These may be the world’s best warships. And they ’re not American...

[Fred Bloggs]

\"Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans.\"

As usual, US is in a state of disaster...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/asia/japan-south-korea-naval-shipbuilding-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

At a minimum, half of everything China makes doesn\'t work or isn\'t used properly, so you can slash the effective size of their fleet in half just on that basis.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 2:32:06 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:

\"Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans.\"

As usual, US is in a state of disaster...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/asia/japan-south-korea-naval-shipbuilding-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

At a minimum, half of everything China makes doesn\'t work or isn\'t used properly, so you can slash the effective size of their fleet in half just on that basis.

Fred Bloggs has unique insights into Chinese naval quality control. That doesn\'t make them valuable - he\'s a raving lunatic who thinks he knows what he is talking about.

The time you might be able to talk about Chinese naval equipment not working or being used properly would be after Japanese and South Korean boats had sunk at lot of them, and that hasn\'t happened yet.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 1:32:22 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 2:32:06 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
\"Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans.\"

As usual, US is in a state of disaster...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/asia/japan-south-korea-naval-shipbuilding-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

At a minimum, half of everything China makes doesn\'t work or isn\'t used properly, so you can slash the effective size of their fleet in half just on that basis.
Fred Bloggs has unique insights into Chinese naval quality control. That doesn\'t make them valuable - he\'s a raving lunatic who thinks he knows what he is talking about.

The time you might be able to talk about Chinese naval equipment not working or being used properly would be after Japanese and South Korean boats had sunk at lot of them, and that hasn\'t happened yet.

Sloman is a caricature the \"let me tell you all about it\" types, who in reality know absolutely nothing, and is totally oblivious to the sourcing of what little he can understand about the subject matter. If he\'s not linking to scientific papers that are little more than PRC disruptive propaganda, he\'s shilling for the various western weapons industries who want as much business as possible.

People who know about naval operations consider Chinese capability to be nearly laughable.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/05/05/asia-pacific/china-aircraft-carriers-theatrical-role/

They accidently ran that Liaoning aground a few months ago. They can\'t read charts, pay attention, and or generally operate that ship.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 4:44:02 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 1:32:22 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 2:32:06 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:

\"Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans.\"

As usual, US is in a state of disaster...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/asia/japan-south-korea-naval-shipbuilding-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

At a minimum, half of everything China makes doesn\'t work or isn\'t used properly, so you can slash the effective size of their fleet in half just on that basis.
Fred Bloggs has unique insights into Chinese naval quality control. That doesn\'t make them valuable - he\'s a raving lunatic who thinks he knows what he is talking about.

The time you might be able to talk about Chinese naval equipment not working or being used properly would be after Japanese and South Korean boats had sunk at lot of them, and that hasn\'t happened yet.

Sloman is a caricature the \"let me tell you all about it\" types, who in reality know absolutely nothing, and is totally oblivious to the sourcing of what little he can understand about the subject matter. If he\'s not linking to scientific papers that are little more than PRC disruptive propaganda, he\'s shilling for the various western weapons industries who want as much business as possible.

People who know about naval operations consider Chinese capability to be nearly laughable.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/05/05/asia-pacific/china-aircraft-carriers-theatrical-role/

They accidentally ran that Liaoning aground a few months ago. They can\'t read charts, pay attention, and or generally operate that ship.

Human error is always with us. Aircraft carriers are essentially theatrical units in any navy these days. A competent and well equipped opponent would sink any of them in minutes. They are handy for intimidating less well-equipped opponents, That article is just wishful thinking.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 12:22:39 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 4:44:02 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 1:32:22 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 2:32:06 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:

\"Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans.\"

As usual, US is in a state of disaster...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/asia/japan-south-korea-naval-shipbuilding-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

At a minimum, half of everything China makes doesn\'t work or isn\'t used properly, so you can slash the effective size of their fleet in half just on that basis.
Fred Bloggs has unique insights into Chinese naval quality control. That doesn\'t make them valuable - he\'s a raving lunatic who thinks he knows what he is talking about.

The time you might be able to talk about Chinese naval equipment not working or being used properly would be after Japanese and South Korean boats had sunk at lot of them, and that hasn\'t happened yet.

Sloman is a caricature the \"let me tell you all about it\" types, who in reality know absolutely nothing, and is totally oblivious to the sourcing of what little he can understand about the subject matter. If he\'s not linking to scientific papers that are little more than PRC disruptive propaganda, he\'s shilling for the various western weapons industries who want as much business as possible.

People who know about naval operations consider Chinese capability to be nearly laughable.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/05/05/asia-pacific/china-aircraft-carriers-theatrical-role/

They accidentally ran that Liaoning aground a few months ago. They can\'t read charts, pay attention, and or generally operate that ship.

Human error is always with us. Aircraft carriers are essentially theatrical units in any navy these days. A competent and well equipped opponent would sink any of them in minutes. They are handy for intimidating less well-equipped opponents, That article is just wishful thinking.

It\'s a lot more than that, there\'s a BIG competency issue. U.S. has caught them spying on airbases to see how our pilots fly various aircraft types. And they\'ve hired Americans to teach them how to do carrier landings and takeoffs. And just about all their weapons systems, have been publicly critiqued by western analysts as marginal. Most modern warships don\'t sink unless something really huge happens. They\'re full of floatation material. That\'s how you can have things like that USN Aegis ship get hit broadside by an oil tanker and nearly ripped in half, but it stayed afloat- looked like hell.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 12:27:30 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 12:22:39 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 4:44:02 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 1:32:22 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 2:32:06 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:

\"Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans.\"

As usual, US is in a state of disaster...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/asia/japan-south-korea-naval-shipbuilding-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

At a minimum, half of everything China makes doesn\'t work or isn\'t used properly, so you can slash the effective size of their fleet in half just on that basis.

Fred Bloggs has unique insights into Chinese naval quality control. That doesn\'t make them valuable - he\'s a raving lunatic who thinks he knows what he is talking about.

The time you might be able to talk about Chinese naval equipment not working or being used properly would be after Japanese and South Korean boats had sunk at lot of them, and that hasn\'t happened yet.

Sloman is a caricature the \"let me tell you all about it\" types, who in reality know absolutely nothing, and is totally oblivious to the sourcing of what little he can understand about the subject matter. If he\'s not linking to scientific papers that are little more than PRC disruptive propaganda, he\'s shilling for the various western weapons industries who want as much business as possible.

People who know about naval operations consider Chinese capability to be nearly laughable.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/05/05/asia-pacific/china-aircraft-carriers-theatrical-role/

They accidentally ran that Liaoning aground a few months ago. They can\'t read charts, pay attention, and or generally operate that ship.

Human error is always with us. Aircraft carriers are essentially theatrical units in any navy these days. A competent and well equipped opponent would sink any of them in minutes. They are handy for intimidating less well-equipped opponents, That article is just wishful thinking.

It\'s a lot more than that, there\'s a BIG competency issue. U.S. has caught them spying on airbases to see how our pilots fly various aircraft types.

China has been copying other peoples stuff since they started playing catch up. Military technology is just one more area where they will pay attention to what works for other people.

> And they\'ve hired Americans to teach them how to do carrier landings and takeoffs.

Or that\'s what they told the pilots that they hired. Nobody does carrier landings well - it\'s tricky.

> And just about all their weapons systems, have been publicly critiqued by western analysts as marginal.

Western analysts do have a vested interest in praising their own weapons systems. That sort of analysis isn\'t all that reliable, but until you\'ve got some combat to analyse it\'s all you have got.

> Most modern warships don\'t sink unless something really huge happens. They\'re full of floatation material. That\'s how you can have things like that USN Aegis ship get hit broadside by an oil tanker and nearly ripped in half, but it stayed afloat- looked like hell.

So how does a US Aegis ship get broadside by an oil tanker? They really should have seen the oil tanker coming in time to dodge it.

I\'m sure that the Chinese military analysts wrote reams about that.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 07:27:26 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 12:22:39?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 4:44:02?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 1:32:22?PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 2:32:06?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:

\"Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans.\"

As usual, US is in a state of disaster...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/asia/japan-south-korea-naval-shipbuilding-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

At a minimum, half of everything China makes doesn\'t work or isn\'t used properly, so you can slash the effective size of their fleet in half just on that basis.
Fred Bloggs has unique insights into Chinese naval quality control. That doesn\'t make them valuable - he\'s a raving lunatic who thinks he knows what he is talking about.

The time you might be able to talk about Chinese naval equipment not working or being used properly would be after Japanese and South Korean boats had sunk at lot of them, and that hasn\'t happened yet.

Sloman is a caricature the \"let me tell you all about it\" types, who in reality know absolutely nothing, and is totally oblivious to the sourcing of what little he can understand about the subject matter. If he\'s not linking to scientific papers that are little more than PRC disruptive propaganda, he\'s shilling for the various western weapons industries who want as much business as possible.

People who know about naval operations consider Chinese capability to be nearly laughable.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/05/05/asia-pacific/china-aircraft-carriers-theatrical-role/

They accidentally ran that Liaoning aground a few months ago. They can\'t read charts, pay attention, and or generally operate that ship.

Human error is always with us. Aircraft carriers are essentially theatrical units in any navy these days. A competent and well equipped opponent would sink any of them in minutes. They are handy for intimidating less well-equipped opponents, That article is just wishful thinking.

It\'s a lot more than that, there\'s a BIG competency issue. U.S. has caught them spying on airbases to see how our pilots fly various aircraft types. And they\'ve hired Americans to teach them how to do carrier landings and takeoffs. And just about all their weapons systems, have been publicly critiqued by western analysts as marginal. Most modern warships don\'t sink unless something really huge happens. They\'re full of floatation material. That\'s how you can have things like that USN Aegis ship get hit broadside by an oil tanker and nearly ripped in half, but it stayed afloat- looked like hell.

The big smelly ski-jump Russian carrier is hilarious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJDJv95Huho

The Ukrainians are showing us the future of warfare: large numbers of
unmanned smart weapons. Ultimately, the party that runs out of robots
first loses, infrastructure wrecked, before many people are killed.

I don\'t see a multi-billion-dollar carrier as much more than a target
for a hundred cheap flying or floating or underwater drones. Why not
have a lot of small ships with F35s and drones?