China 2035 Plan is Half as Many Aircraft Carrier Groups as USA

China plans to build at least six aircraft battle groups by 2035.

China will have two aircraft carrier groups for each area (Yellow Sea, East and South China seas).

China has developed the insulated-gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) chip which enables high-efficiency electric energy conversion systems for electromagnetic aircraft launchers.

China refit a used aircraft carrier (Liaoning) from Ukraine. It is only to be used for training purposes.

China started building its first Type 002 carrier in early 2015. This will be China’s third carrier and the first one with an electromagnetic launcher. It will not be nuclear powered. It should be the first carrier that is not a relatively small and crappy carrier.

China is expected to launch its next-generation aircraft carrier within a year and construction on a sister ship for the new giant vessel has been hastened. Both of these are not nuclear powered and should be roughly equal to the UK Queen Elizabeth 2 aircraft carriers.

China’s fifth aircraft carrier should be nuclear powered and would start to get close to US super-carrier capability.

Two of the UK type aircraft carriers would be about equal to one of the US supercarriers. The US will have 11-12 super-carrier groups at any time and about nine or ten smaller jump jet carriers. The has ten to twenty times the conventional military capability of countries like the UK, France, Japan or Germany.

Russia is only able to match the USA on nuclear weapons. Russia’s economy is about ten to twenty times smaller and its military budget is over twenty times less. China is reaching about one-quarter to one-third US military spending. However, military capacity is built up over decades.

China will clearly outclass India’s military and other Asia region powers but the US will stay the dominant global military beyond 2050.

SOURCES- South China Morning Post
Written By Brian Wang,

39 thoughts on “China 2035 Plan is Half as Many Aircraft Carrier Groups as USA”

  1. China 2035 can stand on the decks of their Aircraft Carriers while hundreds of starships pass overhead and pay their respects to Admiral Musk.

  2. It is foolish for another reason. Once the “carrier groupies” become an entrenched constituency as they are in the United States, they and the fighter jocks will lionize budgets away from space/missile/rocket development. That happened to the Russians. They were bullish on space at first, but the space-first focus was lost with the deaths of the Chief Designers, and it has been a downhill slide for them ever since.

  3. It worked somewhat better for South Africa. The tech was more developed & the plants weren’t getting bombed. Still more expensive than making gasoline or diesel from petroleum, but if you are blocked from getting petroleum or have reasonable fears of being blocked it may be worth doing.

  4. China’s high tech is cruder than America’s. That explains lower nominal
    and moles. Switzerland would be military stronger than Israel…if surrounded by enemies. For your satisfaction, in ten years China will
    have highest nominal also.

  5. Germany in the 1930s and 1940s poured a whole lot of resources into coal-to-liquid fuel and it never added up to more than a tiny fraction of their requirements. It was never viable for them.

  6. This is just like the Venezuela thing. Countries can hold together long after the conditions there appear “intolerable” from an outside perspective.
    The world, and world history, is full of examples of places that had everything become terrible, and just stayed like that, sometimes for decades.
    Yes, they may come apart, but you can’t predict anything.
    Now add that China has been going through periods of such trouble for thousands of years, and your confidence is misplaced.

  7. Yeah, but that’s how many young adults they will have in 20 to 40 years from now. 2035 is not within that time bracket.

  8. China is facing a banking crisis, a population crisis, a dollar/Yaun crisis, a demographic crisis, an agriculture crisis, a succession crisis and currently a flooding crisis that may take out their most productive agricultural land and then productive capacity of Wuhan.

    China will fragment within 3 years. Period.

  9. Germany in the 1930s & 40s & South Africa during Apartheid did some coal to liquids tech. I think S. Africa still has those plants running. It’s currently more expensive than making those liquid fuels from petroleum, but in some cases it’s worth it for security of supply.

  10. Only for small countries
    There are 2 exceptions

    Do not forget that West has smaller populations and workforce than China’s and India’s

    For big civilizations like China, India PPP in long run is more relevant
    They are mostly / have potential to be self sufficient, China already is, still being developing country, India will be in 15-30 year(must catch up in tech and science, breed large tech corporations). China produces their own advanced weapons, tons of cars, bullet trains, recently chips, space stations, nuclear reactors, everything. They do not need to exchange a lot of their currency to dollars to buy cars, electronics from abroad from advanced nations, like smaller nations.
    Each passing year their imports and exports as % of GDP are decreasing

  11. China seems to be trying to change that – and they’re claiming that South China Sea is to them what the Caribbean is to the US. They don’t seem to realize that their neighbors aren’t tiny Antigua or Bahamas. Japan and Indonesia aren’t tiny countries. China’s attempt to dominate the high seas will only bring them more problems, and ultimately end in failure.

  12. A number of countries have tried, or at least studied, that approach since at least the early 1970s. It hasn’t worked yet.
    Though of course, ever increasing battery tech means that it will become possible one day.

  13. Lucca always going nuclear. If Japan needs a nuclear missle or dozen to deter China do you think the US would say no? What is keeping Japan from becoming a nuclear power? A peice of paper.

  14. What do you mean local military supremacy? Who are they going to invade? India? Vietnam? They want to invade Taiwan but don’t have the boats for it … yet. My advise for those nations is to cooperate with the US. We’ll probably do it for free just to stick it to the Chinese. Unlike the Chinese, the Americans won’t move in and take charge your country … maybe land for one or two Forward Operation Bases.

  15. I would like you to be right, but I don’t see what Japan can do about Chinas local military supremacy. Could you give an example of what they could do?

  16. China’s quality control problems continue to haunt them when they try to produce original tech. Fewer outsiders are willing to risk being ripped off.

  17. China can try to intimidate Japan. If they poke there nose from under their missle “shield” they will find out how far that goes. A big army is only scary if you can move it. edit:sp

  18. I see you’re still following your boss’s script with your posts. Keep it up. I get a good laugh out of them. Here are some things people everywhere are saying. Investment inflows into China are decreasing. Many businesses are leaving China. Japan is paying companies to do so. New FDI mega-investments are being announced in India almost every week. India’s GDP growth rate will soon surpass that of China. China is a sitting demographic time bomb. In a few decades, there will be more old people than young people. By the way, how are things in Russia? Is there an anti-Putin demonstration going on outside your building? You don’t have to reply right away. You can go join them and get back to me later.

  19. There are plenty of countries in the region around China that they can intimidate. Japan, Korea, The Filipines etc. They will be able to bully them into accepting their claims for international water…

  20. Would the way for China to avoid vulnerability to oil cut off, be to build lots of nuclear for stationary uses & use nuclear heat to turn coal into liquid fuels?

  21. Chairman Mao “liberated” China soon after WW II. Do they still need liberating today? They could probably drop the Liberation out of the name as well.
    People’s Army
    People’s Navy

    Next time I take over China I’ll be sure to make that change. Note to self…

  22. Dictatorships crave power and depend on stuntsmanship to survive. The bigger the dictatorship, the bigger the stuntsmanship required by it, and Beijing is definitely the biggest dictatorship. The main stunt Beijing’s dictatorship is dependent upon is relentless expansionism in order to keep China’s toiling masses from turning on the regime.

  23. Another saber-rattling story plucked from the National Interest, meant to incite the Call of Duty crowd? ‘No way am I gonna allow thems Chinese sumsabitches to have more carriers than us Mericans’.

  24. The more people China moves into cities the less people they will have. Urbanization lowers birth rates.

  25. “They have virtually no army…”

    You don’t need an army to sink a ship. You need a navy.
    And you don’t need to post with 2 alt accounts to reply.

    India would probably want to sink any Chinese subs that it to the Persian Gulf.

    An India/Japan alliance against China would be hard to break. India does have the manpower to withstand the Chinese army if it comes to that. Any country other than India would be foolish to try to invade China, but then why invade when you can blockade? Without energy, China collapses.

    India could blockade China’s oil supply with minimum effort, due to geographic positioning alone. China’s only recourse would be to turn hard West and sail the other way around the world to avoid India.

  26. All you need to know about the Chinese navy is its offical name: Peoples Liberation Army Navy. China is a land power.

  27. I personally think that the concept of ‘military global dominance’ is becoming more and more meaningless with time. Regional powers will be able to project their influence locally and will be able to fight regional proxy wars, but once you get to the nuclear weapons open global wars are out of the picture as nobody will win.
    Even hyper-sonic weapons and orbital laser platforms will not grant a viable first strike option against another nuclear armed country in a world connected by trades: the fastest way to deliver a nuke now is to have it sitting in a container already in a target city controlled by a deadman switch signal (and bribing/blackmailing few customs official costs much less than developing an hypersonic platform).
    So chest-thumping aside my personal opinion is that carriers and bases (or fortified islands) are and will be valuable assets for regional control, but there is no real ‘military global dominance’ as global dominance is already achieved (both by US and China) through economy and trades control and non of the actors involved in this game has interest in sending us all back to the stone age.

  28. The key to power is power addiction. One must be mentally ill to be an addict. It is the mistreatment of people as children that makes them self humiliating power addicts. They don’t even realize they are neurotic. Yet. (We do!)

  29. Number of workers is not necessary good measure of power (btw, China has larger workforce 800m to less than 600m for India)
    What is relevant is what those people are doing
    Hundreds of millions more Indians than Chinese are simply growing and eating their food, thats basically it. Now China has still a lot of farmers, but hundreds of millions of worforce doing more productive jobs like manufacturing, advanced services and working in knowledge economy.
    China is moving 20m people anually to cities, India only 10, and they(India) have a lot more young people. wasted potential…

    China will be more advanced even with smaller worforce because they will be doing advanced stuff, tech and science while India will be focused on second industrial revolution, building roads etc, doing stuff that China was doing between 1990-2020

    Israel is more powerful than Bangladesh, Nigeria, having 1/20 of population. Once again its all about tech/science, not raw numbers of people

  30. New aircraft carriers are quite worthless investment in 2020 and beyond, eating tons of money 
    Just a big metal boat perfectly visible in the middle of the ocean (in case of coming at you)
    In case of war you just need a small swarm of underwater suicide drones(with stealth tech will be even better) or regular(not suicide or from air) drones attacking with few tens of torpredoes simultaneously to sink it.

    China is just building few of them(slowly) for the sake of appearance, it would be weird for a superpower to not have a few such toys. But they will never waste as much money as US for 10+ of them even if their army budget will become larger 

    US must be smarter and invest in cutting edge futuristic innovations, not outdated concepts like big mobile parking lots for jets

  31. I’m surprised China wants carrier groups, as I thought hypersonic missiles are going to make them obsolete anyway. Carrier groups are mainly useful for intimidating 3rd rate powers, but I would think hypersonic weapons could be used for the same purpose.

  32. Let’s see how China will cope with the upcoming population collapse, India fertility rate is very healthy. This is the biggest underline in the rise of super powers, not military.

  33. It takes a lot to make a carrier strike group, and there’s an enormous difference between a regular carrier and a CVN. The USA spend insane amounts of money on the military and has for decades. China can’t just catch up in a couple weeks.

    Couple this with China’s collapsing trade where their money dries up. Most of their economy only exists on paper. It has to be the biggest ponzi scheme in all history.

    And what is their goal here? Do they really expect to replace the USA as the dominant superpower? That won’t happen. In all likelihood it won’t be the USA to topple China, but Japan. As the USA pulls out of the global oil market (because we can) other countries will be fighting over supply chains, including oil. Japan can pinch off China’s supply with their blue water navy and route their own supply wide around China. This would happen long before China gets a nuclear carrier.

    Another new contender would be India. China’s trying to invade India recently and India’s not too happy about it. They’re positioned right at the mouth of the Persian Gulf. India could easily sink all oil tankers bound for China. Checkmate. China really ought to be nicer to the one large country they need to navigate around to get their oil. India’s right in their way.

    For the record, the USA could do the same any time it wants.

    China’s 2050 navy sounds impressive in theory but first they need to survive as a nation for the next few years.

Comments are closed.