Is this chart correct?

>>63978014 (OP)
I don't know nigga, I don't care and neither do you. Else you'd use google.

I don't see the fun in fat retards arguing over their favorite militaries like they're fucking action figures. Go touch some goddamn grass instead.

seems a little disingenuous. im sure whoever made that didn't include the US coast guard.

>>63978014 (OP)
Mostly, it lacks context though

For example, china has 3 carriers, one of them is an old russian carrier, another is based on that russian carrier (but produced domestically in china), and the last one is a brand new domestic Chinese carrier design.

Similarly, the Type 055 destroyer is the only destroyer in Chinese service equivalent to a US Arleigh Burke destroyer.

The US has 74 Burkes in service, with 2 fitting out before commissioning, and another 6 under construction, and 14 more authorized for construction.

China has 8 Type 055 in service, with 4 more under construction and 4 more planned.

>>63978059
also 'patrol vessel' is a really nice way of saying "fishing boat with a .50 Cal"

>>63978066
By that they mean their Type 022s trimarans. Before they were able to make dostroyers or frigates that's what they had to face the US CSGs.

>>63978014 (OP)
Doesn't include the US Coast Guard which could give the US a strength of closer to 3,000.

>>63978059
But the fact that the USN only has Burkes, and no other smaller destroyers or frigates, means that ASW, escort role would need to be carried out by them, while the PLAN can assign their frigates and medium size destroyers for that role. Every single hull matters

Implessive

>>63978014 (OP)

>>63978158
If the US commits to the fight then their allies are too, so you can add those numbers to that side if you think it's so important. Taiwan, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Philippines, UK, etc.
China would be joined by whatever North Korea could muster but that would be a very localized threat.

>>63978014 (OP)
Yes but including patrol boats when comparing blue water fleets is like counting crop dusters when comparing air forces.

people put a lot of faith in china's military despite the fact their military doesn't do anything except stick fight with india (no hate there, that shit is hilarious).

meanwhile the USN is on-purpose staging fleets in the middle east so their guys get live-fire training vs drones and missiles.

>>63978253
Or they could just "borrow" from another service branch with ships designed explicitly for this eventuality?

>>63978278
USCG could be counted too. Not sure if the original image was counting the Chinese CG to boost numbers.
And those bastards have already been moving around the Philippines and ramming/otherwise harassing other ships.

>>63978158
That really only matters if china pops off in the next 3-4 years.

Connies will start coming into service in the next few years and seemingly Canada/Australia/UK are all buying new destroyers/frigates as well that can complement the US burkes.

>>63978278
I can't see the Coast Gaurd entering the fight, that's were the rich hide their kids when it's conscription time and war with China would be conscription time.

>>63978014 (OP)
>Mine Warfare
>8
Its not even accurate in that regard.

>More on topic
You won't do shit, chang. Feel free to try anytime.

>>63978014 (OP)
>>63978253

>>63978302
>and war with China would be conscription time.
why would it be? so far it seems that shills just scream about conscription to try to intimidate normalfags into passivity since chinese military itself is clearly not scary enough for that.

>>63978308
>Its not even accurate in that regard.
Do you think there are more or less than 8?

As for ships that are actually CONFIGURED for laying mines, it likely is fewer than 10.

The US primarily uses planes for mine laying and while some US ships retain the CAPABILITY to lay mines, I can pretty much guaranteed very few (if any) are actually setup for mine laying operations.

>>63978288
Original image does include the Chink equivalent of their Coast Guard. A Chinese frigate would barely be considered the a corvette to the USN meanwhile that US Coast Guard ship is larger than some Chink destroyers.
>>63978302
Their ships are basically designed to be taken over by the USN if shits hit the fan and quickly refitted for war. There will still be a US Coast Guard but all their blue water assets would be seized by the USN.

I would even say that the PLAN would probably lose to a refitted US Coast Guard in a straight up fight considering what the Coast Guard consider a patrol vessel the Chinese would think of as a corvette.

>>63978334
Which US Corvettes have 32 VLS cells?

>>63978014 (OP)
how about the
>total tonnage
>number of VLS cells
>nuclear subs
>nuclear carriers
> carrier-based fighters

these are more relevant numbers

If the USCG were to get involved the USN would likely outfit them Lockheed Martin Mk70 containerized VLS cells, it would take a lot of time and money to install a proper Mk41 VLS system.

>>63978324
8 Avengers
26-27 LCS OR 5-6 Independence depending how you want to count
10 Legend

If you want to count autonomous/unmanned vessels than there is a lot more. I wouldn't bring this up if it was just off by one or two just because it was a few months out of date or somerthing. Also, the pic says "Mine Warfare" not "Mine Laying," fucking Burkes are technically "mine laying." You say planes but to my knowledge the US military focuses on using rotor craft historically for laying mines. Did you have something else in mind? That aside, that just means that any vessels hosting the Sea Dragons and having sufficient stores would also qualify; Niclear Powered Aircraft Carrier mine layers! (I jest of course)

>>63978517
You know we have more than 130 of these things in service, right?

The only purpose-built US mines are from the late 1960s, and while they're technically listed as in-service, I doubt they would ever seriously be used, everything more modern is just torpedos, or air dropped bombs that have been slightly modified for use as a naval mine.

And again, for actual mine laying while plenty of ships CAN do it, almost none of them are actually setup to do that job today. You mention burkes being "technically" minelaying, but naval mines AREN'T a regular part of their armmaments, so while you could specifically loadup a burke to do the job, you couldn't call up a deployed burke today and have them start laying mines within the hour, they just don't have the mines on board.

>>63978014 (OP)
>correct
>0 frigates
You tell me.

>>63978624
>You know we have more than 130 of these things in service, right?
I was thinking about mine warfare and not just laying mines but I get that I worded it poorly. My bad

That said, I can't help but notice you completely ignored everything else I said, why is that?
>inb4 you spiral because you can't have a functional conversation

>>63978635
The US doesn't have any frigates in service.

>>63978650
Okay, LCS ships can't actually do mine countermeasures or mine laying because they never actually developed the mine warfare mission module.

>>63978656
They did though, it finally works.

>>63978671
https://news.usni.org/2025/03/18/navy-deploys-first-operational-lcs-mine-countermeasures-packages

two ships, and they still likely need to undergo testing before it's actually mission ready.

Sick

>>63978656
It never ceases to amaze me how confidently wrong people can be
https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2167535/littoral-combat-ships-mine-countermeasures-mission-package/
>MCM aviation mission modules, AMN and NSD, have been deployed to the 4th and 7th Fleets since 2021. MCM MP completed Initial Operational Test and Evaluation of the Baseline MCM MP in August 2022. In March 2023, the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfighting Requirements and Capabilities declared IOC for the MCM MP and AN/AQS 20 Sonar.

>>63978675
They've probably already undergone more testing than the chink equivalents have.

>>63978675
see >>63978681 you absolute fucking brainlet

>>63978671
Dirty little secret, it has for awhile. They just gave up trying to get it to work on the Freedom and dropped one of the drones that they couldn't quite get to work yet.

>>63978014 (OP)
It doesn't matter, when the US air force completely shits on the PLARF and so does the US Navy's air force and the Air national guard.
China's going to feel a reckoning in war that their ships can't match when thousands of anti-ship missiles overwhelm their navy and the Chinese have to pull an Iran and sue for peace.

>>63978694
PLAAF*

>>63978517
> the US military focuses on using rotor craft historically for laying mines
>he doesn’t know

>>63978694
But the US will not completely occupy the country and station a fireteam inside every house and square mile so that means they lost the war.

>>63978302
there's too much drug interception for the coast guard to be "the rich kids"
your stupid ass is thinking about the air force. hell, they're even capable of affording flying lessons. guaranteed entry into the air corp with a pilots license.

>>63978650
>was thinking about mine warfare and not just laying mines but I get that I worded it poorly.
You didn't word it poorly, you straight up said it

> You say planes but to my knowledge the US military focuses on using rotor craft historically for laying mines

How should this be taken in any other context BESIDES specifically mine laying?

>>63978707
If you defeat the China man's ships you defeat the China man -Sun Tsu art of war

>>63978302
Coast Guard basic training is BRUTAL, there is no way that's the rich kid haven.

>>63978014 (OP)
Navy that's constantly deployed vs. navy that hasn't seen conflict in living memory? Yeah, I give this an implessive/10

>>63978302
>that's were the rich hide their kids
Ah, so you're either a retard or a chink-cockgoblin

>>63978704
Nah, PLARF is correct. That’s the sound my cat makes when she gets a hairball.
The hairball is about the level of competence I’d expect from the Chinese military.

>>63978066
surface search radar
optical track sensors with flir
C4 datalink
8 anti-ship missiles
short range IR homing surface to air missiles
30mm CIWS

It's a typical missile boat with decent armament, nothing to sneeze at.
Bit light on anti-air, but plenty to be a credible threat to any surface combatant.

>>63978694
this. chink surface fleet would be annihilated by literally tens of thousands of quicksink JDAMs, LRASM and Naval strike missiles. US hypersonic missiles won't even be needed

>>63978762
This reads like that one copypasta of the chinese jet features. Someone post it please.

>>63978762
The US has similar in development, but they're unmanned or minimally/lightly/optionally manned.

>>63978032
The Coast Guard isn't a part of the US military, it's law enforcement.

>>63978830
In a major conflict, it would be.

>>63978837
Except it explicitly cannot under the constitution.

>>63978830
And the Navy isn't an air force and yet it's the third most powerful air force on the planet (after the USAF and USMC).

>>63978839
Except it can be and literally has.

You DO know that a significant portion of the dudes driving landing ships at Normandy were Coasties, yes? And that they also provided escort ships for convoys.

>>63978839
>The U.S. Coast Guard operates under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during peacetime. During times of war, it can be transferred in whole or in part to the U.S. Department of the Navy under the Department of Defense by order of the U.S. president or by act of Congress. Prior to its transfer to Homeland Security, it operated under the Department of Transportation from 1967 to 2003 and the Department of the Treasury from its inception until 1967.[12][13] A congressional authority transfer to the Navy has only happened once: in 1917, during World War I.[14] By the time the U.S. entered World War II in December 1941, the U.S. Coast Guard had already been transferred to the Navy by President Franklin Roosevelt.[15]

>>63978635
The first Constellation class FFG won't be delivered until 2029

>>63978694
>>63978794
Good luck

>>63978965
implessive!

>>63978839
I despise when turdies open their mouths to tell me about my country. How about you work on your own and quit trying to worm into mine?

>>63978839
Nobody tell him about the CG vessels in the middle east

>>63978965
>chinkshill doing his round of angry passive aggressive shilling again
what part of this video showing a non 6th gen aircraft is supposed to back up your reasoning for saying "good luck"?

vely implessive.

>>63978624
>Torps
Didn't we just start producing glide torps with a 200mile range or some shit?

https://theaviationist.com/2025/07/03/boeing-contract-torpedo-glide-kit/

>>63978652
>>63978958
He's still working on the old script that tells him the LCSs are frigates.

>>63979017
Simple, he posted the dorito or the Xi photoshop and that means it's over for the west. Why? Feng shei, century of the rabbit or something. Did you know China has a lot of people? It's so ogre for the decadent wect

>>63979015
They're there to protect US civilian ships (and taking grievous casualties in the process), not for military purposes.
It's amazing how many ameriturds don't know their own laws.

>>63978965
Chink navy's best naval SAM is an S-300 derivative. We all know how they fared against the Israeli air force. Good luck against the USAF and USN

>>63979095
> taking grievous casualties in the process
What the fuck are you babbling about?

>>63979072
>Did you know China has a lot of people?
I know they've been lying about it, a LOT. Some data even suggests they have less than a billion

>>63978014 (OP)
Post tonnage you coward.

>>63978267
I dunno. Do the patrol boats mount ASHM?

>>63978839
>under the constitution
Nigga it's the current year.

>all submarines listed as one type
Holy shit what a farce
Thats like putting a cvn in the same group as a riverine boat

>>63978675
If two ships are such a low number to be ignorable, I don't see why 8 aren't also ignorable

>>63979527
I mean, the chart also puts their 3 conventionally fuelled carriers (two of which don't have catapults) which can only have between 24-50 aircraft (the first two carriers can do between ~20-36 fixed wing + helis, the new catapult carrier can do ~50) on par with the Nimitz-class that is nuclear powered, has catapults, and has 80-90 aircraft.

>>63979582
It does that while ignoring 9 US LHAs which are more capable as carriers than actual chink carriers.

>>63978852
US Navy is the largest naval fleet with the US Naval Reserve fleet being second largest.

>>63979606
Nah it has LHA/LHDs on the next level

Though even then, it counts a Chinese Type 076 that is undergoing fitting out and sea trials until 2027/8, but doesn't count the America-class LHA that is supposed to be commissioned in 2026.

>>63978694
>PLARF
That's their new nickname from now on!

>>63978830
>The Coast Guard isn't a part of the US military, it's law enforcement.
Yes it is, just because it isn't DoD doesn't mean it's not Military, and if a wa breaks out it gets absorbed into the DoD.

>>63979625
That's not true, It's counting only the existing 4 Type 075 LHDs. If they actually counted the Type 076, It would've been 5

>>63979582
At least its still a carrier
Lumping all subs together is braindead

>>63979659
PLARF already exists, it the Rocket Force. I've always found it odd that they have a whole branch for rocketry and then give the above SHORAD duties to a different branch. Seems pretty retarded.

>>63979697
>another ship that still isn't in service being counted
wew you really proved me wrong there.

>>63978014 (OP)
>patrol vessels
lmao

>>63978014 (OP)
the reason the navy doesn't list patrol vessels is because they are in the coast guard.

>>63978830
Coast Guard's secondary purpose is to be a rapidly refit coastal defense force if all shit hits the fan and we have majority of naval forces deep in the shit with nothing protecting home territory waters. And yes, they are a branch of the military.

>>63979625
Calling them just helicopter carriers is complete bogus though. Not only can they carry a landing force but their deck can fit more VSTOL aircraft than those they count as full fledged carriers.

>>63978158
Retard alert

>>63978302
The Coast Guard is the most competent branch with the toughest training standards because it has the least amount of people joining it as a welfare service. Recuse Swimmer training is tougher than any combat training in any branch.

>>63978014 (OP)
Here's updated version I just made

>>63980723
>their deck can fit more VSTOL aircraft than those they count as full fledged carriers
Ehhhhh, not really.

Flight 0 America-class does 20 F-35Bs (or Harrier IIs) + 2 MH-60Ss at a "maximum" firepower loadout, with a more realistic loadout being 12 MV-22Bs, 6 F-35Bs, 4 CH-53Ks, 7 AH-1Z/UH-1Ys, and 2 MH-60Ss.

Flight 1 America-class has a reduced hangar capacity to make room for a well deck. I haven't seen any official numbers, but I would expect it to be more like 12-14 F-35Bs + 2 MH-60Ss. Or more likely a mix of ~6-8 MV-22Bs, 4-6 F-35Bs, 2 CH-53Ks, 3-6 AH-1Z/UH-1Ys, and 2 MH-60s.

China's full fledge aircraft carriers can do 24-36 fixed wing beating out the America-class (though barely) on their two older carriers, and their newest one can likely do upwards of 45-50, more than double an America-class LHA.

>>63980804
>submarines
only ~15 of those 65 subs are equivalent to the US's submarines.
>Destroyers
only ~40 of the 52 are modern enough to matter, and only ~8 of them are true matches for the US burkes.
>Aircraft Carriers
They're simply not directly comparable to current American carriers, maybe the Type 004 will be, but the Type 003 appears to be more analogous to the USS John F. Kennedy, and even then it has a slightly smaller airwing (type 003 has ~50 aircraft vs the JFKs ~80+)
The Type 001 and Type 002 are simply not up to snuff and shouldn't be in the discussion.

Mine warfare is also a pretty dumb one since most US ships have some mine warfare capability (either detection, countermeasures, and or deploying mines) The US doesn't have a dedicated mine countermeasures platform (unless you count the LCS boats) but i'd be willing to bet a year's salary that a US Burke doing mine warfare as an afterthought is more potent than any Chinese dedicated mine countermeasures platform.

>>63979015
To be fair, they were there in a law enforcement capability. The USN doesn't have the legal authority to arrest people, just detain them, which is why they'll either bring a couple of Coasties on board if they're doing smuggling prevention or they'll just have to hold you until the CG arrives to take you into custody.

>>63979068
By Chinese standards they are.
>>63979413
As ignorant as they are or working together?

>>63978014 (OP)
Remember that china does actually count it's militia naval vessels, which are mostly observation and patrol craft as 'war ships'. Some of those corvettes? Could easily be just big ass fishing boats with maybe a few MG's on it.

>>63978030

This is literally the only point of this board

>>63978014 (OP)
notice how even without the "patrol vessels," that the PLAN does not even count, the USA still get BFTO'd?
That's the premium mutt's cope tactic. They do that to scream "SEE THEY HAVE A LOT OF SHIPS BUT MANNNYYYYYYYYYYY OF THEM ARE JUST SMALL SHIPS"

>>63980939
the burkes with its shit radars (PissA in 2025 lamo) and small diameter VLS, shittier missiles and sensors, does not even match a 52D let alone a 055 kek

Every time people post this I point out the same thing (which people probably have already done) is that the majority of vessels that China has are green water at best. Where they classify a fishing bought with a PKM on it as a 'warship'.

Also, no? It has no frigates and patrol vessels? What?

>>63980939
We have a good mine countermeasure ship with the Chesty Puller. It's an inexpensive converted civvie ship with two levels that can launch a number of sea dragons and mine sleds from the lower decks among dozens of other uses. It's actually really interesting.

Where are the cruisers?

>>63981334
I didn't believe the US had no frigates so I look it up, it's true. They were decommissioned though the 90s and there are none in service.

>>63981355
It's a matter of definition. LCS would be a frigate in other navy definitions. Especially since it is basically the same size as a Perry-class. It's the same nonsense as Japan building a 22,000 displacement ship and calling it a 'destroyer' when it is clearly an aircraft carrier.

>>63981317
>the burkes with its shit radars (PissA in 2025 lamo)
All Flight IIA+ burkes are getting (or already have) AESA radar.

>>63978830
Coast Guard is one of the 6 armed branches part of the US military, you dipshit

>>63981545
>2 more weeks
yea as long as China sells them.

>>63978302
>that's were the rich hide their kids when it's conscription time
yeah...

>>63978014 (OP)
>A 100,000-ton Gerald R. Ford-class and a Type 037 sub chaser both count as one

>>63980804
>naval fleet strength
Sure is easy to compare "strength" when a patrol boat counts the same as a nuclear aircraft carrier, kek

Chinks really gonna get bodied if they ever try something

>>63980939
> only ~0 of those 65 subs are equivalent to the US's submarines.
FTFY

>>63978830
>>63978839
>The service has participated in every major U.S. conflict from 1790 through today, including landing troops on D-Day and on the Pacific Islands in World War II, in extensive patrols and shore bombardment during the Vietnam War, and multiple roles in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Maritime interception operations, coastal security, transportation security, and law enforcement detachments have been its major roles in recent conflicts in Iraq.

>>63978014 (OP)
>>63929821

>>63981776
If he didn't make his own thread, how would he meet his daily quota of % of catalog threads shilling for china?

>>63978014 (OP)
If only the US had an alliance network with both sizeable (holistic) naval forces and impressive shipbuilding capacity that could decisively weight in favour of them.

>>63978652
Wait. I thought the US defeated Japan because they could easily outproduce them. But nowadays Americans seem to struggle to build any ship while the Chinese can mass produce them. How are Americans going to win this one?

>>63979756
The Chinese need someone to blame when their soldiers are using cancerous rocket fuel to heat their coffee.

>>63981997
Mass producing ships is a waste of resources and a logistical nightmare.
China is going to find out the hard way that America always wins logistically and that we don't build beyond our capabilities for a reason.
We don't build ships just to say we have ships.
That's some retarded shit the Chinese navy has to do in order to pretend anyone takes them seriously.

>>63981997
By blowing up the Chinese shipyards.

It’s not a matter of having production capabilities. It’s a matter of having production capabilities where the enemy can’t get to them.

>>63978334
The USCG is literally the USN's first fleet. That's why fleet numbering starts at 2. FYI.

>>63978298

> Connies will start coming into service in the next few years

First "delivery" now in 2029 and continuing to slip, and that's still a long way away from being ready for an operational cruise. That's somewhere on n the mid 2030s.

>>63982005

> Fewer ships gooder!

Now that's a Hot Take.

>>63978083
are they any good?

>>63978014 (OP)
>150 Patrol Vessels
>https://youtube.com/watch?v=_PM4OHVVFng

>>63982422
Fishing trawlers with a mortar ratchet strapped to the hull are not warships, they would lose to ships from the 1800s.