The Chinese Navy Of 2024 Is Unlike Any Other Major Navies

[@MeanJackal]

The 055 destroyer is the most beautiful warship I've ever seen seen

[@Pepe-dq2ib]

Highly disagree, the French bb are still the best looking today.

[@timothychung4811]

​@@Pepe-dq2ibWhat part of English did you not understand? How can you disagree with his finding for himself?

[@Pepe-dq2ib]

@@timothychung4811 and I gave my opinion, so what zhang?

[@thegto8535]

@@timothychung4811 What part of contesting a statement don't you understand ?

[@hyuxion]

The aircraft carrier is so outdated in today’s drone and missiles war. I cannot think of the future navy war to be fought between aircraft carriers.

[@jawadkazmi5327]

The world needs a strong China and a strong Chinese military for the balance of power that was lost decades ago - and the whole world suffered for that.

[@nightlightabcd]

Only a Communist would say that the world needs a strong Communist navy for balance of power! No one wants to attack China, it is Communist China that wants to attack Taiwan and THAT is what it is all about!! Taiwan does not want to attack China. Is the democracy of Taiwan a threat to Communist China?

[@thegto8535]

Blatant case of stupidity. The cold war era was anything but peaceful, no one want to relive those years of fear but those who clearly are clueless, were not around at the time and mostly benefitted from this 30-40 years of mostly peaceful times. At this point it's like how uneducated can you possibly be ?

[@padre4306]

“China” is a Country controlled by the CCP, Chinese “COMMUNIST PARTY”! Communists are Mob Families of Totalitarian Dictators who have Taken Control of and Enslaved Millions and even Billions of Their Own People ! “At the Barrel of a Gun” in Mao’s own words!… You say “that is a Good thing”??!… I say You are Dangerously Misinformed to actually believe That !! Mao Murdered at least 30-100 million of his own people and that Fact is Well Documented ! Is That the kind of “Balance of Power” You want to maintain ?! So You want the CCP to be able to Continue to be Tyrannical Dictators by Arming them such that they can Never be Defeated !… Do you want to “End all Wars” and have “World Peace”?… Then Get Rid of All Dictatorships ! Because THEY are the Ones Causing All Wars !! Fact ! : Only 17 times in History have 2 Countries even resembling “Democracies” gone to War against each other! and they were very short a Minor Skirmishes at that ! Why? Because when the People are in Change they Don’t Want to Kill other like minded peoples and push for Peace ! But Dictatorships can Only Survive by Stealing everyone else’s Assets to Maintain their Power Grip ! Once they run out of their own peoples Assets, They have to Attack and Steal other Peoples Land and Assets to Pay their own Power Base that keeps then in Power and Alive !!…All Major Wars in History have been between, either, 2 Dictatorships ! or a Dictatorship and a Democracy !! But Not, between 2 Democracies ! In Democracy is Compromise to keep the Peace Peacefully ! Dictatorship is No Compromise and permanent Oppression that Only War can Dismantle !!

[@johnbodman4504]

So true.

[@binaurallegends8229]

Unless your country is close or neighbour to China

[@johnbodman4504]

This is the best channel for information on navies of the world. No other channel comes close.

[@raymondwong3739]

Yeah the best bs channel!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@syncmaster915n]

An informative insight to the strategies of the 3 major sea powers of the world! Thanks for sharing!

[@killen47]

Great video! Thank you so much!

[@newhailman]

I respect the honesty of this video, something I wasn't expecting.

[@tonywei423]

Recently a 055 destroyer Nanchang single handed push the US aircraft carrier group out of the southern china sea, how? what happens behind the scene?

[@Rob_F8F]

Yes, and yesterday, my dog pushed a truck out of my driveway after my package had been delivered. How? What happened behind the scene?

[@averagechinaenjoyer1513]

@@Rob_F8Fwhat package did they deliver?

[@kelwang446]

@@averagechinaenjoyer1513 could be inflatable dildo pillows

[@UltraRealTrueJesus]

the dog injected itself with your dose of steroids from Aliexpress, what hapened behind the scenes? your dog wanted to be the master. how is the dog kennel doing? did the dog take over the pool as well? we need to know. pertinent questions require answers.@@Rob_F8F

[@esphilee]

@@Rob_F8F, your package probably has some Dong Fong Hypersonic Missiles in there and your dog is worried.

[@gelinrefira]

The next milestone for the PLAN will be an extended exercise in the Indian Ocean, passing around Singapore, through the Straits of Malacca and spending weeks, if not months in the Indian Ocean. This will change the balance of power in the region. A port call by Fujian at Iran's Port of Bandar Abbas will be truly historical.

[@mulin-kd6tt]

do not you know? During the peace talks in Kunming in northern Myanmar, China obtained the military port in Myanmar and extended the Indian Ocean. From now on, China will never be threatened by the Strait of Malacca again

[@ManwithNoName-t1o]

@@mulin-kd6tt lol

[@cosmoray9750]

Election Part 2 kzbin.info/www/bejne/iKGzf5ucgLt8btU

[@gelinrefira]

@@mulin-kd6tt Obtained? Are you sure?

[@mulin-kd6tt]

@@gelinrefira The lease period is 99 years. Isn’t this “acquisition”?

[@richardwarren4830]

Excellent well balanced review - not something you often see on KZbin concerning this sort of thing.

[@PapaOscarNovember]

IMO the Achilles heel of US Navy is that their fleet is irreplaceable. China could probably beat US Navy in an extended war of attrition (assuming China can survive multi-year blockade). Chinese shipyards can pump out ships to replace losses while US Navy will diminish until becoming ineffective.

[@FirstTakahashi]

How survivable are Chinese manufacturing base from onslaught? Crimea has taught us stealth missiles could easily sneak in AD.

[@ElZilchoYo]

@@FirstTakahashi They have over 500 large shipyards some of which are located deep in central China via rivers, but in mountain areas.

[@jamessummers-dm7me]

Shipyards require large amounts of electricity to operate, they should be safe if they are 2,500 km from the coast.

[@bigpumper643]

All of China's ships doesn't even weight half as much as the United States Navy.

[@shanewilson2484]

Where is China going to get the raw materials to build ships in a time of war. Where is the iron ore going to come from? China imports 70% of exported iron ore in the world, and most of that is from Australia and Brazil. PapaOacar is a clown.

[@eymeeraosaka2954]

To me this is the best military defense channel...

[@frankojudoka]

Uncle Sam is known for being a troublemaker. All these years of war on terror by Uncle Sam has not made the world any safer.

[@esphilee]

Truth.

[@angliccivilization1346]

No, but that was never the strategic goal. The strategic goal was to disrupt the moslem world so terrorism and other disruptive threats are not a threat directly to the US homeland and our most important allies.

[@esphilee]

@@angliccivilization1346 , Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Osama, Hamas was created by CIA.

[@esphilee]

Those moslem are created by C Ai Eiy.

[@esphilee]

Dang… yT

[@liujuncn]

The interesting data I found on Wikipedia is that the cost of an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer is US$2.2 billion per ship, while the 055D is only 6 billion RMB (equivalent to less than half of it). And in terms of annual shipbuilding and launching capacity, the 055D can be two to three times that of the Arleigh Burke-class. Additionally, when it comes to the vertical launch system for missiles, the DDG has 96 cells, while the 055D boasts 112 cells. If this were a game of Red Alert, the outcome would be quite clear.

[@tvgerbil1984]

The way of accounting for cost varies wildly from country to country. You can take those figures on Wikipedia with a large grain of salt.

[@Rob_F8F]

Yes, if it was a game of Red Alert, the outcome would be quite clear.

[@johnsilver9338]

Type 055 don't have a BMD radar like the ones used by Aegis destroyers. In that regard, Sehjong class is better. 128 VLS with BMD SPY-1 and BMD/ASAT SM-3. But even Sehjong's SPY-1 is less powerful and less versatile than SPY-6 radar on Burke Flight IIA and Flight III. However on DCS simulations, neither Type 055 nor an Aegis destroyer can sink each other. Only way for China to sink an Aegis destroyer is to expend more than a 100M USD using a volley of DF-21/YJ-21. But for the price of a single DF-21, a salvo of 5 - 10 Tomahawks or 3 - 7 LRASMs can be launched instead. For the same 100M USD, a whole Chinese CSG can be sunk maybe even cheaper using MALD decoys. Bottom line, Aegis destroyers are the best in terms of defense while Type 055 is better in terms of offense.

[@henli-rw5dw]

It's the yj-21 that will be used. Probably less than 10 mil each, given China's cost savings.

[@bigpumper643]

😂😂😂😂😂😂ok, one question. How many conflicts around the world have Chinese ships responded to? None? Thier numbers don't count for shit when you have idiots running the corruption machine that is The communist chinese military.

[@mikes.4136]

Your understanding and analysis is thorough, and well-researched. You are a true asset and an incredible naval primer.

[@soothinglycool9806]

Would respect the report better had the water in rockets been reported. Or reporting how Chinese ships propelled cowardice at American ships in the south China sea. Everything Chinese is fraught with integrity issues, shoddy quality and lies. The world has wizened up and ran in the opposite direction whilst China doubles down on stupidity.

[@St_AngusYoung]

Oh please! He's just a pom pom waver and propagandist for Winnie the Pooh.

[@russelfang7434]

@@St_AngusYoung Now that one can be accused of being a CCP loyalist by the McCarthy brats for merely stating the facts. What a yesterday once more.

[@bobsmith3983]

@@St_AngusYoung Cope from you I see. "Winnie the Pooh" can squash the USA easily.

[@kimmurphy3713]

US waking up from a dream and in for a rude awakening

[@S0ulinth3machin3]

you mean that dream where their systems have actually been used in combat? The dream called "reality"? "no plan survives first contact with the enemy" - von Moltke

[@felisasininus1784]

​@@S0ulinth3machin3 Yes, used in combat against enemies wearing sandals. Whom they're afraid to fight face-to-face right now. 😂

[@russelfang7434]

I just came back from a video about how the United States will defeat both China and Russia.🤣

[@vangpham2514]

arogant dont last forever@@S0ulinth3machin3

[@Iamabot4708]

​@@S0ulinth3machin3Used in combat against sandal, wearing enemies whose main weapons are AK47 and i.e. D's come on now. The US hasn't faced a near appear adversary since World War 2. And if we did, we'd probably get s*** on.

[@datianlongan5567]

Both US & China Navies will be very effective within the purpose of their intended missions. US Navy will be best dominating the high seas & choking off strategic shipping routes while China Navy will be best protect the mainland & territorial claims in the South China sea. In any US-China naval contest, US will have the advantage on the high sea and China will have the advantage within Chinese water.

[@UltraRealTrueJesus]

CN have home advantage and the fact they are the literal factory of the world. and no one needs be a fan of them to know that for every ship the free world makes, (and even disregarding quality and corruption) they can make 10+ in the same time. by boats right now have the largest navy. note: I fact checked the assertion of 10+ boats vs peers, and they produced 30 in 2022 alone, adding to their almost 800 military boats.

[@刘聪-i4c]

​@@UltraRealTrueJesus世界70%的商用船只由中国制造。

[@FastlaneProductions1]

@@UltraRealTrueJesus The number of boats you have doesn't really matter and is kind of a red herring. I mean think about it. Who would win a fight? 1,000 senegalese warships or 1 American warship? What matters is what capabilities and talent are on the ship. China may produce a lot of impressive ships, but the ships' capabilities and crew are significantly less impressive.

[@mja4wp]

it amazes me that so few recognize the relationship of geo-political interest, independence vs. inter-dependence; parity v. superiority v. supremacy. China and Russia are barely on parity with the US (West Allied) Naval forces....and the only reason they are even discussed with any 'respect' at all, is because both China and Russia have Nukes. China imports 85% of their Energy needs and 70% of their agricultural imports. The US is completely independent in those 2 categories. China would be blockaded if it tried to do more than flex, bully and incrementally grab territories that are not legally there (per international law). In a few months, the lights are out, and in 6-8 months China is very very hungry. only 10% of Chinas Navy is Blue Water and Japan alone can handle that on their own. The US, as blemished and warted as it is, does a very good job of and has done a very good job of policing the maritime shipping lanes since 1946....that has allowed every country the wants, to trade with most any other w/o secutrity concerns, which allowed for fewer clashes, fights and wars (which were the norm prior for centuries) and increased food security for a greater portion of the world than in any other period in known history. Ironically, China was the biggest beneficiary in the post WW2 order that regular US citizen paid for (especially the gutted middle class). @@UltraRealTrueJesus

[@grandwonder5858]

@mja4wp, China is connected by rails and highways throughout Asia and Europe, Mr Knows-It-All! Even with Russia alone China has all it needs as far as supplies is concerned to easily defeat the US! The US can’t handle Afghanistan even with the help of the UK, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, Canada, etc what makes you think the US could handle China? You can to talk shit all you want, but once you get hit in the…. it’s a completely different story from your talking!

[@tamimkhan742]

Currently it seems like the PLA navy can already defeat US pacific fleet

[@ZweiZwolf]

US PACFLT should worry more about the PLARF than the PLAN, because their overseas bases are sitting ducks for China's long range missiles.

[@tamimkhan742]

@@ex0duzz yea , you are absolutely right, i would even say that China can only win within the first island chain, what i said was for the first time PLA navy had the capability to defeat the pacific fleet even if it is only within first island chain , and its enough capability for a Taiwan blockade or invasion

[@ZweiZwolf]

@@ex0duzz China won't send the PLA Navy for a symmetrical fight against the USA Pacific Fleet. If the US goes to war with China, the PLARF asymmetrically destroys the US bases and ships across the Asia Pacific. The US only has "AUKUS" as their Asia Pacific alliance. Expect Korea, Japan, and the Philippines to stay out of any China-US fight - they'd get crushed.

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

​@@ex0duzz Remember when US carriers dominate China sea? Time is not on US side.

[@danielmartin7838]

Eventually the five countries that have an interest in ensuring peaceful transit of that which you mentioned will need their own naval forces to police it. The U.S. doesn’t want to do it alone, but many countries are happy to let the U.S. navy provide peace and security for a number of reasons

[@jay9220]

In the new naval war it’s not about how strong your carriers are. It’s about how sure can you protect your carriers. From another perspective, how capable are you to destroy your enemy carriers? The 055 destroyer is an important ship.

[@julio3256]

No No No bro，055 is just a continer ship or cargo ship， no worry about it plz~

[@dddddh1]

指定有点毛病

[@henli-rw5dw]

055 destroyer now have 1000 mile attack range because it carries hypersonic missile.

[@zhu_zi4533]

Perhaps guided missile destroyers are more like capital ships in modern naval warfare, while aircraft carriers are more like base ships.

[@julio3256]

@@zhu_zi4533 什么驱逐舰？什么航母？不存在的，告诉鬼佬，那些都是大号货船罢了害~

[@Alan-megan]

Good unbiased info

[@UpShiftTypeR]

Very good analysis, very informative video 👍

[@theliansin6516]

The design of Type 055 is so beautiful, and its Fujian carrier will surprise the world when it is officially commissioned

[@galkanftw]

The main difference as has been mentioned is the proximity of support. If the USA or Nato forces run into any trouble they are not in range of support so they would be in serious trouble.China and Russia on the other hand can quickly add support from al of it's resources. So for example the USA has it's ships but China has it's entire military at hand it needed.The USA strategy relies on knowledge knowing their enemies intentions long before they happen which gives them a chance to respond as needed.However support even with long term knowledge will still have a large task to get over to China or Russia and would also need long term support.Another thing seldom talked about is actual munitions under fire most of these vessels would run dry of munitions very quickly and need to resupply.

[@but_at_what_cost]

俄罗斯在乌克兰的表现那叫一个丢人现眼。俄罗斯航母还在船厂修着呢，修了多少年了？俄罗斯最近造的军舰都是不超过3000吨的护卫舰！

[@secctech357]

lol

[@noellaw3477]

Why would any country need the might to reach another country across an ocean if they are not thinking about pillaging it? The age of colonialism is over...

[@alexandermelbaus2351]

That doesn't make much sense, but I think you are describing a scenario of US or NATO ships near either China or Russia. There are a number of sea and air bases within the region in Korea and Japan; that can provide additional military support and supplies rather quickly. There are also other friendly countries and military bases much closer then the US, that being said in a military conflict the US navy would not be deployed in such a vulnerable position. They would be used to cut off shipping to China and this would be why China is expanding it's navy. China is in a terrible strategic position; It imports huge amounts for critical supplies of energy, food and other raw materials from countries that are far away or allied with the US; The geography of their coastline is not a large area, it is boxed in and the routes travelled to it must pass through one or more choke points. 1.4 billion people to feed and food imports are cut, oil supplies for fuel would be a fraction of what was needed, coal and iron ore would drop by more then 50%. The US navy can project power across the ocean to affect world shipping. The Chinese Navy does not have a similar ability to affect shipping on the US or most other industrial countries.

[@kenji4596]

China's concept has always been to fight/defend near its shores. It has all the advantages it need. It's not a warmongering invading nation with far offensive capabilities

[@phils4634]

The PLA Navy is very much concerned with protecting Chinese interests, and certainly designed to ensure safe and reliable commercial passage, local to major Chinese port facilities, essential for Chinese trade. Force projection hasn't been a priority until recently, possibly explaining the interest in developing the Chinese PLA Naval Air Wing. China plans a LONG way ahead, so their true intentions for use of these Carriers may not be immediately evident.

[@thehumus8688]

idk, its not so opaque to me. the Sea Denial role which was quite traditional PLAN purpose was "replaced and/or suplemented" by presence of their land bassed Anti Ship-Balistic Cruise missile. which threathen American CBG up to 1700km away from Chinese shore. which provide immense Denial capability as Carrier bassed aircraft combat radius is only around 1000km if USN try to get close, then PLAN would have tactical edge, with their Land bassed aircraft and Naval ship - operated under protection of their Land bassed Anti Ship Ballistic Missile umbrela. they basicly dont need to be to invested in that role anymore thus the Future Naval combatant of PLAN was seems to be Sea Control of Indian Ocean protecting "Maritime Silkroad" of Belt and Road Innitiative with partner countries. however China dont have many Safe harbour in area, Even though India is in BRICS they essentialy still rival, and so PLAN only have single Naval resuply point in Djibouti. at that prospect of Navy that cant rely on Land Support, their Surface combatant would be exposed without air cover, thus thats where Carrier role is. and the Surface combatant development would seems centered around that idea.

[@hollowgonzalo4329]

@phils4634 Simple, because in a battle against the United States they allow the Chinese navy to stray further from the mainland then otherwise possible which may prove quite useful if America were to attempt a blockade of Chinese shipping at certain choke points.

[@johnsmith1953x]

Invade Texas, Washington and California.

[@joeymurdazalotmore6355]

😂 they are done in a decade, look at there demographics they haven't run out of young people they have run out of 40 yr olds as well, Russia too, these populations will have the tide turned on them by sheer force of numbers demographics and geography matter , the us is down protecting global trade , m all that entails is a lot of regional shifting sands, the us will be in its own hemisphere but untouched for sure, folks have issues they can solve that means close to home, everybody sticks forks in the us, but then what , what happens the day after,

[@PahatRout]

@@hollowgonzalo4329 ,with super sonic missiles around, do you think these ships are needed if a real war breaks out? I thought all these ships are for their annual parade shows and to justify their huge expenses plus employments!

[@sinic1978]

The Bangalore Call Center Army is already commenting on this video.

[@taiwanstillisntacountry]

Scam center Mumbai-Dharavi

[@Iamabot4708]

People saying things I don't agree with must mean that these are trolls or bots

[@taiwanstillisntacountry]

Says the 1 from scam-center Mumbai-Dharavi 🤣🤣🤣

[@douginorlando6260]

China looks overwhelmingly strong well past Japan, S Korea, S China sea. Areas where they do not look overwhelming begins at Singapore, Midway, and perhaps sea lanes between Australia and Americas. At this point, Guam is a toss up. A real expert might see things I don’t.

[@agrajyadav2951]

I literally strolled the whole comment section and there were no Indian comments, but there's deterrence already present.

[@djtan3313]

Perseverance, determination, deception, humility. And hypersonics.

[@rapidsqualor5367]

Your narration is clear, concise and easy to understand with correct pronunciation. What I see with the PLA Navy is not so much a Taiwan invasion navy but a way to make China blockade proof. They now have a need for longer range ships to bridge their base in Djibouti. Even in peacetime China needs to secure it's oil supply.

[@bobsmith3983]

The Russians will take care of supplying oil to China in the event of a blockade among other things. China has contingencies in place for such events.

[@tylersoto7465]

China has access to oil from Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia etc . They should be fine with oil .

[@rapidsqualor5367]

@@tylersoto7465 as long as nobody sinks the tankers. The only pipeline from Russia to China is the Yakutia-Khabarovsk-Vladivostok pipeline and it carries less than NORD stream 1. 100 years ago, Japan was a rising power. The US began an oil blockade that may have let to WWII. Pearl Harbor did not come out of nowhere; Japan was on a search for oil and taking land that had oil deposits in SE asia. The choice was to become agrarian again or keeping industry going.

[@josephguo6256]

@@bobsmith3983 China has her own oil underneath whole country.

[@Xiaengao]

Which it cannot do.

[@cabasadefogo9533]

Nothing like a new video from this Channel about PLAN when I have insomnia!

[@jason_sleek]

You and me both, fam. 😂🤝🏽

[@1313hyme]

Same here, 😂. Woke up 5:44am and watching the video now 😂.

[@tylersoto7465]

But it's worth watching it even with insomnia .

[@jorual12]

May more videos be produced by the best channel on weapons and military development on the Web. Congratulations on this good video.

[@bobbylow175]

In other words, US fleet is offensive as it pokes it's nose in everyone's backyard whereas China is for defense.

[@hollowgonzalo4329]

@bobbylow175 Yes it is the same with Russia's navy.

[@ulikemyname6744]

Very biased view! The US has allies and they conduct regular training sessions with them

[@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle]

Poking it's nose in everyone's back yard is being used as a negative term it seems, when in reality they are sailing in international waters, not China's, or Russia's territorial waters.

[@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle]

​@@ulikemyname6744very biased indeed

[@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle]

Back yard of nations = territorial waters something the U.S. has not sailed through like you are falsely claiming it is.

[@KennyL0009]

Excellent work.

[@lu_rrgg]

The video mentions the PLAN future presence in the eastern Pacific (effectively the southern Pacific Islands) and the northern Ind-ocean, but not sufficiently. Chinese companies are developing ports along the west African coast and in the waters around the Panama Canal, and some of these trade ports are likely to be developed as overseas bases for PLAN. This means that ultimately, China and US will be relative to each other in three war zones : the eastern Pacific, the Caribbean sea and the mid-Atlantic.

[@Rob_F8F]

China will have to figure out the logistics part of having bases halfway around the world.

[@AZ-dj1ni]

​@@Rob_F8FYes, they have to learn from the American model with its 750 military bases

[@Rob_F8F]

@@AZ-dj1ni I guess that the true purpose of the Belt & Road Initiative is for China debt trap its way in a collection of overseas bases.

[@wlwumingyonghu]

不如美国在叙利亚建立基地偷取当地的石油和粮食🤗@@Rob_F8F

[@gelinrefira]

I doubt they will have large, long term bases established to attack nearby countries quickly. They will likely have refueling stations, small bases leased from host country and established port of calls for their ships. China explicitly does not want to have bases like the US military. They are expensive and imperialistic and China is not interested in empire.

[@theinfralink6598]

Compared to the U.S. NAVY which is more carrier centric in the sense that most of its attacking capabilities come from the aircrafts from the carrier, the PLAN seems more destroyer centric with its 055 packed with long range air defense and antiship missiles capable of striking an entire battle group thousands of kilometers away. The aircrafts from the carrier are probably more for providing protection for the destroyers. It’s rather similar to the Soviet doctrine except with much more capable carriers and aircrafts, better reconnaissance and missiles.

[@arminius6506]

It's because China has no super carrier in service, in future when they get operational and J-35 also get inducted with Chinese AWACs than maybe it would give offensive role to the aircraft and their carriers. But yeah we've learned from this particular channel and other sources that destroyers are the main offensive component of PLAN, we can say that it's part of their sea denial strategy

[@animalfarm7467]

I liked the photograph of the five Russian Typhoon submarines; they had the submerged displacement of a WW2 aircraft carrier. Sadly, only one now remains.

[@EthanX1ao]

Truly cold war dinosaur....

[@animalfarm7467]

@@EthanX1ao A Cold War dinosaur with a gym, sauna, and swimming pool.

[@SunShine-sn9ek]

Thank you so much for this great analysis

[@young749Au]

In the world of missiles, drones, and glide bombs a surface ship is quite vulnerable setting on top of a relative flat sea of water. Any surface ship is going to become an easy target in future wars as the missiles, the drones, and the glide bombs become more developed and deadly.

[@hsingchen321]

I agree with you that navy ships are easy targets by missiles, but not drones. A powerful laser weapons can shoot down drones to clean up sky in seconds.

[@yang5159]

AC sitting duck to drones, anti ship missiles

[@yang5159]

​@@hsingchen321laser cannot shoot down every drone, thousands will attack from all directions

[@kennethvenezia4400]

You neglected to mention the importance of those white walls on those tires of the mobile anti ship missiles. My cat really wants to know.🙀 That said, we both enjoyed your analysis. Thank you

[@AlexanderLehmann-c6z]

The PLAN today is perhaps the most complete Navy on earth.

[@danz1182]

???? Most Chinese ships cannot even operate for 30 days without resupply, the US can sink every ship bigger than a trawler using its 4 SSGN's in about an hour and China has no countermeasure for those ships. Once the US takes out China's sattelites, the carriers will come into play as well because without satellites China will not be able to find or target US carriers. China is at least 30 years away from challening the US navy beyond the range of ground based radar in China proper.

[@chadkarr7394]

The idea that Ch1na already isnt a fully blue water, deploy around the world navy, is an antiquated one. Not only that, but the tech and wpns boasted by the PLAN are now literally the best in the world.....and the sheer size of theie navy, including the biggest sub fleet on earth, as well as surface, is plenty enough to win any war (especially in the Pacific or indian ocean, where they have the most bases to support their logistics).

[@bigpumper643]

You're on point. China is an inexperienced fighting force as a whole. What was the last conflict they have used assets and equipment? Besides border squabbles with india.

[@chadkarr7394]

@@bigpumper643 experience doesnt always matter (like the Wehrmacht who crushed most of Europe), but they actually do have experience, like deploying combat forces to the Syr1an civil war on multiple occasions (there's actually plenty of articles about it, open-sourced info). There was their limited incursion of Vietnam (not a full scale invasi0n, but what they called a punitive expedition), and a low-level counter-insrgncy op against a certain ethnic group in XinJiang, roughly of a similar intensity level on-par with most of the 1raq or Afghan conflicts (as it relates to the American experience, i being an 1raq veteran can say that). So, they're not totally devoid of experience, but it's not even that which matters, it's a combo of training, the doctrines utilized, wpns wielded within the scope of said-doctrines, AND the quality of leadership. So......I'd say, Ch1na is actually in good shape all the way around, as in being well-rounded in terms of its armed forces ans their enormous capabilities.

[@johnC2537]

China communist is absolutely cannot win the war to rule the world.

[@timothychung4811]

​@@chadkarr7394Not only this but who truly has experience now? The last truly navy war the US had was against Japan during WW2. Sailing around the world are trips NOT EXPERIENCES.

[@UltraRealTrueJesus]

pacom think otherwise. experience in this context is a moot point. area denial and sheer force multipliers matters. they have both. hence the sabre rattling on the news daily. from both sides.@@bigpumper643

[@hollowgonzalo4329]

When Chinese refer to far seas capabilities they primarily mean the ability to protect the malacca and sunda strait trade routes both in times of peace and war considering that the Chinese economy is still heavily dependent on their exports being able to sail freely through there. It's the same reason they care so much about the South China Sea because their economy and thus national security is largely dependent on the trade which passes through there. Obviously there's certain vital resources they import through it as well but I suspect the volume of sea traded oil and things of that nature will reduce in the coming decade or two as more pipelines from Siberia into mainland China are constructed. It also means being able to dominate up to the second island chain eventually as you say because ideally by mid to late century they'd like to overcome America as the dominant military power in Asia.

[@Rob_F8F]

Pipelines can reduce oil and gas shipments. But other commodities (iron, grain, etc) will still need to be shipped through the South China Sea.

[@mulin-kd6tt]

do not you know? During the peace talks in Kunming in northern Myanmar, China obtained the military port in Myanmar and extended the Indian Ocean. From now on, China will never be threatened by the Strait of Malacca again

[@Rob_F8F]

@@mulin-kd6tt A Chinese naval base in Myanmar does not solve China's Malacca problem. Commercial shipments of imported oil, fertilizer components, and other raw materials must still go through Malacca. Exports of finished goods to Europe and St Petersburg, Russia must still go through Malacca. A Chinese military base would be located in northern Myanmar, far closer to India than Malacca. Such base would be no more effective in keeping Malacca open than the larger PLA bases on Hainan. Do not you know?

[@mulin-kd6tt]

The ones provided to China are deep-water ports. I don’t think that China will only build naval bases. That would be a waste of our port resources. Such ports can be used as mixed military and civilian ports. Resources will never be wasted. Don’t take advantage of the United States. Apply the logic of China, so you will only get the wrong answer, you know?@@Rob_F8F

[@UltraRealTrueJesus]

that is if we ignore the fact that RU has been shipping via the Artic. sure. a southern route that is heavily patrolled by western forces, a route that could easily be a chokepoint/bottleneck and blockade. the northern route however is basically within their own territorial waters. did you know? I am sure you didn't.@@Rob_F8F

[@taiwanstillisntacountry]

I cant wait to see a comparable between the 2 Chinese operative carriers, the UK carriers and the 2 Indian carriers.

[@user-ku6bv4ni2f]

Theoretically UK>=Chinese>Indian, though in reality UK carriers are barely in operation...

[@中国螃蟹哥]

​@@user-ku6bv4ni2fThe British carrier twin-ship island also has a smaller tonnage, which means there are fewer locations for fighter jets.

[@ZweiZwolf]

Chinese > UK >>> Indian. The UK carriers just aren't reliable enough, and the India carriers aren't good enough. If the UK had the funds to properly maintain their carriers, they'd be on top, but they're so short on staff, they're pulling ships from active duty. The frequency of breakdowns and mishaps on the UK carriers is really troublesome if they intend to fight - if the UK again has an engine go out during wartime, that could be a real disaster.

[@tigersilberhannes9153]

@@user-ku6bv4ni2f The UK carriers are 80% jobsprogram and 20% post imperial withdrawl syndrom, they do not need to be factored into anything.

[@Iamabot4708]

The UK navy is a pile of dog. Shi was just arguing with somebody on whether the fact the chinese navy was objectively better than the u k navy, and they just couldn't seem to figure out why

[@katprowler6805]

PLAN's strategic goals are very different than USN's. China's doesn't have any global domination ambitions unlike what the Western press and politicians keep telling their populace. They only care about trade. Their very long civilization has shown no colonial or imperialistic mindset. Even their voyages in the 12th century along SEA showed trading with the local natives instead of domination like their European counterparts. Their military growth is more for the defence of their homeland. If you carefully study thier orbat and assets, its not geared towards power projections in faraway locations. Things like tankers, carriers, strategic bombers, are relatively small compared to other assets.

[@ylstorage7085]

China did have imperialist mindset, but it was usually limited to her neighbouring regions.

[@alkers372]

Where were they going to expand to? Frozen Siberia? The Gobi Desert? The jungles of SE Asia? The roof of the world (Tibet)? They expanded into places easy to expand into. The Ming voyages in the early 15th century were an attempt to gain commercial control of the Indian Ocean region and set up tributary states, but stopped after a couple of decades.

[@davidaaa3523]

I learned something new today. thank you

[@multipolarworldorder]

The Chinese navy requires about 50 modern Nuclear Attack SSN Submarines for sea denial and Carrier escort.

[@UltraRealTrueJesus]

modernization is likely taking place. but they have 78 subs as of 2024. source: world population review

[@mja4wp]

The PLA Navy is not even a Navy of Parity with the US, Japan or others....There is Parity, Superiority and Supremacy. Only 10% of the China Navy is Deep Water or Blue Water (able to project out into the 7 seas unfettered by land based constraints). The PLA Carriers are sub par or unoperational. 1 is a retrofitted Ukrainian Shipping vessel - uses Steam - needs weeks to build up power after shuts downs - the other has engineering limitations in the design which requires constant repairs in structure....and the newest and most high tech, is still in port as they try and fail to figure the launch propulsion system. Aircraft additionally, must launch with 20-35% less fuel due to stress fractures caused by faulty design in launch lip on deck that is too sharp in angle for the aircraft fleet. Not saying this posted content is propaganda...but if it gives anyone the impression that China Navy is Superior to others....thats false....it's not even on par. The Russian Navy is in worse shape - but for different reasons. They have the worst ports and land constraints possible...they have lost over 30% of their Black Sea fleet in the last 2 years...and the Baltic Sea is virtually closed to them w/ the exception of St Petersburg. If not for the Nukes that China and Russia each have, they would not be taken seriously at all.

[@jimmcnair5843]

Buddy don't knock the plan, they built their fleet for defense unlike the Americans whose interest are poking their noses into everyone's business, of which they have no right!! And it looks as though that China has left no rock unturned and has countered any threat to themselves perfectly! Best of all? All brand new state of the art kit! As the usa is relying on decades old breaking down equipment! Lol

[@JamieParanihi]

Good video. Interesting to learn of these three superpowers naval objectives.

[@Hduduchdb]

At the end of 2021, the 055 destroyer single-handedly challenged the entire U.S. aircraft carrier battle group for 20 days. Don't you know? The best news has been exposed，Then the United States fired some commanders😂😂

[@billriker7865]

Why is your video only consist of still photos?

[@theautoman22]

Hypersonic missiles may make several types of Navy ships obsolete.

[@UltraRealTrueJesus]

submersible UAV's make most ships obsolete.

[@douginorlando6260]

@@UltraRealTrueJesusI expect their AG600 amphibious planes will be repositioning submersible UAVs depending on quickly developing situations. .

[@UltraRealTrueJesus]

kinda like how RU is doing with sea mines. but they could perfect the strategy with submersible drones@@douginorlando6260

[@pietersteenkamp5241]

Where? In the central pacific or in mid atlantic or Indian Ocean? The USN can arguably beat every other navy without even using it's aircraft carriers and only a portion of it's Arleigh burkes. It's ludicriously powerful and the reason it build carriers is because it can afford to do something as inefficient and somewhat ridiculous. For the Chinese to project power the Way they USN is will probably take half a century if the USN kept just it's current force structure. I have been posting and discussing hypersonics and supersonic missiles for almost two decades now and yeah they don't do so well against aircraft carrier groups in the centers of the worlds oceans.

[@bobsmith3983]

@@pietersteenkamp5241 You are overstating Chinese intent. China's military is only for defensive purposes in the areas around China where they have overwhelming force. 18 out of 18 US think tank war scenarios between China and the USA in China's defensive areas resulted in the destruction of the US navy so having a strong blue water navy doesn't guarantee success and in this case a humiliating defeat for the USA.

[@pablopeter3564]

EXCELLENT analysis. Thanks

[@axelschroeder6657]

Interesting video, thank you for posting. My question: Did you include in this comparison also the US Coast Guard (an independent force) with a different mission?

[@Robert-qi6mb]

A great little video the Chinese Navy looks very impressive.

[@freeworld88888]

china and soviet are similar strategy , until recently china has aircraft carriers, china has only 3 air crafts and 50 destroyers and a few nuclear attacker are china most powerful ships. america destoryers and nuclears submarines are still about 10 years a head of china. But china fighting the first and second chains islands only. I don't think that anyone can get near to Taiwan or chinese coastline now aday. As china's anti ship missiles are very advance now.

[@liaojohnweechun7454]

GREAT INFORMATIVE VIDEO 👍👌

[@ylstorage7085]

my naval doctrine: Ctrl+A --> Ctrl leftclick screw the micro, it is all about the MACRO my dudes.

[@gorlestondoug]

Thank you for this interesting and excellent video.

[@filipzietek5146]

Steregushchiy and Gremyashchiy actually have better AA than Grigorovich, they have Redut which is capable of using 120km range missles as well as quadpacking short rnage missles. They have less tubes, 12 and 16 vs 24 but better missles and quackpacking make up for that. Also why did you not mention Karakurt class when talking about Russian modern small missle ships? You also forgot about it in your corvette video...

[@danapeck5382]

Thanks, new subscriber, very much appreciate your content, your English is great, far better than my Mandarin ever got, all the best

[@yzhang9265]

30 years ago, every ship in US carrier fleet looks nice and powerful. Standing in 2023, looking at those old ships and thinking about their lacking of ability defend themselves against hypersonic anti-ship weapons, can only feel powerless and tiredness of US military.

[@loremasteringwion9930]

Your ships are made in China, meaning extremely low quality that breaks easily.

[@yzhang9265]

@@loremasteringwion9930 You are right. They are made using paper and clues. Some of them are just CGIs or picture and videos generate using AI webpage. Don't worry. =)

[@ottocubed9520]

Outstanding analysis sir.

[@zhli4238]

China also uses ballistic missiles as sea denial and possibly far sea anti-ship attack weapons. This is achieved through DF-21D, DF-26 and potentially far sea attack YJ-21 anti-ship ballistic missiles on Type-055 destroyer/cruiser. That is a unique naval strategy different from USN and Russian navy.

[@kellyjohnson9394]

Go ahead paper dragon. Try it! What you haven’t stolen and do not know will SURELY destroy you.FACTS.🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅

[@AY2121-i4y]

While we're busy debating wokeness. They're quietly building up strength.

[@天然の左]

尊敬的人民解放軍❤

[@loremasteringwion9930]

An army of evil which threatens world peace

[@obblue]

Superb work on this video, ENI. Informative, clear-eyed and succinct.

[@sarahkhan2310]

Excellent PLA navy the guardian of peace and protector of sovereignty. Strong deterrence against hostile forces from faraway colonised lands. Well done China a blessing to the world 👍♥️🇨🇳

[@newhailman]

China doesn't need long range ships because in case of war, they'd never make it out of the first island chain.

[@sunshinesun121]

With ALL the HARDWARE ( made Available ) ... How is the Software ( Personnel ) required for Operation, Maintenance and Supplies ( Food, ammunition and Fuel ) ??? China looks to have solved these issues. However US have a SIGNIFICANT short FALL in recruiting new Sailors in 2023. Plus MANY veterans are TOO OLD or have retired.

[@ValinPrezkowski]

So far away from friendly bases? Come on. The US has “friendly” bases in Japan, S Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Australia, etc. Stop kidding yourself!

[@redhongkong]

PLAN doesnt have much oversea military port (one at Djibouti only) thats one of the reason many dont understand why PLAN like larger ship for carrier escort group

[@mulin-kd6tt]

Just three days ago, the Burmese army held peace talks in Kunming, and China obtained the military port in Burma, extending the Indian Ocean. From now on, China will never be threatened by the Strait of Malacca again

[@crhu319]

China really only needs to defend Djibouti to Myanmar naval escort route, to trade anything with Africa.

[@garrymacphee8328]

Three words put the Chinese at a disadvantage "made in China".

[@ZoneCrasher]

3:19 - What did I just see? A guy with a bra. LOL

[@kanestalin7246]

Definitely an American😅

[@RadicalFloat_95]

This video is actually genuinely underated and damm and this is actually the actual real China that the actual American and British BBC propaganda mainstream media actually don't show you is actually really like and actually capable of actually doing

[@taiwanstillisntacountry]

The USSR/Russian Federation Navy. The USA Navy. The Chinese Navy. Not even mentioned the Brag-Rhat Navy 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Somebody will be so butt-hurt.

[@johnsmith1953x]

*I noticed that you spent some time describing the Russian Navy in this video as well* Its good, but I think you could have used all that in a separate video. In fact, you could have made this video into 3 or 4 videos. I know youtube wants their developers make a video every few days and I think you could have done this to save your sanity!!

[@oki1966]

Glad to see China gaining naval vessels that have true blue water capability. It will be a few years before she learns how to use them. Nothing makes up for US Navy's years of operating a blue water Navy and actually winning against an adversary like Japan in WWII. Britain with its experience showed Argentina that nothing replaces experience in actual warfare. China probably will need to focus on weapons that keep foreign Navies away from its shore.

[@rags417]

Great stuff and great analysis. I am currently compiling an Excel database of every single warship ever built in the last 150 years and recently added the Chinese tab. I can see why the US is terrified - the growth rate of the PLAN has been outstanding - in 2014 they hardly had anything and today they are closing in on being a match for the USN. By my projection they will have more ships of greater tonnage and more missiles than the US by 2035 - I finally realised why the US has been pushing for a war with China now while they can still win it. I am definitely a new subscriber !

[@colemanmorefield]

I just saw a special about the Chinese military on Comedy Central.

[@ycplum7062]

Excellent video! Too often, people view navies from the perspective of a single grand naval battle at sea. The reality is that the size and composition of the navies is dependent on their intended uses, which can vary dramatically on the country, their geopolitical circumstances, and their national objectives. Unlike the US and Russia, China is extremely vulnerable to maritime disruptions, specifically energy and food. China import some food, but more critically, they import industrial volumes of fertilizers needed to maintain their existing agricultural production, especially rice. They need a blue water capability to protect their sea lanes. Even with their existing large navy, it falls far short of their needs.

[@mulin-kd6tt]

I agree with your view. Just three days ago, the Burmese army held peace talks in Kunming. China obtained the military port in Burma and extended the Indian Ocean. From now on, China will never be threatened by the Strait of Malacca again

[@ycplum7062]

@@mulin-kd6tt While a Myanmar port improves CHina's security, I do not think it is sufficiently significant. China would need a major naval port and air base to protect the port. I am not totally familiar with Myanmar, but I believe the only real location with a sheltered port (from the monsoons and typhoons) is Rangoon (aka Yangon). And it would likely need a more robust transportation network (rail and road) back to China for logistical purposes. It would be extremely costly, but I suspect China would be more than willing to pay the price. Looking at potential adversaries, India is withing air strike range of Ragoon from the Andadaman Islands or from India's aircraft carriers. India also has a few tankers to allow for air strikes from India itself. Also, the Andaman islands are closer to the Malacca Strait than Rangoon. In theory, China could build an air base near the southernmost point of Myanmar, but it would need at least a rail line to connect it with China, which would also be vulnerable. The US would simply operate from the south, outside of Chinese land-based air and at the very operational limits of many PLAN ships. Yes, teh new destroyers hav ethe range to get to teh Malaca Straits from Rangoon, but to patrol an area, the operational range is about one-quarter to one-third. Most of the fuel is used for patrol and, if necessary, combat. And of course, there is also the use of subs. Furthermore, China has one of the longest supply chains. Their commerce can be interdict in the Araboan Sea or western Indian Ocean. Can all this be overcome, probably. But, it will take time. Probably decades. And I am not so bold enough to predict several decades out. lol

[@jeromekearney2587]

China needs 2,000 major surface ships

[@dancingferret6654]

@@jeromekearney2587 Probs not that many, but they would need way more than the US Navy has to have any hope of keeping their supply lines open.

[@ycplum7062]

@@jeromekearney2587 Probably not that much, but definitely hundreds more. Actually, what they are in desperate need of are more naval bases distributed across the globe for these ships to operate from. The huge US network of alliances and naval bases is a massively underrated asset of the US.

[@Vermilion2049]

Play at x1.25 guys. So much better

[@johnzach2057]

Are you going to do a video why Russia's naval air defenses have been a complete disaster? And would the Chinese fair any better?

[@camt8804]

A lot of Chinese systems are based on soviet designs so maybe not.

[@中国螃蟹哥]

Older and lacking in maintenance, not worth the time

[@xinyiquan666]

@@camt8804 stop NS, chinese systms selfdom are based on soviet , the only system has conncertiont to soviet is 1950s , also, the US system is way behind russia system , let alone compare to china system

[@xinyiquan666]

@@camt8804 chinese systms selfdom are based on soviet , the only system has connection to soviet is 1950s , also, the US system is way behind russia system , let alone compare to china system

[@accountantthe3394]

​@@camt8804Please tell US DoD to think like you do 😂

[@shootergavin3541]

The most important part of the modern navy is the subs. The nation with the best subs along with the best trained crew is going to be in the pole position for the strongest force.

[@derekshaw8050]

Reminder - This is a NZ-chinese propagandist. Take everything with a massive grain of salt.

[@jollygreen4662]

Are you the TV KZbinr guy?

[@DaGoook]

Congratulations to the Taiwanese for selecting their new DPP President! I'm sure the dejected PLAN will start having grumpy naval exercises shortly.

[@spikermike2843]

Yawn - wake us up when he isn't coward enough to declare independence LoL. His party has won most elections for the past two decades - still hiding under the RoC name.

[@chrislui571]

The clock is ticking

[@allanpoecn]

除了更多的嘴炮，又会有多少改变呢？民进党准备开战？让自己开心的政治毫无意义，两岸关系本质上只是中美关系，台湾谁执政都改变不了什么

[@angliccivilization1346]

Doctrine is tactical not really operational or strategic. And most navies keep those classified in details. The word you are looking for is CONOPs (concept of operations)

[@bubbalo3388]

The greatest advantage America has are bases and allies spread out everywhere. Hawaiian islands being a major one.

[@Little-chilli]

这是1959年毛泽东评论美军基地的话“美帝国主义看来好像很强，实际上也是帝国主义中最强的，但也很弱。它的兵力分散得很薄，它在欧洲要驻兵，在亚洲也要驻兵，如此分散，到处都有，结果是到处不顶事。无论从军事、政治、经济方面来看，美国都是扩张得非常大的。它越扩张得大，力量就越分散，反对的人也越多，这样，事情就会向它的意愿的反面发展了。美国就好像一个用双手抱着一堆鸡蛋的人一样，鸡蛋堆的满满的，可是一动都动不得，稍一动鸡蛋就掉下来了。”

[@johnbodman4504]

What you say is true, at the moment, however this advantage is starting to vanish, as the US continues to upset many of their allies, who allow the US to have bases on their land. This is caused by the way that the US mishandled both the Ukraine and Gaza crises. Over the last two years, the US has caused a world wide economic depression, particularly in Europe, after destroying the nord stream fuel pipeline. I am sure that the US has lost the support of all of Europe and can not count on European support for the coming war against China.

[@DJs021]

​@@johnbodman4504if they really start conflict with China, European definitely won't drag into it because the puppet state is here to sacrifice themselves especially Japan, SoKo and Philippines.

[@bobbylow175]

America is failing to recruit new army in the recent times. They are resorting to illegal migrants to backfill their army. How loyal can migrants be when it is not their country to defend?

[@FirstTakahashi]

​@@Little-chillithey had decades to continuously strengthen the dispersed bases. Those too are logistical hubs, air fields, ports which afford attacks to be launch from many directions.

[@joaodecarvalho7012]

5:41 - This one no longer exists.

[@oxvendivil442]

As a Chinese-Filipino, I am happy that China's navy is improving but it will be better for the PLAN to concentrate on the Ist and 2nd island chains only as well as near water defense, not respecting the zones of influence of other states like the US and India as well as developing a far water able navy is a mistake, defending the trade routes will just make China a hegemon, having the ability to patrol and reach the waters near other powers will be seen as disrespectful and the lesser powers will view China as no different to the US; China just better be self sufficient in Eurasia by improving links with Russia and the rest of the near abroad, oil can be piped from the gulf to central asia and then piped to China and decreasing the need for China to patrol the Indian ocean, China should never be the monster that it went after to slay, China's zone is in Northeast/Southeast Asia only and this it should dominate but beyond this is off limits unless China wants to look like a jerk/bully like the US; if China right now demands mutual respect in its monroe doctrine from other powers like the US/EU/India then it should also do the same and give these guys their space unless China is a hypocrite that will be just as bad as the other powers before it and all for the sake of money, prosperity and power while disregarding the security needs of the other powers. There should be balance of power in this more deglobalized world and China better consider the monroe doctrine of other powers unless China's aim is to dominate others as a hegemon for its self interest.

[@taiwanstillisntacountry]

H-Inglish? Brag-Rhat translate app?

[@thetreekeeper143]

Considering you live in the Philippines, I'm guessing you've been brainwashed by western propaganda. There's a lot of accusations and western bias in your arguments.

[@yang2949]

中国人卧薪尝胆发展几十年，并不是为了满足你们的想法来建设人人平等的世界的，你们的想法在我们眼里一文不值，中国不希望成为美国，也不会成为美国。 中国是内生性国家，只要国内发展跟上时代就永远是世界的统治者，中国要恢复的是5000年传统的朝贡体系，在朝贡体系之外的永远是失败国家，在古代叫做蛮夷，菲律宾正在走上这条路。中国的目标是接管美国二战后建立的世界贸易体系，事实上中国商品也正在取代美国制造，菲律宾是加入这样的世界，还是拥抱腐朽的王朝？ 另外，和你不同，中国人都在期待战争，不管是台湾还是菲律宾，没有开疆拓土的王朝没有盛世，这也是这个视频下面质疑中国军队的原因，美国用在日本爆炸的原子弹证明了自己，我们也需要一场比加沙强上百倍的工业化的屠杀来证明赫赫武功，希望这个舞台是日本，而不是菲律宾。 以上，希望你看得懂中文

[@G观者清]

@@yang2949 中国人只想不被人欺负而已，你是那种讲中文的中国而恶毒攻击中国的独运轮而已。代表不了中国人。

[@Proto-Tytan]

Now I’m really worried. Reading the title made me think this: “The US Navy is screwed.” I thought about it since the PLA Navy has more ships, and are more strategic than any other navy.

[@mssv19123]

Leak news a single lone 055 manage to push out entire US carrier battle group out in East China sea....the missile range and detection is very formidable, the US ships cannot even move into 055 range before being locked and shot out

[@kingwing3203]

We must admit that the United States is advanced. They are 100 years ahead of the world. China still needs more efforts.

[@jimmyyoh8144]

The best defense is offense. Near shore defense not solely depended on naval force but augmented with land based defense systems. With ability of deep blue naval development, it pushes the potential threat further and further far away which minimized the effectiveness of carrier based aircrafts. This is the 孫子兵法，圍魏救趙。

[@jacintochua6885]

Why were these island chairs erected in the place to blockade.? . No other countries erected such chains around England, italy or US. So what's the justification for such blockades ?

[@yliang1688]

🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩CHINA💯💯💯💯💯CHINA❤❤❤❤❤

[@mythbusterthe6749]

The type 055 is equivalent to USN DD1000. The next variant will have an Electromagnetic Railgun, the naval version which has been successfully tested. China intends to build between 40~60 of them.

[@crhu319]

That's not a practical weapon for a ship given the rails wear out fast and power needs are huge. I think that's a feint. However for shore defense rail guns are ideal as they can be located near hardened nuclear reactors with many power grid connections, and as many spare rails as exist. No limit.

[@georgequek7996]

Thanks for the great videos👍

[@andrethorpe6183]

China's naval focus is regional defense, their ship's features reflect the limiited operational long distance performance characteristics for sustainability and resupply

[@SoCalFreelance]

"Sea control" and "sea denial" are loaded terms. The oceans are thousands of square miles, and you only have X number of ships. And even the fastest ships can only move at ~40 knots. You can't cheat physics. No time warping from one end of the ocean to the other. All time / space / force considerations apply. I'm surprised you didn't mention Maritime Belt and Road once in this video? o_0 Obviously, protecting that vital trade route will be of utmost importance. So basing is another vital component to PLA's calculus as well, like Djibouti for example.

[@jamesphifer7324]

The Peter the Great nuclear battle cruiser is a magnificent ship. China should get 10 of these.

[@lukemckay3262]

You sound relatively well informed. I’m therefore curious why you neglected to note that the USA can no longer resupply their VLS tubes whilst on mission? Ie: when the missile batteries run dry… those arleigh burkes are next to useless and have to run for the nearest resupply base. They will do this running the gauntlet of new near peer Russian subs. And if the Russians have it… I’d bet my house that the Chinese have been given this technical assistance. I’m afraid that USA and nato naval doctrine is an anachronism

[@TP-ie3hj]

Dont be silly. First off the USN could supply the Burkes at sea and load the mark 41 vls. They have this ability. While they removed the cranes in each burke which made it possible ... the ability is there. I would imagine your the same guy who runs around posting the "look how close they put their country to my military base" about the US. The US has 100s of bases for a reason. The 90 burkes the US has would have to dodge the "new near peer Russian subs" all three of them, Yassen class? On their way to one of any 100 bases. Just a note, at current nobody loads a VLS like the mark 41 at sea, maybe with sams, but the missiles cost way too much and an accident is very possible, you could lose a ship. Russia does not load UKSk at sea, USN does not load Mark 41 and China does not load its VLS at sea. Of the three only the USN has the ability to pull it off, its the only one who made it part of the system even if its not being used at current.

[@jaylenflanagan1295]

Who told yu that🤡🤣?

[@lingth]

I hope the 055 successor will be bigger like a cruiser, already there is rumors of India building a 14,000 ton displacement destroyer, and Japan building a 20,000 ton displacement large destroyers, slowly reaching the size of the Ticonderoga class cruisers.

[@naga2015kk]

does China have S400 ?