You can talk all the nonsense that you want, but they have no nuclear power. And that's going to affect the effect of their logistics in actual conflict. All you're really talking about is your own projected theory that's clearly not a reality.

​@EMEM71it's not. They have no such thing that's demonstrated any such thing. Keep dreaming, you deluded nonsense.

预计上4月23号进行第一次海试。现在甲板舰载机降落标识线已经划好，如果没有其他工作进行。大概是海军节试航❤。

​@@feiwang5306 Are you even supposed to be here? Are you using a VPN?? Better watch you don't get caught and sent to a prison camp or have your social credit score tanked.

@@CheekyMenace I know you are here for your daily propaganda feed so have at it

Not in the age of A.I.

​@@kuangedNow you're deluding yourself. AI can only do so much. It can't man and run an aircraft carrier without an experienced crew.

@@joet7136 Manning and operating an aircraft carrier aren't an issue for any side. Missiles finding the enemy and hitting them are what required skill, and autonomous weapons systems are the great equalizer. You wait and see.

No it hasn't lol... The modern US navy has never faced an opponent as capable as china. Not even remotely. Even Japan wasn't anywhere close in terms of technological capabilities compared to china. For example... Japan during world war, lacked intelligence capabilities. China on the other hand, has extremely advanced intelligence capabilities that could track US naval assets all over the Pacific and around the world. China's smart satellites have tracked US assets multiple times in real time, using artificial intelligence. Assets as small as a car too. So, this amount of advanced intelligence makes it pretty much impossible for the US navy to hide during war, and they make US naval assets vulnerable. And this is one example out of many. I could bring up many examples, like drone capabilities, electronic warfare, underwater warfare, etc China is highly capable. The US has never faced an enemy as capable as china. Not even close...

After the conflict with Japan, the US navy has only "fought" against primitive militia that have no ability to actually defend themselves. Militias with no true capabilities whatsoever. Japan was the best the US navy faced, and Japan wasn't anywhere close to the current china in capabilities. Not even remotely. So, a conflict with china would be unlike anything the United States has ever experienced. The so called "experience" would be nothing in a war with china because it would be completely different from anything else the United States has ever faced

USSR were weak, and industry collapsed. Without western Land-Lease support, that includes not only tanks, planes, but also trucks, parts, rubber and roller bearings... Russia will be doomed. Napoleon didnt underestimate Russia, he didnt estimate right weather and supply lines.

​@@jakubstrumillo of course it's always the weather! Oh thee great generals, always seem to be too dense to supply army properly, little rapscallions! Also isn't it miraculous how that already collapsed industry managed to outperform german one in military production in just a few years? Damn there had to be whole manufactures shipped to Russia by that USA lend lease. Funny how USA managed that with lend lease to USSR only being about 1/3 of lend-lease to Britain? Damn you polske guys are marvelous historians, great analysis here Jacub dude

I believe that the PLA is underestimating Western forces, the US government does not underestimate China. At this point, is a matter of getting Americans to cut ties off with China, we are literally feeding the monster that wants to eat us for lunch. American corporations are still paying homage to Winnie the Xi, until that stops, we're not going to be able to succeed.

@@jakubstrumillo 👏🏻

​@@jakubstrumillo 🤡

Thank you well said,

中美需要合作而不是成为对手。

Iraq freedom? First time to hear, well said👏🏻

Well, since Iraq adopted the dollar, Saddam didn't get to switch to Euros, that's "Mission Accomplished". Did you see what I just did there? As for Nam, who needs their Tin if there's more in Indonesia and who needs their Rubber either? AmIright Pol Pot? By the way is GM gonna supply the trucks for China like they did for us? I mean, their factories are there... Plenty more like them as well.

thank you for your service

The best way I've seen it put is this way. There are 21 aircraft carriers in the world, the U.S. own 11 of them and all of the most advanced 11.

@@Compton3clipsed and exactly how many of those 11 Ac in commision? and deploy round the world.... 11 you mean 3-4 actual combat readiness

@@jetli740 US had like 5 aircraft carrier deployed last year at one time, USS Ford, USS Eisenhower, USS USS Ronald Reagan, and USS Theore Rosevelt. Plus USS Harry S Truman had just come of maintenance.

carrier don't rule the sea, submarine do. a single nuclear sub has enough firepower to wipeout not just a carier but it entire battlegroup. carriers are really what great power use to bully smaller countries now...

那只是现在而已，按目前速度，中国可以在20年内部署7艘新型航母，我们可是最近20年才开始发展航母的

Yes, Sam Fellman neglected to tell us the whole truth. Such dishonesty.

Sad to hear but not surprised. Well steam catapults and arresting gear wasn't perfected first time out either. Took 2 generations of carriers.

Under estimated China’s Fujian carrier - not the concurrent equipment - go check the Diplomat magazine.

Because it's make in the US.........!!!!!!!!!!!

Well the Chinese carriers are using the same system so something must be good about EMALs over steam. Steam catapaults weren’t perfect and required two generations of carriers to get to where it is now

And can go into the finer details like it’s using DC based, and not AC based of what US is trying to get into service

True the Fujin has a significantly smaller flight deck and still largely relies on the older system of a an angled flight deck to get it’s planes airborne due to the electromagnetic catapult only allowing led to be used in emergencies as it takes around 15-20 minutes to recharge after each use

And so what if China stole it? That just means their espionage branch is good enough to steal US military secrets. Having good espionage is invaluable during wartime.

Blunder by the Australians there on many levels. Good thing you pointed this out too because this video is quite biased and doesn't go into detail.

@@0bsolete_fps773 absolutely a blunder.. but also when china bought the scraped Carrier I’m sure we all weren’t aware of china’s true ambitions

@@derekreardon4427 Yeah true

中国在窃取美国还不成熟的电磁弹射技术🤣

是的，世界上第一个工业国家是自行车，呵呵。既然这么简单，那美国为什么不敢在西太平洋再大动作呢？害怕吗？

​@@user-hi6hl5pz5t风声雨声读书声声声入耳，家事国事天下事事事关心，发没发现英文圈青蛙特别多，所以这幅对联代表了咱们的世界观，知道天外有天，人外有人，从不妄自菲薄，也不高人一等，低调才是王道，哈哈！

Then why you guys so afraid of China lately lol

huge waste of money

u made it sounds so much smaller, only 4 acres?

@@datruth66392 It’s not

​@@datruth66392 nope

I see then as sitting ducks 😂😂

I get what you're saying but that kind of logic means that you're seriously underestimating Chinese naval capabilities. Even though experience is a factor, You don't need an equal amount of experience in order to level the playing field. Strategy, tactics, technology, weaponry and command structure play major roles. Add to that China has the late mover advantage and has a much shorter learning curve. Underestimating them would be to your own demise.

@@Aamirmhmd99 Not underestimating anything, I'm just stating the fact that the combat effectiveness of a carrier, is mainly a function of the effectiveness of carrier ops. And experience is decisive in this regard; ops on Nimitz-class carriers today, for instance, are a far cry from what they were even back in the Forrestal era. You simply can't replace the experience, that the U.S. Navy has gained by operating 78 aircraft carriers over its history (and over 50 of those in actual combat ops!).

Only "operation experience" matters. Combat experience is useless as war scenarios change after one decade and different nations. This is why China built Liaoning type 001 as a training platform rather than a combat one.

@@ajaykumarsingh702 Sorry, but you obviously have zero experience with this. You've completely overlooked the crucial role of things like running logistics during weeks of combat. And...well, the list is practically endless, so, tell you what, maybe a PLA Navy aircraft carrier XO can get back to me in 2035 and let me know how they're coming along?;-)

Only America and the banks controlling them want a war with China

The consequences of capitalism. Research the China WTO ascension. Had a few sane people, but money won out.

It's a love/hate relationshiop. The US hates China more though, I would say.

很简单，两个最大的贸易伙伴如果不是对手，其中一个不强大的话，那会变成单方面的掠夺. 这种事情历史上发生过不止一次

The J35 is spotted on the Fujian now while Fijian is doing his sea trials. J35 also under testing.

​@@babykingkong7010 I find it funny that the american version is F35 while the chinese is J35. lmaooooo

@@centurymemes1208 Letter J is the initial of Chinese character “歼”in Pinyin( Spelling in English Alphabet). “歼”has various of meanings. Mainly used to describe “to kill,to destroy,and to eliminate”. Chinese used it to name their fighters. But J also the initial of another same pronunciation character “奸”. Which means to rape and Fxxk. So J35 in the Chinese slang means the 35(f35)Fxxker. 😂

@@centurymemes1208 Letter J is the initial of Chinese character “歼”in Pinyin( Spelling in English Alphabet). “歼”has various of meanings. Mainly used to describe “to kill,to destroy,and to eliminate”. Chinese used it to name their fighters. But J also the initial of another same pronunciation character “奸”. Which means to rape and Fxxk. So J35 in the Chinese slang means the 35(f35)Fxxker. 😂

@@centurymemes1208 Letter J is the initial of Chinese character “歼”in Pinyin( Spelling in English Alphabet). “歼”has various of meanings. Mainly used to describe “to kill,to destroy,and to eliminate”. Chinese used it to name their fighters. But J also the initial of another same pronunciation character “奸”. Which means to rape and Fxxk. So J35 in the Chinese slang means the 35(f35)Fxxker. 😂

This is propaganda against China, so they must put a bad guy's music

drones :)

J35 on trial ......

@@jetli740 agreed. It certainly is on trial since it’ll be the main rival to the F-35 and new F/A-XX.

they claim its gonna be ready by the end of 2025

But the US navy has reported several times of issues that overshadowed the Ford class carriers. The US super carrier isn't 100% ready for war either. That's what you get when you try to build a perfect machine. The same thing flawed the F-35b.

who wrote the art of war again?

@@levelazn Nobody knows. Sun Tzu narrated the content. Who wrote that down is unknown.

Carthage also had decades of naval experience over Rome. Look who won at the end.

😂There’s nothing you can do against those mighty water cannons 😂😂

其实中国航母是纸做的😂

china is the mighty dragon. China would win in any war easily .

US cannot make phase array without material from China. no trade = no missile = no ability to continue the war. US can grandstand all it wants, but it is no longer an economic power, and you cannot sustain a military without an economy, sure US can keep borrowing money, but eventually that will lead to hyperinflation. US is ruling on borrowed time... China is not going to do anything. US biggest enemy is itself, it own ego, to spend beyond it means, it is repeating the mistake of the USSR. why should China interrupt the US?

If you non ironically use Solar and Wind in the same sentence as 'energy', you have proven propaganda is real power...

@@lutherbelle1 I have Rooftop Solar for 12 Years Now. Made in China. ❤️Thank You China. In the kitchen Inductioncooking, Microwave, Airfryer. And close in Boiler. No Gas in the Kitchen. A Boiler in the bathroom as Aquabattery. No Gas in the bathroom. Shower with Warm Water from my own Electricity from the Roof. A HT Heatpump LG Therma V Monoblock 60 degrees for Heating. Since 2012 no Gas no energybill. Makes me 3000 euro every year. I let a House with Rooftop Solar no Gas. and the Tenant makes 3000 euro a year. That is 6000 euro every year. Real Power. Thank You China ❤️👍☀️☀️☀️

@@willeisinga2089 China Bot says what? No it doesn't. If you are getting paid that means you are being subsidized. Govt essentially creating useful idiots that don't have the understanding to realize they are being lied to.

@@willeisinga2089 Quick, list as many things as you can that didn't happen...

One can argue that the US solely relies on its sheer firepower. The US famously lack in combat exercises when compared to much smaller armies from other countries. Maybe that's why they need all that firepower and still don't seem to be able to win a war against any decent adversary..

Never underestimate the ability of quantity to beat quality.

Off topic. The video compares carriers, not navies. Some in the comments have widened the scope of the conversation to navies, though.

@@MrBuckman420 that cuts both ways

@@MrBuckman420That rarely works in war.

I know right it should be the other way around, the way he position the comment as if America is copying the Chinese carrier very ignorant from the person making the video.

@@KieferNguyen America copying Chinese carriers, US had 3 classes of nuclear powered aircraft carriers before Chinese could get Liaoning in water. Enterprise class, Nimitz class and Ford class. You can add advanced Nimitz USS Bush and USS Reagan in there too, they have some capabilities of Ford.

5. and it can only sustain that for 9 month.

😂you believe it , so be it

Payload is the problem with ski jump carriers.

Britain is not using ski jump. They’re a STOVL types of ships.

@@kordellswoffer1520 so what's the difference

@@kordellswoffer1520 British carriers have ski jumps. *You can see them in photos.* Whether or not they use them is another question.

2049 is when.

Catch up to what? The world distrust China, all its neighbors hate them because of the intrusions in other country's sovereign borders.

No. The economy is breaking and without Western investment they'll collapse, all we have to do is stop trading with them especially the US and Europe. It's already happening. Cheap labour should have been totally ignored - why make a communist country a world power?

2100 is when

​@@levelaznbetter there not even close. Chinese ship are made out of scarp metal and bearly fictions

你在说美国吗！！！🤣🤣🤣👉🇺🇸💩🤡

Badly. I mean it’s the Brits…China quietly owns a quarter of their country

@@user-us6pj2jw1h The Brits that would kick your arse if the numbers were the same. Americans, all the gear, no idea! Also, you might want to check out the "GREAT" USA's debt level to China, probably more than you can afford!

If the numbers were the same? What a short straw you're grasping at lmao

@@richardhill5792 Bros mad that his country no longer has an empire.

Good

That’s not true and it how naval warfare or production work.

China’s major ports that produce surface combatants are on the coast and would likely be targeted by U.S. bombers (B-1,B-2, B-52).

@@garrettfulks2932 ha ha B1,B2 B52 all old craft yes they would success only if cn dont have any missile or jet

@@jetli740 “all old craft,” so is China’s H-6 bomber which makes up their bomber fleet which doesn’t carry as much as a B52, B1, and B2. Also all of those aircraft have been upgraded and are highly advanced. As for “they will succeed if China has no missiles and jets,” they can launch standoff JASSM and LRASM missiles at long range and could hit Chinese ports from a long distance.

@@garrettfulks2932 dont matter how u upgrade them, they are ww2 bomber it slow, easy take out

Yeah，using DC instead of AC is totally "imitation".

It is facinating how americans always try to simplify things. "Oh those two things all use electricity, so they must be the same."

It can’t carry as many planes as a Nimitz on the type 003 or 004

​@@garrettfulks2932 you have to remember that US carrier airwing are "attached" to their carrier, they don't always operate on the carrier, this can inflate the idea of how many plane is actually in the hangar, most of the time the extra plane just hangout in the flightdeck. the chinese do not include those in their numbers, their numbers are pure hangar space numbers... this give the illusion that they carrying fewer planes when they just have different doctrine in counting. for example the Nimitz can only carry 34 fighter in it hangar, 36 if you remove the E2s. yes that is still bigger than Liaoning's 22, but it alot less than people think. the 003 is much bigger than Liaoning...

@@lagrangewei The Nimitz is bigger than both the Liaoning and Shandong and the Fujian is also smaller. Also Nimitz and Ford hangars can hold up to 64 aircraft not 36. At max a Nimitz can carry up to 130 F-18s.

Village

This is not WW2 anymore, America has only 21 Advanced and expensive Aircraft Carriers and Amphibious Assault Ships compared to their prime in 1945 with 100 Carriers and 67 Carriers by 1969

@@inigobantok1579 Agreed, this is no longer WWII. The US Navy no longer has the necessary Cruisers Destroyers and Frights to patrol the oceans of the world and keep shipping lanes open for free and safe passage to trade and ensure the rules based world wide economy to function. That's gonna suck for most countries until they can get their own naval forces up to protect their own shipping. The US Navy Carrier Battle Groups are the 5 largest air force on earth and along with its submarines have the ability to take down any country

US can afford to lose carrier in the past because it has the mean to build new one... it can't do that anymore... what we are seeing is not risk averse, rather it is declining economic power, the media is just afraid to say it.

How? Your math is flawed

Obviously, Chinese does the math better.

The electromagnetic ejection technology on the Fujian aircraft carrier is one generation, or 20 years, ahead of the U.S. aircraft carrier

@@llkk290 No it's based on a maglev train technology and doesn't appear to work properly yet. It may never work.

@@Aamirmhmd99 Count the sorties possible with a normal complement of aircraft. If anything I'm overestimating China's carriers.

americans just floating around not even operational atm so who is worst off

@@densidste9137 what they have multiple active carrier groups...

i mean yea one of them is literally a soviet aircraft carrier and the others are just modified versions of it

​@@densidste9137 America spends more on their stuff and actually maintain their military assets. Don't confuse them with the Chinese.

Cause it will be obsolete by the time their Aircraft carrier becomes operational 😂

Cause it will become obsolete by the time their new carriers becomes operational😂

Cause it will become obsolete by the time their new carriers becomes operational😂

Well china hasn't been in a war for a long time

There is no evidence of the electromagnetic catapults in action. Probably, because it doesn't actually exist. Which is standard CCP operating proceedure: steal a technology that's twenty years old, claim you innovated or invented something, and lie about its performance.

the info is wrong... The moment I heard that Fujian is 2 gens behind because of "steam" powered catapult or it is "steam powered altogether", I just stopped watching...

The "US navy guy" is wrong. Fujian is powered by steam turbine, but the catapults are powered by electromagnetic source. The carrier left the port last year, but sea trials haven't started yet.

It has electromagnetic catapults, but the ship itself is conventionally steam powered. What I've heard in the past is that the Chinese keep struggling with the catapults because the conventional power plant can't seem to produce enough power for them.

​@@v12tommy thats the u.s Ford has trouble with the EMAL system. China was able to solve that issue

It's a suicide when they confront the us navy

With that kind of logic means that you're seriously underestimating Chinese naval capabilities. Even though experience is a factor, You don't need an equal amount of experience in order to level the playing field. Strategy, tactics, technology and command structure play major roles. Add to that China has the late mover advantage and has a much shorter learning curve. Underestimating them would be to your own demise.

@@Aamirmhmd99 they don't need to be underestimated they don't have the naval battle experience to go toe to toe with the U.S navy

@@arvinaguila2156 You don't need an equal amount of experience in order to level the playing field.

The electromagnetic ejection technology on the Fujian aircraft carrier is one generation, or 20 years, ahead of the U.S. aircraft carrier

I didn’t know Chinese is now a race. Amazing!😂

The point is here that right now they have become strong enough to dismantle the US navy easily. If the US navy wants to win then they have to throw everything they have and maybe then they might come out victor with acceptable losses. But that is not possible in reality as US cannot risk it's 2/3 navy sunken just to defeat China as China is not the only adversary of the USA and the US navy cannot leave many borders unguarded just like that

Sounds like we got a shill here. Take your BS propaganda elsewhere. Anyone that believes this garbage, go watch the the channels Serpentza, Laowhy86 and The China Show to see the truth that China doesn't want you to see. There's many reasons why the CCP keeps their internet separate from the rest of the world and censors everything to only show what they allow. They are lying to the world and driving opinions and divide in the US with huge campaigns of misinformation and propaganda, don't let them fool you to!!

Sounds like we got a shill here. Take your BS propaganda elsewhere. Anyone that believes this garbage, go watch the the channels Serpentza, Laowhy86 and The China Show to see the truth that China doesn't want you to see. There's many reasons why the CCP keeps their internet separate from the rest of the world and censors everything to only show what they allow. They are lying to the world and driving opinions and divide in the US with huge campaigns of misinformation and propaganda, don't let them fool you!!

Sounds like we got a shill here. Take your BS propaganda elsewhere. Anyone that believes this garbage, go watch the channels Serpentza, Laowhy86 and The China Show to see the truth that China doesn't want you to see. There's many reasons why they keep their internet separate from the rest of the world and censors everything to only show what they allow. They are lying to the world and driving opinions and divide in the US with huge campaigns of misinformation and propaganda, don't let them fool you to!!

Russia said their super sonic missiles couldn’t be intercepted but the Patriot missile system didn’t get the memo.

Basically a giant potent invincible turtle that has the best defense and a moderate offense ability

@@anthonyk423 If I were Ukrainian, I wouldn't agree with your point , so I'd like to see more and more people think the same like u.

@@Macsim-rs1dg weather you agree or disagree doesn’t matter the fact that it’s true is all that matters.

That's hilarious. Almost every single missile in existence is supersonic, and most of those are also actually hypersonic because it's just a speed classification and missiles move very fast. You meant to say hypersonic, by the way. They are also incredibly defendable, for reasons that probably won't be declassified for another 50 years.

Exactly

You mean the island that are sinking😂😂😂

Oh, you mean the illegally taken area. Gotcha

The US is the 3rd largest country on earth. Not the largest.

The largest is Russia, 2nd is canada, 3rd is US, 4th is China

People who pretend to be asleep will never wake up.😂

Put down your weed and go to sleep 😂

It already has, unfortunately

@@ChandanMishra-ql1biIt has not keep dreaming

@@user-me4tj9re7m”people who pretend to sleep will never wake up,” people who copy other people’s stuff will never surpass them.

type 003 is not nuclear power.

PLA itself said Fuijan is steam powered.

I think you're forgetting that China has the world's number one supersonic missile. This is why for nearly 20 years, American aircraft carriers have not dared to enter China's coastal waters.

Wrong. The Chinese carriers are 2+ generations behind in multiple facets from design to operations. Just because the Fujian has EMALS doesn't mean it's on par with the Ford. American carriers have been through dozens and dozens of battles against other enemy carriers and each generation of US carrier has improved based on what went wrong during the battles such as the fire suppression to department placement to combat operations. The Russians and Chinese have NEVER been in a engagement where their carriers have been tried and tested in actual combat and are building carriers blindly believing what might work as oppose to what actually works. An example of this is when Russia's Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov caught fire in 2019 and caused 1 death and dozens more injured. The reason for the death and injury was because of fire inhalation injuries. The Admiral Kuznetsov wasn't equipped with a proper fire suppression and exhaust system because the Russians have never had to deal with damages occurring on their carriers so their Designers didn't know how to adequately design their systems to protect the ship and crew. The Chinese are building their carriers on what they are learning from Russian designs, not American designs. American carriers were getting bombed on a monthly basis during WW2 so American engineers have had plenty of insight and knowledge on how to adequately design and protect the ship and crew. The Ford Class is even more indestructible after what was learned during the SINKEX operation of super carrier USS America in 2005 where it took them 4 weeks to sink a Kitty Hawk class super carrier. Even if the Chinese get their EMALS system to work, the Chinese don't have a jet that was designed to be catapulted. During the 50s, 60s and 70s, the US Navy was scrapping hundreds of jets because the jets weren't designed properly to handle the shear amount of stress the catapults were putting on the jet's frame and the jets were getting damage so badly after only a few launches. American designers realized they had to build and get their catapult system corrected first, and then they could build the jets after the catapult system was perfected. It still took multiple decades for the Americans to finally design a jet that was truly a carrier based jet which is now the F/A-18 Super Hornet. Even then, you still need the experience for carrier flight operations which the Chinese vastly lack which is why the Chinese are trying to buy ex-US carrier pilots as instructors for the PLAN.

You cannot buy experience. and the USA has this experience with its aircraft carriers, having used them since 1922 on all oceans and fought wartime in all conflicts without defeat.

​@@tdawg5742 You must be seriously stupid to even think that the Chinese are idiot enough to build an EMALS carrier without testing out its practicality and a jet developed exclusively for its operations (J-35, J-15). They didn't spend billions and wasted years just studying it. It is a well tested platform that surpasses everything the USA has. They have shown the world that they can achieve far more advanced technology in very less compared to what the US navy spends.

​@@tdawg5742 we are talking about technological generation not human experience. You went completely off topic and unable to address what i wrote. Someone who is inexperienced could choose to adopt to the latest technology quickly and this is what china did since the 2000s. Also, modern carrier operation is a completely different ballgame compared to ww2 era. So China can quickly catch up to US's modern carrier operation within 2-3 decades since they have closed the technological gap and both country's modern generation of naval experience came from peace time operation overwhelmingly. The US has never faced a near peer adversary in open blue water conflict for half a century. In conclusion: Having 100 years of carrier history is not a pre-requisite for being capable in modern carrier operation since modern carrier aviation only need 2-3 decades at most at the Chinese level of efficiency and shipbuilding. At least half of the US's long carrier aviation history are so long ago it doesn't contribute to modern carrier operation. Its years of experience plateau out and has diminishing returns vs China because china had leap frogged through several generations of carrier technology. In the future, with 6 carriers of 3-5 thousand crews operating at the same time, China's 2-3 decades carrier experience by mid century has pretty much zero gap with the US carrier operation.

@@hubpaq at least half of the experience is irrelevant to modern carrier operation, it's not a pre-requisite. It's like saying just because a university is 100 years old, a 30yr old university cannot surpass it and become a better one, which is far from reality.

Like the rest of the russian navy it is either mostly broken or is a submarine that used to be a ship.

The Kuznetsov is "undergoing refit" in Murmansk, where it has been sidelined for 6 years now. It is basically a joke of a ship. It is a sister ship to China's Liaoning carrier, which China purchased 68% complete from Ukraine, following the collapse of the USSR.

It's actually like 15-16, because some old carriers are still in the reserve fleet.

@@niweshlekhak9646actually it could be 30 since America has 19 “aircraft carriers” which is basically the same size or bigger than aircraft carriers in most countries. And then America has 11 “super carriers” which, being the largest and most powerful carriers plus combined with their fleets, are larger than most literal navy’s in the world.

That was water streaks. The reason why the US has so many carriers is because they are so spread out everywhere, they have to make sure the dollar is the center of trade(although the dollar power is now declining). China doesn't need that many. China only needs enough to defend their homeland and interests abroad.

cracks in deck? hahaha, you must watch too much Fa Lungong media

Control of global oceans is actually a delusion. No one truly controls it. Yes, there is dominance of the West in sea passes but that is due to its superior trade routes not the military prowess.

It's mainly US, other members of AUKUS are micro sized fleets not even in the same league who can barely defend their own home island. And one major conflict with China may destroy the Chinese fleet, but it will cripple US navy sacrificing 3-4 carriers in return thus effectively ending its global reach and the US led global order.

@@TelpPov The US could lose 3 carriers and still have 8 more and 2 under construction

America does not neccessary live for another century

@@velqt at any given time 4-5 U.S. carriers are refueling or refitting. that makes 4 left which effectively reduce U.S. global reach by half. Think about why some people want 12 carriers instead of 11. Some regional powers will start doing whatever they want with US no longer able to sustain long term intervention

Like they can make 200 times more fake Nike t shirts😂 Don’t talk if you don’t know about the ship building. They can’t build a proper single LNG tank that doesn’t leak mid ocean. In term of quality they are still miles away. In terms of air craft carriers. Yes they are 3 generations away. But they are gaining and gaining fast as well all know.

@@jskim8418Their industrial capability would be destroyed by sanctions, blockades, cyberattacks, U.S. airstrikes on ports, etc.

​@@jskim8418 Like you know anything about China ship building capacity and its industry...I suggest you go back and do your research !!! Obviously you're still thinking about the Nike days when they can build their own space stations. Times have changed..go back and educate your self.

By your stupid logic, then why did the Chinese army fight the Allies in 1950 with even more outdated weapons?

Have you forgotten that China has the most advanced Beidou satellite system in the world?

@@wallace6228They weren’t outdated back then as it was largely Soviet weaponry and US weaponry taken from the defeated nationalists. And they entered the way as they didn’t want a US ally on their border like that .

Boeing：？you are correct

you behind time, modern warfare it technology that count.

I would like to see the CAP {combat air patrol ) that the new comers manage. I assume that they would fly 3 aircraft each hour for 12hours. making it 36aircraft that are in the battle zone and 36 a/c being maintained or ready to launch. Some evolution and if you are the new kid on the block you better get your sh1t together. cause it is a bad world out there.

Funny thing half of what used daily in America made in China 🇨🇳 😂😂😂

中国人在欧美日韩台眼里就是有原罪😊

China may be lower quality but it could build 3 for the same price.

But no problems with iPhones made in China. So why cry now?

​@@Aamirmhmd99 is iphone gonna be used in the aircraft carrier

The Anglo-Saxons are all black now. The Anglo-Saxons are all a group of pirates. They will be abandoned by history.

😂😂😂 Look what happened to the British Empire.

⁠@@cr77702maybe you want to check how their economy is doing right now.

@@Slattatronnn 4.9% vs what? 2.3 % US gdp growth? lol

wrong, China has 2 carriers that work, while US has 5-6 because they other half are always under maint or refit.

@@TelpPovLiaoning very likely suffers from similar issues to Kuznetsov, and I wouldn't be surprised if Shandong did too

@@velqt liaoning came to China as empty husk with no systems installed. The deal was China gets the carrier with zero technology inside. Everything inside the Chinese carrier are domestic modern systems. For example Kuznetsov uses mazut fueled steam boilers and has no AESA radar. The inside of the Liaoning is totally unrecognizable from Kuznetsov even the compartments were totally rearranged.

@@TelpPov Their lame 2 carriers are tiny, can't operate at sea for extended periods (ours do and that's why they need repair and refitting, which any ship needs after extended voyages at sea doing what blue water navies do and that China's navy can't do), can't fly planes off fully loaded with munitions and fuel, pilots crashing on landing as often as not, fully 1/5 of China's planes can't fly at any one time ... yeah, right those little weenie carriers don't count.

​@@TelpPov Exactly. Even Liaoning is a serious threat if left un-countered during the battle.

It’s the truth though. It’ll take decades for China to create a fleet of aircraft carriers comparable to that of the U.S’ fleet. It’s simply another factor that will play a role in a potential firefight between the two nations.

You know u.s. have the world's biggest propaganda machine, good at boasting their military might but defeated by militants with ak47 running around in slippers. 😂😂

@@andrewlim7751Yes, they fought people with guns in a place where civilians and terrorist look the same. They didn’t lose, rather they lost the will to fight in Afghanistan or Iraq. Oh and the terrorists also charged straight into battle. Shot some people, then ran. Because that’s the truth of war. And why if China also fought the same war they wouldn’t even last a week.

@@alphateam3326 You got it wrong mate, there're clips of marines fleeing from militants but also clips of them using drones to target civilians, women and children, absolutely disgusting. 😁😁

@@alphateam3326 If you're still ain't convince, ask Snowden. 😁😁

If you think that's the only improvements to the ship then you might actually be dumber than a toddler.

Yep! It's American made by union workers.

And nuclear power vs conventional this is the most important difference

Its part of China

😂

Even Palestine is more of a country than Taiwan.

what is its offical country name?

@@hcjet it's not the people's republic of China.

There is no comparison. USA is major league, China is T ball.

@@telescopicS627For now

@@telescopicS627 USA is small morally

And you're always obsessed with us. What a shock.

@@telescopicS627these ships are all worthless against chinas hypersonic missile technology which is more advanced than USA