t_co
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2012
- Messages
- 2,538
- Likes
- 709
Right, my original analogy with Germany and Britain didn't imply that China would be using its carriers for global power projection. During the First World War, Imperial Germany used its High Seas Fleet to defend its North Sea and Baltic Coasts from invasion, and also form a "fleet in being" to tie down something like 2/3rds of the main battleships of the British fleet. In that respect, Chinese plans to build up a large carrier fleet are neither grandiose nor strategically mistaken, but they do make a full-blown Sino-US arms race more likely.One has to look at China's foreign policy before you get such grandiose ideas. They have chosen a path of regional aggression but global non-interference. The folly of trying to conduct anti-piracy patrols without forward basing agreements saw Chinese admirals embarrassed begging France for port calls. A CVN has a couple advantages, but range isn't one of them. It is limited by its escorts which aren't nuclear powered. The advantages are ready steam for catapults, more room for aviation fuel by eliminating bunker stores and cheaper fuel life costs.
The purpose of Chinese carriers are the same as the Soviets. To extend the range of aviation from the coast and protect vulnerable submarines. It is part of extending the defense ring to the second tier...
Since China will never have a true power projection carrier like CdG or Nimitz class, nuclear isn't really necessary.
Also, I'm not sure how Chinese admirals were 'begging' France for port calls, either. Such basing arrangements are routine in peacetime--and China used Sri Lankan ports for refueling during the operation...