China’s naval supremacy: A new reality for the U.S.

[FHN]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1835344214579703833

The damage from yj-12 ain't no joke that ship got pummeled. There's also df-17 glide vehicle and df-26 (say hello to Guam)

 

[atmi_bum]

The idea of China's naval supremacy over the USA is an interesting but exaggerated claim. Simply being bigger doesn't mean you are better.

For one thing, China's aircraft carriers are way behind the US Navy's aircraft carriers.

Finally, PLAN has little to no warfare experience. Let's see how these shiny new toys fare under battlefield conditions.

 

[FHN]

US naval experience against who???

This???

 

[FHN]

Didn't go to well against houthis. They don't have a navy btw.10 mq-9 down. Now let's try that against PLA rocket force multiply by 1000.

 

[FHN]

The US never beat china in a land war. Whether it's in Korea or Vietnam. China also trained the taliban during Soviet Afghan war btw u can always look it up. China is one of major suppliers. Weapons were flowing through xinjiang like flies. China's arms shipments to Vietnam included 270,000 guns, over 10,000 pieces of artillery, 200 million bullets of different types, 2.02 million artillery shells, 15,000 wire transmitters, 5,000 radio transmitters, over 1,000 trucks, 15 planes, 28 naval vessels, and 1.18 million sets of military uniforms." It was China's aid to North Vietnam from 1955 to 1963 that effectively gave the North the resources needed to begin the insurgency in the South.

 

[SolarWarden]

Did you say 'for practice' as targets? Yes you did. You need to learn to read. That didn't change my statement the US has no supersonic anti-ship missile launched from their DDGs, did it? USN ships have been designed to shoot down mostly ballistic missiles. Houthis was not known to have shot a supersonic cruise missile at American warships yet and YET they are still in control of the Red Seas transportation traffic. That says a lot about how successful the US' guarding the israeli ships and themselves.

And in First and Second Chain, USN will have to face thousands of DF missiles launched from land, sea, and air by the PLA and all are supersonic and hypersonic.

Are you purposely being stupid? Yu said US has no way of stopping supersonic cruise missiles and I shot down your claim with proof that they can and because you have no response to my retort, you NOT-cleverly deflect.

We/US will own the battle space picture and EM realm in a naval air conflict you chinos are not in the same league...

-The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on August 14 that Chinese and US forces engaged in reconnaissance and electronic warfare before and after Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, in which China lost.

China’s state-owned broadcaster CCTV reported that the PLA Navy and PLA Air Force conducted “full tracking and surveillance” against the US Air Force transport aircraft flying Pelosi and her delegation from Kuala Lumpur to Taipei on August 2.

The purpose of tracking was “deterrence,” according to PLA Major General Meng Xiangqing of the PLA National Defense University, cited by CCTV. However, PLA’s tracking efforts which involved the J-16D aircraft and a Type 055 destroyer, failed, reported SCMP, citing an unnamed Chinese military source.

“The PLA deployed some electronic warfare aircraft such as the J-16D and warships to try to locate Pelosi’s aircraft, but were not successful,” the report said.

“Almost all the PLA electronic warfare equipment couldn’t work because they were all jammed by electronic interference by the American aircraft strike group sent by the Pentagon to escort her.”

Pelosi’s aircraft reportedly took a longer and more indirect route, heading southeast toward the Indonesian part of Borneo. After that, it turned north and flew along the eastern part of the Philippines.

According to He Yuan Ming, an independent airpower analyst, it is not surprising that the Type 055 was not able to detect Pelosi’s aircraft, who noted that “the Type 055 (destroyer’s) radar is said to be 500-kilometer (310 miles),” but its “effective range in the real world would be much less.”

“Couple this with the vast operating area as well as the Type 055’s relative newness both in terms of its hardware (capabilities) and software (crew), there should be little surprise that the PLA (naval) cruiser could not locate (Pelosi’s plane),” Ming told SCMP.

How Pelosi’s Taiwan trip set off a new wave of US-China electronic warfare

PLA eyes in the sky and at sea sought to track the aircraft carrying the US House speaker.

www.scmp.com

 

[FHN]

Significance of China's involvement
The military aid and training China provided were vital to the Vietnamese defeat of the French. “They also sent political advisors to remold the Vietnamese state, economy, and agricultural system in Communist ways.

China in the Vietnam War - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

If u can't beat china in Korean war don't even think about fighting a land war. Keep underestimating cause China ain't scared. U think a nation with lots of smart people can't fight???

 

[FHN]

The Americans here are funny all that talk while they don't even protect the Philippines. Whats the matter? Is the plan that weak or too strong to handle? China is showing that America is all talk even if the Philippines revoked the defense treaty pact. Marcos jr is a for sure.

 

[huanghong]

Are you purposely being stupid? Yu said US has no way of stopping supersonic cruise missiles and I shot down your claim with proof that they can and because you have no response to my retort, you NOT-cleverly deflect.

We/US will own the battle space picture and EM realm in a naval air conflict you chinos are not in the same league...

-The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on August 14 that Chinese and US forces engaged in reconnaissance and electronic warfare before and after Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, in which China lost.

China’s state-owned broadcaster CCTV reported that the PLA Navy and PLA Air Force conducted “full tracking and surveillance” against the US Air Force transport aircraft flying Pelosi and her delegation from Kuala Lumpur to Taipei on August 2.

The purpose of tracking was “deterrence,” according to PLA Major General Meng Xiangqing of the PLA National Defense University, cited by CCTV. However, PLA’s tracking efforts which involved the J-16D aircraft and a Type 055 destroyer, failed, reported SCMP, citing an unnamed Chinese military source.

“The PLA deployed some electronic warfare aircraft such as the J-16D and warships to try to locate Pelosi’s aircraft, but were not successful,” the report said.

“Almost all the PLA electronic warfare equipment couldn’t work because they were all jammed by electronic interference by the American aircraft strike group sent by the Pentagon to escort her.”

Pelosi’s aircraft reportedly took a longer and more indirect route, heading southeast toward the Indonesian part of Borneo. After that, it turned north and flew along the eastern part of the Philippines.

According to He Yuan Ming, an independent airpower analyst, it is not surprising that the Type 055 was not able to detect Pelosi’s aircraft, who noted that “the Type 055 (destroyer’s) radar is said to be 500-kilometer (310 miles),” but its “effective range in the real world would be much less.”

“Couple this with the vast operating area as well as the Type 055’s relative newness both in terms of its hardware (capabilities) and software (crew), there should be little surprise that the PLA (naval) cruiser could not locate (Pelosi’s plane),” Ming told SCMP.

How Pelosi’s Taiwan trip set off a new wave of US-China electronic warfare

PLA eyes in the sky and at sea sought to track the aircraft carrying the US House speaker.

www.scmp.com

It is hard to understand that the United States has such powerful electromagnetic capabilities. that a few days ago, senior US and Philippine officials had publicly stated that when Philippine ships were starving and unable to resupply, they would receive help from the United States. However, now they are taking action to pull anchor and escape instead of getting supplies from the United States. Why?

Maritime and aerial spats in the South China Sea between China and the Philippines, Washington’s oldest treaty ally in the Indo-Pacific, will be a key talking point in high-level meetings between the U.S. Department of Defense and their Chinese counterparts.

A senior defense official told reporters Wednesday evening that Chinese actions against the Philippines will be raised during the upcoming U.S.-PRC Defense Policy Coordination Talks. The engagement was described as “an opportunity for us to be frank and candid with the PRC about the issues affecting the relationship and the concerns that we have,” the defense official said. Other issues highlighted in the call included Beijing’s support of Russia’s war effort against Ukraine, operational safety and stability in the Taiwan Strait.

The senior defense official called Beijing’s actions as a “threat to regional peace and stability,” noting recent ramming incidents against Philippine Coast Guard vessels by Chinese forces at Second Thomas and Sabina Shoals,

“The United States will do what is necessary to support the Philippines,” the official said. “The Philippines is our oldest mutual defense treaty ally in the Indo-Pacific. We’ve made very clear that the treaty extends to armed attacks on Philippine Armed Forces, public vessels or aircraft, including those of its coast guard, anywhere in the South China Sea. So we’re watching further developments there very, very closely.”

No additional details were available about comments made by Indo-Pacific Commander Adm. Samuel Paparo on the possibility of escorting and supporting Philippine efforts in the South China Sea, no details could be provided. Paparo said last month that a U.S. vessel escorting Philippine forces was “an entirely reasonable option” and within the limits of the 1951 U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty.

Before Paparo’s statement, Philippine defense and military officials claimed that U.S. assistance had been offered. In July, Armed Forces of the Philippines Chief of Staff Gen. Romeo Brawner confirmed the offers of assistance but told reporters that Manila prefers to conduct unilateral operations in the region.

Following Paparo’s offer of escorting Philippine vessels, Brawner reiterated his stance and claimed that the Philippines would only resort to bilateral operations with U.S. forces if there were no other options left.

“When our troops are already hungry, they don’t have any supplies anymore because our resupply mission have been blocked and they are on the verge of dying, then that’s the time we are going to seek the help of the United States,” Brawner said.

Despite the drastic increase in incidents between Manila and Beijing within the last year, the Philippines has yet to take up American offers of direct escort and assistance in its resupply missions. Although U.S. Navy maritime patrol aircraft and warships have been spotted in the vicinity of incidents, the noticeable lack of direct American presence leaves many questions about what the two nations define as an armed attack and tests the 70-year-old mutual defense treaty.

 

[huanghong]

Are you purposely being stupid? Yu said US has no way of stopping supersonic cruise missiles and I shot down your claim with proof that they can and because you have no response to my retort, you NOT-cleverly deflect.

We/US will own the battle space picture and EM realm in a naval air conflict you chinos are not in the same league...

-The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on August 14 that Chinese and US forces engaged in reconnaissance and electronic warfare before and after Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, in which China lost.

China’s state-owned broadcaster CCTV reported that the PLA Navy and PLA Air Force conducted “full tracking and surveillance” against the US Air Force transport aircraft flying Pelosi and her delegation from Kuala Lumpur to Taipei on August 2.

The purpose of tracking was “deterrence,” according to PLA Major General Meng Xiangqing of the PLA National Defense University, cited by CCTV. However, PLA’s tracking efforts which involved the J-16D aircraft and a Type 055 destroyer, failed, reported SCMP, citing an unnamed Chinese military source.

“The PLA deployed some electronic warfare aircraft such as the J-16D and warships to try to locate Pelosi’s aircraft, but were not successful,” the report said.

“Almost all the PLA electronic warfare equipment couldn’t work because they were all jammed by electronic interference by the American aircraft strike group sent by the Pentagon to escort her.”

Pelosi’s aircraft reportedly took a longer and more indirect route, heading southeast toward the Indonesian part of Borneo. After that, it turned north and flew along the eastern part of the Philippines.

According to He Yuan Ming, an independent airpower analyst, it is not surprising that the Type 055 was not able to detect Pelosi’s aircraft, who noted that “the Type 055 (destroyer’s) radar is said to be 500-kilometer (310 miles),” but its “effective range in the real world would be much less.”

“Couple this with the vast operating area as well as the Type 055’s relative newness both in terms of its hardware (capabilities) and software (crew), there should be little surprise that the PLA (naval) cruiser could not locate (Pelosi’s plane),” Ming told SCMP.

How Pelosi’s Taiwan trip set off a new wave of US-China electronic warfare

PLA eyes in the sky and at sea sought to track the aircraft carrying the US House speaker.

www.scmp.com

NO, NO, America's EM realm is far from being as powerful as you dreamed.
Since you use the South China Morning Post article as evidence, let me give you the South China Morning Post's latest report on Sino-US electronic warfare. Don't live in your own dreams, kid.

China’s electronic warfare surge shocks US in South China Sea
China’s cutting-edge electronic warfare (EW) capabilities are transforming the balance of power in the South China Sea, as shown by a recent encounter between US and Chinese forces.

This month, the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on China’s enhanced EW capabilities by shedding light on a December 2023 incident between a US EA-18 Growler carrier-based EW aircraft and China’s Type 055 cruiser Nanchang in the contested South China Sea.
SCMP says that in December 2023, the US Navy dismissed William Coulter, commander of US Electronic Attack Squadron 136 (VAQ-136), stationed on the USS Carl Vinson, citing a loss of confidence in his ability to command.

The report says that a month later, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) recognized the Nanchang’s crew for their actions against a US carrier fleet. It also notes that Chinese media highlighted an encounter involving an EA-18G, believed to be from Coulter’s squadron, and the Nanchang cruiser.

The report mentions that PLA scientists recently disclosed in a Radar & ECM journal article that AI-enhanced radar gave the Nanchang an advantage over the EA-18G’s jamming capabilities.

It claims that the EA-18G, manufactured by Boeing, has been upgraded since 2021 for future warfare but faces new challenges from the PLA–Navy’s (PLA-N) integrated radar systems and communication strategies.

SCMP notes that these advancements allow PLA-N warships to form a “kill web” to counter the EA-18G’s attacks. It also says that the Nanchang’s reported proactive tactics and successful engagement with US forces illustrate a shift in the PLA-N’s EW approach.

Much-improved Chinese EW capabilities developed after then-US Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi’s controversial August 2022 visit to Taiwan may have enabled a feat.

SCMP noted that the PLA failed to track and surveil the US Air Force transport plane carrying Pelosi during her visit despite deploying Type 055 cruisers and J-16D EW aircraft. The source says that almost all of the PLA’s EW equipment failed to function because of electronic interference from Pelosi’s escorting aircraft force.

From that experience, China may have improved its EW capabilities quickly by investing in new technologies and placing them in a more extensive kill web consisting of kinetic and non-kinetic elements.

SCMP reported in February 2024 that Chinese scientists have invented a new class of EW equipment that can reportedly rapidly detect, decode and suppress enemy signals.

The new system, SCMP says, allows the PLA to seamlessly monitor signals into the gigahertz zone, encompassing frequencies used by amateur radio and even Elon Musk’s Starlink satellites.

It notes that the equipment includes innovative signal processing chips and AI integration, enhancing China’s ability to counter enemy jamming and maintain communication flow.

Furthermore, SCMP claims that in encounters with US Navy ships with EW activity, China has used electromagnetic-emitting equipment, including high-power phased array radars, to lock on to multiple targets including US carrier-based aircraft.

China's electronic warfare surge shocks US in South China Sea - Asia Times

China’s cutting-edge electronic warfare (EW) capabilities are transforming the balance of power in the South China Sea, as shown by a recent encounter

asiatimes.com

 

[MH.Yang]

China also needs the support of a large number of naval ports and military bases from East Asia to East Africa.

 

[LeGenD]

The US never beat china in a land war. Whether it's in Korea or Vietnam. China also trained the taliban during Soviet Afghan war btw u can always look it up. China is one of major suppliers. Weapons were flowing through xinjiang like flies. China's arms shipments to Vietnam included 270,000 guns, over 10,000 pieces of artillery, 200 million bullets of different types, 2.02 million artillery shells, 15,000 wire transmitters, 5,000 radio transmitters, over 1,000 trucks, 15 planes, 28 naval vessels, and 1.18 million sets of military uniforms." It was China's aid to North Vietnam from 1955 to 1963 that effectively gave the North the resources needed to begin the insurgency in the South.

US-led forces liberated South Korea from North Korea in 1950 and also from China in 1951 and the war was concluded with acceptance of South Korea as an independent state. China saved North Korea which is impressive but President Truman did not approve a second push in North Korea so it was a stalemate there. Setbacks can occur in war but American mission in the Korean War was limited in scope as well.

Let's have a look at another example. US-led forces defeated German and Italian forces in Africa but suffered a major setback in Italy while attempting to push towards Germany through Italy so did it make a difference in the longer-term or the US had lost the ability to fight? Absolutely Not. US-led forces regrouped and invaded France to cut through layers of German forces in this region to reach Germany from this direction. This second push worked. The US was determined to overthrow Hitler in war. There was a gap of 1 year between first push and second push.

So it is a bad assumption to assume that the US cannot fight China, it certainly can and possibly win.

WE also think that India is a walkover but it is not. Times continue to change and India can field a competent force in some areas to match opposition there.

Never have superiority complex. The assumption that others cannot fight is a bad one and false arrogance.

China is big, strong and can fight and win in battles, but same is true for the US. So give credit where due.

 

[Beijingwalker]

US-led forces liberated South Korea from North Korea in 1950 and also from China in 1951 and the war was concluded with acceptance of South Korea as an independent state.

China's bottom line is always 38th parallel, China doesn't want to see a unified Korea throughout the history, after 38th parallel, under lots of pressure from Kim and Soviet Union, China just made some token attempt to capture more land but quickly pulled back.
Bottom line, China's part of Korean War started at the very border of North Korea and China and finished half way through Korea at the 38th parallel, so don't count the part of Korean war which China didn't take part in as reference.

 

[j_hungary]

I’m saying the Chinese can catch up to where the USN is now in 2024, by 2035.

Yes their R&D and reverse engineering labs seem to be working all out. Our defense contractors seem to be lagging and giving up the lead. Just look at shipbuilding and how instead of evolutionary designs, the USN pays contractors to design (the USN use to do this itself in the old days) and build ships at ever long time frames.

That's because today warship is modular........

It really didn't matter how or what design you get a lot of modules are now plug and play (See America class and the LCS) which made designing these ships in house not really a necessarily, not as much as designing Radar System, propulsion and CIC.

As I said before, it really didn't matter if we are talking about Maya Class, Hobart Class or Arleigh Burke Class, they all have the same guts inside......

 

[LeGenD]

China's bottom line is always 38th parallel, China doesn't want to see a unified Korea throughout the history, after 38th parallel, under lots of pressure from Kim and Soviet Union, China just made some token attempt to capture more land but quickly pulled back.
Bottom line, China's part of Korean War started at the very border of North Korea and China and finished half way through Korea at the 38th parallel, so don't count the part of Korean war which China didn't take part in as reference.

That might be correct but when the war broke out, China took its chances and pushed all the way to Seoul but faced heavy resistance in South Korea and China-led forces were pushed back to the 38th parallel. All of this happened in 1951 and the battles are well documented. In fact, US-led forces recaptured some North Korean lands of strategic value. China attempted to liberate these lands to no avail. This is why the war continued across the 38th parallel till 1953 but China accepted American terms to conclude the war with dialogue and recognition of South Korea as an independent state. China had no bilateral relationship with South Korea earlier.

China has lost more troops in the Korean War than in any war after World War 2. But you attempt to downplay the whole affair.

My perspective is confirmed in SCMP as well. You can check it. History should always be read and understood correctly.

If you think that China could do better than keep in mind that the US-led forces witnessed in Korean War were less developed and equipped than in World War 2. The US could also improve them but President Truman was not interested in expanding the war. Setback in North Korea was pinching but the US made no attempt to retake it.

In my previous post, I shed light on American experience in war with Germany and Italy - two very capable European colonial powers of the time. My suggestion is to study it.

Because at this rate your next argument will be that Japan could not invade China. It was all an eyewash as China allowed it.