Most powerful Navy's in the world today?

[steveedster]

Have found the following link, http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/

Just thought it would make interesting discussion.

I think the most powerful today are...

1. USA
2. UK
3. FRANCE
4. RUSSIA?


Anyone got any other suggestions? Looking at the above link I was surprised how big Taiwans Navy is, got seemingly everything except carriers.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

This is the HISTORY forum.

 

[nc-1701]

1. USA No Contest
2. Russia
3. France
4. UK
5. Japan
6. China

 

[steveedster]

Hmm yes Russia is an odd one a powerful Navy yes, but I feel tech wise about a decade out of date, it will be interesting when the UK builDs its supercarrier class in a few years time.

 

[Princeps]

5. Japan
6. China

I think without American help, China would swallow Japan...

 

[Azale]

So? The point is that it doesn't. Not to mention that Japan has a very proud naval history, while the Chinese are usually known for...well, not having one. Not unless you include a brief period of the Ming Dynasty.

 

[Evie]

Not to ruin your party, Princeps, but...

As of early 2007, in terms of major surface combatants :

China : 29 destroyers, 40 frigates.
Japan : 54 destroyers, 0 frigates.

While this appears to give China a slight number advantage, consider that destroyers are generally heavier and more powerful warships than frigates, that the vast majority of Chinesse ships are of 70s design (and based off an even earlier Soviet design), whereas only a handful of Japanesse ships are even that old, even those were based off contemporary american design, and virtually every cold-war-era ship still in service in the JMSDF has been extensively refitted and modernized.

Submarine wise is more or less the same story. Yes, China has a LOT of subs, but again - their latest subs are at best roughly comparable with late 70s and early 80s Soviet subs, whereas Japan's submarines (keeping in mind that Japan build their ships generally up to date with American tech) are all state-of-the-art ships.

If you bring in airpower, it's more or less the same. Sure, China has as a huge number advantage there, but Japan has the nasty piece of work that are the F-15Js and E-767 AWACS that go a long way toward evening out the odds.

Neither side has carriers ; Japan lacks the political fortitude and Chinesse the tech know-how to build them. Given current trends, I expect that to change - for both sides - within the next decade or two. Certainly, if China actually starts building a carrier or three, you can expect Japan to look hard at whether to call quit on the "no carrier" business.

------------------------

By the way, For comparison's purpose :

Japan : 0 Carrier, 54 destroyers, 0 Frigates.
France : 1 Carrier, 12 Destroyers, 11 Frigates.
UK : 2 Carrier, 8 Destroyers, 17 Frigates.

Frankly, until the Queen Elizabeth class enter service, the Royal Navy would probably lose a naval fight against Japan - 40-odd Sea Harriers just won't make up for that gross number advantage, especially given Japan's AEGIS ships. France isn't much better, even if their Charles de Gaulle is a BIT better than an Invincible ; they only have one.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

This is the HISTORY forum.

So just come back to this thread in 5 years . . .

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Moderator Action: Moved to Off-topic.

 

[Urederra]

Well, I guess Andorra will make the last position of the list.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

@Princeps. The Japanese Navy is one of the most capable in the world, with a wide array of AEGIS-like vessels. It may not project far from Japan, but it would manhandle China's navy.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

But Japan is not far from China itself, and the PLAAF possesses such massive numerical advantage that air superiority would be won and with it naval superiority.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

But Japan is not far from China itself, and the PLAAF possesses such massive numerical advantage that air superiority would be won and with it naval superiority.

Umm.... very unlikely. Japan has an air defense ability that would make short work of the few modern and many antiquated fighters China could throw at it. The Japanese Navy itself also has a very strong anti-air capability. Maybe in 10-20 years China could pose a threat, but throwing a bunch of planes from the 60s at the Japanese will only end in a lot of dead Chinese pilots.

In fact, I would say the Indian air force is far more capable than the Chinese air force. For that matter the Indian Navy is probably about as capable right now.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Maybe not the UK.

I was surprised to learn yesterday that their fleet is now the smallest since the 1500s. It also said that their current British navy is smaller then France's and comparible in size to that of Turkey and Indonesia.

 

[Evie]

The PLAAF's number superiority means nothing unless they can get within range of the Japanesse fighters.

Which, considering that we're talking the F-15J/AIM-120/E-767 combo, is a tall order indeed.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Maybe not the UK.

I was surprised to learn yesterday that their fleet is now the smallest since the 1500s. It also said that their current British navy is smaller then France's and comparible in size to that of Turkey and Indonesia.

You are confusing quality and quantity - both are important. Perhaps the French Navy is better, perhaps it isn't. But there is no way in hell that Turkey or Indonesia have a navy that could rival Britain's. Indonesia is where 40 year old destroyers go to have a second life after European nations find them inadequate. Turkey isn't bad, but still not as high a quality as Britain, meaning any small quantitative advantage isn't very meaningful.

 

[GinandTonic]

Powerful at what? Air power? Sub/ ASW? Nuclear capability? Ability to land an expeditionary force? Defend their own waters? Generally naval power is a means to an end.

If the sub conflict is lost then kiss goodnight to all the rest of the fleet. If all you have is subs then your victory is rather hollow since you achieve very little with it.

In terms of capability a lot of the unglamerous ships are the most useful, the transports and oilers and resupply vessels.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Britain is very capable with all of the logistical support. Which is why Britain was able to send a fleet all the way to the freaking Falklands, while Indonesia never could support such an operation.

Though, subs from the 1950s and 1960s start to lose some of their value (which is what China has basically got).

 

[GinandTonic]

That being the area the RN is most over-representated in. Post WW2/ cold war sub/ asw fixation.

Too many subs with no-one to fight, too few surface vessles with lots of people to fight.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Maybe, but I would trust the RN surface fleet to give a terrible beating to anyone but the US, Russia, France, or Japan. Those countries could either win handily, or make a good contest of it under certain conditions.