China is generally defensive minded, the only time you'll be scared if America does something stupid and goes on the offensive while pinning it on China, then that's when you should be scared. As of now, there's a chance of America doing something like Ukraine, Syria or Iraq in the South China Sea so that's a hot point.
Apparently the equipment of a Chinese soldier is shit. It costs less than 100 USD to equip one Chinese soldier, whereas a US soldier costs 20 times that. Idk about vehicles tho. Assume it's shit, compared to US stuff.
Their surface combatants are approaching world class standards, and the ASuW/AAW capabilities are pretty formidable. Their C&C and ASW is shit though, so for at least the short term future their navy is still not at a level comparable to the US. Obviously, any war would have geography in their favor so to the extent that the US worries about its position in Asia, there is some cause for alarm.
>>28702423 They have the potential to be a threat, but they've still got a long way to go.
We shouldn't become complacent, but it's not like the sky is falling. All of the technologies they're hyping up are at their heart defensive weapons, so all their bragging effectively amounts to >you can't touch us on our soil Rather than >we can project our force halfway across the world and there's nothing you can do about it
In that respect, they haven't even reached the level of the Soviets in the Cold War.
Not really. They can't project power at all. Their main anticarrier weapon can't be used at all so they cant stop the US from projecting power. Some of their new hardware looks ok, but they are decades away from having the institutional knowledge necessary to catch up with the US military
>>28702423 >should we be scared of china? No >why? Force projection and logistics, the US has then and vachina does not. Any war between the US and china will be fought in china. In their streets, destroying their infrastructure, their manufacturing base, bombing their civilians, ruining their economy.
also they have opened clone facilites for human beings. maybe theyr planning to build a huge service spot in the chinese sea for human design and other business bullshit to ensure the survival of their subhuman race and interests. they just decided t help libanes and syria with new phone towers
As someone who is heavily interested in China's rise, not a fucking chance.
The PLA's doctrine is focused upon a modern version of Mao's "People's War" where an invader would be drawn deep into the Chinese heartland, and worn down through insurgency and guerrilla tactics. Whether that would work against a NATO-level force is a whole other question.
China's current level of procurement looks intimidating on paper, but thats because Beijing inflates its statistics to terrify potential adversaries.
As an anon mentioned, their C&C is abysmally bad. Like barely-got-the-concept-of-squad-radios kind of behind. This is, naturally, a byproduct of a rapidly-industrializing power, but also reflects PLA doctrine: don't forget that the "army" in China is basically the combat wing of the Communist Party. They don't take kindly to improvisation from their commanders, since they would be disobeying the party, and any disobedience could snowball into Tiananmen Mk.II: Election Boogeyman.
And finally: while their stuff may not be a threat to western interests in small numbers, it is far superior to anything their neighbours can offer. The Philippines doesn't really have a functioning navy, Japan's were (rightfully) castrated post-Pacific War, Vietnam is still going through major governmental reforms and Russia doesn't have enough troops in the Siberian/Eastern provinces to properly repulse a full PLA attack. Then again, those same countries are now looking for cheap ways to destroy China's advantage, not unlike what China is attempting to do to the US.
>>28704559 Wrong >>28704633 No. >>28705161 >one company moving a factory = the 300,000 factories in China moving >>28705201 Funny post >>28706092 Shitpost >>28706186 Decent Source or you're a faggot. >>28706247 >shit avionics worse than slavs Odd you say that because their 4th gen fighters have AESA while Russia's don't. The WS-10 is used on all J-10B's.
>>28706250 >>28706259 You're both kind of right. Japan has no major amphibious capabilities at the moment (and questionable logistics: apparently that American reformation in the 50's skimped in a few areas)
their air defence is god-tier. Those Kongo-class are roughly the equal of a Ticonderoga in the amount of things they can track and asplode. Combine that with rudimentary ASW capabilities, and there's the makings of an okay fleet.
Honestly, I'm more interested in Vietnam: they've basically the same doctrine as China when it comes to invaders, but with a hell of a lot more experience, and some high-quality Russian equipment strategically spread that's a match for whatever China sends down there.
"Author's Note: During the research process on the J-31’s avionics (for the upcoming Threat Analysis of Foreign Stealth Fighters:J-31 Part II), it became apparent that very few credible, verifiable, and non-speculative English based source materials existed on the subject of PLA fighter radars. "
Until they start offering them for export, it's probably bullshit.
>>28709557 You forgot to mention that aside from the ammo and boots, all that other shit gets cycled to the next soldier when the initial one leaves the military. So in reality, it would cost probably 1/4th that since rifles and optics get cycled out after 15-20 years.
>>28703679 Well, China really wants the Sparty islands and Taiwan, something that America might have to object to.
That said, their economy is collapsing while local agriculture is massively pressured by pollution. It's sort of a tossup if they will go global superpower or if it's going to turn into Africa 2: Africa Harder.
>>28711553 >A rifle in the military >Lasting 20 years
Ech, you could technically try and force one to last that long but you'd be spending far more then the replacement cost to keep it around. After being issued and returned a weapon is assessed to see if it's worth keeping. It's the mileage, not the years, that matter, so there isn't really a ballpark but if a rifle is issued to a grunt that is going to carry it all day and shoot the fuck out of it on the range or, god forbid, a fight, it's lucky to last three years.
>>28709557 Body armor adds another $1200 to $2000 on top of that, while a radio can add another $1000 and other equipment makes it a crapshoot to guess how much a given solider's equipment might cost.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.