3
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] culpritus@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I recently saw someone cite the 'China has the world's largest navy'. So I looked it up.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/largest-navies-in-the-world

It's true if you just count 'naval vessels' because China and NK have a lot of small boats:

Top 10 Largest Navies in the World (by total number of warships and submarines - 2020):

China - 777
Russia - 603
North Korea - 492
United States - 490
Colombia - 453
Iran - 398
Egypt - 316
Thailand - 292
India - 285
Indonesia - 282

So maybe not the most useful metric for comparison of relative might. Maybe tonnage is a better metric of that?

Top 10 Most Powerful Navies in the World (by total tonnage - 2014):

United States - 3,415,893
Russia - 845,739
China - 708,886
Japan - 413,800
United Kingdom - 367,850
France - 319,195
India - 317,725
South Korea - 178,710
Italy - 173,549
Taiwan - 151,662

Taiwan even makes it on the the top ten list that way. And you can clearly see that the USA has the most massive navy by a wide margin. You can get into aircraft carriers and subs too if you want to see how lopsided these stats can appear.

[-] ProfessorAdonisCnut@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

So China has about 500 grams of navy per capita, vs 10.2kg per capita for USA and 6.3kg per capita for Taiwan.

How can we not be scared of the yellow peril?

[-] culpritus@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

I really like this metric of tonnage per capita. hero-of-socialist-labor

[-] Blinky_katt@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

China has been working to increase the PLAN's power and reach this past decade. They are nearing to a blue water navy at this point, and have broken through the first island chain, within which they are no longer considered to be defeatable without extreme cost.

The US has withdrawn their concentration back to Guam (previously, they didn't bothered to arm the second island chain).

China has 20x the manufacturing power of the US and a bigger PPP (more efficient use of their military budget) , and they have known the US will one day come for them since Mao. Their recent ships are lighter in tonnage but newer than the American fleet by several decades, carries better equipment, radar, with greater fire power that makes them more equal to traditional ships one category higher in tonnage.

Finally, they aren't building a navy to project power around the globe like the US navy does. The PLAN intends to have the capability to defend their home waters and to protect their economic interests abroad, that's it, so it will never need to have as many ships as the US navy, so a tonnage or ship number comparison would not be an accurate measure of the PLAN capabilities.

[-] Magos_Galactose@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Thailand - 292

Did...did whoever made this consider a frigging river patrol boat equal to a guided missile frigate?

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Note that this list include auxiliary ships. China have a lot smaller ships because PLAN is a defensive navy so they build a lot of mine trawlers and short range missile corvettes, patrol boats and conventional submarines. While USN is build specifically for acting as a long arm of imperialism, therefore they have less small ships but they need a lot of huge ones. Their carriers make up for a lot of that tonnage, and their auxiliary ships also needs to be huge for the reason they need to operate on a long ranges to perform their gunboat diplomacy. Even their frigates are 4000 tons and underarmed because they need that operational range.

So yeah, USN have huge margin of tonnage advantage, but the questions is, will it be able to use this advantage vs PLAN in west Pacific, and here the answer is way less conclusive, especially that latest Chinese hypersonic missile drill point out that carriers can be as well useless.

[-] Magos_Galactose@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Even their frigates "are 4000 tons" and underarmed because they need that operational range.

You haven't seen the newest frigate they're building, I take it.

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah i meant the Perry and Knox classes, around twice as big than most other contemporary projects (except British ones). Even the LCS which should be light ships are over 3000 tons.

load more comments (-1 replies)
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)

GenZedong

4284 readers
15 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS