It is enough to drown two aircraft carriers: how China is going to defeat the US

21
How to defeat the United States of America, a superpower with the strongest army and navy in the world, as well as the largest nuclear arsenal? To do this, it will be enough to send “two hundred thousand tons” of export “democracy” to the bottom, i.e. two aircraft carriers of the US Navy. In any case, a certain Chinese rear admiral Lu Yuan thinks so.





The well-known specialized publication The National Interest published a warlike article by this military theorist from China with his comments. Yuan writes that the likelihood of a real armed conflict between the two leading countries of the world has seriously increased and is no longer "fiction." The alleged theater of operations is the South China Sea or Taiwan. Rear Admiral notes that the Pentagon is at the forefront economy, "A lot of money," the mighty army and navy.

So how did the Chinese strategist decide to defeat such a formidable opponent?

Lu Yuan points to two factors that he considers the weakness of the United States: the fear of their opponents and the fear of the Americans themselves about losses. According to the theorist, it will be enough to drown only 2 aircraft carriers and 10 thousand sailors and pilots on board so that a protest movement begins in the United States, demanding an end to the war. At the same time, Beijing already has Dong Feng-21D and Dong Feng-26 missiles, which are capable of performing such a task.

What I would like to note about this:

At first, the expert community found that the “rear admiral” is a sofa. In the literal sense of the word, he did not serve a day at sea. In various articles, he subscribes as a colonel of the PLA, then as a general, then as rear admiral. In fact, Yuan is the one we previously called the "political instructor." His task is to voice the formidable rhetoric about how the Chinese “got up from their knees” and show everyone “Kuzkin’s mother”.

Secondlyto sink an aircraft carrier in itself is not a trivial task. So, in the middle of the 98,7s, Americans mocked their decommissioned USS America aircraft carrier for four weeks, unsuccessfully shooting it with cruise missiles and torpedoes. He held on, being an unrequited target. The displacement of modern aircraft carriers of the Nimitz class is one and a half times greater, 61,1 thousand tons compared to XNUMX for USS America. And they don’t swim alone, but only as part of the strike group, and the air defense / missile defense system and combat aircraft also stand on the AUG.

In general, you should not simplify the task. This is not a computer game where you can start over.

ThirdlyIt would be a big mistake to overestimate the fear of US citizens about losses. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, when more than two ships were sunk, yielded the opposite result. On the contrary, the Americans were filled with fighting spirit and desperately chopped with samurai in the Pacific Ocean. At the same time, they lost 12 aircraft carriers, but for some reason no one asked for peace with Tokyo. Instead, Washington conducted field tests at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Thus, the opinion of "Rear Admiral" should be treated with some skepticism. However, given its role as the “mouthpiece” of Beijing, it’s worthwhile to perceive the statement as a signal from China to the United States of America about its readiness to defend its interests, including by military means.
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    26 June 2019 14: 27
    to sink an aircraft carrier in itself is not a trivial task ...
    Americans mocked their decommissioned USS America aircraft carrier for four weeks, unsuccessfully shooting them with cruise missiles and torpedoes. He held on

    Is modern weapons not capable of sinking a large, heavy, steel boat? What's the catch? I would like links to military experts ...
    1. 0
      26 June 2019 14: 52
      https://rg.ru/2018/08/05/poiavilos-foto-gibeli-avianosca-ssha.html
      1. -1
        26 June 2019 15: 07
        This link repeats your quotation and confirms the American tales "American weapons are the most, most ...", but what about the opinion of Russian experts?
    2. 0
      27 June 2019 12: 14
      Certainly capable! In addition, now is not 1941 and the descendants of those Americans are different - overweight, feeble-minded and absolutely relaxed in their "exclusiveness", so that, at the first defeat, they will arrange a revolution of pacifism in Psakoland!
    3. +2
      27 June 2019 15: 57
      It reminded me of how one man wanted to cut a diamond into several pieces and was told everywhere that it was impossible. Finally he saw an old shop, in which he had seen an old Jew and his grandson. The man asked again about cutting the diamond. The old man told him - it is impossible, but Monya does not know this and he will do it. Einstein said approximately the same. Everyone knows that such a discovery is impossible. But then an ignoramus appears who does not know this and he makes a discovery. The Americans cannot sink an aircraft carrier. There are people who do not know this and they will let him go to the bottom. Recently there was an emergency on one aircraft carrier. He caught fire and only miraculously managed to save him from drowning. So he can be drowned. As one blacksmith said in the film "Formula of Love", what one person has done, another can always break. The imperialists created their highest creation, Nazi Germany, and the socialist country destroyed it. And the Americans realized it was impossible to do this with weapons, they had to look for a traitor and they found him.
  2. +3
    26 June 2019 15: 21
    Quote: Vladimir_Voronov
    This link repeats your quotation and confirms the American tales "American weapons are the most, most ...", but what about the opinion of Russian experts?

    No one bothers Russian experts or those who consider themselves experts to speak out on this topic.
    smile
  3. +1
    26 June 2019 15: 26
    The question here is what territory the battle will unfold on. If closer to China, then they can sink from the coast. If it is closer to the States, then it will be hard to sink. And the Chinese are more profitable to capture California. Hawaii is also possible, but only after Taiwan. The army of the Anglo-Saxons has always been weaker than the fleet. A small landing of 0,5 million people is enough.
  4. 0
    26 June 2019 15: 38
    Quote: Vladimir_Voronov
    This link repeats your quotation and confirms the American tales "American weapons are the most, most ...", but what about the opinion of Russian experts?

    I can assume that the matter may lie in a very, very large displacement of this steel boat and that it is specially designed to sink for a long time.
  5. -1
    26 June 2019 15: 57
    The footage of our tests of our missiles does not add optimism.

    On, from memory:

    An old Syrian destroyer in tests after a new PC missile finished off a bomb .... - there was a video.

    From a small missile PC - on a towing target - one cabin was broken, the porthole of a neighboring cabin survived. 2 holes - about a meter in size.
  6. +6
    26 June 2019 15: 58
    To complicate the task is also not necessary. It depends on what and how to drown an aircraft carrier. The US fleet and the Perry-type frigate could not drown for a long time at the exercises, and the Iranian pilot almost sent this frigate to the bottom in one fell swoop ... US aircraft carriers Enterprise (displacement of 93400 tons) and Forrestal (displacement of 81101 tons) nearly died from minor emergency situations the board, which caused a severe fire, great damage and human casualties to hundreds of sailors ... Forrester almost died from all that accidental explosion on board a 127 mm ZUNI type NURS ... the same thing happened to Enterprise ... One can only guess so that with them it’s they get a direct hit RCC M Oskite, Granite, Volcano or something similar, with a much more powerful warhead than 127 mm Zuni NURS
  7. +1
    26 June 2019 17: 50
    ... in the middle of the XNUMXs, Americans mocked their decommissioned USS America for four weeks, unsuccessfully shooting them with cruise missiles and torpedoes.

    So this is not an aircraft carrier so strong, but the arrows are bad. And missiles with torpedoes they have the wrong system.
  8. +3
    26 June 2019 17: 57
    Drowning these troughs is not necessary at all, just gouging the upper deck with superstructures, and let yourself swim like a piece of shit in an ice hole.
  9. +2
    26 June 2019 20: 29
    I do not know. I am also a sofa expert. But it seems to me that it makes no sense to sink the trough. One hit RCC and aircraft carrier can be sent for repair.
    The experience of war at sea shows that it is not necessary to sink a ship. Sometimes a single hit was enough to disable a ship.

    At the moment, the United States has 11 or 12 AUGs. With the most active use of active can be 6. Damage to 2 aircraft carriers is already serious.
  10. 0
    27 June 2019 07: 00
    Quote: gorbunov.vladisl
    ... in the middle of the XNUMXs, Americans mocked their decommissioned USS America for four weeks, unsuccessfully shooting them with cruise missiles and torpedoes.

    So this is not an aircraft carrier so strong, but the arrows are bad. And missiles with torpedoes they have the wrong system.

    There were used charges mounted on an aircraft carrier, simulating missiles and torpedoes.
  11. +1
    27 June 2019 07: 17
    Quote: Bakht
    At the moment, the United States has 11 or 12 AUGs. With the most active use of active can be 6. Damage to 2 aircraft carriers is already serious.

    Here we are not talking about victory in a particular battle, which can be achieved. And about whether such a defeat is enough for the surrender of the United States.
    I doubt very much ...
    1. +4
      27 June 2019 08: 52
      .... will such a defeat suffice for the surrender of the United States.

      It is not about US surrender. Surrender involves the surrender of the armed forces of one of the warring states. Even all sunk aircraft carriers are unlikely to lead to US surrender.
      The sinking (disabling) of aircraft carriers should force the United States to cease hostilities against a particular state. This is how big losses in the war against little Vietnam forced the United States to end the war.
    2. +2
      27 June 2019 11: 23
      Do not doubt. For Atlantic civilization, possession of the sea is critical. That is, the ability to control maritime communications. The loss of 2 aircraft carriers makes this task unsolvable. That is why the States are greatly concerned about the strengthening of the Chinese Navy. And China set the task by 2050 to create a fleet capable of controlling the oceans. The Chinese Maritime Doctrine has three objectives. First, coastal superiority has already been decided. By 2025-2030, it is planned to solve the second problem - to control the near seas of China up to Singapore. The third task is the strongest fleet in the world by 2050.

      In general, many of the capabilities of the Chinese Navy are designed specifically to deter or prevent US military intervention in the region. The Yellow Sea, East China and South China Seas are separated from the Pacific Ocean by a chain of islands. The island chain covers both these waters and the Philippine Sea, located between the Philippines and the island of Guam. The Chinese control over this line of islands, on the one hand, opened the way for the Chinese Navy to the expanses of the Pacific Ocean, and, on the other hand, blocked the access of the probable enemy to the sea coast of China. The significance of these islands can be compared with the significance of the islands of the Kuril ridge for the activity of the Russian Pacific Fleet.
      1. +2
        27 June 2019 11: 27
        US naval experts envision the following range of new challenges for the expanded and growing Chinese navy:

        - Approval of the status of China as a leading regional and world power. This, in particular, corresponds to the motto put forward by the Chinese authorities: “Tiger of the earth, dragon of the sea”;

        - maintenance of territorial claims of China in the South China and East China Seas, dominance in these seas;

        - ensuring the interests of China in its 200-mile marine exclusive economic zone;

        - the protection of China's commercial maritime communications, especially in the direction of the Persian Gulf and the Suez Canal;

        - countering the influence of the United States in the western part of the Pacific Ocean, crowding out Americans from this part of the Pacific Ocean;

        - Implementation of auxiliary missions, such as the fight against piracy, the evacuation of citizens, humanitarian operations, etc.

        https://eadaily.com/ru/news/2017/08/26/drakon-morya-razvitie-vmf-kitaya-trevogi-i-protivodeystvie-ssha
  12. +2
    27 June 2019 14: 49
    to sink an aircraft carrier in itself is not a trivial task. So, in the middle of the two thousandth Americans for four weeks mocked their decommissioned aircraft carrier USS America, unsuccessfully shooting it with cruise missiles and torpedoes. He held on, being an unrequited target.

    The whole question is whether this decommissioned aircraft carrier had weapons, ammunition and fuel. If not, then the example is wrong.
    And the second - it is enough to ruin the deck and catapults, so that it becomes a simple floating trough.
  13. +3
    27 June 2019 17: 41
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Quote: Vladimir_Voronov
    This link repeats your quotation and confirms the American tales "American weapons are the most, most ...", but what about the opinion of Russian experts?

    I can assume that the matter may lie in a very, very large displacement of this steel boat and that it is specially designed to sink for a long time.

    The aircraft carrier does not need to sink for a long time. Let him swim. Even if it can reach its base. The main thing is to break his upper deck and make it impossible to launch airplanes. And, even better, sit down. Let them sit on the water. Beside. And let this create a strong headache with repair. In modern warfare, the main thing is not to kill. To hurt. Around the wounded soldier, five doctors are spinning and are actively spending the budget. Around the murdered only relatives spin.
  14. 0
    27 June 2019 19: 28
    It will not be enough. God loves trinity.