by Ravi Rikhye
From the above, it may be reasonably inferred that the Chinese Navy will soon have global reach. Its progress has been impressive. In terms of blue-water ships, here defined as greater than 4,000-tons, China is already the second largest in the world and outnumbers us, by this criterion, by three times.
Aircraft Carriers
As far as is known:
Serial
Name
Tonnage
Status
Fighters
016
Liaoning
001
65,000 (training)
Deployed 2017
20 x J15, 6 x ASW; 2 x SAR, 4 EW helio
017
Shandong
001A
70,000
Launch February 2017, commission 2019
30 x J15
018
??
002
85,000
Start 2015, launch 2021
40 x J15
019??
??
003
100,000 N-power
Start 2019? Commission 2025?
50 x J15
China also had under construction 3 Type 075 x 40,000-ton LHDs, capable of embarking 30 helicopters. China has been working on a VTOL fighter for several years. Allegedly it is a carrier-borne version of its twin-engined J-31 stealth fighter. Assuming it works, I’m not sure how it will integrate with an amphibious ship as opposed to a purpose-built carrier. The Type 075 has a well deck for six hovercraft landing craft.
For some reason it is put out that China plans three carriers, to match India and Japan. Japan is working on equipping its two Izumo class light carriers (24,000-tons) with F-35s[250] The new Izomu is refitting for 8-10 F-35B and 10 helicopters of various kinds, but as yet there is no indication of F-35B orders. Japan’s self-imposed ban on carriers may change now that Shinzo Abe has won a third term in 2017; he has pushed to change the pure defense clause in the Japanese constitution. India, of course, had hoped for three carriers, but the third has been postponed because the Indian Ministry of Finance is getting severe chest pains[251] at the cost, perhaps $4-billion (Rs 25,000 -crores) without the air group and escorts, say $12-billion with. By the time it materializes, India will still only have two carries because the Rusiian-built Vikramaditya will reach the end of its life. Though it might remain useful as a training ship.
Moreover, some Chinese analysts have estimated a minimum need for 5-6. In 2017, a Chinese official said a minimum of six were required. China would build 10 bases – Pakistan is specifically mentioned as a possibility – around the world, depending on which countries were friendly to China.[252] plus about 10 bases. Normally, six carriers permit keeping two up; in crisis, four are up. Forward bases reduce deployment times, making it possible to keep 3-4 up. This the start of China’s ambitions. As China heads for superpower status, it will aim for 10-12 carriers to match the US. The latter has twelve authorized but is making do with ten. Overall, the US has ten, plus one in trials, plus two under construction, plus two ordered. Additionally, it has nine amphibious assault full-deck carriers of 40,000+ tons; their air wings include 6-10 F-35B for self-defense but at the cost of the all-important helicopters.
China has the yard capacity to build two carriers at a time. As the world’s largest shipbuilder, it can add carrier construction capacity to a third yard any time. Please to note: China’s civilian yards are unsuited to build warships. As for timing, two carriers every four years is easily achieved, which means ten by 2035. Some abalysts use 2049 as the year China becomes a super power. I disagree. Xi is impatient; my estimate is the target-date has been moved up to 2035.
Let’s look at this a moment. Will the Chinese carrier force be as good as the American? Obviously not. By 2035 the US will have been building and operating carriers for one hundred years. In that period, it has operated multiple carriers in combat: 4-years World War II, 3-years Korea, 7-years Second Indochina, and so far, 16-years Global War on Terror. At the same time, if by 2025-2027 China has four carriers, and we have Vikramaditya in service, Vikrant by 2023, and Vishal under construction, this will not be a happy situation for us. The sad story of the Vikrant delays is available in CAG[253] report (p18-68), and indeed it will make a grown man cry, for a short version read Rossiyskaya Gazeta,[254] which diplomatically says it shouldn’t take 24-years for a mid-size carrier – the ship was cleared in 1999. The Indian Navy says it will get the carrier end 2018, but that’s not up to the Navy. After that it will need fitting-out and trials, so 2023 is a reasonable date. Is the inclusion of Japanese warships relevant? As discussed later, because of the loose Quadrilateral agreement, it may be. The Japanese Navy’s warships are first-class types with no compromises. Because Japan has money, it has gone for the best.
Table 2017 <30-years of age; 4000> tons
China
India
Pakistan
Japan
CV
1
1
0
2 light, 12 F-35, 8 helio, 27K tons
SSBN
4
1
0
SSN
9
1
0
SS
60
13
5
18, all 4000+tons, 5 more to join
DDG 10,000-t
1
0
0
6 Aegis, 2 more to come
DDG
24
11
0
20, 6000-tons plus
FFG
36
12
4
12, all 4000-tons>
LHD
1 (40K, 30 helio)
0
0
2 x 19,000 (LPH)
LPD
5
1
0
0
LST > 4000-t
30
5
0
3 of 14,000-tons each[255]
Replenishment
17
5
1
Warship totals
125
39
9
[256] [257]
The Japanese have not yet purchased F-35B, the VTOL version that will be required for the two light carriers. In March 2018, however, the ruling party has called for purchase of 40 or so.[258] The 2019 budget will start the funding, for initial 2024 deliveries. (We can stop calling them helicopter destroyers, please. It is absurd to term a 27,000-ton full-load ship a DDH, as the Japanese have done). But they are strengthening the decks. Observers have said there is no provision for catapults, implying this will be a limitation on operating F-35Bs. The US Navy operates F-35Bs as a regular part of their Wasp-class amphibious ships; the planes do make a short-take-off roll and land vertically. All the lack of catapults mean is the aircraft cannot carry a full attack load, as can the Navy’s F-35C. But for air defense with 4 AAMs or 2 AAMs + 2 anti-ship missiles, the F-35B will be fine over a 500-km radius. Japan is already building the F-35A under license. Of course, the Japanese being the Japanese, they are talking about using the plane to fly from commercial as opposed to military airfields, along them to be dispersed to the smaller Japanese islands.[259] The Japanese are a consensus society, and it take them time to come to such important decisions. The discussion would not even be possible but for China’s increasing aggressiveness. Aircraft carriers used to be taboo in post-war Japan because they are seen as offensive weapons, but now it is inevitable that carriers are needed for defense.
Note on Chinese submarines quietness.
All Chinese nuclear boats are easily detected: Xia. Jin SSBNs, Shang, Han SSNs. The new Yuan Type 095 SSN is detectable, but not as easily as the others. (O’Rourke, 12). The comparison is with Russians boats, not the US. The hardest Russian SSN to detect is the Sverodvinsk class. Of the conventional submarines, none approach quietness of Russian Kilo Project 636, of which China has twel
ve. The Chinese are now claiming to have tested an electromagnetic drive[260]. This type of drive has no gears, rotating shaft, or propeller, which greatly reduces radiated noise. The US and UK have been working on such drives, but between testing and operational deployment, there is a big gap. The Royal Navy’s planned Dreadnought SSBNs, the first of which will launch in 2031, has still not committed to the EM drive and so far plans a conventional drive. The US is exploring the option for its later Virginia attack boats. In the meanwhile, however, just as is the case with every navy, conventionally propelled boats are used, and it will take 30-years after the first boats deploy to modernize the underwater fleet. And sound is only one way to detect submerged boats. For some idea of the new technologies under development, read Michael Peck’s article,[261] and this Popular Mechanics article.[262] Peck’s case is overstated, but certainly, the US Navy plans to use underwater drone swarms, which equally could counter an adversary’s swarms. These technologies can take decades to operationalize, and the US is usually ahead of anyone else.
In all cases, only blue water ships 30-years of fewer and ~4000-ton are counted. In Pakistan’s case, it has 4 modern frigates about 3200-tons (counted), plus 1 on order, 2 under consideration; new corvettes and about 8+ missile boats capable of carrying at least 4 SSM are not included. India has 20+ missile corvettes for coastal defense, not counted.
India may aspire to a 200-ship navy by 2027,[263] but China plans 350 by 2020[264]. Read a detailed 2017 report by US Congressional Research Service.[265] US Naval Institute. But India’s shipbuilding rate is 4-5 ships/year, whereas China’s is 10-15. China’s new 052D and 055 destroyers are being built in batches of 4 at a time. A new nuclear submarine facility under completion can build four boats at a time and may lay down its first Type 095 general purpose nuclear attack submarine this year.[266] Moreover, if only blue-water ships are counted, China’s shipbuilding rate is 4-6 times India’s. China has announced plans to quadruple the size of its Marine Corps to six brigades (the third has already been converted from an Army brigade, and another Army brigade is also being converted). China’s production of amphibious ships is keeping pace. It has 5 LHDs, with a battalion lift, and is building 3 40,000-ton LHD, each with 2000 Marines.[267] It may be assumed after the ships are built, that China can lift four amphibious brigades.
Another indicator of China’s seriousness in becoming a naval superpower is the Type 055 type destroyer, the first of which has been launched, at least three more under construction at two yards, and four more planned.[268] More will follow. The ship is 12-14,000 tons, with a main armament of 112 missile cells. Those cells devoted to SAMs will carry four each. It has two helicopters. The Type 055A will be even larger. This may be compared to the US Ticonderoga cruisers, which the US Navy seems to be in a rush to get rid of, and which displace 10,000-tons. The US, of course, does have three Zumwalt “destroyers”, with a maximum displacement approaching 18,000-tons. But this class of 32 was reduced to three. The alleged reason is cost overruns, but one suspects that the US is developing weapon suites superior to the Zumwalts and will use/is using the three as testbeds. So, the US Navy keeps commissioning Arleigh Burke destroyers. Incidentally, ignore the weeping and wailing about the US having no long-range anti-ship missiles, as compared to those the Chinese Type 055 carries.[269] US Navy is getting 2000 Standard 6 triple-purpose missiles, anti-air, anti-missile, and anti-ship. The supersonic missile has been in service since 2013, but its role as an anti-ship missile was revealed only in 2017, and its range is still classified[270] though assumed to be 480-km or more. A single round sank a decommissioned 4000-ton warship in a test because the speed increases the kinetic energy. An anti-ship variant of the Tomahawk is under development and cruise missile may deploy around 2021 if chosen over a new Lockheed missile in development. Both have 1000-lb warhead. The Chinese equivalent of the US Burke DDG is the Type 52D with 64 cells plus 24 short-range missiles and about 7500-tons. China has six in commission, three launched, 5 building, and 13 planned, for a total of 27. There are also six Type 52C, with 48 long-range SAM and 8 cruise missiles. Regarding missile frigates 4000+ tons, China has 26+3 Jingkai II Type 052. The successor class Jingkai III, one of which is known launched, and at least one building, will be 5,000 tons, to replace obsolete frigates; 32 SAM, 8 cruise SSM, and 8 short-range SAM, and will be all-electric with 20-MW capacity.
The point of the analysis is simply to show we are far behind China at sea and falling further behind. We have 6 modern destroyers, with a new class (Visakhapatnam) to commission 2018 followed by one ship every two years. (The 5 Rajputs were commissioned between 37 and 30 years ago and will presumably be replaced by the Visakhapatnam class.) Frigates: the first of the 17A class will commission 2018, with six more to follow; there are three 17s, 6 Talwars with 4 more building, and three Brahmaputra. The last two Ganga frigates will phase out soon. By 2020 we will have 8 destroyers, and perhaps 11 frigates. This is not a happy situation.
China Marine Corps [271]
Currently, China has a goal of six marine brigades, with five in service, 1st, 2nd, 5th, 6th (new), 77th, and 164th. The brigades are being renumbered 1-6. [272] The Marine Corps was abolished in 1957 when Beijing gave up on seizing Taiwan. It was revived in 1980, with the 1st and 164th Brigades. The latter was downsized from an army division of the same number. The 77th Brigade was transferred from the Army in 2017.[273] The 6th is likely a conversion from an army brigade. There was some talk of the Marine brigades seizing beachheads and the Army’s two amphibious mechanized divisions, 1st and 124th exploiting, but that has not happened. The 124th has become a combined arms brigade, and the fate of 1st Division is unknown, but it is likely disbanded. The Army’s 91st Motorized Division has become the 91st Amphibious Combined Arms Brigade. It is unclear if the 2nd and 5th Brigade, stood up toward end 2017 are ex-Army or new brigades. One report says the brigades will be numbered 1 through 6, plus a Special Operations Brigade. The overall Marine Corps strength will be 100,000. Many analysts have jumped on the manpower figure, saying since a marine brigade has 6,000 men, how can China get 100,000 men? Well, for one thing, there’s the overhead, and likely six brigades will mean 60,000 men. The manpower mystery could be resolved if we assume there will be more than six brigades. The figure comes from the off-shore Chinese press; it is not an official figure; some sources speak of eight brigades.
The Chinese Army has retained five amphibious brigades. They may transfer to the Chinese Navy as has been the case with other Marine brigades. Ten or so marine brigades would certainly warrant a 100,000 manpower total.
10.2 Pakistan Navy
The interesting thing about the Pakistan Navy is that it has less than 1100-km of the coast to defend. Yet it has ordered 8 Hangor-II class submarines to be delivered 2022-28 from Chinese and Pakistani yards. And its planned total is 12 boats. Currently, its three Agosta 90B submarines are being modernized and getting a mid-life rebuild at the cost of $350-million [274] and should be able to stay in service until 2030-35 These have AIP, which Indians boats do not have yet. Aside from Hangor, other names are almost sure to be Mangro and Sushank, as Pakistan tends to consistency in ship names, and these were the names of the navy’s Daphne class boats, now disposed of. Ghazi, the fourth Daphne, took its name from the first Pakistan Navy submarine, acquired second-hand from the US, lost off Visakhapatnam in the 1971 War. Likely one of the right Chinese submarines on order will carry in the name. The new boats are not cheap, costing somewhere around $500-million each. (The $5-billion cost for 8 boats includes frigates and corvettes.) million each. Then it has four modern Chinese frigates plus five older British origin ones. More frigates are agreed on with China; the number could be 2 or 4.[275],[276] A contract for 4 Turkish Ada class frigates was signed in November 2017[277] to replace the British frigates. The A-100 in its surface/air warfare configuration has 8 x Harpoon SSM, one RAM launcher with 21 SAM/anti-ship, one 76mm gun, 2300-tons, and 93 crew, and one SH-70 type helicopter. The PN has about nine missile boats, inc
luding 3+1 560-tons with 8 SSM. The table below includes the Maritime Security Agency and Coast Guard, which are separate from the Navy.
Submarines (2028)
8 Chinese, 3 Khalid rebuilt
Frigates
8-10: 4-6 Chinese, 4 Turkish
Missile boats
9-10
Minesweepers
3
Patrol boats
6 for harbor defense
Aircraft
MR: 6 x Orion, 7 x F-27. Helio: 6 ex-Royal Navy Sea King (older batch of 6 out of service, 6+6 x Z-9, 7 x SA 316/319 presumably out when more Z-9s arrive, 2 x Mi-14 ; Hawker 850 x 1 or 4; 3 x ATR-72-500 MR/transport
Maritime strike
No. 2 (JF17) and No 8 (Mirage 5) Squadrons PAF
Marines
Three battalions, 1 SF battalion; Brigade HQ in prospect; 2nd Bn Karachi, 3rd Bn Gwadar, Sir Creeks Battalion Sujuwal; 21st Air Defense Battalion Karachi. Total perhaps 4,500, theoretical plans for eventual 12,000
Maritime Security Agency