"China’s most advanced destroyer - The Nanchang" Topic
8 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please avoid recent politics on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article Looking for an armored car with some punch?
Featured Workbench Article With clean lines and not a lot of clutter, Minidragon  says these figures are a painter's dream!
Featured Book Review
|
Tango01  | 13 Jan 2020 4:14 p.m. PST |
"China officially commissioned its first Type 055 guided missile destroyer, the Nanchang, on Sunday in what it hailed as a "leap forward" for its naval modernisation programme. A grand ceremony was held in Qingdao, a major naval base in the eastern province of Shandong, on Sunday morning, state news agency Xinhua reported. The Nanchang was launched in June 2017 and made its public debut in a naval parade to mark the 70th anniversary of the PLA Navy in April last year…" link
Main page
link Amicalement
Armand |
| arealdeadone | 13 Jan 2020 5:52 p.m. PST |
Meanwhile the US Arleigh Burke program is looking at being cut down from 2 ships per annum to 1 and current US ships are lacking in anti ship capability. The PLA probably has complete dominance in the first island chain and can probably do a lot of damage to the second island chain and increasingly the third island chain. The US navy on the other hand is dying a slow death of lack of training, lack of investment and convoluted design processes. |
| Thresher01 | 13 Jan 2020 9:33 p.m. PST |
Yea, I saw someone float an idea of mothballing a bunch of our Burkes – more than 50% of them, IIRC. A really stupid idea given the current world situation, and the need for vessels to possibly take down MRBMs, IRBMs, ICBMs, not to mention their normal sea-going duties as well, with a growing Chinese navy, and ongoing threats in the Middle East from Iran. |
| Tango01 | 14 Jan 2020 12:35 p.m. PST |
|
| arealdeadone | 14 Jan 2020 3:06 p.m. PST |
Thresher01, and to make matters even more ridiculous Congress is prohibiting the Navy from retiring a number of old Ticonderoga-class cruisers, which means lots of resources dedicated to keeping old maintenance heavy ships in service when the USN is lacking in manpower and facilities to maintain such a fleet. |
| Thresher01 | 14 Jan 2020 9:25 p.m. PST |
I think they need a "GoFundMe" page, since I also agree with not retiring the Ticos too. |
| Tango01 | 15 Jan 2020 12:24 p.m. PST |
|
| arealdeadone | 15 Jan 2020 4:39 p.m. PST |
Thresher, the Tico's are increasingly maintenance heavy (as are all ships) and the USN no longer has the capacity to maintain it's current fleet. The number of navy yards has shrunk and most haven't seen any significant investment since WW2 and are crumbling. link Keeping old maintenance heavy ships in service when the current infrastructure is barely coping or in some cases not coping just means making the system even more unsustainable.
Numbers of hulls and hypothetical capabilities might bring joy to armchair generals, politicians and wargamers alike but they are meaningless if these systems aren't functional.
Then there's issues with staffing and training. Again numbers of hulls and hypothetical capabilities mean squat if crews aren't adequately trained. And last few years have seen a number of incidents that reveal poor crew training ranging from CH-53 collisions to 2 destroyers being colliding with civilian ships.
The Navy has to get basics right before ramping up hull numbers.
|
|
