China’s Navy is a flashback to the 70’s

by R H | July 7th, 2018

Readability

China's Navy is a flashback to the 70's

[cap­tion id=”” align=“aligncenter” width=“1024”] USS VIR­GINIA (CGN-​38), By Cam­era Oper­a­tor: PH2 D. KNEISLER (ID:DN-SC-8806640 /​Ser­vice Depicted: Navy) [Pub­lic domain], via Wiki­me­dia Commons[/caption]You can’t stop hear­ing about the Chi­nese Navy and their advances in tech­nol­ogy. Did you know they have an air­craft carrier?

There is a “con­sid­er­able chance” the num­ber of aircraft-​carrying ships avail­able in the Chi­nese navy will be seven instead of four by 2025 because of a “lower pro­file defense pro­gram” that has already taken shape, a new report indicates.

Or what about a super cool rail­gun, appar­ently bet­ter than the U.S. Navy’s?

While the United States spent years dither­ing over the future of its much-​hyped elec­tro­mag­netic rail­gun project, China ate its lunch. The Chi­nese navy plans to field its own secre­tive ver­sion of the elec­tro­mag­netic rail­gun on naval ves­sels as early as 2025, accord­ing to a U.S. intel­li­gence assess­ment first reported by CNBC.

Or the lat­est Chi­nese anti-​ship mis­siles?

China unveiled its Type 055 naval destroyer on June 28, the lat­est step in its decade and a half of mil­i­tary buildup. The new Chi­nese destroyer out­com­petes U.S. destroy­ers and cruis­ers, high­light­ing a major fail­ure in U.S. Navy plan­ning that stretches back to the 1990s. Given the 055’s long-​range super­sonic YJ-​18 and YJ-​12 over the hori­zon (OTH) anti-​ship cruise mis­siles (ASCMs), the Chi­nese destroyer cur­rently out­com­petes U.S. Arleigh Burke class destroy­ers and big­ger Ticon­deroga class cruisers.

Man, it’s like so…1971.

If you read the news, you’d think the Chi­nese are pro­duc­ing things that the United States never could dream of: long range anti-​ship mis­siles, air­craft car­ri­ers, rail­guns and the lot. But here’s the real­ity: we made that stuff a long time ago. The US began design­ing Tom­a­hawk mis­siles in 1971. Ini­tially the Tom­a­hawk had an anti-​ship mis­sile vari­ant that could reach 1,000 nau­ti­cal miles. Yup, in the 1980s. Well before China was even a thing.

What about rail­guns, death rays and the like? The biggest chal­lenge is in pow­er­ing them. China will likely be rolling out a nuclear cruiser here before much longer. When they do, it’ll be the 1970s all over again, because the United States already did that. The VIR­GINIA–class cruis­ers were beastly, able to keep up with our nuclear air­craft car­ri­ers while run­ning advanced weaponry and air defense sys­tems. Nuclear power’s energy den­sity was the key to their success.

So if we’re so great, where are all these awe­some weapons? We gave them up. We chopped nuclear cruis­ers due to cost. We chopped TAS-​Ms because we never thought we’d need them. We’ve gone back­wards, stick­ing with crappy sys­tems like HAR­POON and dimin­ish­ing our nuclear sur­face capa­bil­ity. In the process, we also gave up a lot of inno­va­tion, because had we built on these sys­tems, we could be exper­i­ment­ing with truly rev­o­lu­tion­ary weapons.

It doesn’t have to be that way. These sys­tems can be built again, and built bet­ter because of man­u­fac­tur­ing advances. But we keep churn­ing out crappy weapon sys­tems because we haven’t attacked the biggest prob­lem with the Navy: the poorly designed Defense Acqui­si­tion Sys­tem. More than tax reform, the way we buy things for the Depart­ment of Defense needs a huge over­haul. We blow mil­lions on prod­ucts that don’t work and under-​perform. We add to this by not writ­ing good require­ments, and then we fail to hold peo­ple account­able when they get hacked by China or in gen­eral turn out poor work.

Pres­i­dent Trump has the energy to actu­ally reform the acqui­si­tion sys­tem, which seems more focused on build­ing jobs in Con­gres­sional dis­tricts than actu­ally mak­ing good equip­ment. This isn’t new, check out tor­pedo per­for­mance in World War 2 or prob­lems with the M-​16 in Viet­nam. Should we go to war with China or Rus­sia, we’ll prob­a­bly see the same thing: faulty weapons, pub­lic out­cry, indus­try denial (and pro­tec­tion by paid off Congress-​critters), fol­lowed by even­tual pro­duc­tion of use­ful weapons.

Why wait though? Let’s get this prob­lem solved now, at far less expense, so we can con­tinue to keep our ene­mies on their toes.


This post rep­re­sents the views of the author and not those of the Depart­ment of Defense, Depart­ment of the Navy, or any other gov­ern­ment agency. But bring­ing back nuclear cruis­ers and real mis­siles should be a pri­or­ity, hope­fully someday.

Please donate to Da Tech Guy!

USS VIRGINIA (CGN-38), By Camera Operator: PH2 D. KNEISLER (ID:DN-SC-88-06640 / Service Depicted: Navy) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

You can’t stop hearing about the Chinese Navy and their advances in technology. Did you know they have an aircraft carrier?

There is a “considerable chance” the number of aircraft-carrying ships available in the Chinese navy will be seven instead of four by 2025 because of a “lower profile defense program” that has already taken shape, a new report indicates.

Or what about a super cool railgun, apparently better than the U.S. Navy’s?

While the United States spent years dithering over the future of its much-hyped electromagnetic railgun project, China ate its lunch. The Chinese navy plans to field its own secretive version of the electromagnetic railgun on naval vessels as early as 2025, according to a U.S. intelligence assessment first reported by CNBC.

Or the latest Chinese anti-ship missiles?

China unveiled its Type 055 naval destroyer on June 28, the latest step in its decade and a half of military buildup. The new Chinese destroyer outcompetes U.S. destroyers and cruisers, highlighting a major failure in U.S. Navy planning that stretches back to the 1990s. Given the 055’s long-range supersonic YJ-18 and YJ-12 over the horizon (OTH) anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), the Chinese destroyer currently outcompetes U.S. Arleigh Burke class destroyers and bigger Ticonderoga class cruisers.

Man, it’s like so…1971.

If you read the news, you’d think the Chinese are producing things that the United States never could dream of: long range anti-ship missiles, aircraft carriers, railguns and the lot. But here’s the reality: we made that stuff a long time ago. The US began designing Tomahawk missiles in 1971. Initially the Tomahawk had an anti-ship missile variant that could reach 1,000 nautical miles. Yup, in the 1980s. Well before China was even a thing.

What about railguns, death rays and the like? The biggest challenge is in powering them. China will likely be rolling out a nuclear cruiser here before much longer. When they do, it’ll be the 1970s all over again, because the United States already did that. The VIRGINIA-class cruisers were beastly, able to keep up with our nuclear aircraft carriers while running advanced weaponry and air defense systems. Nuclear power’s energy density was the key to their success.

So if we’re so great, where are all these awesome weapons? We gave them up. We chopped nuclear cruisers due to cost. We chopped TAS-Ms because we never thought we’d need them. We’ve gone backwards, sticking with crappy systems like HARPOON and diminishing our nuclear surface capability. In the process, we also gave up a lot of innovation, because had we built on these systems, we could be experimenting with truly revolutionary weapons.

It doesn’t have to be that way. These systems can be built again, and built better because of manufacturing advances. But we keep churning out crappy weapon systems because we haven’t attacked the biggest problem with the Navy: the poorly designed Defense Acquisition System. More than tax reform, the way we buy things for the Department of Defense needs a huge overhaul. We blow millions on products that don’t work and under-perform. We add to this by not writing good requirements, and then we fail to hold people accountable when they get hacked by China or in general turn out poor work.

President Trump has the energy to actually reform the acquisition system, which seems more focused on building jobs in Congressional districts than actually making good equipment. This isn’t new, check out torpedo performance in World War 2 or problems with the M-16 in Vietnam. Should we go to war with China or Russia, we’ll probably see the same thing: faulty weapons, public outcry, industry denial (and protection by paid off Congress-critters), followed by eventual production of useful weapons.

Why wait though? Let’s get this problem solved now, at far less expense, so we can continue to keep our enemies on their toes.


This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency. But bringing back nuclear cruisers and real missiles should be a priority, hopefully someday.

Please donate to Da Tech Guy!

Comments are closed.

Buy My Book!

Buy My Book!

Hit DaTipJar and Support Conservative Journalism & Opinion




Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 4,150 other subscribers

DH Gate Dot Com, Online Shopping

Cheap ecigarette from China - DHgate

Best Grassroots Blogs

Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Catholic CD of the Month

Know your Catholic Faith

Da Pages

Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Donald Trump Calls on DaTechGuy Worcester MA

 
%d bloggers like this: