed with NSM, tomahawk & SM-6. HACM, HAWC, PrSM, Peregrine, SIAW, AIM-260 and HALO are in production or going into production next year.
I don't think the US naval hegemony will end anytime soon, though China is definitely catching up quickly and is closing the gap.
China is over a decade away from fielding a blue-water navy, but time flies. That type 055 cruiser looks impressive.
lmao, china is a decade away from demographic collapse
China already field a blue-water navy, if China isn't a blue-water navy, then only the US is a blue-water navy, the UK, Frances, Japan and etc doesn't even close to chinese capabiltiies.
In 10 yrs, their demographics will result in them no longer even discussed when US brokers talk about the global economy. Their economy started dying in 2015, and the virus and recent international drama is only done for the purpose to distract their public from the actual cause of their downfall, the CCP. They destroyed themselves only a few years after they began their modernization efforts, with the 1 child policy as well as their marriage laws that encourage male progeny, for the sake of inheritance. Basically, demographic issues are not fixed for them, not without several decades of societal rebuilding, and that would require the end of the CCP and secondary structures found in most stable societies (like church and other non-govt entities) which I dont see the CCP allowing. The CCP will suppress and subvert the public until the chinese people are very nearly gone or until those people take back control of their own culturally rich and historic society’s structures.
@@bussolini6307 Yes, but China isn't sending and has little to no experience wiyh multi-ship global deployments. As small as the European navies are, Britain and France can still cobble together an expeditionary force quickly. Afaik, China keeps its navy close to its own shores, with a few ships here and there deployed on anti-piracy missions.
If only the PRC fishing vessels would stop eradicating the seafood supply in poached waters worldwide, the planet would be healthier.
@@bussolini6307 There is a reason why these "analysts" only ever compare China's navy to the U.S.'s navy. If you compare it to any other navy, it simply dominates.
Yes the US COULD "block" a lot of ocean transport, but its task for years has primarily been to keep the sea lanes of commerce open and to support international law respecting maritime boundaries and territorial claims. Quite a number of South Asian, southeast Asian and Australo Pacific nations have been very appreciative toward the US for providing this support for their navigation. It is not the US trying to block shipping.
The US is literally why Modern trade exist
DID U HEAR WHAT THE US CONGRESS MAN SAID....WHEN ASKED ABOUT BRAZIL TRADE WITH CHINA...GROWING ?
" Our Navy can stop the ships "
@@ganboonmeng5370 ... What 1 out of 435 Congressmembers says is a far, far cry from such a thing getting voted through the House, the 100 member Senate and then being signed by the President.
@@ganboonmeng5370 What US congressmen say is for public show.
@@ganboonmeng5370one thing is saying, another is doing, know the difference before blurting nonsense 😂😂😂
How many more lessons does America need ? Just like a child with learning difficulties …
It certainly will be done , no doubt about it.
It also needs to be noted that China has few - if any - useful mutual defense alliances whereas this is an essential component of US strategy.
To have vassals, one must obtain them through war. This is a fundamental difference between China and the US in spite of breathless videos such as this one talking about a rising China threat to US hegemony. The Chinese aren't looking to attack the US, they're looking to avoid being strangled. TW is lingering issue from the revolution and will be resolved peacefully if not for US interference and pot stirring in search of Ukraine 2.0.
Russian
@@shunfengzhang2052 Not really
@@shunfengzhang2052 You mean the same navy that's so incompetent it's getting obliterated by land-based artillery in Ukraine? I'm not sure Russia is a great Country to rely on given their record.
When push comes to shove, if the US declares war on China - Japan, australia, etc are unlikely to also declare war on China unless they are attacked.
As a Chinese, I sometimes get tired of the quarrels on the Internet. On the Chinese Internet, people generally look down on Americans and are proud of their achievements. On the English-speaking Internet, people are generally dismissive of Chinese people and feel they are vulnerable. Contempt for each other can lead people to ignore the serious consequences of war.
蛮夷畏威而不畏德，你的友好和忍让只会被当成软弱可欺，朝鲜战争带来的和平期马上就要过去了，我们需要面对全新的挑战
There has been nothing to disprove that you aren't
@@user-kc5gd2ok1v 我真不是友好，我是觉得现在氛围很不正常，经济也很糟糕
@@user-kc5gd2ok1v如果我们没有核武，他们有可能把第一岛链放在中国的边缘上！1949年前，美国英国的军舰自由进入中国的内河！
@@AI-ih5or 全世界都在观望最终的结果，赢者得到一切
When it comes to appreciating the benefits of island chains, China has to be at least fifty years behind the USA . . .
What is most concerning is that the newest Chinese ships are big, modern and very capable. While most are no match for US Navy ships. But the newest one are certainly big and over full enough to give the navy a serious challenge. Fast forward 20 years and factor in the rapid build up of Chinese shipyards and you easily see China quickly achieve real world parity to US Navy.
It'll take less time than 20 years. Remember that China is still growing day by day economically, while the US is drowning further and further in debt.
Chinas economy is actually starting to contract. No covid policy really hurt them and their reputation for unfair trade is also putting people off.
That is assuming the USA stop producing ships and weapons while China is accelerating their production.
@@ernieleem77 China's shipbuilding capacity is 232 times greater than the United States. Specifically, Chinese shipyards have a manufacturing capacity of roughly 23,250,000 million tons, whereas U.S. shipyards have less than 100,000 tons.
China is hard to stop. It seems like whatever the US tries isn’t working. It might slow them down somewhat but the gap between the US and China is continually becoming less and less.
The shoud worry about Japan build up
Remarkable resemblance between the PLA navy and the Qing Dynasty Beiyang Navy.
Seems to me that China's best option for acheiving greater power and influence is to avoid war and be a good neighbor. Beefs with India are totally unnecessary and a waste of resources.
Lol. China are not the Anglo Saxons. They've been peaceful neighbors to the majority of countries around it for thousands of years. Were China a western civilization Asia and Australia would all be enslaved by now
It isn't just the United States Navy. It is their allies and bases in the Pacific. If you simply block off the Straits of Mallaca it's pretty much over. This does not include things like Australian submarines or the fact the Chines import 65% of their food.
Chinas ships are tiny. USA can build those really quick too if needed.
@@mariajones8304 for real? Chinese ship building industry is 200x bigger than the US according to the US official report.
@@altrabodyltd7328I think she means that the ships themselves are of a smaller size than the US ships
@@altrabodyltd7328 ''according to us report''
even if its true what does that matter when US navy has already 2.5x the tonnage, and china isnt going to overtake it anytime
@Finkaisar according to the US Navy themselves China is aimed to overtake them in that capacity over these next years. Trust USN or some American troll on youtube....hmm...
Bit of a click bait strawman really. Interesting, but the analysis completely ignores the US's most potent and inarguably decisive advantage vs any and all adversaries; durable alliances with well resourced competent and motivated actors. Add the navies of Japan, Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Australia, India and Thailand to the game and the outcome is far less favorable for China.
With the exceptions of Japan and Australia, nobody in the region wants to have to choose sides between the United States and China. Siding with the loser in this conflict will have grave consequences, and maybe siding with the winner could as well in the short term. The other country that might actively take a side is Russia, but that probably would not be to the benefit of the United States.
the us is thousands of miles away but your "allies" are stone throw away from china and they would all prefer to be not the target of chinese missiles. i'd doubt even the us would want to fight china when they finally decide to take taiwan
In East Asia, no country will participate in the US war against China. Even Japan was worried that participating in the war would cause national disaster. It has only been less than a hundred years since Japan invaded China. Ordinary Chinese have no psychological burden to retaliate against Japan. Moreover, even if Japan assists the United States in participating in the war, it will not change the fact that the United States cannot defeat China in China's offshore waters. And Japan will suffer very serious consequences. The most direct one is the independence of the Ryukyu Islands (most of the U.S. military bases stationed in Japan are here, and Japan only has administrative districts without legal sovereignty). Moreover, the trade routes between Japan and other countries basically pass through the east coast of China. Once China blocks Japan, the Japanese economy will collapse.
@@snowlee-ml7rr 🤮😂😂🤟
It all comes down to the 3 Gorges Dam and the south to north H2O project, unfortunately.
18:25 that's the number in 2021...
Notice that the Chinese are primarily concerned with defending their own territories. While the US is trying to achieve air/sea/land/space/cyber dominance near and in China. One is defensive vs. offensive.
China literally invaded Tibet, cut off water to the Mei Kong . . . overfishes in water that doesnt belong to them . . . still oppresses and enslaves Mongolians.
Oh and they're conducting a literal genocide of Uyghur muslims in the west.
Yeaahh.. thats one way to look at it 😂
"I declare half the sea my territory! Wait- why are these trespassers already there?! 'DEFEND'!"
@EinFelsbrocken Can you explain why you believe China's claims on the South CCHHYYYNNAAA Sea are illegitimate but the other countries' claims are?
Think the future off warfare is decentralized and behemoths like aircraft carriers are doomed much like tanks vs manpads... But like tanks, they can't afford not to have them... Lets hope we can just continue to speculate...
25:59 aircraft ranges.
Why are you only counting from the deck ranges? It's called an aerial refueling bridge. Look it up.
Plenty of range if needed. Great trap for Chinese aerial assets too! They go for the tankers, meet F-22.
Finally those DF series is files still have to abide by distance, velocity, time issues themselves.
A carrier battle group can be a long ways away from a projected target area at 30 knots by the time it gets there especially if warned by the plethora of ISR assets in space. You've forgotten that detection doesn't equal a kill. You need to track the target too which at those ranges the Chinese will struggle to do.
No satellites can't act as a tracking kill chain as of yet.
May Taiwan be peaceful and prosperous in these uncertain times
it will be. We are going to swap a big chunk of what is currently part of Russia, to China for Taiwan Independence in a win win situation. When China can have more land, better food and water security by not dropping the Taiwan idea, they will be pragmatic.
Lol one can always dream but it ain't happening. Taiwan is part of China.
USA recognizes the PRC though
That prosperity depends largely on the prosperity of mainland China - its largest trading partner and the largest trading partner of most countries on this planet. Mainland China has not gone to war with any other country over the last 40 years. What can we say about the US?
The thing about the Chinese navy is that it's untested. On paper the navy is a formidable force, but the real question is how well they'll do in actual combat.
Same with the USN tho
How to test? Test with whom? The only worthy opponent of Chinese navy is US navy. The 2 powers won't have direct military conflicts otherwise it will be the end of the world.
At about 2:39 to 2:43 of this video, the moderator suggests that the Republic of China was "established" on Taiwan island when the PRC was proclaimed, which was on Oct 1, 1949. Taiwan island was already returned to the Republic of China by the World War II allies in 1945. So the national capital of the Republic of China was merely moved to Taipei in 1949 as a temporary measure until the Nationalist could "retake" the mainland. It's not that the ROC was established in Taipei. It was established in 1911 on the mainland.
Wait a second.
Guam is the major US base in Western Pacific?
What about the base of Yokosuka in Japan? Or the Philippine bases?
It’s easy for China to say they added ships to their military fleet, while in reality some of them are simple fishing boats.
If you considered fishing boards, China navy size is 10x of US size.
the chinese can build 5x more destroyers during the same time compared to the US.
@@bussolini6307utterly wrong, US & China built Zumwalt and Type 055 exactly the same timeframe despite US zumwalt is bigger
No. Their navy can be hemmed at many choke points. They get most of their oil from the Middle East. If things go sideways, India can sink every tanker as they pass by. If they find a way to solve all these issues, they will still be hamstrung by their demographics. We are watching the final years of the China we currently know. They may experience another famine in the upcoming years.
Russia has plenty of oil and gas and the Middle East can smuggle its stuff through Central Asia.
@@bulkierwriter2772definitely but i doubt they can supply enough to run gaint nation like china atleast not yet. But now maybe there will be gaint pipelines directly from Siberia to central china
Multiple pipelines to Russian oil and gas fields can easily solve this problem. India is irrelevant here, they are also massively dependent on oil from the middle east.
the real question is, would india even be willing to sink Chinese ships on behalf of US? It should be remembered that india is not australia or UK, which are none other than US's dogs.
@@Aamirmhmd99In case of war those platforms and pipelines which will be very very long and very expensive and very difficult to build and that's assuming Russian oil keeps flowing which it's not going to be soon because no one's maintaining these systems and they are in the frozen tundra. So the hundreds of billions of dollars that China's going to spend to build these pipelines and get these oil rigs back online after they die will be a very easy target. Look at what happened to the nordstream pipeline just recently. You think in an all-out war that those won't be one of the first targets. Then good luck feeding your people. All you have to do is just leave Taiwan alone. You already stole Tibet Hong Kong and the uighur region. You call yourselves peaceful stop your expansionism and then everyone can have peace. Continue and good luck it's not going to happen
Pretty sure in a few decades they can handle them on a regional level that they want.
China's challenge to American naval hegemony is NOT real.
The naval bases the US has around the world +
the multitude of alliances the US has around the world
is the real source of American hegemony.
The technical superiority of our fleet is nice,
but it is the bases and treaties that is the real source of our power.
美国在世界上有许多联盟 但是美国在世界上的敌人更多😂
No. America doesn’t go it alone. Being numerically bigger than her doesn’t mean you can take on the US backed by friends.
Just like in 1950 when nuclear superpower USA had 18 allies vs single backwards poverty China yet still lost.. good luck today.
Which of the US Friends is realistically a threat? China has Russia and Iran on its side which are major players in their respective regions. The US has dominion over Western Europe which is very weak militarily.
Hegemony is such a weird word. I think the biggest thing to think about, and I know it’s hard for those that have a usual un-merited hatred towards the US. The US promotes free trade, promotes country’s to partake in "globalization." More countries in the world have enjoyed increased GDP’s than ever before. So what do you think is gonna happen when you have an autocracy/dictatorship running the global waters? How exactly will that be better or even equal to free trade?
Свободной торговли не существует.
Увы, это - миф, навязанный США, которые имеют флот.
Раскрою Вам правду, американцы всегда найдут косяки у того, кто захочет свободно торговать по морю.
Ah, and how about how much the US depends on chinese products for their luxurious lives? I doubt they're willing to give that up
US Military Machine:
- US NAVY = most powerful and capable on the planet (also 2nd most powerful Air Force).
- US AIR FORCE = by far the most advanced, powerful, and lethal on the planet.
- US ARMY = most well equipped and advanced Army on the planet.
- US MARINES = best trained, most lethal and feared fighting force on the Planet.
- US SPACE FORCE = Classified.
- US Population (70%) = largest fully armed population on the planet. GOD, Family Country, Fire Arms.
I don't think it's hard to put 2+2 together. The US Military has some crazy tech that they are hoping to find a reason to use. Iran and either Russia or China will cease to exist if it gets to that point.
i dont think u got the 'god, family country,firearms ' right, you mean the furries and they/them are fighting? and are godfearing. stop with the family life pls, divorce rates skyrocketed in recent years. and degencery in cities asweel, miami.
Also, let's hope that we don't get to experience a real version of "Fallout."