China has the 350 ship Navy that is the US goal

China has nearly 350 ships in its Navy. It is larger than the 280-ship U.S. Navy. China commissions nearly three submarines each year and will have 70 submarines by 2020. China should have 430 surface ships and 100 submarines by 2033.

Currently about 250 of China’s ships are modern. By 2025, China’s Navy should be over 90% modern.

US Navy budgets not increasing

If the Navy’s budget is the average of its budget over the prior 30 years in real dollars and it maintains its aircraft carrier and ballistic submarine construction schedules, in 12 years the active naval fleet will decline to 237 ships. In six years, the U.S. submarine fleet will decline to 48 ships, and in eleven years the number of U.S. attack submarines will decline to 41 ships.

In 2015, the US Navy planned to increase the fleet to 308 ships by 2022. The Trump administration plans a 355-ship navy. However, Trump had to order a 5% budget cut. To reach 308 ships, the Navy will have to spend 36 percent more than the average shipbuilding budget over the past 30 years, requiring a one-third increase in its current budget.

The US will have to pay $300 to $500 billion per year in additional interest in the next 2 to 4 years. This will prevent increases in the military budget.

56 thoughts on “China has the 350 ship Navy that is the US goal”

  1. I am not aware of people who have said such things being physically assaulted. I can well imagine that many people would be reluctant to hire people who said such things. It is safer to say such things in the US than to criticize the Communist Party in China, or to criticize Mohammed in Pakistan.

    Reply
  2. Only if sailors, fuel and munitions come for free.

    Which they don’t.

    Otherwise the USA has to continue with the policy of fewer, more automated, but overall more effective ships. Because a ship without the crew and supplies is useless.

    Reply
  3. So if an average US citizen were to publicly state that feminism was a load of BS and that gay marriage was an evil idea, would their future careers be secure and they be safe from physical assault, or not?

    Reply
  4. By the way, you are typing to compare apples and orange here. The US Navy is a blue water navy and the Chinese Navy is by in large a littoral navy.

    Reply
  5. “The US will have to pay $300 to $500 billion per year in additional interest in the next 2 to 4 years. ”

    As opposed to all those Chinese SOEs not paying anything on their massive debts that is easily 400% of Chinese GDP?

    Reply
  6. If by 350 ships you mean the crappy, mass produced poor copies of other nations’ ship designs, then yes. They have a 350 ship navy.

    Reply
  7. My main criterion for who is the bad guy is ‘Is is safe for a resident of the country to publicly state that the leader is an ass or a thug, or that the leading political or religious ideology of the country is a load of BS.’ If not the country is a bad guy.

    Reply
  8. Some of the people in every country are brainwashed sheeple that are mostly out of touch with global affairs. I guess you had a point to that, though it eludes me at the moment.

    “With an arrogant and an out-of-touch-with-reality attitude such as this, the US should get ready for some serious strategic surprises if push comes to shove.” Apparently you are not familiar with humor as those statements were made in. The number of ships doesn’t matter, it is the capabilities, experience, training and doctrine that matter the most. People posting on this site get that. Brian (the site author) is a booster for “Great China”.

    “In war, numbers alone confer no advantage. Do not advance relying on sheer military power.” Sun Tzu

    Reply
  9. What? It’s time for social welfare to stop for the corporations, not the citizens. The USA already spends more on defense than the total of the next five countries including China. The DOD also is the largest source of fossil fuel emissions, making climate change a serious problem for the pentagon. My guess is you must be one of the one percent or the exact opposite with little knowledge or what will happen if social programs are “severely” curtailed.

    Reply
  10. It is long past time for us to cut Medicare and Medicaid severely. I wonder why conservatives, who were in charge of the House, Senate and Presidency have not accomplished it yet? Without cutting these programs we will continue to fall behind on our budgets and it will limit our military expenditures. Now that the Democrats control the House they may have lost their chance, because Democrats have never seen a Socialist program they didn’t like and want to expand. Politically we are stuck with Social Security so good luck killing that program.

    Reply
  11. ” Time to cut taxes some more to finance an apropriately sized navy again! ” <– Exactly, returning spending authority to the private sector grows the economy far more than offsetting marginal tax cuts…which has been true every time it has been tried,

    Reply
  12. The first line of China’s naval defense, the Maritime Militia, consists of 180,000 ocean-going fishing boats and four thousand merchant marine[1] freighters (some towing sonar detectors) crewed by a million professional sailors transmitting detailed information about every warship on the world’s oceans, twenty-four hours a day. Shore bases fuse their reports with automated transmissions from Beidou positioning, navigation and timing satellites and provide real time data to reporting specialists, xinxiyuan, trained in target information collection and identification operating ‘vessel management platforms’ that collate, format and forward actionable information up the command chain. Along the shore, eight million coastal reservists train in seamanship, emergency ship repairs, anti-air missile defense, light weapons and naval sabotage.

    [1] China’s Maritime Militia, by ndrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy

    Reply
  13. I’d be cool with that, but it would require a lot of regulations and oversight. Otherwise that company might have a rogue Pro Chinese employee who adds a line of code into the ships OS, which would let China push a button, and disable our whole fleet.

    Reply
  14. A lot of Americans are brainwashed sheeple that are mostly out of touch with reality when it comes to global affairs. All I can say is this, the PLA surely hopes that the US military and civilian “leadership” believes that “China’s brown water navy is very impressive.” and “US has 20 carriers soon to be filled with stealth fighters to the brims and China has 20 corvettes that 4 of the F35s can take out in 5min.. 20 not equal 20.” and “China also have more horses than we have tanks.”

    With an arrogant and an out-of-touch-with-reality attitude such as this, the US should get ready for some serious strategic surprises if push comes to shove.

    Reply
  15. A 1 to 3 ratio is useless to China. It puts ROK, Taiwanese, US marines ashore in Fujian and Andong within a week of hostilities commencing, and Beijing is taken within a month.

    ” Thiers are in the south china sea pretty much exclusively. Everyone always forgets that we are the global invasive force. That makes us the bad guys no matter what moral we claim as americans. ”

    No mor0n it doesn’t, because your baseless assertions create no facts. For example, we have invaded no place with the last 80 some years without very good reason to do so, and China has illegally occupied parts of the South China Sea for no more reason than that they want it. China’s the bad guy.

    Reply
  16. China’s brown water navy is very impressive. No one can challenge it in the China seas. If China could only buy Okinawa from Japan it would have very good blue water access. Being hemmed into brown water and playing bumper ship with the other boats in the fleet becomes tiresome.

    Reply
  17. 1 to three ratio is big. IF a higher percentage of those is hunter killer subs than we would be fucked. Also our ships are spread around the earth. Thiers are in the south china sea pretty much exclusively. Everyone always forgets that we are the global invasive force. That makes us the bad guys no matter what moral we claim as americans.

    Reply
  18. So, you are ok with over 60% and rising of our tax base every year going to non-productive sections of our society? I am not the 1% or the bottom 60% and have no trouble seeing how that is going to hammer us in an age when state actor competition wants our scalps. If we try to keep all of our social programs, we will likely not only fail and have to cut them anyway, but be in a much worse position when we get around to doing something about them. Do us a favor and take a look up a pie chart of federal spending please.

    Reply
  19. Quality vs quantity.

    But 2 ships can be at 2 places at the same time which one can not no matter how good its quality.

    Time to cut taxes some more to finance an apropriately sized navy again!

    Reply
  20. I am not aware of people who have said such things being physically assaulted. I can well imagine that many people would be reluctant to hire people who said such things. It is safer to say such things in the US than to criticize the Communist Party in China, or to criticize Mohammed in Pakistan.

    Reply
  21. Only if sailors, fuel and munitions come for free.

    Which they don’t.

    Otherwise the USA has to continue with the policy of fewer, more automated, but overall more effective ships. Because a ship without the crew and supplies is useless.

    Reply
  22. So if an average US citizen were to publicly state that feminism was a load of BS and that gay marriage was an evil idea, would their future careers be secure and they be safe from physical assault, or not?

    Reply
  23. The first line of China’s naval defense, the Maritime Militia, consists of 180,000 ocean-going fishing boats and four thousand merchant marine[1] freighters (some towing sonar detectors) crewed by a million professional sailors transmitting detailed information about every warship on the world’s oceans, twenty-four hours a day. Shore bases fuse their reports with automated transmissions from Beidou positioning, navigation and timing satellites and provide real time data to reporting specialists, xinxiyuan, trained in target information collection and identification operating ‘vessel management platforms’ that collate, format and forward actionable information up the command chain. Along the shore, eight million coastal reservists train in seamanship, emergency ship repairs, anti-air missile defense, light weapons and naval sabotage.

    [1] China’s Maritime Militia, by ndrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy

    Reply
  24. “The US will have to pay $300 to $500 billion per year in additional interest in the next 2 to 4 years. ”

    As opposed to all those Chinese SOEs not paying anything on their massive debts that is easily 400% of Chinese GDP?

    Reply
  25. My main criterion for who is the bad guy is ‘Is is safe for a resident of the country to publicly state that the leader is an ass or a thug, or that the leading political or religious ideology of the country is a load of BS.’ If not the country is a bad guy.

    Reply
  26. Some of the people in every country are brainwashed sheeple that are mostly out of touch with global affairs. I guess you had a point to that, though it eludes me at the moment.

    “With an arrogant and an out-of-touch-with-reality attitude such as this, the US should get ready for some serious strategic surprises if push comes to shove.” Apparently you are not familiar with humor as those statements were made in. The number of ships doesn’t matter, it is the capabilities, experience, training and doctrine that matter the most. People posting on this site get that. Brian (the site author) is a booster for “Great China”.

    “In war, numbers alone confer no advantage. Do not advance relying on sheer military power.” Sun Tzu

    Reply
  27. I’d be cool with that, but it would require a lot of regulations and oversight. Otherwise that company might have a rogue Pro Chinese employee who adds a line of code into the ships OS, which would let China push a button, and disable our whole fleet.

    Reply
  28. A lot of Americans are brainwashed sheeple that are mostly out of touch with reality when it comes to global affairs. All I can say is this, the PLA surely hopes that the US military and civilian “leadership” believes that “China’s brown water navy is very impressive.” and “US has 20 carriers soon to be filled with stealth fighters to the brims and China has 20 corvettes that 4 of the F35s can take out in 5min.. 20 not equal 20.” and “China also have more horses than we have tanks.”

    With an arrogant and an out-of-touch-with-reality attitude such as this, the US should get ready for some serious strategic surprises if push comes to shove.

    Reply
  29. A 1 to 3 ratio is useless to China. It puts ROK, Taiwanese, US marines ashore in Fujian and Andong within a week of hostilities commencing, and Beijing is taken within a month.

    ” Thiers are in the south china sea pretty much exclusively. Everyone always forgets that we are the global invasive force. That makes us the bad guys no matter what moral we claim as americans. ”

    No mor0n it doesn’t, because your baseless assertions create no facts. For example, we have invaded no place with the last 80 some years without very good reason to do so, and China has illegally occupied parts of the South China Sea for no more reason than that they want it. China’s the bad guy.

    Reply
  30. China’s brown water navy is very impressive. No one can challenge it in the China seas. If China could only buy Okinawa from Japan it would have very good blue water access. Being hemmed into brown water and playing bumper ship with the other boats in the fleet becomes tiresome.

    Reply
  31. 1 to three ratio is big. IF a higher percentage of those is hunter killer subs than we would be fucked. Also our ships are spread around the earth. Thiers are in the south china sea pretty much exclusively. Everyone always forgets that we are the global invasive force. That makes us the bad guys no matter what moral we claim as americans.

    Reply
  32. So, you are ok with over 60% and rising of our tax base every year going to non-productive sections of our society? I am not the 1% or the bottom 60% and have no trouble seeing how that is going to hammer us in an age when state actor competition wants our scalps. If we try to keep all of our social programs, we will likely not only fail and have to cut them anyway, but be in a much worse position when we get around to doing something about them. Do us a favor and take a look up a pie chart of federal spending please.

    Reply
  33. What? It’s time for social welfare to stop for the corporations, not the citizens. The USA already spends more on defense than the total of the next five countries including China. The DOD also is the largest source of fossil fuel emissions, making climate change a serious problem for the pentagon. My guess is you must be one of the one percent or the exact opposite with little knowledge or what will happen if social programs are “severely” curtailed.

    Reply
  34. It is long past time for us to cut Medicare and Medicaid severely. I wonder why conservatives, who were in charge of the House, Senate and Presidency have not accomplished it yet? Without cutting these programs we will continue to fall behind on our budgets and it will limit our military expenditures. Now that the Democrats control the House they may have lost their chance, because Democrats have never seen a Socialist program they didn’t like and want to expand. Politically we are stuck with Social Security so good luck killing that program.

    Reply
  35. ” Time to cut taxes some more to finance an apropriately sized navy again! ” <-- Exactly, returning spending authority to the private sector grows the economy far more than offsetting marginal tax cuts...which has been true every time it has been tried,

    Reply
  36. Quality vs quantity.

    But 2 ships can be at 2 places at the same time which one can not no matter how good its quality.

    Time to cut taxes some more to finance an apropriately sized navy again!

    Reply

Leave a Comment