Why The US Navy Should Fear China’s New Aircraft Carriers

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

I love the logic of “we’ve been running carriers for over 100 years while China has only been doing it for 20 so we are clearly better and more experienced”. With that logic, the British Navy is still the most powerful on the planet even though they barely have any functional ships.

[@aidanmacdougall9250]

Don't forget the Spanish and Portuguese! 😂🤣😂

[@luoeain2026]

Sadly so many ppl deeply beleive western propaganda and they dont realize it

[@jeebusk]

China had some epic navies in like 2000bc or something 😅

[@astahfirula]

I’ll go further, Carthaginians were by far the best sailors on the planet for over 300 years when they lost the battle of Ecnomus to the Romans that barely had any naval experience. This is the kind of hubris that topple’s down empires.

[@MrArthoz]

​@aidanmacdougall9250 you forgot the Mycenaean and Carthaginian 😃

[@whiskey_tango_foxtrot__]

No man admits to polishing their torpedoes.

[@KaptifLaDistillerie]

As an aeronautics engineer, I have to admit we do polish our missiles...

[@timspiker]

@@KaptifLaDistillerie is that how they go up?

[@KaptifLaDistillerie]

@@timspiker yes, red paint is also forbidden by international law so they don't go too fast you know

[@timspiker]

@@KaptifLaDistillerie What about racing stripes?

[@KaptifLaDistillerie]

@@timspiker considered hyper lethal and a cosmetic of mass destruction

[@gerroos5751]

Let us talk about rockets, China used rockets the first time in 1232 AD. That’s 797 years of experience. US should be afraid

[@carrotbrainYT]

😂😂😂

[@greybone777]

Yes, a country that can't make a car that they can sell in the real world makes great aircraft and ships.

[@Tyrant369]

@@greybone777china can’t sell a car world wide? Are you living under a rock or just incredibly stupid?

[@fluxtheory3136]

​@@greybone777 You're being extremely uncharitable to Ford and General Motors.

[@chrissyp930]

​@@fluxtheory3136 our shit actually works and isn't made with the lowest grade materials we can find unlike China. Kindly shut up, signed someone who works with both American and Chinese materials in manufacturing and actually know tf their talking about/isn't a CCP troll

[@WintersJim-ly9no]

As a Chinese, i clearly know why America Carriers don't dare to stay neat the mainland and the islands of South China Sea.After 2016 in Southe China Sea, The us has actually given up the first chain.The Pla Navy isn't all, there are still thousands of df missiles and PLAAF are waiting for US Carriers. So the general once said even US drive 10 Carriers in the South China Sea,they will never be back again.

[@yuugenr7549]

Qin Shi Huang approves 👍🏼

[@damonburroughs5283]

@@WintersJim-ly9no I do not glorify conflict or encourage it. Nothing is cut and dry , there are hundreds of defense and strike missiles in a carrier fleet . All quite capable of intercepting and returning fire. A battle would be catastrophic for both sides and many would die. I have Chinese friends and nobody wants conflict. I'm British and wish no ill health to Chinese people. On the contrary , during WW2, we defended you . There is no need for conflict. Tbh , with all this talk of traditional lands etc, I feel surprised China hasn't requested Manchuria back, there were important resources there, very beneficial to china. There are also other traditional lands annexed. Personally , I think, we the people, have no ill feelings towards one another. Taiwan by contrast is a small island , your brothers, they choose to lead life differently is all. A partnership in trade would be beneficial as opposed to hostilities unless people really crave bloodshed

[@dhjrbhuehveh]

I am Chinese and I don’t want to go to the battlefield. I care more about class conflict than conflict between nations. The state is just a weapon used by a group of people to strengthen themselves. Many people only remember the country but forget their own class.​@@damonburroughs5283

[@ajaykumarsingh702]

@@damonburroughs5283 The thing about any vessel is that it has a limited volume and capacity. That's just physics. This is why no matter how advance any ship out there, they can be overwhelmed very easily. Even a million ships cannot defend against Mainland China, because they will be against Trillions of missiles fielded across the entire continent.

[@TheLaidia]

@@damonburroughs5283Soviet Union defended PRC. Compared with Soviets, Brits did nothing.

[@soldierz18]

China is the 1 shipbuilder in the world, so naturally they would eventually gain an advantage over the US in the long run. The US should have never outsourced its industry to other countries.

[@NJ-wb1cz]

How do you compete with a country that's larger than 3 times your size? Only by allying yourself with other countries

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 The US navy is nearly double the size. We don't count all our ships in our navy like China does, that would be like claiming every coast guard vessel as naval ships. Also don't just blindly trust China's numbers without proof.

[@Luke_Crmwl123]

Exactly

[@daseapickleofjustice7231]

@@NJ-wb1cz Americas problem is that it only has alliances with its minions who rely on America while China has proper allies

[@ctrlaltdebug]

@@NJ-wb1cz import more migrants to match their size lol.

[@volvo245]

US is so experienced and OP in naval warfare they have to shoot their own planes down.

[@sonofjack6286]

Exactly. We're so far ahead of the enemy it's not even fair at some points. I heard a little while ago that DARPA was working on squeezing light, so our radars can work more efficiently, and without raising power consumption.

[@rickandbrandonshow]

You do know they had drones and missiles inbound while they were launching and within 30 seconds of launch the jet was hit while the ships were repelling the attack and something went wrong and they also hit the f-18. It happens to every military in every war. Russia and Ukraine have both shot their own planes down in this war

[@Ziegfried82]

LOL gotta admit that kinda stuff really damages the US military's aura of invincibility. I think a lot of Americans forget that the US military is not in fact invincible, and could be defeated by it's peers Russia and China. Back in the Cold War days Americans weren't so overconfident, but now? The USA has become delusional from the top down.

[@tylerlewis2766]

Nothing says OP like DEI incompetence in the armed forces. You should be getting your good goy award in the mail soon

[@goccha-xm2yv]

The have not been able to control the Red sea. But they're still on it😂

[@houseofhas9355]

The only carrier the US should worry about is the keyboard warrior carrier. We are winning in Ukraine. BlueSky said so.

[@BlueFire015]

Hey US got alot of Keyboard warriors as well soo i wouldnt sell urself short in that departement

[@RADICALFLOAT_95]

I actually genuinely agree with you ​@@BlueFire015

[@greybone777]

Who's we?

[@houseofhas9355]

We the Nafo army. 😂

[@Spartan-jg4bf]

@houseofhas9355 3 year, 3day special military operation 🤣🤣🤣

[@realspeed1944]

HistoryLegends always uploads the videos when my dinner is getting ready, I don't have to look for videos to watch while eating

[@Luke_Crmwl123]

Nice lol

[@PortlightInspections]

While the US can't get 3 aircraft carriers out of dock and into operation at anyone time anywhere. They couldn't even get a third operational to relieve the Eisenhower after 9 months of high intensity operation off the coasts of Yemen in the Red Sea.

[@OAGAMER-gen3]

Bro the what I did lol

[@christopherscott932]

It's 830 in the morning where I am where in the world are you?

[@2DC24]

Other side of the pond it's 17:44 rn

[@VictorAwodutire]

china and history legends two words i want to hear

[@ShadowReaper-pu2hx]

Um, those are three words. 🤓

[@VictorAwodutire]

@@ShadowReaper-pu2hx 🛀 whatever u say im just happy to watch

[@felipebarbosamedeiros4845]

Two words history legends

[@felipebarbosamedeiros4845]

Eheheh

[@MonkeyLiggaScrumptiousNan]

I just want to find my discord kitten that loves me for me type shit yk?

[@丝鱿鱼]

Twenty years ago, the United States said that I had advanced equipment but you didn't; Twenty years later, the United States said I have practical experience but you don't; What are you planning to boast about in the next twenty years? 😂😂😂

[@ygibsoon9261]

America says we have diverse genders

[@stevencher9968]

Emma has 2 mums and China doesn't 😅

[@易陆-p6w]

american have more powerfull LGBT forever

[@jf7009]

somehow the things you wanted to say got lost in the translation from chinese to english.

[@Stierlitz-z2s]

​​@@jf7009If everyone understands it and you don't, what does that say about you?

[@moggridge1]

Four aircraft carriers? That's a lot of Chinese seamen! 😮

[@tariqramadan1521]

They have a huge population

[@svaseriofficial6061]

I see what u did there xddd

[@mouroblox]

Oh nah​@@svaseriofficial6061

[@avus-kw2f213]

~ 10,000 to be precise

[@polybius666]

The US will try and swallow but will choke

[@adder88]

The US Navy doesn't need to be afraid of the Chinese Navy now. The next thing is that China will start building the Type 004 nuclear powered aircraft carrier, which is China's target carrier. No one knows how many will be built, which is worrying. Of course, we also know that China's shipbuilding capacity is 230 times that of the United States.

[@Betz23K]

there may be a reason Trump goes for Panama - above the financial terms carriers as HL said are fast-local power.projection or "rule the waves" - if China could for a limited time establish naval power in a region they could protect their "foreign investment bases" or neutralize the US "canon-boat"-options

[@VioletSilence]

Meanwhile Russian submarines just chilling nearby: "Dafak they doin' over there on the surface"

[@PortlightInspections]

While the US can't get 3 aircraft carriers out of dock and into operation at anyone time anywhere.

[@potassiumk5549]

​@PortlightInspections how many can Russia get out of dock?

[@ste9856]

More than F-35 confirmed combactive sorties

[@I.AM.ON.MY.WAY.]

@@potassiumk5549NONE🤣🤣🤣

[@azanudniy]

Yes, this type of carrier warfare has become obsolete with the invention of anti-ship missiles. However, it seems that only a war can prove this assumption. Just like World War II was necessary to demonstrate that battleships were no longer relevant.

[@pyrophobia133]

like in Age of Empires, China's favorite strategy is forcing the opponent to tech up at a very high cost

[@Gunslinger832]

Nah nah that's America's strat that's how they beat USSR. China is just using it too which is great

[@Eneias-q9m]

Like in age of empires, China's strategy is to send infinity meat waves.

[@brendon1689]

@@Eneias-q9m ah yes, genghis khan back from the dead is how the us failed the advance on the chinese border in the korean war, makes sense

[@jimmywang6779]

​@@Eneias-q9m Although I don't think you really know the game, in age of empires civs like slavs and poles are way better in collecting food, cheap tech is still chinese biggest advantage.

[@SnowJon-v7t]

that's how soviet union fall

[@trblemayker5157]

Don't worry Tom Cruise will liberate the skies

[@rickandbrandonshow]

Fuck yeah🎉

[@jasonscorsese]

terror wrist your day is through !

[@k3llym0]

cuz now you have to answer too!

[@justonlyme6121]

He will liberate all the seamen

[@Henry_Jones]

Fact-hypersonic missles have made aircraft carriers obsolete.

[@historylegends]

That's the topic of a future video 😏

[@hunterthompson6737]

aircraft carriers are all cool against isolated 3rd world countries that barely have an army , far harder to use them against a proper foe i guess.

[@jarrettpage4009]

Absolutely not, no sir

[@lorneiggulden7123]

. China also has supersonic torpedoes.

[@simple17226]

USA doesn't possess that either, definitely not in large numbers as they are still in an infancy state

[@luoeain2026]

I am tired of the argument that the Chinese army has no combat experience. It turns out that the asymmetric warfare experience of Western countries over the years has no effect in war (e.g., Russia-Ukraine conflict). How can you expect the experience gained from bombing guerrillas with only AKs and RPGs with million-dollar planes to be effective in a world war level battle?

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 China's last actual combat in war was a devistating defeat against Vietnam in 1979. The USA by all intentions completely obliterated the Vietnamese in the theater of war, where China was humiliated. The hell you talking about the USA has no experience? We took out Iraq in weeks in 04 in a conventional war, we ended the Syrian civil war in a matter of months in 17-18. And yeah Russia the second strongest nation is winning against our proxy, funny how it's our proxy and not us directly. Last time they USA by proxy fought Russia by proxy we won. I don't see how that has any correlation on China who has yet to even win a proxy conflict against another nation.

[@alvinbonny1562]

The last experience americans have against modern armies is basically Desert storm and Iraqi freedom. But the record goes on. With Panama, grenada Iran and more. China Latest conflict was a failed invasion of Vietnam in 1979. So yeah lot of people understimate them. The reality is none of that matter, when the war kick out it is the most resilient side who win. How much US is willing to lose against the Chinese, or how many chinese must die before they surrender.

[@huyckhl6074]

And where do they think experience can be gain from? If they are that afraid of not having war experience we would not be here to talk about it. China have 1.4 billion people. they have manpower to spare.

[@NovaViper-x7m]

​@@alvinbonny1562How much China is willing to lose against the US and how many Americans must die before they surrender. It sounds so different when flipped?😂

[@josephmalit5689]

It seems obvious that aircraft carriers cannot be used effectively in any setting where the enemy can plausibly strike back. See how scared the USN is of the Houthis. You can, however, use aircraft carriers against insurgents like ISIS and al-Qaeda. Since the US is committed to using low-tech terrorist proxies in its ongoing war against the rest of the world, it might be best to view the Chinese carriers as an anti-terrorist force, rather than as a force designed to counter the US Navy.

[@TheOnlyKingNat]

gonna save this video for my dinner

[@danishcossack4392]

Lol

[@DutchTunisian]

Bro exposed what i always do

[@Mr.Bobcat1776]

Hot dogs and beans?

[@ShadowReaper-pu2hx]

I’m saving it for before I go to sleep.

[@kiyembapatrick2138]

Bro stop exposing my behavior with history legends

[@boxtears]

Let's be honest, neither side would deploy carriers in a Taiwan crisis. They're far too expensive and prestigious to trade in a peer-to-peer/near peer conflict. More likely, the carriers will be saved for their only real role in the modern age: bullying smaller countries with limited or nonexistent navies and surface-to-air capabilities.

[@yttean98]

What is this analysis, you did NOT even consider China's Rocket Force, to me it is the most formidable force that the US will encounter in case there is conflict.

[@lolasdm6959]

No, they will disrupt operations but aren't decisive

[@yttean98]

@@lolasdm6959 I disagree that the implementation of rocket force in the Pacific ocean will decide the direction and outcome of the battle. Just wait, if US launched the Pacific war because of Taiwan, just watch how the rocket force would be implemented, it would blow your mind.

[@lolasdm6959]

@@yttean98 There won't be a pacific war, Taiwan will fall without much of a fight. Rocket force isn't something unique to China, US has already deployed their own ballistic missiles, which can also be used for antiship. Rocket force munitions are very limited, they can disrupt operations, they aren't decisive.

[@yttean98]

@@lolasdm6959

[@祖宗-e5o]

@@lolasdm6959 you have a good dream

[@John_Pace]

As to combat experience. I see the US has just now managed to shot down one of its F18 aircraft in the Red Sea..

[@AdrianFahrenheitTepes]

Friendly Fire happens in a conflict when you’re under attack.

[@useryggfdcc]

​@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes Need a tissue?

[@sonofjack6286]

Well it was during a point where the Houthis threw a bunch of junk their way. Freak accidents can happen. The pilots survived, so all's good.

[@jorgebarriosmur]

@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes Embarrasing, but understandable

[@xhydrag0br203]

@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes IFF, the Houthis dont have aircraft

[@Kuraimizu9152]

3:26 also, China has 2,000 years of warfare experience, they wrote the Art Of War. If we are going to bring the years experience, let's bring them fully.

[@Tate.TopG.]

Great point

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 and how many times has China been invaded and conquered? Because the USA got invaded in the war of 1812 and during the Mexican American war. Neither went well for our enemies, particularly Mexico who we annexed 55% of their territory after humiliating them by taking their capital.

[@tat3179]

@@tylerrobbins8311Should I remind you that you people spent 2 trillion dollars , thousands the lives of your soldiers and 20 years in order to replace the Taliban with….the Taliban? 😂

[@tylerrobbins8311]

@@tat3179 Should I remind you that none presidential order took out a Taliban cell with the push of a button. I don't think you realize how weak your strawman argument is.

[@nicholasbrown668]

​​​@@tat3179bro is coping hard also 2 trillion was the cost of the entire ME campaign not Afghanistan also we did replace the taliban with another government? not our fault that government gave up, we killed over 70k Taliban according to the taliban themselves compared to what? 2k Americans? and now Afghanistan is a shithole that its own people are leaving in droves

[@thesage4729]

and how does 110 years of experience help ; when a Kinzhal or an Oreshnik lands in the middle of your flight deck

[@George_5050]

I don't think Kinzhal or Oreshnik have terminal guidance for moving targets. If Russia was to sink an aircraft carrier, they'd probably use Zircon.

[@sirpatriarch8122]

Well, that is what you think. Russian missile designers think otherwise.

[@allthenewsordeath5772]

Do you know what a layered defense is? America has two rules, number one don’t touch our boats, number two don’t touch the oil.

[@kolviczd6885]

SShhhhhss.... Let them think they (US) is always the best!! Muricans are lousy, let them blabber whatever they want lol..!

[@Mercps]

Only if you guys can even build them in the first place

[@thehumus8688]

I think most people dont know, that Military Equipment is very Maintence heavy like US have 11 carrier, but only like 3 or 4 is operational/Battle ready at same time - the rest was undergoing repair and maintance basicly its a rotation UK have 2 carrier, but struggle to field both at same time. mean their operational readiness has serious problem China however, flexing that they dont have operational readiness problem with their Carrier Battlegroups - despite mere...20 year experience

[@thomasdorey3296]

Uk two one is pretty much parts cause they fcked up so bad n can't get parts for it n other one it in dock again cause they fcked up building is propulsion.

[@riflescientist1744]

It's pretty easy to have operation readiness when you only go within you own waters Also it's not 4 anymore it's 6 active now. We also just reopened the shipyard near me in new Orleans for more carriers and cruisers

[@medlogics.a.s.4410]

And what the hell are YOU doing in other countries' waters? And YOU accuse Chinese and Russian of being imperialist

[@captainbalderdash5412]

​@medlogics.a.s.4410 what? The US fleet doesn't illegally enter nation's waters without permission.

[@felipebarbosamedeiros4845]

True hahahaha

[@adrianariaratnam5817]

An excerpt : The story around China issuing USD-denominated sovereign bonds in Saudi Arabia is generating an enormous amount of buzz in China, and could potentially be immensely important. I strongly suspect it's a message to the upcoming Trump administration. Let me explain what seems to be going on. The first somewhat interesting aspect of it is that the bonds were oversubscribed by almost 20x (meaning $40+ billion in demand for $2 billion worth of bonds), which is far more demand than usual for USD sovereign bonds. Typically US Treasury auctions see oversubscription rate between 2x to 3x so there obviously seems to be very strong market appeal for China's dollar-denominated debt. The second interesting aspect is that the interest rate on the bonds was remarkably close to US Treasury rates (just 1-3 basis points higher, i.e. 0.01-0.03%), which means that China is now able to borrow money - in US dollars (!) - at virtually the same rate as the US government itself. That's the case for no other country in the world. As a benchmark, countries with the highest credit ratings (AAA) typically pay at least 10-20 basis points over US Treasuries in the rare instances when they issue USD bonds. The third interesting aspect is the venue itself for this bond sale: Saudi Arabia. This is unusual since sovereign bonds are typically issued in major financial centers, not in Riyadh. The choice of Saudi Arabia and the fact that the Saudis agreed to this is particularly significant given its historical role in the global dollar system, the so-called 'petrodollar' system which I don't need to explain... By issuing dollar bonds in Saudi Arabia that compete directly with US Treasuries, and getting essentially the same interest rate, China is demonstrating it can operate as an alternative manager of dollar liquidity right in the heart of the petrodollar system. For Saudi Arabia, which holds hundreds of billions in dollar reserves, this creates a new option for investing their dollars: they can invest it with the Chinese government instead of the US government. Read in illuminating detail at ; x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1859446480198828360 (Brilliant move by China)

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

At this point, there is no threat to China freezing these bonds or finding BS reasons not to honor them, a huge risk holding US assets has. This move is a direct assault on the US based financial system and the US can do nothing about it. It also gives China the ability to eat away at the demand for US treasuries, thus making the US have less options for borrowing money. China has huge dollar reserves as well. They have no need to borrow dollars so that clearly isn’t what they are attempting to accomplish with this move.

[@adrianariaratnam5817]

​@barnabusdoyle4930 Indeed. This is a trial run on an option (one of many being formulated) that is intended to weaken that stranglehold on the world financial economy by Washington. Look for further implements down the line.

[@亦如飞鸟]

美元是世界货币，大家都可以用，哈哈哈

[@GenghisX999]

Any coincidence that the Saudis also refused to renew security agreement with US?

[@LRRPFco52]

There is no Petro dollar. That's a simplistic view of US finance, which ignores all of the US-dominated global industries. The US is the biggest economy and the second largest exporter, but exports are only 15% of the US economy. Riyadh absolutely needs the US to refine its crude oil, whereas the US doesn't need a thing from Riyadh. The Chinese system would implode without US oil refining and exports, let alone the US Navy keeping the trade routes open for China.

[@eerieforest9188]

China needs to work on its submarine technology. Those are the most important naval deterrent in the modern battlefield and so far only Russia and the US have much of one.

[@Steelythestacker]

I think the UK, Sweden, Germany, and France might argue that.

[@shanegraham9077]

Iran has the acoustic signature of the US subs now. Got them in the Persian gulf based on videos.

[@shanegraham9077]

Plus konashenkov talked about a sub getting chased away with a particular displacement. Plus another African country forced a Izrealllii sub to surface a few years back.

[@foodparadise5792]

China made progress in hypersonic glide vehicles -- missiles, aircrafts the MD19 MD22 and MD25. It would be weird if they totally ignore the submarines....Chinese don't need to make a big fuss about their upcoming project to get funding from tax payers.....remain low profile is big thing in Chinese culture.

[@andrean2247]

You mean new silent nuclear-electric submarine. With battery can be used up to 10+ years They go EV way with subs. Try chinese EV. And feel the silence.

[@LyndonLaRoucheArchive]

Having served on an ammunition supply ship back during the cold war, we spent a lot of time conducting underway replenishments with carriers mainly. The ability to supply ships at sea while underway was a significant advantage the US had over the Soviets at the time. Logistics is that unheralded key component of warfare.

[@jorgebarriosmur]

Having served nowhere, and beeing barely able to swim, I would say that your opinion hugely owerweights mine, buy if I may, I would want to point out that the Chinese navy is not chalenging (yet) US-global naval dominance, wich would require, efectively, a logistic-chain that right now, only the US is able to deploy.........China seems to be targeting "only" a local superiority, not very far away from their coasts. The logistic-requirements for that task, although probably still brutal, are mostly only a fraction of what you need to dominate the seven seas.......

[@AbandonedMaine]

​@@jorgebarriosmurUltimately, this is over dominance of sea routes versus continental land based transportation. The exact reason the British manipulated everyone into both World Wars.

[@TheKiltedGerman]

​@@AbandonedMaine You make a good point. The Germans tried local superiority against the Brits prior to WWI and it didn't work. When push comes to shove, the superior navy is going to cut you off from a distance using trade routes. China, like Germany before, is heavily reliant on imports via sea lanes to survive. In any prolonged fight, starving them out will be the US' primary strategy.

[@AbandonedMaine]

@TheKiltedGerman At the time, the British Empire largely had global dominance through sea power and control over key choke points. The US developing the transcontinental railroad, our assistance in helping Russia develop their Trans-Siberia railroad and Germany.'s Berlin to Baghdad railway were correctly as dire threats leading up to Mackinder formulating the Heartland Theory after all the maneuvering going on in the Great Game of central Asia.

[@TheKiltedGerman]

@@AbandonedMaine Mackinder, haven't heard that name in a while.

[@TheRanger1302]

The key thing is production, members of congress and the west's political class think the US has some sort of advantage since its "the most powerful" without talking about the specifics in production and the ability to equip a force. Our ability to produce equipment has been non existent compared to WW2, that the ability to produce large numbers of guns, tanks, ships and munitions is even inefficient to our smaller military forces of today. It takes 8 years to produce ONE American carrier, and we hardly do anything to expand and simplify production. Yet we see China building new shipyards, building more factories, in turn, constructing a higher rate of production of equipment so they can keep supplying a force that would need that constant flow of supply. Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.

[@Doxymeister]

This! Our much-vaunted sea superiority by 100 years over China's is tempered by the fact that about a third of our fleet is undergoing repairs and maintenance at a time, so we can't field them all at once. While at the same time, most of China's is almost brand-new, just fielded long enough to field test them, kind of shaking-out the kinks so to speak. We haven't added any new ship-building facilities in ages, have we?

[@TheRanger1302]

@ exactly, considering it takes so long to build ships, and then we don’t bother building them at all. These expansions to the military take a decade long. It’s not even worth the “superior” tech if we can’t build any of it. You can see it in cars on the road having a lot of expensive but not widely used and unnecessary tech, when a car that’s 30 years old does the exact same job.

[@DanR-kc1yt]

Spot on! The lack of investment in America's manufacturing capabilities over the last 40 years is really starting to become a problem that is getting harder to ignore. Seems like every shop I've worked in there's a bunch of guys getting ready to retire but very few able and willing to take their place.

[@LRRPFco52]

Weird that we have the 3 largest air forces in the world and a single F-16 can carry a heavier payload farther than a B17 of WWII. The current US military force structure can deliver more munitions on-target in a fraction of the time we did in the 1940s. Combat power is leveraged far better than the inefficiencies of the 1940s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. If we were to do Desert Storm again, the kill chain would have been accelerated and compressed into a much smaller window of time.

[@enriqued8401]

@@TheRanger1302 my dude we have money. You think if we offered someone a few billion to make something, it wouldn't get done? Remember we started WW2 without a tank, and outclassed in almost every other technology except for trucks and individual service rifles

I'm still in the school of thought that aircraft carriers are basically just giant targets in the age of satellites and long range anti-ship missiles. It's like the build up of battleships in the age of carriers, we are preparing to fight the last war, not the next one. Cheap drones for offense, nuclear subs for sea denial. Everything else feels pretty redundant against a peer adversary.

[@allthenewsordeath5772]

You’re forgetting about the importance of force projection, being able to project force anywhere in the world and support other operations is a massive advantage. Even if the aircraft carriers of the future are just drone hives, they would still serve that purpose.

[@whatswhite110]

你的兵力投射能力那么远吗？？航母是一个移动的小岛。

[@Salmon_Rush_Die]

What's that line about... Never commit a unit to the battlefield that you can't afford to lose.

[@Gunslinger832]

Bro in that case those things are just to show off

[@SnowJon-v7t]

fall of Aircraft Carrier in unacceptable for every country

[@NoPantsBaby]

What does 110 years of experience have to do with anything? They haven't actually engaged in any peer force match ups in over 100 years.

[@VIPER276]

Fr. not like anyone they fought against had the capability to shoot at them 😂

[@RambleOn07]

It's not like any of the guys who fought back then are still alive, much less in active service.

[@potassiumk5549]

110 year Aircraft carrier experience. Simple.

[@potassiumk5549]

​@VIPER276 because nukes exist, life isnt some kind of game where you prove yourself by challenging someone on equal footing.

[@ajstyles5704]

110 years of just upgraded machinery, not actually recalibrated or redesigned for war as we never had an actual full naval war even in WW2. Try to look for it, we barely have any records of proper movements and tactics compared to Brirain royal navy during the EIT empire. We have extremely useless Generals that easily are more corrupted than Mafias. 1 trillion for F35 ladies and gentleman, over a freaking trillion US dollars to make a shit fighter, we have AWACS that does the same freakjng thing, for longer operation time and longer range. 30 years our tanks barely improved and we still use jet engine for our abrams, look at the proxy war, they barely sent them forward because there is no point to ut, they can be seen with thermal 200 miles away, heat seekers loves the Abrams.

[@roymustang3247]

Both the US and China are developing technologies to counter each other's aircraft carriers, which, in the long run, could negate the entire purpose of having them.

[@AtticusKarpenter]

And Russia not have such amount of excessive money, so they just develop missiles to sink any ship, and not invest into carriers (and overall battle ships. Aside from Borei-class nuclear submarines ofc) at all

[@dejannincic9671]

@@AtticusKarpenter Missles even hypersonic ones can be intercepted by other missiles or point defence systems

[@jeebusk]

we will probably loose more in any fight, our missiles unusually cost more than their targets 😅

[@ajstyles5704]

​@@dejannincic9671you joking right? Yes it can be shot down, but this isnt a game, point and shoot dont work the same as it is in games. We may have targeting systems that are state of the art, but not everyyhing we have are fully upgraded and nit all have the computing speed to recalculate an object moving at hypersonic speed. It means the moment we detected them, not all our systems will try to stop it, and the sheer speed gives us less time to shoot them down. Did you see the video where they shot more than 12 and it hit the targets less than a minute? At that sheer speed, all points of defense will ve alerted and most like end up try to shoot down 1 or 2, and they cost much less than building, refuelling and maintain an aircraft carrier, so not only its a valuable target, its the best target for an expensive missiles, which surprisingly, it costs less than when we started making Tomahawks. We overspend in everything.

[@dejannincic9671]

@@ajstyles5704 Ever heard of progress? Tech will advance and the missiles will be countered its what always happens

[@somdattsable5540]

The overconfidence of USA will become fatal for them one day !!!

[@Jershom-l4q]

They may learn their mistakes from Ukraine Ukraine believed in their own lies Too bad Ukraine too bad

[@damonburroughs5283]

Why does everything have to refer to conflict . Conflict would be a mess for the entire world

[@Jershom-l4q]

@@damonburroughs5283 sorry,I couldn't understand you Can you explain your phrase

[@damonburroughs5283]

@@Jershom-l4q that is unfortunate for you

[@Jershom-l4q]

@@damonburroughs5283 bruh

[@RUTHLESSambition5]

Let's be real. Russia alone can outpace America and NATO when it comes to weapons production. China can easily do 100x whatever Russia produces. They west doesn't stand a chance

[@robertmusil1107]

That's where all the outsourcing of production of the West will come back hurting them. China has now all the production capabilities it needs to win a war against most nations. The USA is meanwhile busy debating gendered toilets

[@BlueFire015]

But but theyr using shovels and conputer chips from washing machines and theyr soo bigoted they dont believe in 3000 genders and they dont hire enough women and they dont have a massively beaurocratic military command nahh i think we be fine i wouldnt worry 😂 How they know what a woman is kinda impressive though but im sure we can survive them having that slight advantage 😂

[@captainbalderdash5412]

Not even remotely correct.

[@petenieto1575]

Correction. They outpace NATO with SH!TTY weapons that don’t work and fall apart. Russian weapons are doing so well in Syria and Ukraine lol so much that they’re buying up even shittier North Korean weapons. As for China, when all you do is copy technology and don’t innovate a thing, your ceiling will only be that of a crappy carbon copy lol.

[@BlueFire015]

​@@captainbalderdash5412 ahh american keyboard warriors very impressive formation and very helpful to the US military but i just feel they really sell themselves short sometimes and that saddens me. remember US bots are not inferior to Russian ones or the Chinese ones u are very impressive soo just have some confidence and go after all those nasty US enemys detailing how theyr military is a joke and all that, i believe in u go get them.

[@ex0duzz]

Great video. You covered most of the relevant information relating to China's carriers, but I think one thing was missed. The Liaoning carrier had a major refurbishment from Feb 2023 - Feb 2024 and upgraded over last year, and afterwards during sea trials it was seen with mockups of J-35. Another aft elevator was added, along with another 2 weapons elevators also added, drastically improving sortie rates and capabilities. Before it was like 20 peak sorties a day, now it's like 37 sorties a day average, with a peak sortie rate of 48 a day being achieved. For comparison, the Type 002 Shandong averaged 47 sorties a day during the Oct 2023 deployment. So as a result of the major refurbishment on the Type 001 Liaoning(40,000 ton), both the overall capacity and efficiency in terms of sortie rates was drastically improved, bringing it closer to the capabilities of type 002 Shandong(60,000 ton) which china built from scratch as an improvement on the Liaoning which china had bought directly from Ukraine/Russia. This was the 2nd major refit for the Liaoning, the first one was in 2018 and lasted for 6 months. Now after the latest refurbishment in 2023-2024, the Type 001 Liaoning is estimated to have a capacity of 40 fixed wing aircraft(32 jets, 8 helicopters). Made up of mostly J-15's(including J-15D electronic warfare variant), but will likely also be fielding J-35 and various drones also as soon as they are commissioned. Most likely within the next 3-5 years. The Type 002 Shandong has a capacity of 44(36 jets, 8 helicopters). Same exact load out as Liaoning, just more capacity and higher sortie rate. The type 003 Fujian is reported to have a capacity of 50+. That would include 40~ or so fixed wing jets, mainly J-35 and J-15(including the electronic warfare variants), a couple KJ-600 AWACS planes, and 12~ helicopters, and probably also other smaller remotely piloted or autonomous drones, for use in loyal wingman role or highly contested high risk recon role as a part of long range kill chain, maybe for use with China's Land Based carrier killer missiles like DF-17/DF-21/DF-26 with hypersonic glide vehicle attached like DF-ZF. These will have like 5000km+ range. Don't forget China also has the type 075/076 LHD's. Perhaps the drones will be on those instead. China in late 2022 also produced a 2100 ton, unmanned, remotely controlled+autonomous seaborne drone carrier ship that can launch more smaller unmanned drones of various shapes and sizes for multitude of roles.. ie they can fly in the air, sail on the sea surface, and also underwater. Google Zhu Hai Yun for more info. China said it was for "marine scientific research and other observations" but the military uses are obvious. It can be an unmanned autonomous or remotely operated sea mine layer, it can be the first line of defense and also make up the final link in chinas 5,000km+ kill chain. Coupled with China's mass production and "overcapacity" in manufacturing electronics and drones(just see DJI alone, one Chinese company) and electric cars and everything else, and China's PPP and deep pockets and 4 times usas population and manpower, there is no way USA nor anyone can out produce China. So that leaves the question.. will usa blockade china on a global scale with the intent to destroy China completely like North Korea? I doubt it. That would basically be the same as USA declaring total war on China. China will never be defeated like that or go down quietly. USA cant even choke or blockade Russia or NK or Iran or Pakistan etc let alone China. China has already prepared for all that and diversified and China is actually self sufficient for everything. USA talks a big game about decoupling from China and bringing manufacturing back to USA, but China has already been doing that for 4-5 decades now and has already succeeded and is the world's factory. China is actually making money and it's economically feasible for China to do it and keep doing it, while usa will only bankrupt itself and destroy it's own companies by making them all leave China and move manufacturing back to USA and tariffing china 100% and sanction and banning China like the chip bans, Huawei bans, etc etc. China has already won and USA has lost that game decades ago. It's far too late for USA to try do some knee jerk 4 year plan like 100% tariffs and ban this and ban that lol. That will only speed up usas demise and China and global souths rise(BRICS+ etc). BRICS+ is already bigger % of global GDP than g7, and BRICS+ is only starting, with dozens of countries having applied and currently on the waiting list, including Turkey, Indonesia, Hungary, etc etc. Obviously China isn't going to be militarily fighting USA directly head on in the middle of the Pacific Ocean in some silly carrier group vs carrier group battle.. China wont be fighting militarily at all but if they are forced to defend themselves, it will still only ever be fighting under it's A2-AD umbrella, backed up by all its land based anti ship missiles. And by A2-AD umbrella, I mean china will only fighting 1000-2000 km from China's coast max.. as in a defensive war over Taiwan and the South China Seas. China has no reason to be fighting anywhere else nor does it have any intention to be directly fighting with USA to begin with. Time is on China's side, it doesn't need to use military force/violence as a means to overtake USA in everything(economy/technology/global influence etc). Ultimately, China will only fight to defend its sovereignty, ie Taiwan and SCS. So if China and USA ever fight, it will only ever happen with USA being the aggressor and thus USA will become a global pariah, with the whole world including the UN all supporting China. USAs own allies will be supporting China and will be sanctioning USA. They will all jump ship from USA to China if it happens. It will be like how USA took over from UK. USA and any of its vassals dumb enough to be part of such a war will end up like Japan/Germany in WW2. USA could not even beat China in 1950 in Korea when China had absolutely nothing, let alone today when it has everything, including nukes. Ultimately, USA would have to be suicidal to fight China under those conditions inside China's A2-AD umbrella, and to be honest I don't see it ever happening since being shared 1st with China or even number 2 is better than starting a nuclear ww3. Like I said.. if USA tries start ww3 and global nuclear war just because it can't tolerate no longer being the sole global hegemon and because it can't have "full spectrum dominance" even in East Asia and Taiwan/SCS, it will quickly lose all global support even from its own allies. Even from its most loyal vassals like Japan and SK, Philippines, or even Taiwan. they've all seen what happened to Ukraine, and how USA and EU/NATO all did nothing except watch Russia destroy Ukraine and take 1/3rd of its territory with no end in sight. You can tell just by the rate of Chinese procurement that China is not worried at all about USA and that it also shares my thoughts and is confident that USA won't/can't attack China, and if they try, they will just become a pariah state and hasten their decline/demise. If China wanted, it could easily pump out 5 carriers in 5 years, even 10 if it wanted to. Same with jets, ships, everything. China is spending only 1.x% of its GDP on military and USA and whole West already can't keep up. Instead china is building infrastructure like high speed rail, spending trillions on belt and road and building infrastructure all around the world, it's lending trillions to USA and Russia, etc etc. China isn't worried, it knows USA can't do anything. And if even USA can't do anything, no one can do anything. USA is trying to get others like Philippines or India or xinjiang or hong Kong or Taiwan or Tibet etc to all fight china but China has defeated them all and none of them want to take the bait. USA is trying to use them to hurt China but they are trying to use USA instead to hurt China. In the end none dare to fight china directly in any serious conflict. Just see Philippines. They try to annoy china but China just puts its foot down and water cannon ph navy, or boarded ph navy ship and confiscate their weapons, ram their ships etc, and USA is nowhere to be seen. No one dares to cross China's red lines like SCS and Taiwan because China will never back down from those disputes because that is a matter of national security, of sovereignty and is literally an existential threat to China like Ukraine is for Russia, and like Cuba/Mexico/Canada would be for USA if China and Russia were to put nukes there and build military bases all in close proximity and surrounding USA. In the end, time is on China's side. USA is only wasting all its time and money on military and endless wars and conflicts like Israel/Middle East, or even Russia/Ukraine which is useless in the great power competition vs China which is all about economy and technology and global influence. If anything that only helps China since USA pushed Russia straight into Chinas open arms, and also pushing whole global south and middle east and Islamic world towards China. USA has even lost all credibility in the liberal West and even with its own people by supporting and defending Israels continued genocide.

[@rh906]

TL-DR next time.

[@SnowJon-v7t]

你也是中国人吗

[@霜月-b2z]

讲的非常好

[@TheRealChilly]

CCP BOT DETECTED

[@mehmetbozkurt3274]

Great rundown of what's actually been going on. Good read.

[@whiskey_tango_foxtrot__]

Aircraft Carriers may be obsolete now in a near peer war.

[@KaptifLaDistillerie]

Hear me out : *UNDERWATER DRONES*

[@DRourk]

Absolutely.

[@morganwartman8507]

I wouldn’t say obsolete, just much less useful than they were 15-20 years ago

[@lorneiggulden7123]

​@@KaptifLaDistillerie Supersonic torpedoes

[@АнтоДив]

​@@KaptifLaDistillerie Ты прав.

[@elliskaranikolaou2550]

In 1904 the British were heavily assisting the Japanese with their navy and viewed using the Japanese geopolitically against the US as at the time they viewed the US a threat to the British Empire. By building Japan up they thought it would create trouble for US ambitions and protect their own interests. British input was essential for this Japanese victory against Russia.

[@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw]

The British also contributed aircraft, knowhow and training to the IJN after WW1 in helping them create carrier aviation. Which was hilarious as the IJN would chase the RN almost out of the Indian Ocean in WW2, with the RN fleet having to hide in African ports as its bases in Sri Lanka were now too vulnerable and British carriers woefully outclassed by their Japanese counterparts.

[@NovaViper-x7m]

The British and German. People forget that Germany was the main superpower back then. It was such a big power it challenged the world order twice and nearly won both times.

[@mariamdjama2698]

British cowards invented proxy warriors to secure their interests…. Fascinating

[@poorman2457]

The British never feared the Americans. They were very close to the people that took over America after the US civil war.

[@rh906]

That explains why the Japanese marching as stupidly as the British.

[@Strategy_Analysis]

Thanks for the video, Alex. No evidence yet of China building its 4th aircraft carrier. Also, I went to the Zhuhai Airshow and saw the new J-15T. As you say this is a significant advancement for the PLAN.

[@Sourdoetoo]

Thanks!

[@tarmotyyri6733]

The most important thing to realize is that China can build almost 300 such aircraft carriers in the time the U.S. can build only one equivalent carrier. This is because China's shipbuilding capacity is about 300 times that of the U.S..

[@riflescientist1744]

If that was true china would have beat our tonnage a decade ago China has 2 million with ALL ships combined including civilian and museum ships, the us navy alone has 1 million more tons in the water, the 3rd largest in tonnage is the us museum fleet, hell the coast guard is only 300,000 tonnes away from the pla Navy's tonnage

[@djm7323]

@@riflescientist1744 well, unlike usa, China isn't an invasive state. So, China can get there a lot faster than USA.

[@drainscholar]

Then why haven’t they built 300 carriers and announced themselves as the new biggest dick in the ocean.

[@lagrangewei]

this is a big misunderstanding, not all shipyard can build large warship because the steel that is use is diffrent. conventional welding technique do not work. an example of the complexity of the steel is how India's domestic carrier program had to import the specialised steel from Russia. just because you can build ship, does not mean you can build carriers. in China there are only 2 shipyard with dry dock big enough to build carrier and worker skilled enough to handle carrier steel. of which they are capable of fitting out a maximum of 5 carrier at one time...

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

@riflescientist1744 Chinese ship building is merchant focused. China produces 51% of the world's ships every year, at 33 million tons per year. The US produces 65 000 tons per year (0.1% of the world's ships), meaning China produces more than 508 times the tonnage of ships each year compared to the US. Even the us navy acknowledges Chinese shipbuilding advantage, saying even if the us went to max capacity China would still outoroduce the us 230 times over.

[@LocalBosnian-99]

"Ughh i need to do something but i have nothing to listen to while i wor-" HistoryLegends: "I. Was the knight in shining armour in your movie."

[@jean-francoislebroch9171]

Nobody wants American seamen in the pacific

[@Stephen-bq4nq]

Nobody wants Chinese seaman in the Pacific

[@Bf26fge]

Everybody but China wants the USA there. The chinese have no friends since they bully their neighbors.

[@rh906]

Except when someone does something in their backyard, then they come screaming for seamen to cover them.

[@jollypolly1686]

Nobody except Japan, Taiwan, India, Philippines, Vietnam etc. In other words, everyone in the region that's been bullied by Chinese expansionist ambitions.

[@lolasdm6959]

@@jollypolly1686 The reason why NATO exists is because Russia has ambitions to conquer Europe. The reason why NATO equivalent against China never formed in Western Pacific, is because China is merely irredentist.

[@ronnyb9416]

Enlightening commentary. Learned a great deal about the Chinese carrier's and new landing support ships.

[@painfultruth1846]

Keep up the good work, you are one of few KZbinrs who are still reporting relatively unbiased on these topics

[@FreetOfficial]

us people fought so many civilians that they think they are unstoppable lol absolutely hilarious

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 when his the US military lost a war?

[@Arandompenguin227]

A F G H A N I S T A N

[@tat3179]

@@tylerrobbins83112021 if I recall correctly, when the US spent 20 years replacing the Taliban with the Taliban.

[@tylerrobbins8311]

@@tat3179 🤣 that's not losing a war. We effectively took over Afghanistan, held it for 20 years and abandoned it. That has nothing to do with our martial capabilities nor the theater of war. That was all political corruption in our senate, and that is a separate issue.

[@jokeychin]

@@tylerrobbins8311 😂So you're asking me to believe that the US spent trillions and wasted 20 years just to play a turn-based game?

[@2sqnbandit379]

I’m Royal Navy retired going to china to teach the Chinese Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) which Involves detecting and destroying enemy submarines as well as Breaking the line tactics. Very nice contract. No woke there. That’s what’s so attractive about the job.

[@Samuel_V1]

Interesting

[@domokun845]

Careful, in todays messed up politics people will call you a traitor especially here in the states. The red scare is peaking

[@PygeonKilla97]

Helping the enemy... Top lad

[@2sqnbandit379]

@ enemy? Didn’t realise we were at war 😂 perfectly legal. It’s called free enterprise and market. Plus the UK as far as I’m concerned is an Islamic state anyway. Not worth preserving.

[@jimmychoi5219]

good on you...

[@mnmnyi]

USA: "Emma has 2 moms." 😅 China: “subdue the enemy without fighting”

[@MukulKumar-pn1sk]

Nice to be a part of your headquarter💂

[@tgsgardenmaintenance4627]

The type 076 is the most interesting naval vessel being built at the moment! Can't wait for the final product! Merry Christmas chap! Have enjoyed your channel very much this year!

[@marcusaetius9309]

What also has to be taken into consideration is that carriers are huge targets for long range missiles especially if they’re hypersonic 😬

[@n3rdy11]

The US has 10 carriers only on paper, but in practice it already struggles to keep enough of them operational for the _global coverage_ US hegemony requires in "peace times". Case in point: For the last weeks the US has had no carrier coverage of the Middle East/Red Sea because the USS Abraham Lincoln strike group already pulled back from there before it's USS Harry S. Truman replacement arrived from Norway. Some claim this had to do with successful Houthi strikes on the USS Abraham Lincoln, one reason for sure is that the US Navy has a massive lack of oilers and personell. That's also why the US would struggle to actually deploy all 10 of it's carriers even if none of them are going through maintenance/modernization. This is a big handicap for the US in the case the conflict over Taiwan would go hot: Chiense carriers only need to act in support of the main forces from the mainland, they are not the main vector of Chinese force projection. While for the US their carrier strike groups are their main vector of force projection in the region because Okinawa is practically quite ways off and geographically not well located to defend Taiwan against mainland China.

[@Ziegfried82]

There is zero chance the US navy could operate anywhere near Taiwan at any time. Chinese missile systems would sink every single carrier fleet that got too close. There's also the issue of production: China can produce a lot more missiles than the US can.

[@JohnSmith-pu3zv]

@@Ziegfried82 Let's see what the US should do. Convince its allies to deploy medium-range ballistic missiles in Japan and South Korea; transform Starship into a LEO bomber to replace B-1b or B-52, or even B-2. But in reality, this is impossible because it will turn the traditional US military-industrial complex into a clown, and hundreds of billions of dollars of orders will be canceled. The biggest enemies of the US military are its deep government, and the second enemies are the US's seemingly close but distant allies.

[@lolasdm6959]

Chinese carriers are a part of area denial strategy, China don't need carriers against Taiwan

[@Drake-mt5ml]

In the age of drones and hypersonic cruise missiles, is it worth spending billions building aircraft carriers?I don't think so.

[@Imperatorcf]

Sure it is, to carry unmanned aircraft😉

[@AdrianFahrenheitTepes]

Carriers can easily launch missiles and unmanned craft from great range as well.

[@sonofjack6286]

It is still worth it. They are floating air bases. And also true hypersonics don't exist yet.

[@Ziegfried82]

China has a good use for them for it's Taiwan operation. But sure carriers are pointless for peer to peer warfare these days I'd agree with that.

[@TheKiltedGerman]

Anti-ship hypersonic missiles are completely untested against a moving carrier group. Neither the US nor China is going to bet everything on them working as advertised.

[@alkubbo1291]

Hello HistoryLegends! Thank you for your honest and truthful reporting. Keep safe.

[@leighfoulkes7297]

Five years ago, you guys were going, "aircraft carriers have been made obsolete after hypersonic missiles have been invented."

[@Marmocet]

Aircraft carriers are nearing obsolescence if they're not already obsolete.

[@andraslibal]

The main issue is not that China has some aircraft carriers. Japan had some in 1941, better than the US, better pilots better planes, better torpedoes ...but they lacked the manufacturing capability to scale up their Navy. The US outproduced and out developed them. The question is, who can outproduce whom today and who can adapt and develop better?

[@spinnakerthegreat2612]

The US will fight an economic war against China, leave China fight proxies (Japan, Philippines, Taiwan). US will effect an oil embargo on China and collapse its economy within 2 years. It will switch China off from the global trade system and trigger mass unemployment in China. Didn’t work with Russia because Russia has a closed and small economy, has infinite resources. China does not. Export economies always lose wars (mainly trade wars).

[@jamarplunkett3283]

I do agree that it’s who can out produce whom. But, not in the sense of big expensive war machines, but rather comparably easier munitions. We have to look at it realistically. In any possible conflict between both nations, Chinas “military” Shipyards would be one of the very first targets striked. Limiting their ability to deploy new ships. Theirs been a study that talks about a hypothetical scenario in which both nations fight and how that the type of machinery used will mostly be the ones each nation has before the war. ( with replenishments of munitions). They go on to talk about how that technology has advanced so much, that hyper scalability ( especially the type akin to WW2) is no more. At the height of WW2 the U.S. was able to produce 3 ships a day, now China can only do that in a month. The U.S. should be focusing on production of its best munitions. Just imagine if the U.S. had 10,000 Jassm/Lrasm missiles with each one capable of taking out a destroyer. How much would Chinas “ship building capability” matter then? It’s hard comparing future conflicts with WW2 because it doesn’t really matter what type of machine you have like back then. But, rather what type of munitions you have.

[@hughmungus2760]

@@jamarplunkett3283 the US attacking chinese industry would result in relatiation attacks on the continental US by chinese ballistic missiles. China can very easily equip its ICBMs with Oreshnik style conventional MIRVs that would decimate the few facilities the US produces its munitions at. The US on the otherhand can't justifiably use nuclear weapons over a single non-nuclear ICBM strike.

[@andraslibal]

@@jamarplunkett3283 I saw some video on how (commercial) shipbuilding moved to China and that is a problem for US shipyards that only have orders from the military. That is a problem for the US - there is no robust industry that could switch to wartime production.

[@Archer89201]

Problem is the situation is reversed now with chinese shipbuilding dwarfing the US

[@derrickwanyonyi8691]

History legends is on a roll

[@Kiyoone]

Chyna pays him!!🤣😂Not the facts

[@Supple_Leopard]

Yea this video is dogshit lol this dude didn't show one video of them launching aircraft which is the whole issue with Chinese aircraft carriers lol a bunch of people who've never been in the Navy talking straight out of their ass

[@Ziegfried82]

@@Kiyoone China has some big problems with it's new carrier. It's navy is second rate at best. But the missile systems are what will deter the USA from daring to send any carriers near the Taiwan conflict zone once things pop off. It's why the US moved semiconductor manufacturing Stateside they know they won't win that conflict.

[@SigmaRulesEdit-g3v]

​@@Ziegfried82 and what about American navy that bravely shot its own F18 no no no the American air force can't even shoot a Chinese plane first determine the gender

[@SigmaRulesEdit-g3v]

​@@Kiyooneeven my dog disagrees with you and pities you

[@farhanmanggala6444]

Having breakfast while watching History Legends. What a wonderful way to start the day, love it

[@pogo1140]

When you calculate the combat range of an aircraft, divide the one way range by 3. This gives you the fuel to go to the target, attack/fight in full burner, return to base with 5-10 min of fuel, and in the case of carrier aviation, 15 minutes of fuel is often needed just to get back aboard the boat

[@KatarinaP-u6r]

America's arrogance is their undoing.

[@_N3M3S1S]

And of course, the Chinese and Russians aren't arrogant whatsoever, are they?

[@Chisobhaneko]

@@_N3M3S1S nah China is very modest.. it’s in the eir Confucian culture from 3,000 years

[@_N3M3S1S]

@@Chisobhaneko Right… “With the virus we have won the war”… (China).

[@ragnarokws2670]

@@_N3M3S1S U guys cant even took down China with 7 allies back then. not even mention Vietnam and talibans which is U.S nightmares

[@_N3M3S1S]

@ 70 years ago isn’t a good reference when you’re speaking of your grandpa’s war… 😆 As for the Taliban, well Biden screwed that up, not the US Military.

[@makingwaves1239]

China does still not posses nuclear aircraft carriers, which greatly reduce the range they can operate in.

[@Scheisse1y]

Doesn’t have to be since they are not planning on visiting the US coast.

[@Ziegfried82]

True, but they don't seem to have much interest in longer range...only in their backyard.

[@makingwaves1239]

@@Ziegfried82 : But then the whole point with aircraft carriers kinda disappears. Then they could just launch air strikes from land based stations.

[@makingwaves1239]

@@Ziegfried82 : China is at this point probably at least 10-15 years behind the US, maybe even more. They will of course try to close in on that gap, but today the US has the strongest navy in the world by far.

[@rustam5003]

Don’t be so sure. Russia will give them a bunch of new modern compact nuclear reactors for their fleet.

[@bradleyakulov3618]

2:15 "Tickle the American G-point"? You missed a good opportunity here, but we know what you meant.

[@samuelmahmud1909]

Great video coverage 💯

[@sohail_geopolitics]

One of my favorites KZbinrs ❤

[@FONDHEATEDITS]

Gonna watch when i get back from work and wanna eat, just came here to say first although i was beat to it by far😅

[@spitfire7482]

2:26 what is that Philippine island over there? It brings back some memories 👴🏻👨🏿‍🌾

[@xanderdylan5085]

You are very stupid

[@froman1813]

Imagine how a swarm of AI-controlled kamikaze drones clears planes and manpower on the decks of aircraft carriers, and then 2-3 precise strikes with torpedoes or missiles send millions of dollars to the bottom of the ocean. The only question is whose drones will arrive first.

[@ChidisSkaniukas]

Read about ww2 pacific carrier battles, and replace planes with drones, here your answer

[@drainscholar]

drone swarm vs multiple ships armed with CIWS that are designed to shoot down missiles. Would be able to make decent work out slower moving drones. Not saying that tactic wouldn’t work.

[@andreasl_fr2666]

Carriers allow you to project power / patrol / supply across the oceans. That is the main capability you build them for these days.

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

The main advantage China would have in any war with the US is fighting defensively. China would be able to launch thousands of long range missiles at any and every naval asset the US had in the region. It would be interesting to see America’s reaction to watching their aircraft carriers get destroyed on KZbin.

[@danielpetrucci8952]

US Aircraft Carriers are worth Billions of dollars that's why the USN does not send it's carrier strike groups to the Houthies

[@mikeviard9086]

Toujours un plaisir, joyeux Noël.🇨🇵🌠

[@PrénomNomAlias]

Toujours aussi précis et intéressant ! Merci Alexandre !

[@KaiserOfKnowledge]

GUYS alex dropped another video!!! Its 2am in australia but fucking BOMBACLAAT gotta watch it rn

[@BornJune1984]

I'm in Sydney 😂

[@tntbomb50]

Haha in Albany 😂

[@mkodyglobalsouthsoldier]

Morning 😂 now So good morning

[@tevlex3405]

I didn't know that aircraft carriers could be clean, the US carriers are always so dirty

[@Ching-Chong-Bing-Bongg]

That's because we actually use them instead of use them for propoganda.

[@tooters1728]

When your fleet has never seen a minute of combat, that tends to happen.

[@firasajoury7813]

​@@tooters1728 explain combat experience

[@nrabinov]

That's actually rust

[@TomDrez]

@@Ching-Chong-Bing-Bongg Yeah you use them since almost half a century, no problem at all

[@gge7gge]

Dear friend, the information you provide in your video is very good, but I think the overall interpretation of the situation is totally wrong. All of China's military, naval and land preparations are not aimed at invading Taiwan, but rather at preventing the US from invading Taiwan. China has no need or intention to invade Taiwan. China intends, and will succeed, in reuniting Taiwan with mainland China in the same way that it reunited Hong Kong and Macau, peacefully without any invasion. When the Western capitalist system collapses and the Western Alliance (USA, EU, UK, Canada, New Zealand and their Asian members, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines [which will be the first to leave the alliance]) falls apart after NATO's defeat in Ukraine and the current and ensuing economic and political decline of the developed Western countries, Taiwan will no longer receive any help, neither economic, political, nor military, from the former Western Alliance and will be economically totally dependent on China, although it already is to a very large extent. It will be the Taiwanese themselves who will decide to reintegrate into mainland China, through democratic elections and through negotiations, which have been quietly underway for quite some time now in anticipation of the upcoming fall of the Western capitalist empire. As for the ability to invade and annex other sovereign countries, do not forget that the US has already invaded and annexed other countries or territories, such as Hawaii, much of Mexico or some Pacific islands, territories that are now considered part of the US. And they invaded and conquered them through the force of war, not through peaceful means. Given the US outrage over the Russian invasion of the Donbas in Ukraine, it would be nice if History Legends could make three videos on the history of the invasion of Hawaii, of the Mexican territories annexed by the US and of the Pacific islands that are now part of the US, in addition to those it controls with its military bases. I am sure they will be very interesting and informative videos. Thank you in advance.

[@alancrane9762]

ha, ha. Is this a CCP troll? China is so righteous that it "Liberated Tibet." CCP lecturing about history? What a joke.

[@fordwrc2006]

Well done Alex, superb analysis. 🎉

[@Maurice599]

Great content man!

[@TervelBG]

Excuse my ignorance, but arent carriers kind of obsolute? And more like a status of prestige rather than a practical or cost efficent ship?

[@Archer89201]

Nothing yet to replace the carrier in staying power and force projection yet

[@foodparadise5792]

I guess it depends on the power level of that country. It can fill certain strategic needs.

[@ashlandina1812]

Yeah they said the same about MBTs. But remember carriers can only be countered by massive anti-ship missiles strike, as for a small coastal country, they are still reapers at your doorstep.

[@JohnSmith-pu3zv]

@@Archer89201 Aircraft carriers and their aircraft are a joke compared to Starship. Let's be thankful that Elon Musk is committed to bringing humans to Mars instead of becoming the next Gustav Krupp.

[@p4ntom87]

please make more china military analysis videos because too many channels just dismiss anything from china's military as trash (for no reason)

Hey slav bro its called a G spot not G point good try though 2:10

[@scrubber]

Love your content...keep up the good work!

[@manueloliveira200]

Thanks for the vid and Happy Holidays!!!

[@Jamesthechef0311]

The Navy needs to fear it's own missles as the shoot down their own planes

[@IdeI2StOnEd]

It means the missiles are working unlike S400. Blue on Blue ist tragic but happens nothing to make fun of here.

[@Archer89201]

Can't let the army take the lead in friendly fire kills , Patriots have shotdown Tornado IDS and Navy F-18 and almost killed and F-16 that shot HARM at the radar to save itself, Patriot added the F-16 to its kill tally by shooting down the first Ukrainian F-16 sent too.

[@curiositycloset2359]

Problem is, they also need carrier vessels.

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

China has about 4 times global shipbuilding capacity. Do you really think they have also constructed support ships for their carriers? China knows that they are eventually going to war with the empire and are already ready for it and getting more powerful as each year moves on.

[@TheKiltedGerman]

​@@barnabusdoyle4930 If China was "ready" they would have moved already. The fact they keep postponing the operation while barking so loudly shows they are not ready and are actually quite concerned about the outcome.

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

@@TheKiltedGerman Ready for what? Invading Taiwan? Why do you think China wants to invade Taiwan? Because the same entity that told us Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or the Covid vaccine would stop the spread is also telling us China is planning on invading Taiwan? I really doubt China actually intends to do that. China is getting their naval power ready to face off against the inevitable US naval war they know is coming. Every day China gets stronger while the US and NATO get weaker, especially after Biden sanctioned the crap out of the EU.

[@lolasdm6959]

@@TheKiltedGerman Trump is willing to negotiate US staying out of it, an optimal victory is one achieved without fighting. The primary reason of a military build up is deterrent, you have them so you don't have to use them, how much of the modern US hardware has actually seen combat?

[@TheKiltedGerman]

@@lolasdm6959 Staying out of what, the Taiwan issue? Trump's more hawkish towards China than Biden is, and that's saying something. The US isn't staying out of it. How much modern US hardware has actually seen combat? Way more than China's has. And most of what hasn't has seen much more field testing.

[@andallthatcouldhavebeen...9175]

Polishing torpedos? Just polished mine about an hour ago. Glass a milk and a sammich and ready to get back in the fight 😅

[@pluke2111]

1:45 haha i love this high quality production :D

[@Constitutionalist52]

Great video

[@LivinwithPat]

3:50 asia pacific front lol

[@sterben2064]

HistoryLegends is already in WW3 mood baby 😎

[@whiskey_tango_foxtrot__]

OAK-inawa...is how you say Okinawa

[@SilverSherry]

More like oukinawa

[@Kuasarakyat2]

In modern warfare aircraft carriers are sitting ducks for drones attack...

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 hence a carrier strike group.

[@tlenon2497]

@ hypersonic missiles no strike group can protect

[@jodijaanify]

@@tylerrobbins8311 a typical yankee. China has the fastest super sonic missles. few months back they tested a super sonic missle that circled the earth and then came around to hit its target in china. google it. china will litrally sink all US carriers as soon as war starts. this is china not houthis. US has not fought a real war since ww2. killing civilians and malitia is not called WAR.

[@brothersofthetrident2647]

​@@tlenon2497that isn't true

[@tlenon2497]

@ do some research

[@chadbat4205]

One thing on Shinano, she was NOT complete and on TRIALS when she was intercepted and sunk by the Archerfish. Her watertight compartments were not in a complete state, making the efforts of damage control by her crew nearly impossible. All because she was merely moving to Kure, Hiroshima from Yokosuka for a safer port. Nothing about her voyage was about any sea trials.

[@rogerionilson]

you're good, man!

[@wolfswinkel8906]

The Tony Montana reference killed me 🤣

[@CatOfSchroedinger]

0:10 It is literally the "Steel Fleet Event" on WoWs with multiple videos about Shinano and Archerfish. How is it that you couldn't secure some funding by Wargaming for this story ? lol Better ask them now and put an affiliate link in your description. ;-)

[@normanarmslave5144]

Nice analysis but to be honest...I disagree. Not because Im a 100% full pro-murican pro-NATO fanboi. But its actually more about history. Its only America who managed to get engaged in a carrier vs carrier combat, and thats against Japan. America had all the experience to fight against enemy carrier battle group and throughout the decades they simulate to fight against such. What America needs to fear the most is the ANTI-carrier battlegroups such as a full set of submarines, anti-ship missile armed destroyers, marine warfare drones etc.

[@tlenon2497]

Hahahaha then u have been sleeping... Go research DF 21 26 or 17 missiles 😂

[@delta_glider4362]

>But its actually more about history. we don't live in history - we are living NOW.

[@richardwilliams7169]

I have been waiting for this video

[@Isserson]

I thought he last carrier lost in battle was USNS Bismarck Sea, sunk on 21st of February 1945 off Iwo Jima. It was sunk by two Japanese kamikaze aircraft. And there is the sinking of USNS Card on May 2nd 1960 in the Port of Saigon by VietCong, although the vessel was no longer being used as an operational carrier but performed supply-carrying duties at the time.

[@kshkumsin]

When is the next Russo Ukrainian War video @historylegends

[@NZIGNANTI]

After pokrovst falls

[@mz7688]

He will upload it and when he uploads it.... It's that simple bro

[@jf7009]

@@NZIGNANTI if it falls. You are talking like it's a certainty that Ukraine will give up Pokrowsk, which is certainly not the case.

[@marcowulliampopirers2216]

taiwan war will never happen,it's not worth it for either side

[@BlueFire015]

Despite what US will say they main reason for being aoo determined to protect Taiwan is for TSMC and China ofc wants to bring Taiwan back into the fold but they also really want TSMC the problem with starting a war is that we all know how easily some thing can be gone even when we dont want to expecially with the capabilitys of modern weaponry and neither side wants to lose TSMC and well that can easily happen if the worst comes to pass and China knows this but the problem is as i Said they really want that Island back for more than just TSMC itself really soo idk could it happen yes most deff but what i think China is doing is building an army capable of holding its own against US and Japan and maybe even South Korea and maybe just maybe Nato if the US can pressure them into a fight Not that Nato can help much considering whats happening in Europe we have waay bigger problems than a conflict on the other side of the globe and several European countrys are on atleast friendly terms with China and can decide pissing them off when they can be soo beneficial for us is not worth it so US can be world hegemon expecially since how lately US has deff helped the decline of Europe a little (and im not talking abour Russia-Ukraine im talking about internal struggles)

[@AtticusKarpenter]

But China want to flex its ability to win this war to provoke NATO to prepare to war that will never happen and sink money they need in technological and economic war with China.

[@billbradley4878]

For China it is not about Taiwan per se, it is about enlarging their sphere of influence in the region and reducing the influence of the west just off their coast. China wants to be a rival global power and a big step in doing that is to at least be the biggest power in their region.

[@VashtheStampede007]

@@billbradley4878nope, it is about sovereignty and the end of their century of humiliation

[@BlueFire015]

@@billbradley4878 ofc they want Taiwan back but its more than jsut Taiwan its about controlling the seas close to them and controlling the areas close to them and Taiwan is a first but important step in that then there is the fact US dont give a shitt about "Taiwans democracy" i mean thats what they say but in reality for them its all about them controlling those seas instead of China and last but not least for both sides expecially America TSMC US will say its about democracy and whatever else bullshitt they sell and China will say well that island belongs to us historically and we just wanna bring it back cause we dont like having rebels on our front porch or somethign along those lines. but yeaa as usual its about power and economy and technology nothing else srsly both wnat that island cause controlling the south China sea starts from that island expecially for China considering its right on hteyr front porch and from there they could control theyr regional waters and be able to expand in whatever direction they want. then there is the fact China is being a very bad boy they dont bow down to US they in fact they tell u to F OFF and that is a severe sign of disrespect that US dont like they dont like when countrys get the idea they can stand up to them and even worse take over as the world hegemon and at some point it will come to a head cause US will not tolerate someone trying to be a second world hegemon expecially someone that would then control theyr acess to computer chips which they need for economy and technology sooo srry its very long and a little yeaa....

[@OFFENDYOU365]

Im here to laugh at the Americans bot trying to float the comments with their western propagandas 😊

[@TheIndividualist319]

*sniff* *sniff* smells like bait 👀

[@Tate.TopG.]

A lot of them in this comment sections

[@garylancaster8612]

Murica! Fuck yeah!

[@sonofjack6286]

And I'm annoyed at all the Chinese and Russian bots that are uninformed.

[@AngryBird000]

Nobody is safe from bias

[@earthcitizen7245]

I love you man, you're the best source!

[@Dameon_Jaeger]

Only 20 years of aircraft carrier experience...OH no, so the length of 1 career serviceman before he retires? New Generations fight New generations

[@cauchyschwarz3295]

The video is good and informative but the title somewhat misleading. What is missing here is how these new systems would be deployed to actually represent a danger, given that the US navy alone has more quantity - supposing quality is on par. I would have liked to see a discussion of how China could overcome the disadvantage by combining assets or utilising their home advantage. Because from the video it would seem that China could field a much inferior number of maybe similarly capable systems, which begs the question why the US navy should be afraid.

[@johannuys7914]

I agree. The only conclusion I can come to, is that, if China were of the opinion that an aircraft carrier fleet equal in size to the US one is the only way to challenge the latter, it would've been building carriers at a crazy rate of knots. Apparently they are not. Therefore, they probably have alternative strategies to deal with the US fleet.

[@freedumb_3.0]

China has homefield advantage. They don't have far to go to repair and can launch land based missiles to support their Navy.

[@FCFCFCFCFCFCFCFC-f3k]

It is more about being threatening enough to deter the US from intervening in Chinese military operations. even if china can only take out 1/3 of the US fleet that is still trillions of dollars and thousands of dead US servicemen, is that worth Taiwan? Obviously the idea is not to fight them directly but to make a potential battle far too costly to be worth fighting.