How America’s Aircraft Carrier Crisis Reveals A Military Decline

[Michael]

In spite of what a number of you here believe, when it comes to carrier operations, the US Navy has no peer. It will be years before the Chinese are able to operate at the level of what the US Navy operates at today.

As for what other Chinese people think—I don’t know! Speaking for myself, I can agree with some, but not all, of the points you’ve raised.

In our philosophy of game theory, given a fixed definition, the weaker party can at best reach parity with the stronger party—surpassing them is impossible. The reason is simple: the "definition" itself is determined by the stronger party, who also holds the exclusive right to interpret it. Consequently, the weaker party lacks any capacity to transcend this position. The true crux of the matter lies in who possesses the authority to establish that "definition."

Example:
In the "4G4S" era of air power, China can, at best, stand on equal footing with the United States. This is essentially the limit, as the United States is the very entity that defined the "4G4S" standard. —————— "4G4S": This refers to what are now known as fifth-generation fighter jets, based on the "4S" criteria. The United States initially designated them as "4th-Gen" fighters and established the detailed 4S standards—a framework that China also recognizes. Although they are now referred to as "5th-Gen" fighters, this change in terminology does not alter the fundamental nature of the concept.

But,
what about the future?
China’s J-36 and J-50 are already undergoing intensive flight testing......

As for aircraft carriers, I agree that, by current, generally accepted standards, the United States holds a comprehensive lead over China.
But, certain concepts are quietly undergoing change......

 

[F-22Raptor]

China is going to change the lane by completely dominating the ecosystem of the future green derivative high tech to fuel its AI self-replicating ecosystem. The US technocrats are panicking because they know once China has completely dominated the future ecosystem, all the remaining US technological leverage will be quickly vanishing as the mere temporary lead.

Total fantasy….in reality it’s the US that’s dominated nearly every technological development in recent years. First to Covid MRNA vaccine, first to GLP-1s, first to ChatGPT, first to reusable rockets, first to fracking, first to Internet satellite constellations, first to GPU nirvana.

Dominance in cloud computing, semiconductors, wafer fabs, capital software, gas turbines, LNG etc and on and on.

The only area China has a clear lead in is solar tech and ship production rate.

 

[AZ_HighCountry]

The thread is about an alleged carrier crisis and a military supposedly in decline. Not "go green ecosystems".

Either stick to the topic or find yourself on the outside looking in.

 

[AZ_HighCountry]

As for what other Chinese people think—I don’t know! Speaking for myself, I can agree with some, but not all, of the points you’ve raised.

In our philosophy of game theory, given a fixed definition, the weaker party can at best reach parity with the stronger party—surpassing them is impossible. The reason is simple: the "definition" itself is determined by the stronger party, who also holds the exclusive right to interpret it. Consequently, the weaker party lacks any capacity to transcend this position. The true crux of the matter lies in who possesses the authority to establish that "definition."

Example:
In the "4G4S" era of air power, China can, at best, stand on equal footing with the United States. This is essentially the limit, as the United States is the very entity that defined the "4G4S" standard. —————— "4G4S": This refers to what are now known as fifth-generation fighter jets, based on the "4S" criteria. The United States initially designated them as "4th-Gen" fighters and established the detailed 4S standards—a framework that China also recognizes. Although they are now referred to as "5th-Gen" fighters, this change in terminology does not alter the fundamental nature of the concept.

But,
what about the future?
China’s J-36 and J-50 are already undergoing intensive flight testing......

As for aircraft carriers, I agree that, by current, generally accepted standards, the United States holds a comprehensive lead over China.
But, certain concepts are quietly undergoing change......

I only made 2 points. But, I am not disagreeing with your response.

The Chinese are indeed making some technological inroads. That should not imply the US is not.

Now that the F-35 is now practicing landings on the not yet commissioned John F. Kennedy, the tempo to get the carrier through qualifications and acceptance into the fleet is likely to ramp up.

 

[Aziqbal]

The US Navy can surge 6 carrier groups during a major crisis.

CVN-79 Kennedy will deliver soon to the Navy. Ford carriers are now launching F-35Cs for the first time.

No the last time US surged 7 Carriers was almost 10 years ago with 4 training not combat operations

There's a major difference between six aircraft carriers being at sea and six being deployed for combat operations.

the last time 6 were actually deployed for combat was Iraq invasion of 2003, that was 23 years ago soon to be 24 nearly 1/4 of a century

also now the Carrier fleet has aged and readiness is down

after Oct 7th US did deploy 4 x Carrier Strike groups combat ready

 

[Hussain]

China built more than twice naval tonnage of US in 2024-25: Euronaval​

Oct 20, 2026

PARIS — China built more than twice the naval tonnage of the United States in the 2024-25 period, narrowing the gap between the two countries’ navies, according to the World Defense Shipbuilding report published by Euronaval ahead of the 2026 edition of the naval defense show.

The combined tonnage of combat ships built by China in the two years through to December 2025 amounted to 636,208 tons, compared to 270,509 tons for the United States, according to data compiled by Flottes de Combat and French maritime industry association Gican.

China accounted for more than a third of the global naval tonnage constructed in 2024-25, based on the Euronaval report. U.S. lawmakers and congressional researchers have warned that China’s greater shipbuilding capacity, combined with delays and bottlenecks in U.S. naval shipbuilding, could hurt America’s ability to keep up with Beijing’s expanding fleet.

“We are seeing a fairly substantial expansion of naval forces, and consequently of shipbuilding,” said Philippe Missoffe, the general director of Gican, in a press briefing here on Tuesday. “We’re seeing an increase in power capabilities, particularly nuclear-powered attack submarines for example.”

Global naval construction overall was booming in the period, with 1.47 million tons of combat vessels built in 2024-25, compared with 959,671 tons in the prior two years. The value of global naval construction amounted to $123.9 billion, climbing from $81.8 billion in 2022-23.

The value of Chinese combat-vessel construction was US$43.5 billion in the latest two-year period, compared with $26.8 billion for the U.S., the report said.

China has reversed roles from 2022-2023, when production of the country’s naval yards amounted to 202,520 tons, compared with 245,703 tons for the U.S., according to the previous edition of the shipbuilding report published in 2024.

The U.S. fleet of combat vessels of more than 200 tons amounted to 3.11 million tons as of Jan. 1, 2026, compared to 1.44 million tons for China’s fleet, the report showed, That compares with 3.22 million tons for the U.S. and 1.3 million tons for China two years earlier.

Russia was in third place in terms of naval construction in 2024-25, with 149,056 tons built, followed by India with 76,430 tons and Italy with 53,700 tons. Turkey, France, Japan, South Korean and Romania rounded out the top 10 of naval builders.

The four-day Euronaval show, the world’s biggest maritime-defense exhibition, is set to kick of in Paris on Nov. 3. The number of exhibitors will be more than 40% higher than in 2024, according to the organizers.