-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
China says US navy releasing a photo of US navy sailors lepaking in front of China warship is condescending psychological warfare
- Thread starter UltimaOnline
- Start date
Maybe they were burning joss paper? They must adhere to Chinese traditions, even in the military and when out at sea.
you forgot about netherlands, norway and denmark. norway fought the german invasion the longest among nordic cuntries.It was the same story as Nazi Germany. Poland was declared part of Germany. Czechoslovakia was declared part of Germany. Austria was declared part of Germany. And so on.
Is that the russkies carrier?
they have fought and won in the pacific before at the battle of midway and they were facing a superior adversary. the CCP has never fought a naval battle. the odds don't look good for the CCP.
Cut the crap. The white wasn't even aware the Jap was close the Hawaii.
How many naval war had US fought? None.
The Chinese were backing the Vietnam and Korea war and won.
the fact is U live in the BE circle and Singapore wasn't allowed to access to China Radio and TV stations... If LKY did that the BE will sanctioned Singapore... get that in yr mind.
all TV boradcasts, radios, paper magazines, education must toll the BE line in Singapore.
And now it still is. Ask Loong.
if Pinky lean to China, the US will bad mouth and sanction Singapore.
get it in ye head, you are a frog in the well all the time...
How many naval war had US fought? None.
The Chinese were backing the Vietnam and Korea war and won.
the fact is U live in the BE circle and Singapore wasn't allowed to access to China Radio and TV stations... If LKY did that the BE will sanctioned Singapore... get that in yr mind.
all TV boradcasts, radios, paper magazines, education must toll the BE line in Singapore.
And now it still is. Ask Loong.
if Pinky lean to China, the US will bad mouth and sanction Singapore.
get it in ye head, you are a frog in the well all the time...
Malay navy also lepak when conftonting china navy. Msybe US learn from malays to relac
Are we supposed to take the ski jump Aircraft Carrier seriously? Its old tech steam powered and their J-15 is total crap compared to F18 Hornets
Wait... what had Melayu contributed to humanity? Ah silat... wayang... lepakmelayu
= slanty
slanty genes can't help it
look at japs
gooks
stinkies
taiwanese
aren't these all yankee poodles?
look at tiongs?
aren't they still the biggest copycats copy paste artists ?
not a single invention or innovation worth mentioning?
after 40+ years of so called miracle and development, they brag how they will surpass yanks in another 30 years
all in all, in 70+ years they intend to surpass a 5 times smaller country
ergo if yankees and tiongs had same population, in 350 years tiongs still wouldn't be able to surpass yanks
if they can't surpass yanks in 350 years, they call it the china speed
working at that speed no goal is ever achieved
tiongs = glorified CECA
yeah but that has got nothing to do with slanty inferiority
oh wait
maybe it does coz melayus are also slanties only of the darker variety
corrected it for you
Yuuuuge difference
Redundancy
What if yankee GBI BMD etc succeed partially let's say with 22% rate of hit?
that would mean tiongs will lose 22% of their ICBMs in flight
what if yankees activate some SM-3 Block IIA near gooks or japs occupied territory?
from there maybe intercept rate move to 33%,
then tiongs lose 33% of ICBMs at boost stage/initila stage of flight out of 3 stage of ICBM flight
leaving 2/3
of which another 22% lost by GBI BMD THAAD etc
leave only 52.26% of all initial ICBM
it still leave nothing for japs gooks CECA virus gayropeans
then?
whereas soviets got plenty for every other comers
incl for all these bogus interceptors which don't work well anyways
The yanks are screwed
China’s new powerful warship puts US to shame at sea
April 8, 2021 12:22pm
The Chinese Navy is set for a large build-up in its warship strength....
This week, both China and the United States sailed aircraft carriers into troubled waters in the East and South China seas. But quietly tagging along is a new warship that puts America’s best to shame and could redefine war at sea.
China’s training aircraft carrier Liaoning and five escort vessels were observed passing through a critical maritime “choke point” south of Japan at the weekend. About the same time, the USS Theodore Roosevelt and two escorts were making their way through the narrow Malacca Strait, past Singapore and into the South China Sea.
Since World War II, aircraft carriers have replaced big-gunned battleships as status symbols and gunboat diplomacy flag bearers.
undefined
A translated tweet from the Japanese Defence Force regarding the six Chinese ships. Source: Twitter
On the surface, the US-Chinese battle groups are not evenly matched.
The 110,000-ton, nuclear-powered Roosevelt can operate some 90 heavy aircraft and helicopters.
The 55,000-ton, diesel-powered Liaoning can carry up to 40 light fighters and helicopters.
But that balance shifts dramatically once the low-profile escort vessels are taken into account.
Aircraft carriers aren’t the source of overwhelming force they used to be.
Fast, stealthy missiles have negated their one overwhelming advantage – long-range strike.
And China’s new Type 055 “Renhai” class missile destroyer carries an awful lot of them.
Naval arms race
The pace of change has accelerated. Governments worldwide are struggling to come to grips with issues of privacy, data economics and digital security decades after their emergence.
And shedding old ideas, definitions and standards prove to be just as much an issue for the world’s militaries.
The new Type 055 112 VLS-cell warship Nanchang displays its clean, modern lines. Picture: CCTV Source: Supplied
A new Type 055 “Destroyer” is sailing alongside the Liaoning. The PLAN Nanchang carries 112 Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells. Eight ships of this class have been launched. Another six are at various points of assembly.
Meanwhile, a 38-year-old Ticonderoga class “Cruiser” is protecting the USS Theodore Roosevelt. The USS Bunker Hill also carries 112 VLS cells. But the US navy is struggling to keep these ships functional as more and more are retired. No comparable replacements are being built.
This article contains features which are only available in the web version
The point of comparison, apart from their age, is the number of VLS cells.
These are the “big guns” of modern warships.
Each cell can hold a large missile, or sometimes several smaller ones. The mix of anti-surface, anti-shore, anti-air or antimissile warheads depends on the mission.
They are designed to put as many missiles as possible into the air, as fast as possible.
The idea is to overwhelm the defences of any opponent through speed, stealth – and sheer numbers.
But even as Beijing is sending more and more VLS cells to sea, the US is withdrawing them.
And it has no firm plans to replace them.
The Type 055 Nanchang being manoeuvred by tugboats. This top-down view provides a good look at the numbers of VLS cells positioned forward and amidships. Picture: PLA/Weibo Source: Supplied
Lethal weapon
Japan responded to the PLAN Liaoning battle group’s passage through the Miyako Strait between Okinawa Island and Miyako Island by sending one of its own destroyers and a surveillance aircraft to “shadow” the force.
The Type 055 Nanchang will have been the centre of attention.
It is about 180m long and 22m wide. Its smooth sides deflect radar, and the large square panels betray the advanced nature of its sensor systems.
Liaoning’s two other heavy escorts, Type 052D “Luyang III” class destroyers, are only a little less modern. And they carry 64 VLS cells, giving them less potential firepower to their 33-year-old US “Arleigh Burke” class counterparts which hold between 90 and 96.
This article contains features which are only available in the web version
But it’s the potential of Type 055 that has the US Navy on edge.
Chinese Communist Party-controlled media claims its dual-band radars can detect stealth aircraft and track low-Earth orbit satellites. Its VLS cells can carry 9m-long missiles powerful enough to reach them. Not only does this put crucial surveillance and communications satellites at risk, it also indicates the potential to intercept ballistic rockets – whether they carry hypersonic or nuclear warheads or not.
Some US Ticonderoga and Arleigh-Burke class ships also have this capability.
Now Beijing-controlled media reports the Type 055s are fitted with 20-megawatt generators capable of powering high-energy weapons such as lasers and electromagnetic rail guns. Prototypes of such weapons are already being tested at sea.
What’s in a name?
The PLAN Nanchang weighs 13,000 tons. That’s the equivalent of a World War II heavy cruiser. But it’s called a Guided Missile Destroyer.
The USS Bunker Hill weighs 9800 tons. It’s designation is Guided Missile Cruiser.
The Royal Australian Navy recently accepted the “Air-Warfare Destroyer” HMAS Sydney. It’s the third and final of a batch of three modern 7000-ton warships based on a Spanish F-100 “frigate” design. All are bigger than World War II cruisers. All carry 48-cell Vertical Launch Systems (VLS) and an assortment of short-range and point-defence weapons.
These designations – cruiser, destroyer or frigate – appear meaningless in the context of their size and firepower.
A Type 055 undergoing speed trials. Picture: PLA Source: Supplied
Yet the outmoded World War II gun-based language still shapes the thoughts and opinions of politicians, the general public – and military personnel.
But the raw numbers show a 48-cell “Air Warfare Destroyer” has little chance of protecting itself – yet alone the troop transports it is tasked to guard – against even a single 112-cell “Guided Missile Destroyer”.
And the US Pentagon is accelerating plans to retire its expensive-to-maintain Ticonderoga Cruiser fleet, despite plans for its replacement – DDG (X) – appearing to have stalled. An earlier replacement program, the USS Zumwalt class, was abandoned due to excessive costs and a failure to produce its advanced weapon systems on time.
The upshot has severe implications for the balance of power in the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
“We’re going to have to have a much larger fleet than we have today, if we’re serious about great power competition and deterring great power war, and if we’re serious about dominant capability over something like China or some other power that has significant capability,” chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley recently warned.
Jamie Seidel is a freelance writer | @JamieSeidel
This article contains features which are only available in the web version
China’s new powerful warship puts US to shame at sea
April 8, 2021 12:22pm
The Chinese Navy is set for a large build-up in its warship strength....
This week, both China and the United States sailed aircraft carriers into troubled waters in the East and South China seas. But quietly tagging along is a new warship that puts America’s best to shame and could redefine war at sea.
China’s training aircraft carrier Liaoning and five escort vessels were observed passing through a critical maritime “choke point” south of Japan at the weekend. About the same time, the USS Theodore Roosevelt and two escorts were making their way through the narrow Malacca Strait, past Singapore and into the South China Sea.
Since World War II, aircraft carriers have replaced big-gunned battleships as status symbols and gunboat diplomacy flag bearers.
undefined
A translated tweet from the Japanese Defence Force regarding the six Chinese ships. Source: Twitter
On the surface, the US-Chinese battle groups are not evenly matched.
The 110,000-ton, nuclear-powered Roosevelt can operate some 90 heavy aircraft and helicopters.
The 55,000-ton, diesel-powered Liaoning can carry up to 40 light fighters and helicopters.
But that balance shifts dramatically once the low-profile escort vessels are taken into account.
Aircraft carriers aren’t the source of overwhelming force they used to be.
Fast, stealthy missiles have negated their one overwhelming advantage – long-range strike.
And China’s new Type 055 “Renhai” class missile destroyer carries an awful lot of them.
Naval arms race
The pace of change has accelerated. Governments worldwide are struggling to come to grips with issues of privacy, data economics and digital security decades after their emergence.
And shedding old ideas, definitions and standards prove to be just as much an issue for the world’s militaries.
The new Type 055 112 VLS-cell warship Nanchang displays its clean, modern lines. Picture: CCTV Source: Supplied
A new Type 055 “Destroyer” is sailing alongside the Liaoning. The PLAN Nanchang carries 112 Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells. Eight ships of this class have been launched. Another six are at various points of assembly.
Meanwhile, a 38-year-old Ticonderoga class “Cruiser” is protecting the USS Theodore Roosevelt. The USS Bunker Hill also carries 112 VLS cells. But the US navy is struggling to keep these ships functional as more and more are retired. No comparable replacements are being built.
This article contains features which are only available in the web version
The point of comparison, apart from their age, is the number of VLS cells.
These are the “big guns” of modern warships.
Each cell can hold a large missile, or sometimes several smaller ones. The mix of anti-surface, anti-shore, anti-air or antimissile warheads depends on the mission.
They are designed to put as many missiles as possible into the air, as fast as possible.
The idea is to overwhelm the defences of any opponent through speed, stealth – and sheer numbers.
But even as Beijing is sending more and more VLS cells to sea, the US is withdrawing them.
And it has no firm plans to replace them.
The Type 055 Nanchang being manoeuvred by tugboats. This top-down view provides a good look at the numbers of VLS cells positioned forward and amidships. Picture: PLA/Weibo Source: Supplied
Lethal weapon
Japan responded to the PLAN Liaoning battle group’s passage through the Miyako Strait between Okinawa Island and Miyako Island by sending one of its own destroyers and a surveillance aircraft to “shadow” the force.
The Type 055 Nanchang will have been the centre of attention.
It is about 180m long and 22m wide. Its smooth sides deflect radar, and the large square panels betray the advanced nature of its sensor systems.
Liaoning’s two other heavy escorts, Type 052D “Luyang III” class destroyers, are only a little less modern. And they carry 64 VLS cells, giving them less potential firepower to their 33-year-old US “Arleigh Burke” class counterparts which hold between 90 and 96.
This article contains features which are only available in the web version
But it’s the potential of Type 055 that has the US Navy on edge.
Chinese Communist Party-controlled media claims its dual-band radars can detect stealth aircraft and track low-Earth orbit satellites. Its VLS cells can carry 9m-long missiles powerful enough to reach them. Not only does this put crucial surveillance and communications satellites at risk, it also indicates the potential to intercept ballistic rockets – whether they carry hypersonic or nuclear warheads or not.
Some US Ticonderoga and Arleigh-Burke class ships also have this capability.
Now Beijing-controlled media reports the Type 055s are fitted with 20-megawatt generators capable of powering high-energy weapons such as lasers and electromagnetic rail guns. Prototypes of such weapons are already being tested at sea.
What’s in a name?
The PLAN Nanchang weighs 13,000 tons. That’s the equivalent of a World War II heavy cruiser. But it’s called a Guided Missile Destroyer.
The USS Bunker Hill weighs 9800 tons. It’s designation is Guided Missile Cruiser.
The Royal Australian Navy recently accepted the “Air-Warfare Destroyer” HMAS Sydney. It’s the third and final of a batch of three modern 7000-ton warships based on a Spanish F-100 “frigate” design. All are bigger than World War II cruisers. All carry 48-cell Vertical Launch Systems (VLS) and an assortment of short-range and point-defence weapons.
These designations – cruiser, destroyer or frigate – appear meaningless in the context of their size and firepower.
A Type 055 undergoing speed trials. Picture: PLA Source: Supplied
Yet the outmoded World War II gun-based language still shapes the thoughts and opinions of politicians, the general public – and military personnel.
But the raw numbers show a 48-cell “Air Warfare Destroyer” has little chance of protecting itself – yet alone the troop transports it is tasked to guard – against even a single 112-cell “Guided Missile Destroyer”.
And the US Pentagon is accelerating plans to retire its expensive-to-maintain Ticonderoga Cruiser fleet, despite plans for its replacement – DDG (X) – appearing to have stalled. An earlier replacement program, the USS Zumwalt class, was abandoned due to excessive costs and a failure to produce its advanced weapon systems on time.
The upshot has severe implications for the balance of power in the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
“We’re going to have to have a much larger fleet than we have today, if we’re serious about great power competition and deterring great power war, and if we’re serious about dominant capability over something like China or some other power that has significant capability,” chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley recently warned.
Jamie Seidel is a freelance writer | @JamieSeidel
This article contains features which are only available in the web version
youtube.com/watch?v=nSsPn5sspXU
"Liaoning stalked by USS Mustin in SCS | 3 reasons due to which USS Mustin will have an upper hand !"
wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Mustin_(DDG-89)
"Liaoning stalked by USS Mustin in SCS | 3 reasons due to which USS Mustin will have an upper hand !"
wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Mustin_(DDG-89)
Similar threads
