Who Rules the Waves? U.S. and Chinese Fleets, by Tonnage

[ChineseTiger1986]

China is not a resource rich country for its population.

It's economic model will change from one of exports to one of both exports and consumption over the next decade, as it becomes a developed country well able to manufacture every type of technology from semiconductors to jetliners.

China will export hi tech goods and import masses of foodstuffs, energy etc. A relatively high value Yuan will work with this model.

China has mastered the renewable energy, and it will help other resource scarce countries to become independent of the fossil fuel.

China CO2 Emissions Fall 3%, Oil Growth ‘Grinds to a Halt’ as COVID Recovery Runs Its Course

China saw its carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and cement fall 3% in March, 2024 after a 14-month run of increases, adding weight to projections that the country’s emissions may have peaked in 2023.

www.theenergymix.com

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

25%? Do you know the productive power of the Chinese shipbuilding industry? US can't even build a modern container ship within budget and time. As for submarines, nobody even knows how many were built.

China's Association for Science and Technology has acknowledged that Fujian is hybrid of nuclear propulsion/gas turbine.

And Ma Weiming is the Vice President of that organization.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Na, there will be 5-6 carriers for PLAN in the future, and how do you know the rest will be drone carriers, do you have a backup of your stupid claim or just assuming baseless

So far China has planned Fujian and its sister ship; both around 100,000 tonnes.

And CVN-20 and CVN-21 will be commissioned after 2030, and both ship will displace around 120,000 tonnes.

 

[samejjangir]

American economic model is different from that of Soviet Union, it allows private enterprises to develop and create jobs and wealth (Capitalism). It works irrespective of how it is perceived. American military spending does not strain American economy:

Although the United States spends more on defense than any other country, the Congressional Budget Office projects that defense spending as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) will decline over the coming years — from 2.9 percent of GDP in 2024 to 2.5 percent in 2034. That is considerably lower than the 50-year average spending on defense of 4.2 percent of GDP.

The United States Spends More on Defense than the Next 9 Countries Combined

Defense spending by the United States accounted for nearly 40 percent of military expenditures by countries around the world in 2023.

www.pgpf.org

Following article provides a good explanation of why China buys American debt (Treasury Bonds):

Why China Buys U.S. Debt With Treasury Bonds

China and many other countries buy U.S. debt through the purchase of Treasury bonds, here are the factors behind those purchases.

www.investopedia.com

Modern-age economic system is debt-driven on many counts. Assets = Liabilities, right? It will be helpful to understand American economic system and how its debt is settled and used worldwide. Speculation about American economic decline is old and continuous but it is just that. USD being a world currency in highest demand has its pros and cons.

The US adopted Bretton Woods system as the basis for international economic cooperation after World War II. This system was discarded in favor of choosing any form of exchange arrangement that might work for a country.

"Since the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, IMF members have been free to choose any form of exchange arrangement they wish (except pegging their currency to gold): allowing the currency to float freely, pegging it to another currency or a basket of currencies, adopting the currency of another country, participating in a currency bloc, or forming part of a monetary union."

About the IMF: History: The end of the Bretton Woods System (1972–81)

It makes sense actually.

The US will revisit this system if it becomes necessary at some point in the future. The US has lot of wealth including gold.

Regarding private enterprises, can you tell me who is the owner of Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Boeing, LM, Meta? Don't tell me it is publicly owned as there is always a promotor group with 50% shares as otherwise, one will have problems in taking decisions & control. There will be a need to conduct an election at national level just to take any decision without 50% ownership.

If you are unable to answer, it means the idea that they are private is simply absurd. They are just like the erstwhile East India company. They are part in hands with the govt.

As for taking in USD debt, it makes no sense to take in debt of $600 billion every year. I understand taking smaller debt but taking in $600billion/year is simply too huge to make any investment decision. Moreover, it looks like China keeps loaning to USA every year without actually getting back anything. This means China by now has over $6trillion in assets which it is forced to invest in various projects like BRI, OBOR and even then has significant excess as so much can never be invested.

As for USD being in high demand, that was not the case before Petrodollar. In fact USSR rubles was equally dominant. It was petrodollar in 1970s that changed the equation. After 2008, USD is now propped by Petrodollar as well as Chinese. However, USA having trade deficit to the extent of $600 a year is a bit too much for any investor to consider is a sound investment. Also, USD can be frozen as one could see with Russia as any transaction of USD has to have USA banks as the middleman. This makes the investment even more unsound. With never ending printing of dollars and risks of assets being seized through sanctions, China, GCC are just holding paper with no inherent value.

 

[samejjangir]

That situation will put stress on both countries. China does not want Yuan to substitute USD around the world because a very high value Yuan does not works well for its economic model and needs. American economy is massive and finds a way to work lol.

It is not about massive USA economy but about China not wanting to suddenly disrupt markets by switching to Yuan.
China wants USA to decline organically by gradual destruction of its industry, civilian economy, expertise etc. China wants USA to collapse internally which will automatically collapse its military. But if USA cuts down military and focuses on economy, then it can still exist as a viable country. Though this version will be weaker, it will still have all the technology and weaponry making it a powerful force but without global outreach, something like post USSR Russia.

USA has the choice of completely withdrawing its military and living as a regional power like Russia or continuing its global military outreach and hollowing its internal economy.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

The US is denying any hit to the carrier despite a number of photos circulating in the internet saying so.

Then post please these pics circulating the internet otherwise we can just say Chinese ships were hit and parked there.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Smaller ship but numerous and fast is deadlier and more dangerous.

Especially if each small ship equiped with technology and weapon that capable to destroy big ships.

The problem is they sink easier with simpler smaller weapons…like a small drone.

 

[Sam6536]

That's what happened between China and Japan in the late 19th century Sino-Japanese sea war that decided the fate of each country for the next 50 years. Japanese navy battleships at the time were smaller in size, their cannons were smaller. but faster in ship moving speed and more importantly much faster in firing shells. As the results, Japan won the sea war and it started the invasion by the Japanese in East Asia for the next 50 years.

Then the American shipbuilding industry crushed the Japanese who at the end of the way were focused on building "super carriers" ans larger battle cruisers. America could replenish and build smaller flotillas way faster and cheaper. Battle of Midway and bombing of Japanese home islands was when the Japanese truly lost.

 

[PakAl]

The reason Chinese navy tonnage is low is due to less aircraft carriers 3 v 11, Usa also has large number of heavy transport carriers (31) with Chinese having less and alot of them are older smaller tonnage. But when it comes to tonnage on destroyers, frigates etc China is very close to the Usa, China has 13,000T destroyer with Usa largest cruiser around 10T although more in numbers. For China aircraft carriers are new technology, and Chinese navy is not travelling around the world for wars but possibly after 2030s China will build alot more aircraft carriers, with high tonnage transport/helicopter carriers. The Usa also has bigger powerful submarines, whilst China has large low tonnage diesel submarines, their nuclear submarines are in low number so this is affecting the tonnage difference. China definitely needs to catch up on this, Usa subs are lethal, bigger and powerful with cutting edge technologies.

 

[j_hungary]

China is not a resource rich country for its population.

It's economic model will change from one of exports to one of both exports and consumption over the next decade, as it becomes a developed country well able to manufacture every type of technology from semiconductors to jetliners.

China will export hi tech goods and import masses of foodstuffs, energy etc. A relatively high value Yuan will work with this model.

As long as China remain an export driven country, high Yuan valuation will NOT work for their economic model. Bear in mind, it's a common sense business practice to sell high buy low, which mean in number term, you always going to see higher export value (cause you want to sell for more) than import value (cause you want to buy cheap)

On the other hand, US circulation rate is roughly 10 times the Yuan circulation rate ($21.2T USD vs about $2 trillion Yuan) , you can't replace USD with Yuan 1 on 1, this is going to break the Chinese economy if they want to do that.

Digital yuan in circulation hits 13.61 bln yuan in 2022

The amount of digital yuan in circulation reached 13.61 billion yuan (about 2.01 billion U.S. dollars) by the end of 2022, data from the country's central bank showed.

english.www.gov.cn

How Much Actual Money Is There in the World?

If we took all the U.S. dollars, British pounds and every other currency out there and added them up, how much would it come to? Find out why it's so hard to figure out how much money there is in the world.

money.howstuffworks.com

 

[PakAl]

As long as China remain an export driven country, high Yuan valuation will NOT work for their economic model. Bear in mind, it's a common sense business practice to sell high buy low, which mean in number term, you always going to see higher export value (cause you want to sell for more) than import value (cause you want to buy cheap)

On the other hand, US circulation rate is roughly 10 times the Yuan circulation rate ($21.2T USD vs about $2 trillion Yuan) , you can't replace USD with Yuan 1 on 1, this is going to break the Chinese economy if they want to do that.

Digital yuan in circulation hits 13.61 bln yuan in 2022

The amount of digital yuan in circulation reached 13.61 billion yuan (about 2.01 billion U.S. dollars) by the end of 2022, data from the country's central bank showed.

english.www.gov.cn

View attachment 49605

How Much Actual Money Is There in the World?

If we took all the U.S. dollars, British pounds and every other currency out there and added them up, how much would it come to? Find out why it's so hard to figure out how much money there is in the world.

money.howstuffworks.com

View attachment 49604

Usa also has powerful and loyal allies around the world, they will keep on trading so Usa will be alright till the near future.

 

[j_hungary]

The reason Chinese navy tonnage is low is due to less aircraft carriers 3 v 11, Usa also has large number of heavy transport carriers (31) with Chinese having less and alot of them are older smaller tonnage. But when it comes to tonnage on destroyers, frigates etc China is very close to the Usa, China has 13,000T destroyer with Usa largest cruiser around 10T although more in numbers. For China aircraft carriers are new technology, and Chinese navy is not travelling around the world for wars but possibly after 2030s China will build alot more aircraft carriers, with high tonnage transport/helicopter carriers. The Usa also has bigger powerful submarines, whilst China has large low tonnage diesel submarines, their nuclear submarines are in low number so this is affecting the tonnage difference. China definitely needs to catch up on this, Usa subs are lethal, bigger and powerful with cutting edge technologies.

Another point why China can never have as big a Navy the US has is simply due to coastline and bases, you need dry dock to service any ship, big and small, and US's own coastline is twice as long as the Chinese, that's before US supply bases overseas (Guam, Puerto Rico, Commonwealth of Wake Island) and Allied Base (like Rota, the 5 Naval base in Japan, Diego Garcia etc).

Unless China can find a way somehow service their ship inland, that is going to limit the fleet number the Chinese can have.

 

[j_hungary]

Usa also has powerful and loyal allies around the world, they will keep on trading so Usa will be alright till the near future.

Yes.

The issue here is, what I mentioned above is just US alone. Even if China can expand to that point, they will still need to hope the EU or Japan, UK, Germany and Australia not to back the USD. Because if they do, then you aren't talking about 57% world reserve, you are talking about roughly 90%.

 

[Nuffle]

The reason Chinese navy tonnage is low is due to less aircraft carriers 3 v 11, Usa also has large number of heavy transport carriers (31) with Chinese having less and alot of them are older smaller tonnage. But when it comes to tonnage on destroyers, frigates etc China is very close to the Usa, China has 13,000T destroyer with Usa largest cruiser around 10T although more in numbers. For China aircraft carriers are new technology, and Chinese navy is not travelling around the world for wars but possibly after 2030s China will build alot more aircraft carriers, with high tonnage transport/helicopter carriers. The Usa also has bigger powerful submarines, whilst China has large low tonnage diesel submarines, their nuclear submarines are in low number so this is affecting the tonnage difference. China definitely needs to catch up on this, Usa subs are lethal, bigger and powerful with cutting edge technologies.

The comparison is broader, but it certainly goes in this direction:

US Navy - Battle Force: 226 ships/subs (3.973.200 ton)

CVN: 11 (1.100.000 ton)
10 Nimitz - 105.000 ton(1.000.000 ton)
1 Gerald Ford - 100.000 ton

Cruiser: 15 (159.200 ton)
13 Ticonderoga - 9.800 ton (127.400 ton)
2 Zumwalt - 15.900 ton (31.800 ton)

Destroyer: 73 (672.400 ton)
21 Burke Flight I - 8.400 ton (176.400 ton)
7 Burke Flight II - 8.500 ton (59.500 ton)
45 Burke Flight IIA - 9.700 ton (436.500 ton)

LCS: 23 (82.200 ton)
8 Freedom - 3.900 ton (31.200 ton)
15 Independence - 3.400 ton (51.000 ton)

SSBN: 14 (261.800 ton)
14 Ohio - 18.700 ton (261.800 ton)

SSGN: 4 (74.800 ton)
4 Ohio - 18.700 ton (74.800 ton)

SSN: 49 (381.900 ton)
22 Virginia Block I-IV - 8.700 (191.400 ton)
24 Los Angeles - 6.800 ton (163.200 ton)
3 Seawolf - 9.100 ton (27.300 ton)

Amphibious: 37 (1.240.900 ton)
2 LCC Blue Ridge - 19.100 ton (38.200 ton)
4 ESB Lewis B. Puller - 90.000 ton (360.000 ton)
2 LHA America - 45.600 ton (91.200 ton)
7 LHD Wasp - 41.100 ton (287.700 ton)
12 LPD San Antonio - 25.300 ton (303.600 ton)
6 LSD Whidbey Island - 16.100 ton (96.600 ton)
4 LSD Harpers Ferry - 15.900 ton (63.600 ton)

PLAN - Battle Force: 253 ships/subs (1.498.600 ton)
CV/CVF/CVN: 2 (130.000 ton)
CV-16 Liaoning (60.000 ton)
CV-17 Shandong (70.000 ton)

Cruiser: 8 (104.000 ton)
Type 055(13.000 ton): 8 (104.000 ton)

Destroyer: 42 (291.200 ton)
Type 052D/DL(7.500 ton): 25 (187.500 ton)
Type 052C(7.000 ton): 6 (42.000 ton)
Type 051C(7.100 ton): 2 (14.200 ton)
Type 052B(7.000 ton): 2 (14.000 ton)
Type 051B(6.700 ton): 1 (6.700 ton)
Type 052(4.600 ton): 2 (9.200 ton)
Sovremenny(7.900 ton): 4 (31.600 ton)

Frigate: 50 (187.000 ton)
Type 054A(4.000 ton): 40 (160.000 ton)
Type 054(3.900 ton): 2 (7.800 ton)
Type 053H3(2.400 ton): 8 (19.200 ton)

Corvettes: 50 (75.000 ton)
Type 056A(1.500 ton): 50 (75.000 ton)

SSK: 41 (123.400 ton)
Type 039(2.200 ton): 13 (28.600 ton)
Type 039A(3.600 ton): 4 (14.400 ton)
Type 039B(3.600 ton): 14 (50.400 ton)
Kilo(3.000 ton): 10 (30.000 ton)

SSB: 1 (6.600 ton)
Type 032(6.600 ton): 1 (6.600 ton)

SSBN: 6 (66.000 ton)
Type 094(11.000 ton): 4 (44.000 ton)
Type 094A(11.000 ton): 2 (22.000 ton)

SSN: 6 (36.600 ton)
Type 093(6.100 ton): 2 (12.200 ton)
Type 093A(6.100 ton): 4 (24.400 ton)

Amphibious - 47 (464.800 ton)
Type 075(40.000 ton): 3 (120.000 ton)
Type 071(25.000 ton): 8 (200.000 ton)
Type 072A(4.800 ton): 15 (72.000 ton)
Type 072III(4.800 ton): 11 (52.800 ton)
Type 073A(2.000 ton): 10 (20.000 ton)

Comparisons:
US Navy - CVN: 11 (1.100.000 ton)
PLAN - CV/CVF/CVN: 2 (130.000 ton)
Difference of 9 Aircraft Carrier and 970,000 tons

US Navy - Cruiser: 15 (159.200 ton)
PLAN - Cruiser: 8 (104.000 ton)
Difference of 7 Cruiser and 55,200 tons

US Navy - Destroyer: 73 (672.400 ton)
PLAN - Destroyer: 42 (291.200 ton)
Difference of 31 Destroyer and 381,200 tons

US Navy - LCS: 23 (82.200 ton)
PLAN - Frigate: 50 (187.000 ton) + Corvettes: 50 (75.000 ton)
This is where one of the few areas where the PLAN has the advantage, small combatants. 77 ships and 179,800 tons

US Navy - SSBN: 14 (261.800 ton)
PLAN - SSBN: 6 (66.000 ton)
8 SSBNs and 195,800 tons

US Navy - SSN: 49 (381.900 ton)
PLAN - SSBN: 6 (66.000 ton)
43 SSNs and 315,900 tons

US Navy - SSGN: 4 (74.800 ton)
PLAN - SSB: 1 (6.600 ton) + SSK: 41 (123.400 ton)
Here the comparison is distorted, because both have no equivalents to each other. 38 subs and 55,200 tons in advantage for the PLAN.

US Navy - Amphibious: 37 (1.240.900 ton)
PLAN - Amphibious - 47 (464.800 ton)
Here the PLAN has a numerical advantage but a tonnage disadvantage. 10 ships in favor of the PLAN but a large advantage of 776,100 tons

The PLAN is inferior to the US Navy in:
Difference of 9 Aircraft Carrier and 970,000 tons
Difference of 7 Cruiser and 55,200 tons
Difference of 31 Destroyer and 381,200 tons
8 SSBNs and 195,800 tons
43 SSNs and 315,900 tons
10 ships in favor of the PLAN but a large advantage of 776,100 tons on amphibious ships to favor a US Navy

Where PLAN is superior to US Navy:
SSK: 41 (123.400 ton)
Frigate: 50 (187.000 ton) + Corvettes: 50 (75.000 ton)
The difference between cruisers is really small and this advantage will decrease as the 4 Type 055s enter service and the Ticonderoga retire.

But Destroyer's difference in both numbers and tonnage is still huge.

The Aircraft Carrier gap is also still huge, even considering the commissioning of the Fujian.

The PLAN is inferior to the US Navy in SSNs, but the difference will certainly decrease as the Type 093B and Type 095 enter service, but in quantity and tonnage it will still be lower than the PLAN for at least another decade.

The PLAN is still inferior to the US Navy in SSBNs and this will continue unless China obtains more Type 094As or begins to introduce the Type 096.

And in amphibious ship tonnage, the PLAN remains far behind. If the PLAN's intention to acquire 8 Type 075/Type 076 is truly true, this discrepancy will certainly decrease.

 

[Nuffle]

China's Association for Science and Technology has acknowledged that Fujian is hybrid of nuclear propulsion/gas turbine.

And Ma Weiming is the Vice President of that organization.


View attachment 48642

Every time someone says something completely different.