T Nation

All Aboard the Event Horizon!


#1

This is why I don't worry too much about China (amongst many other reasons). They have no blue water navy, and the only people willing to sell one to them at this time are the Russians, who are making death traps for nuclear submarines these days:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j3kNPOn62KBcB4-4G9VnNlTG2KgwD94B65OO0

First there was the Kursk, now this. Any Chinese sailors on PWI who are waiting to get on the next Russian-built Akula class?

Sure, the Chinese can build their own nuke subs, but it takes time. A lot of time and a lot more money. For now, they'll just have to stick to their 5 knot diesel boats unless they want to end up in Davey Jones' locker.


#2

Back in the heyday of communism, when one needed a license to buy a car, one of the models for commoners was VAZ-2101, a copy of Fiat 124. I have been told by a person who visited the factories in the 70’s, that it was normal to store the chassis outdoors. When they needed one they took haphazardly one more or less rusty chassis and spraypainted it over.

On the other hand, the first batch ever maid had their chassis and bolts thoroughly covered with a layer of tin and these cars are supposedly still in excellent condition.

VAZ-2101 aka Zhiguli in russia and Lada abroad was commonly known for it’s haphazard quality. Many people refused to even call it a car. It was cheap and it’s strength was that it started well in the winter.


#3

I feel what you are saying PR but there’s one thing that worries me about China. They are buying massive amounts of scrap metal from us just like the Japanese did before WW2.


#4

That’s because they’re trying to use it in their factories. They don’t seem to be into militarism and imperialism like the Japanese were. They’re motivated by profit.

We need to worry about who has already declared war on us.


#5

[quote]jawara wrote:
I feel what you are saying PR but there’s one thing that worries me about China. They are buying massive amounts of scrap metal from us just like the Japanese did before WW2.[/quote]

Ja, and then they build bridges and shit…

That should worry you, but for different reasons…


#6

[quote]orion wrote:
jawara wrote:
I feel what you are saying PR but there’s one thing that worries me about China. They are buying massive amounts of scrap metal from us just like the Japanese did before WW2.

Ja, and then they build bridges and shit…

That should worry you, but for different reasons…[/quote]

Yeah. That worries me for the reasons I think you’re thinking of.


#7

The US Navy will hold an advantage for at least the next 10-15 years. Beyond that is anyones guess.

You can build as many ships as you want but the sailors to crew them will take generations to develop. Petty Officers and First Class Sailors are needed as much as the steel in the boats.


#8

[quote]hedo wrote:
The US Navy will hold an advantage for at least the next 10-15 years. Beyond that is anyones guess.

You can build as many ships as you want but the sailors to crew them will take generations to develop. Petty Officers and First Class Sailors are needed as much as the steel in the boats.[/quote]

I think you’re being very pessimistic with the advantage being only 10-15 years.Unless the Russians find a shedload of money no one knows about,25 years+ of superiority seems quite comfortable to me.


#9

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
hedo wrote:
The US Navy will hold an advantage for at least the next 10-15 years. Beyond that is anyones guess.

You can build as many ships as you want but the sailors to crew them will take generations to develop. Petty Officers and First Class Sailors are needed as much as the steel in the boats.

I think you’re being very pessimistic with the advantage being only 10-15 years.Unless the Russians find a shedload of money no one knows about,25 years+ of superiority seems quite comfortable to me.

[/quote]

The Chinese have a shitload of money.


#10

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
hedo wrote:
The US Navy will hold an advantage for at least the next 10-15 years. Beyond that is anyones guess.

You can build as many ships as you want but the sailors to crew them will take generations to develop. Petty Officers and First Class Sailors are needed as much as the steel in the boats.

I think you’re being very pessimistic with the advantage being only 10-15 years.Unless the Russians find a shedload of money no one knows about,25 years+ of superiority seems quite comfortable to me.

The Chinese have a shitload of money. [/quote]

True,but they are starting at a monster disadvantage,so still will take many decades to come up to par.


#11

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
hedo wrote:
The US Navy will hold an advantage for at least the next 10-15 years. Beyond that is anyones guess.

You can build as many ships as you want but the sailors to crew them will take generations to develop. Petty Officers and First Class Sailors are needed as much as the steel in the boats.

I think you’re being very pessimistic with the advantage being only 10-15 years.Unless the Russians find a shedload of money no one knows about,25 years+ of superiority seems quite comfortable to me.

The Chinese have a shitload of money.

True,but they are starting at a monster disadvantage,so still will take many decades to come up to par.
[/quote]

Which is why I do not worry about China. You have to have a navy to support an overseas adventure. It is simply too expensive to fly everything overseas to feed your army. In order to keep SLOCs open, you have to have a working submarine escort, which the Chinese don’t have.


#12

Right. Let’s all pretend that the US carriers aren’t the biggest floating targets ever made.

As long as you fight backward insurgents for whom chain-mailed camel is the pinnacle of weapons technology, you’ll be fine.

Try it against someone who has mastered the self-guided missile, and those floating cities will be underwater before the weekend. Against someone with subs? Even worse.


#13

[quote]pookie wrote:
Right. Let’s all pretend that the US carriers aren’t the biggest floating targets ever made.

As long as you fight backward insurgents for whom chain-mailed camel is the pinnacle of weapons technology, you’ll be fine.

Try it against someone who has mastered the self-guided missile, and those floating cities will be underwater before the weekend. Against someone with subs? Even worse.
[/quote]

How does this relate to the topic? Who are you talking to?

More Canadian penis envy.


#14

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
How does this relate to the topic? Who are you talking to? [/quote]

China has no “blue sea navy” because in this day and age - in modern warfare - a navy is pretty useless. A bunch of big, costly targets just waiting for a volley of low cost missiles to turn them into so many tourist dive sites.

We do better: Our ships are pretty much self-sinking.


#15

[quote]pookie wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
How does this relate to the topic? Who are you talking to?

China has no “blue sea navy” because in this day and age - in modern warfare - a navy is pretty useless. A bunch of big, costly targets just waiting for a volley of low cost missiles to turn them into so many tourist dive sites.

[/quote]
Just like what happened when we sailed our navy over to the Gulf for the Iraq war II. All of our carrier battle groups are at the bottom of the Gulf to become future dive sites, once enough coral and barnacles fix themselves to the hulls, right? We were unable to launch sortie after sortie from the decks of our carriers because they were at the bottom of the ocean after being hit by numerous exocet missiles. I hope we learned our lesson from that ordeal. From now on, we’ll just keep our ships in shallow enough water that we can jump off and walk to shore like the Canadian navy.


#16

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Just like what happened when we sailed our navy over to the Gulf for the Iraq war II.
[/quote]

No, that’s what I meant when I mentioned the camel-powered technology. You attacked Iraq because you fully well knew it posed no threat whatsoever to you. And even that, you managed to fuck up.

But hey, don’t take my word for it, see what one of your own, Paul Van Riper, did to your precious battlefleet during a simulated battle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

The navy got so pissed, they “re-floated” their ships and gave Van Riper scripted actions to follow so they wouldn’t look like idiots.


#17

[quote]pookie wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Just like what happened when we sailed our navy over to the Gulf for the Iraq war II.

No, that’s what I meant when I mentioned the camel-powered technology. You attacked Iraq because you fully well knew it posed no threat whatsoever to you. And even that, you managed to fuck up.

[/quote]

I know, look at all of our carriers sitting at the bottom of the ocean because of inexpensive Iraqi exocet missiles. It’s almost like you could have predicted the entire thing beforehand.


#18

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I know, look at all of our carriers sitting at the bottom of the ocean because of inexpensive Iraqi exocet missiles. It’s almost like you could have predicted the entire thing beforehand. [/quote]

Well duh. The Exocet is crap. It’s got a ridiculously short range… Iraq has almost no coastline with the Gulf. Try it with someone who has missile technology that doesn’t predate the Carter Administration and see how well that goes.


#19

The Event Horizon wants you…


#20

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
hedo wrote:
The US Navy will hold an advantage for at least the next 10-15 years. Beyond that is anyones guess.

You can build as many ships as you want but the sailors to crew them will take generations to develop. Petty Officers and First Class Sailors are needed as much as the steel in the boats.

I think you’re being very pessimistic with the advantage being only 10-15 years.Unless the Russians find a shedload of money no one knows about,25 years+ of superiority seems quite comfortable to me.

The Chinese have a shitload of money. [/quote]

That’s what worries me. They own us nd they don’t like us.