| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| USN 'Accidentally' Releases Chinese Navy Status Of Forces |
| 2010-01-22 |
| The U.S. Navy accidentally posted their classified estimate on the size and composition of the Chinese Navy. This data was quickly taken down, but not before it was copied and posted worldwide. The strength of the Chinese fleet was listed as; Submarines- 62 (53 diesel Attack Submarines, six nuclear Attack Submarines, three nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines). The U.S. has 72 submarines, all nuclear (53 attack and 18 ballistic missile.) Destroyers-26. The U.S. has 52. Frigates-48. The U.S. has 32, including two of the new LCS vessels. Amphibious Ships 58. The U.S. has 30, all much larger and equipped with flight decks and helicopters, plus landing craft. Coastal Patrol (Missile)- at least 80. The U.S. had a few of these, but got rid of them. China uses these for coastal patrol and defense, a concept they inherited from the Russians. In addition, the U.S. has eleven aircraft carriers (ten of them nuclear powered) and 22 cruisers. Most of the Chinese ships are older (in design, if not in the age of the vessels) than their American counterparts. China is building new classes of ships, with more modern equipment and weapons. Their new destroyers have better anti-aircraft weapons, although nothing to match the American Aegis system, much less the 20 U.S. Aegis ships with anti-missile capability. China is trying to develop classes of nuclear submarines that come close to the capabilities of their American counterparts. China is also vastly outmatched in naval aviation, with nothing comparable to the hundreds of American maritime patrol (P-3) aircraft. But China is building aircraft carriers, and upgrading its naval aviation. They are also innovating in some areas, like the development of a ballistic missile that can hit a moving ship (preferably an American carrier.) Only a portion (about a third) of the U.S. fleet is facing China, because of other commitments, while nearly all the Chinese fleet operates along their coast. But the U.S. also has major naval allies in the region (like Japan and South Korea), while China has none. The Chinese fleet is no match for the U.S. Navy now, but the Chinese are building and planning for the future. In another few decades, the Chinese expect the situation to be quite different. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose |
| #9 Wouldn't this all be in Jane's? Among other places. For example: The World Navies Today page at Haze Gray and Underway The Federation of American Scientists site has some useful stuff, no matter what you think of their politics |
| Posted by: SteveS 2010-01-22 14:05 |
| #8 Back in the days when one could reasonably expect to run into a Russian naval vessel under its own power in the western Pacific (and not being towed to some Indian scrapping yard), I used to keep my copy of Combat Fleets of the World handy. It had a lot more useful information than any of those so-called "classified" assessments. Given the state of our intel apparatus, I have no reason to believe that anything has changed in this regard. |
| Posted by: Dreadnought 2010-01-22 10:05 |
| #7 The Chinese are beginning to understand capitalism and international trade, particularly securing critical resources, and are dependent upon a sea going navy to protect those trade routes. One just has to look at all the business activity in making oil deals to grasp that they understand what's all involved in a modern economy. If their approach is to treats the US as an enemy or hostile competitor, then they need to rely upon other resources in the future to protect those organs of commerce. It's basic 19th Century Alfred Thayer Mahan stuff. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-01-22 07:37 |
| #6 Wouldn't this all be in Jane's? |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2010-01-22 07:34 |
| #5 badanov, the PLAN may not have to match the USN on the high seas to achieve Beijing's goals. An operation to seize Taiwan, for example, would take place under air cover from the mainland. Those "coastal patrol" vessels would be of great use in such a scenario, too. The recent-build Type 022 missile boats aren't meant for patrol so much as they are built for swarming attack. Here's a good link. |
| Posted by: Pstanley 2010-01-22 01:19 |
| #4 If the strategy page info is really the extent of the info released, I really don't see the big deal. It's just a sign that too many things are classified. All of this is available through open sources, hell, I could probably find photos of almost every Chinese warship were I inclined to do so. This summary seems a bit misleading in that it groups together modern ships with obsolete and obsolescent classes. That count of SSKs would seem to include the elderly Romeo/Ming boats, for example. |
| Posted by: Pstanley 2010-01-22 01:04 |
| #3 The U.S. had a few of these, but got rid of them. China uses these for coastal patrol and defense, a concept they inherited from the Russians. LOL Wut China should thank the Russians for a common sense naval doctrine that comports with their national level of technology? The Chinese fleet is no match for the U.S. Navy now, but the Chinese are building and planning for the future. In another few decades, the Chinese expect the situation to be quite different. In a few decades the China will learn it's great fun to compete with the US Navy on the high seas, and they will find it is a damn sight easier to play a competitor than it is to do the job the US Navy does. The PLAN is a force in search of a doctrine still. |
| Posted by: badanov 2010-01-22 00:58 |
| #2 be=bet |
| Posted by: gromky 2010-01-22 00:11 |
| #1 Who wants to be the Chinese posted it there themselves? |
| Posted by: gromky 2010-01-22 00:09 |