Is China capable of crippling US CSF's in Chinese ses?

[berry580]

Anything's possible. Australian F-111's have scored successful (notional) Harpoon missile hits on US aircraft carriers using a combination of high speed and an extremely low level ingress, during a number of exercises off the coast of Australia.

RAN Collins Class submarines are also rumoured to have penetrated the USN's defences and scored torpedo hits on US carriers on a number of occasions.

This does not mean however that it is easily done, a fact that should be obvious given that no-one has even come close to damaging a US carrier since WW2. US carriers are extremely well protected by their own aircraft and their supporting platforms.

I think China would find it very difficult to cripple or otherwise disable a US Aircraft Carrier, but I wouldn't say it would be impossible for them to do it... It would have to be a fully thought out operation though. The retaliation that would come if a US aircraft carrier was damaged or even sunk, would be horrendous...

Well according to some reports by the CIA in the Cold War era when America were at it's peak, the US battle group will last no longer than 48hrs in a real battle with the Soviets.
So it seems like the Americans are somewhat overrated.

The PLAN currently is no where near the Soviet navy's capabilites in the 70-80's, but please we're take into account that the US navy is at China's door step. There are heaps that the PLAN can throw at the Americans. They may be considered 'obselete', but I'm sure a gun in the WWII era can blow your head off just as effectively as an OICW can in close range.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Well according to some reports by the CIA in the Cold War era when America were at it's peak, the US battle group will last no longer than 48hrs in a real battle with the Soviets.
So it seems like the Americans are somewhat overrated.

The PLAN currently is no where near the Soviet navy's capabilites in the 70-80's, but please we're take into account that the US navy is at China's door step. There are heaps that the PLAN can throw at the Americans. They may be considered 'obselete', but I'm sure a gun in the WWII era can blow your head off just as effectively as an OICW can in close range.

This is the same CIA that got strat and tac assessments wrong about the Soviet Union and Iraq.

And that contradicts the Soviet assessment that at best they might get 40%.

This is also at 1982 levels when The USN under Reagan was numerically close to being a 600 principle vessel navy and the Russians were at their peak, and had the largest anti-shipping air borne strike force the world has ever seen?

This is also the same period where the USN had just started fielding AEGIS - literally a human generation ahead of anything still in current service.

If the Russians lacked confidence in 1982-1989 (and at the same time thought that they could win the land war), then I don't see any Navy now that can match the USN of Reagans era let alone a digitised and space based assisted navy of today.

A musket made in 1620 will blow your head off if you get in its way at 50m, but the guy with the AI 50cal can still slot you at 2.5km - on a body part of his choice.

The US fights in a combined arms fashion, the notion that CVN's will sail into harms way before the threat matrix has been adjusted ignores the realities of how real combat will happen - not a wish list if every karmic feature is pointing in the right direction.

The US has more AEGIS equiped DDGS in the fleet than all other Navies with PAR systems combined (and that doesn't include all the other AEGIS equiped and linked systems in play)

Sure you can get the lucky shot in, but warfighting is about persistence, projection, precision, performance and political will and intent. Put it in another way, there is currently only one other nation that has a sat capability to provide 24/7/365/360 coverage at a space managed level. The next players (the french and english) are nowhere near that capability. In real terms, becuase India now has access to Glonas, China is probably running 5th-6th - and even with all her projected sat launches for the next 10 years is nowhere near reaching UK or French coverage.

When USN/USAF assets can be handled at a space battlefield level, you basically better work out how you're going to kill 128 satellites (and thats part of the grid) all at once. Good luck.

 

[berry580]

Musashi_kenshin, US forces are grouped together in task forces as required for the situation at hand. If the US were poised for potential operations against China you can bet that at LEAST 3 carriers would be deployed for such a situation, if not more. The Chinese Navy wouldn't stand a chance against a US Navy task force deployed against it, it's as simple as that.

This a situation which will not happen.
There is pretty much nothing currently that's enough to provoke America into a war with China.
To be honest, do you really think America will fight for Taiwan?
Even the UN recognises Taiwan to be part of China. Is it wrong to defeat the rebels?

If the US ever deploys multiple of carriers at China, it'll probably in the time where the PLAN is MUCH MUCH stronger.

If it happens in the forseeable future, then I guess the Kilo's, Song's and Yuan's are China's best hope. If they've done their job well, then the PLAN surface combatants and PLAAF should be able to neutralise the rest.
By that time, I'm sure public pressure on the American government should enough to hold them back considering how many deaths/casaulties there will be. If public pressure doesn't work and the America sends more in, then that's an invasion, and I guess they're really asking a nuke over their heads as the Chinese will have no other options (if a nuclear threat doesn't work).

Even a Powerful Navy like IJN(1941) which literally destroyed the Complete USN Pacific HQ pearl habour thought that they made a Big Mistake by
Awakening Sleeping Giant.
Every One knows Why they called "Giant".

Mate, too many movies.

Even 'giants' are afraid of nuclear tipped cylindrical things with a cone on top.

There is no way PLAN Can Really Challenge the US CVNs other than Building there own Super carriers with Capabilities similar to that of US CVNs.
Like the IJN of ww2.

Making her own carrier battle group is way too costly and inefficient (unless you're battle group's size is significant superior).
Building a strong underwaterfleet would be much more effective.

When USN/USAF assets can be handled at a space battlefield level, you basically better work out how you're going to kill 128 satellites (and thats part of the grid) all at once. Good luck.

Good point, but guess if theose assets will save America from a nuclear strike. (something will happen if the Americans are REALLY THAT persistant.)

[Red aRRow: Editing because it will start a flame]

 

[Number1azn365]

Well it goes both ways....China is superior to India in some fields while India is superior in others. This isn't a topic about India though its about China's abilities to cripple a Carrier. Probably the best chance they have is to use there submarines that they are buidling/getting.... I.E Kilo, Yuan, 093 and maybe the 094.. Saturation is key in my opinion.

 

[doggychow14]

There is no way PLAN Can Really Challenge the US CVNs other than Building there own Super carriers with Capabilities similar to that of US CVNs.
Like the IJN of ww2. Making her own carrier battle group is way too costly and inefficient (unless you're battle group's size is significant superior).
Building a strong underwaterfleet would be much more effective.
Quote:
When USN/USAF assets can be handled at a space battlefield level, you basically better work out how you're going to kill 128 satellites (and thats part of the grid) all at once. Good luck.
Good point, but guess if theose assets will save America from a nuclear strike. (something will happen if the Americans are REALLY THAT persistant.)

About the Indians, they're pretty much inferior to the Chinese in everything. They know how to import sophisticated war-machines (so can the Chinese), but do they know how to make it themselves (please DO NOT mention the Arjun and LCA projects, I don't really want to have a stomach ache again)?

Dude don't start a flame against the indians. The indians are ahead of CHina in some areas and the chinese are ahead in some areas. The point of the fact is that PLAN will not be able to take on the USN. And believe me when the USN goes up against PLAN it will have 4+ carrier groups. Also you must also remmeber that USN are generations ahead of PLAN in sub warfare and tech. When u have 4+ carriers with 50 strike fighters each with 2 ssns each, 5 aegis surface vessels each, it will be the a turkey shoot. Plan will be lucky if it sinks even 1. the USN may be near China, but i can safely say they'll stay out of China's ASCM range. Also don't bring in the consideration of Nuke. China is not stupid enough to launch a nuke when it has lost its NAVY. It iwll only be a naval war. I am chinese and i know when PLAN is outclassed and the USN definately outclasses PLAN.

 

[dabrownguy]

i remember one time in the news that a Russian Flanker flew over a USN carreir. It was close enough to dumb bombs. So PLAAN could get the first strike advantage or beginers luck. but in the end they are so dead when they come up aganist a US Battle group.

 

[Deltared075]

I wonder why most people here said China cannot disable the US CBG?

What the US CBG will use to intercept incoming anti-ship missile attack?

SM2? even the aegis carry few dozens of SM2, it will run out of missile in few intercepts. What happen if the US supply ship hit by anti-ship missile first? The supply ship don't have significant defence again air attack.

CIWS? How many CIWS in one aegis ship and how many ammo it carry?

How many AEW can be deploy to cover all direction? 1? 2?

F-18? How many F18 airborn all the time to protect the carrier?


USN train for saturate attack by Russian? They susscess in the excercise? Like we train archering don't mean we can be Robin Hood!

 

[Pendekar]

I wonder why most people here said China cannot disable the US CBG?

What the US CBG will use to intercept incoming anti-ship missile attack?

SM2? even the aegis carry few dozens of SM2, it will run out of missile in few intercepts. What happen if the US supply ship hit by anti-ship missile first? The supply ship don't have significant defence again air attack.

CIWS? How many CIWS in one aegis ship and how many ammo it carry?

How many AEW can be deploy to cover all direction? 1? 2?

F-18? How many F18 airborn all the time to protect the carrier?


USN train for saturate attack by Russian? They susscess in the excercise? Like we train archering don't mean we can be Robin Hood!

it's not just SM-2, it's the whole spectrum of ECM and close in system that the attackers going to face.

here's the hint; the CVBG will know when and where the strikes take off. i doubt they will let the strike aircrafts come within their missile range.

AEW. in wartime they usually have 2 aloft with another one in cat. a single of these can cover about 200 km in all direction.

F-18, as soon as they got a hint that an attack is coming their way, they'll begin to launch aircraft.

 

[Deltared075]

You not serious the PLAN will attack the carrier directly?

They sure will take out the escort aegis ship first, even with 300km cover of AEW, the moment the F-18 take off to intercept incoming fighter, it will be too late to stop the enemy fighter from launching the anti-ship missile.

even the SM3 cannot intercept incoming balistic missile with fixed projectile, do you think the SM2 can do a better job for sea skimming anti-ship missile?

The China fighter will take off from mainland for assault on US carrier, so the sheer number can replace very fast. For US, they will have hard time to replace all those ship or fighter lost in combat coz they are far away from supply base.

Guam base? (spelling) Few conventional balistic missile can take care it... so no near base for back up.

 

[highsea]

They sure will take out the escort aegis ship first, even with 300km cover of AEW, the moment the F-18 take off to intercept incoming fighter, it will be too late to stop the enemy fighter from launching the anti-ship missile.

F-18's would already be flying CAP. SM-2 can take out anyone that gets past the F-18's. Each carrier has 80 F-18's. The CVBG is spread out over hundreds of kilometers of ocean, all the ships are networked so they share common data, including the E2C Hawkeye's radar. The CVN can direct the DDG's missiles from hundreds of kilometers away. We have real time sat surveillance of your bases. We saw you take off, and we know you're coming. We scrambled the F-18's when you took off, so we'll meet you halfway...

even the SM3 cannot intercept incoming balistic missile with fixed projectile, do you think the SM2 can do a better job for sea skimming anti-ship missile?

SM-3 just completed the 5th successful intercept of a BM. SM-2 is not tasked for sea-skimming anti-ship missiles. We have Sea Sparrow, RAM, ESSM and Phalanx for that. Also ECM, decoys, etc. SM-2 will shoot down the AC that tries to launch the cruise missile at the CVN, if an AMRAAM doesn't get him first.. A CVBG can throw up a defensive screen 1000km. Your Sunburn has a 150km range. Not to mention that you are flying into the most heavily jammed airspace on the planet. Your radar is a blank screen. You are blind, but the CVBG and every asset in the fleet sees you just fine.

The China fighter will take off from mainland for assault on US carrier, so the sheer number can replace very fast. For US, they will have hard time to replace all those ship or fighter lost in combat coz they are far away from supply base.

The US carrier is not sitting on China's shore, it is well out to sea. The defensive screen is quite extensive, and as soon as those AC start coming after the CVN, cruise missiles start raining down on the airstrips they took off from. Now they can either divert to other (more distant) airstrips, or run out of fuel over the ocean. Not to mention the F-18's, Sea Sparrows, SM-2's, etc. that these AC have to get through just to get a shot off at the carrier. Good luck.

Guam base? (spelling) Few conventional balistic missile can take care it... so no near base for back up.

Wouldn't take too many conventional missiles to take out the CCP's central command either, would it? If China attacks Guam, she better be prepared for retaliation.

 

[gf0012-aust]

You not serious the PLAN will attack the carrier directly?

They sure will take out the escort aegis ship first, even with 300km cover of AEW, the moment the F-18 take off to intercept incoming fighter, it will be too late to stop the enemy fighter from launching the anti-ship missile.

You do understand that the screen interrogation footprint is far greater than 300km? A CSF in battle formation, ForceNEt'd, E2's, Mariners or GH's on BAMs, Combat Wings already on CAP as soon as they are within the defence locations refueling range... Plus the SSN's riding shotgun (and now able to launch their own UAV's for surveillance).

300km makes the strike aircraft pretty well within the overlap of 2-3 defensive systems.

even the SM3 cannot intercept incoming balistic missile with fixed projectile, do you think the SM2 can do a better job for sea skimming anti-ship missile?

Actually they can take out skimmers as well as BM's - current US weapons aren't restricted. This isn't the 1970's. The USN has just finished another round of trials against supersonic cruise missiles only about 3 months ago. (and they were mach 3.6 targets)

The China fighter will take off from mainland for assault on US carrier, so the sheer number can replace very fast. For US, they will have hard time to replace all those ship or fighter lost in combat coz they are far away from supply base.

Except the USN will not deploy close to the refuelable range of land based air unless overlaps are on. This isn't a WW2 movie. The USN won't deploy where it doesn't have overlap. Remember they are the ones who signatured Carrier Warfare. Since the Langley they've built over 360 carriers of different types. I think they have the warfighting issues under control.

People seem to forget that the US was training against Mach5-6 AShM's 20 years ago - against a Navy that is far more capable than China's will be even in 10 years time. Sunburn is hardly the uber threat that some talk about.

Guam base? (spelling) Few conventional balistic missile can take care it... so no near base for back up.

The key word is escalation and reciprocity. Take Guam and you'll lose a major city in return. China has less nukes than Israel.

She has no blue water navy (in the traditional sense), and she has no persistent long range maritime strike. If she does get Russias old Tu's, then they are platforms with an RCS the size of a small house (plus the USN and USAF trained against those platforms specifically. Same plane, different uniform = Same Target profile, new respondents. And China can modify the H6's as much as she likes. They're a 45 year old airframe that haven't had major upgrades and are rated as suitable for only AAR roles now.

 

[Aussie Digger]

This WON'T happen eh Berry? Why are you so sure? I actually CAN see a war btw USA and China occurring at some point down the track. I think the US WOULD help defend Taiwan, if it came to it in the end. It IS Legislatively required too afterall... A US President disregarding the UN is one thing, a US President disregarding US law is something completely different... Oh, btw the way, this is a theoretical discussion on the PLAN's ability to sink or damage a US carrier, NOT a discussion on the likelyhood of such an incident occurring...

I can't see the PLAN becoming stronger when compared to the USN. There's nothing on the PLAN horizon that even compares with an Arleigh Burke class destroyer (56 of which are currently on the USN inventory!!!) and the USN already has it's DD(X) and CG(X) class ships planned and under development!!!

A lot of people hereabouts in addition to severely underestimating the USN's defensive capability, are severely underestimating the USN's OFFENSIVE power. PLAN "might" be able to damage or sink a US carrier in a sneak attack, I'd like to see THEM withstand the response they'd get...

 

[Pendekar]

still, my vote goes to KILO as the weapon that have a better chance of inflicting some wound to the USCVNs (if not sinking it outright, but that's a long shot), If Chinese are able to improve the weapons, sensors and signal processing technologies. the kilo's already have ultra-quiet performance. it's just like having a deadly skilled soldiers but they are extremely short sighted and half deaf.

BTW, I wonder why i never heard UAV in ASW role. i bet they can be a cost effective and efficient ASW platform.

 

[gf0012-aust]

still, my vote goes to KILO as the weapon that have a better chance of inflicting some wound to the USCVNs (if not sinking it outright, but that's a long shot), If Chinese are able to improve the weapons, sensors and signal processing technologies. the kilo's already have ultra-quiet performance. it's just like having a deadly skilled soldiers but they are extremely short sighted and half deaf.

BTW, I wonder why i never heard UAV in ASW role. i bet they can be a cost effective and efficient ASW platform.

The Kilos are the best chance, but personally I think that saying that the export Kilos are amongst the quietest is a bit of a stretch. We know that the Chinese Kilos are approx 10-15db noisier than the modified Singaporean submarines, and the Singaporean submarines are using a variation of the Australian Collins Class acoustic reduction technology.

The Chinese have modified their Kilos with French ASW-EW and Sonar gear - but it's not enough IMV to make the quantum leap. They're certainly not in the same league as the 212/214's or even close to the Russsian Kilos. The Russians have deliberately made sure that their Sub exports are detuned. They even have an "expression" for it, but I can't remember the exact terminology used.

IMV (and I mainly work in acoustic warfare), the Kilos are in the top 5-10, not in the top 5. They are definitely not in the same league as the Japanese Oyashios (they can dive to similar levels as small nukes), and they're not as "stealthy" as 3-4 other sub types (and I'm only discussing conventionals) in the region.

In subwarfare the issue is more than just the capability of the isolated platform (especially in conventionals).

 

[aaaditya]

what about the latest chinese conventional submarine and the latest chinese nuclear attack submarine how do they rate in terms of quiting technology when compared to the rest.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

what about the latest chinese conventional submarine and the latest chinese nuclear attack submarine how do they rate in terms of quiting technology when compared to the rest.

You mean the Yuan SSK? Most believes that it is an reversed engineered version of Project 887EKM Kilo. The technical specifications of the boat is unknown, but I guess it has comparable or slightly better performance to the Project 887.

As for the new 093 SSN, it is undergoing sea trial with the PLAN north sea fleet I think. Significant amount of Russian asistance were put into the construction of this class, mainly the reactor. It is a huge leap from the noisy Han class but still nowhere near their western counterpart.

 

[gf0012-aust]

what about the latest chinese conventional submarine and the latest chinese nuclear attack submarine how do they rate in terms of quiting technology when compared to the rest.

Obviously I can't go into specifics. But the Chinese nukes have always been regarded as the noisiest of all the current nukes made, be they US, UK, French or Russian. It/they sound like a tram driving underwater. That is pretty well common knowledge, so I am not giving anything away there.

As for their latest conventionals, again, no one will give absolute details in a public forum - but the new Russian Kilos are still quieter by a substantial margin.

However, the Chinese are still learning the art of sub building. They're certainly not in what I consider the Top 5, and if anything at the deeper end of the top 10.

You are never going to get specific details in a public forum.

 

[berry580]

Dude don't start a flame against the indians. The indians are ahead of CHina in some areas and the chinese are ahead in some areas. The point of the fact is that PLAN will not be able to take on the USN. And believe me when the USN goes up against PLAN it will have 4+ carrier groups. Also you must also remmeber that USN are generations ahead of PLAN in sub warfare and tech. When u have 4+ carriers with 50 strike fighters each with 2 ssns each, 5 aegis surface vessels each, it will be the a turkey shoot. Plan will be lucky if it sinks even 1. the USN may be near China, but i can safely say they'll stay out of China's ASCM range. Also don't bring in the consideration of Nuke. China is not stupid enough to launch a nuke when it has lost its NAVY. It iwll only be a naval war. I am chinese and i know when PLAN is outclassed and the USN definately outclasses PLAN.

Well as far as I'm concerned, the Indians don't give me an impression of superiority. (I'm Australian born, btw, in case you think I'm being blinked.)

Both an indigneous fighter AND tank which is made up of over 50% foreign made components and still, none of them are sucessful after decades of work.
Doesn't give me a good impression at all.

I know China has heaps of failing projects too (their Type 69 tanks, J-8 fighters, etc), but what brings China on top of Indian is that they not only know how to buy, but makes some genuine attempt in indigenous work as well.

And Mr. "Don't Talk About....", I know China won't nuke another country just because they lost their whole East Sea fleet, but they will if USN clearly wins but still sends in reinforcements (implying an invasion).

Yes, China is indeed outclassed, and the Chinese ain't dumb too. So their navy will only operate under PLAAF's cover.
Until now, the PLAAF should still be able to take on the US carrier borne fighters (although training brings Americans the edge) especially when under mainland's dense air defence.

i remember one time in the news that a Russian Flanker flew over a USN carreir. It was close enough to dumb bombs. So PLAAN could get the first strike advantage or beginers luck. but in the end they are so dead when they come up aganist a US Battle group.

mm... the Americans wasn't prepared that time.
Things like tat won't happen in tense situations.

We have real time sat surveillance of your bases. We saw you take off, and we know you're coming. We scrambled the F-18's when you took off, so we'll meet you halfway...

You know that statement just killed everything.

Sats ain't fixed over the sky (geostationary sats are too far for cameras to work) so once the sat moves pasts, then you see something else.

Your Sunburn has a 150km range. Not to mention that you are flying into the most heavily jammed airspace on the planet. Your radar is a blank screen. You are blind, but the CVBG and every asset in the fleet sees you just fine.

LOL, are you sure their jammer can only jam enemy's radar, but not their own?
I'm not so sure if there's even such thing.

The US carrier is not sitting on China's shore, it is well out to sea. The defensive screen is quite extensive, and as soon as those AC start coming after the CVN, cruise missiles start raining down on the airstrips they took off from. Now they can either divert to other (more distant) airstrips, or run out of fuel over the ocean. Not to mention the F-18's, Sea Sparrows, SM-2's, etc. that these AC have to get through just to get a shot off at the carrier. Good luck.

You're not trying to tell me the USN carriers are even more heavily defended than PLAAF airbases, are you?

Wouldn't take too many conventional missiles to take out the CCP's central command either, would it? If China attacks Guam, she better be prepared for retaliation.

Boths sides work.

 

[berry580]

This WON'T happen eh Berry? Why are you so sure? I actually CAN see a war btw USA and China occurring at some point down the track. I think the US WOULD help defend Taiwan, if it came to it in the end. It IS Legislatively required too afterall... A US President disregarding the UN is one thing, a US President disregarding US law is something completely different... Oh, btw the way, this is a theoretical discussion on the PLAN's ability to sink or damage a US carrier, NOT a discussion on the likelyhood of such an incident occurring...

I can't see the PLAN becoming stronger when compared to the USN. There's nothing on the PLAN horizon that even compares with an Arleigh Burke class destroyer (56 of which are currently on the USN inventory!!!) and the USN already has it's DD(X) and CG(X) class ships planned and under development!!!

A lot of people hereabouts in addition to severely underestimating the USN's defensive capability, are severely underestimating the USN's OFFENSIVE power. PLAN "might" be able to damage or sink a US carrier in a sneak attack, I'd like to see THEM withstand the response they'd get...

Laws can be changed when it's not in their favor, and it has happened MANY MANY times.
In fact, according to US officials just recently, the claim they don't have the obligation to protect Taiwan militarily, but only the obligation in deploying units in the area as "deterrent". Sound contradictrary, but that's what they said and that's life.

To be serious, the US govy. can't be dumb enough to kill your economy + kill your own people just to follow a 'legislation' where no Americans even care about.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Sats ain't fixed over the sky (geostationary sats are too far for cameras to work) so once the sat moves pasts, then you see something else.
LOL, are you sure their jammer can only jam enemy's radar, but not their own?
I'm not so sure if there's even such thing.
You're not trying to tell me the USN carriers are even more heavily defended than PLAAF airbases, are you?
Boths sides work.

A couple of things here.

1) Sats are racetracked in groups - thats why there are at least 30 minimum in a group (like Glonass). ie 3 sats per "radiant" means that they follow each other.

2) Chinas demography means that she is easier to track by roving sats

3) The only way to avoid sats is to build underground or in shelter. It works for some things - not for all. eg, even though China was building vessels over 1000k inland, the sats were still picking them up. The USAF has more milsats than the rest of the world put together. That doesn't include other USG sat owners. They have more than enough saturation coverage through multiple spectrums.

4) I'd argue that an autonomous Aegis managed fleet is far more comprehensively defended than your typical airbase. China still runs under the Soviet GCI model. That in itself is a liability. The very reason why they do that is a legacy of needing to control their pilots so that they don't defect. Russian defectors made it consistently clear that this was the reason for their pref over autonomous interceptors that were self reliant and non GCI. An Aegis system (as publicly declared - so not even using real data to show actual capbility) is able to process an enormous volume of concurrent intercepts and tracks. That system has had over 25 years of development. Conversely China has only just fielded PAR on her skimmers - and on 2 of them. Would I have greater confidence over a greenfield phase 1 PAR or on a 25 year aggressively evolved system that is now ForceNET'd?

5) It's an issue of diminishing effect, the greater the land based self protection, the greater the likelihood of euthenasing in a stand off fashion. The US doesn't need to use its aircraft to reach China - OTOH China needs to reach out to neutralise a CTF/CSF.

I stand by my prev, that if the Soviets, with a far more powerful and integrated military were only confident of less than a 20% kill rate on the CVN's, then I rate Chinas potential to be below that. They don't have the same FCS, same quality ISR, same depth of military capability and certainly don't have the maritime strike and skimmer weightings to force a change of balance and assessment.

btw, I'm australian born as well.