The American Dream will remain a dream

Lose to China

The fact that they are losing to China was understood in Washington quite a long time ago. This is where this program came from.

I'm following development closely. fleet The United States, as well as other major players in this field. Even then, this program caused me "vague doubts". And now the report to Congress directly states that the "355 program" is not feasible, even theoretically. This is despite the fact that the Americans, it is not clear why, decided that China would stop at 400 ships.

The Navy's current and projected size and composition, the Navy's annual ship acquisition rate, the prospective availability of the Navy's shipbuilding plans, the ability of the U.S. shipbuilding industry to meet the Navy's shipbuilding plans, and the Navy's proposals to decommission existing ships. For many years, oversight of this was handled by the Congressional Defense Committees.

In December 2016, the Navy released a force structure goal that calls for the creation and maintenance of a fleet of 355 ships of certain types. The target of 355 ships was a U.S. policy under Section 1025 of the National Defense Authority Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (HR 2810/PL 115-91 of December 12, 2017).

The 355 ship goal predates the national defense strategies of the Trump and Biden administrations and does not reflect the new, more distributed fleet architecture (i.e., new mix of ships) that the Navy wants to move towards in the coming years.

The Navy and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) have been working since 2019 to develop a successor to the 355 ship target that will reflect the current national defense strategy and new fleet architecture, but have been unable to reach a conclusion on a successor target.

Future fleet

On July 18, 2023, a press report stated that the Navy had submitted to the Congressional Defense Committees on June 20, 2023, a congressional-approved Combat Forces Ship Assessment and Requirements Report (BFSAR), calling for a future fleet of 381 manned ships.

It's not clear if the administration approves of a fleet of 381 ships as the new navy size target.

The Navy's FY 2024 Proposed Budget provides $32,8 billion in shipbuilding funding for, among other things, the purchase of nine new ships, including one Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine (SSBN-826), two strike submarines Virginia-class boats (SSN-774), two Burke-class destroyers (DDG-51), two Constellation-class frigates (FFG-62), one AS(X) submarine tender and one John Lewis-class tanker (TAO-205) .

The Navy's FY2024 proposed budget also proposes decommissioning 11 ships, including two relatively young littoral combat ships (LCS). The Navy's FY2024 Five-Year Shipbuilding Plan (FY2024-2028) includes a total of 55 ships, or an average of 11 ships per year. Given that the average surface service life of Navy ships is 35 years (a planning factor assuming that all Navy ships will remain in service until the end of their expected service life).

In August 2003, the size of the navy fell below 300 warships (the types of ships that count towards the stated size of the navy and the target structure of the navy of 355 ships), and since then has generally remained between 270 and 300 warships. As of August 28, 2023, there were 297 warships in the Navy.

The Navy projects that under the FY2024 budget, the Navy will have 293 warships at the end of FY2024 and 291 warships at the end of FY2028.

The FY30 (FY2024-2024) 2053-year shipbuilding plan, similar to the FY30 (FY2023-2023) 2052-year shipbuilding plan, includes three potential 30-year shipbuilding profiles and the resulting 30-year headcount projections called PB2024 (Fiscal Year 2024 Presidential Budget), Alternative 2 and Alternative 3.

PB2024 and Alternative 2 assume no real (i.e. higher than inflation) growth in shipbuilding financing, while Alternative 3 assumes some real growth in shipbuilding financing. According to PB2024, the Navy's strength will increase to a peak of 331 manned ships in FY 2039-2040 and then decline to 319 manned ships in FY 2053.

Under Alternative 2, the Navy will increase to a peak of 331 manned ships in FY 2039 and then decline to 328 manned ships in FY 2053 under Alternative 3.

Hack and predictor Aviator

In general, it can be summarized that even these figures look too optimistic. Considering the fact that the Washington administration repeatedly draws the country into very costly adventures. Plus, rising prices for raw materials and energy, which makes ships more and more expensive. If the first Bjorks cost a billion each, then the last ones are already $2,2 billion.

In general, we stock up on Pepsi-Cola and popcorn, it will be interesting.

Comments

[Stas157]

. stock up on Pepsi-Cola and popcorn, it will be interesting.

I can't laugh at the striped ones! What idiots they are!! They can’t even build a fleet properly! Yes, they will soon collapse the dollar in general !!! Losers!
Whether business at us affairs are with respected Vladimir Vladimirovich. Let them envy!

[Doccor18]

Quote: Stas157

I can't laugh with striped ones! What kind of horses are they!! They can’t even really build a fleet!

Well, yes, they definitely can’t, just every 3-4 years they will introduce a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and UDC into the fleet, a year later - SSBN and KSS/tanker, annually: 2 destroyers and MAPL... Definitely “club-armed”.. .

[TermNachTer]

Three - four years a new aircraft carrier?)))) "Gerald Ford" - sawed for 12 years))) existing aircraft carriers are under repair for six years, instead of the prescribed four. The Los Angeles-class nuclear submarine has been under repair for six years, instead of the prescribed two. This is me, offhand - not particularly going into details.

[Doccor18]

Quote: TermNachTER

Gerald Ford" - sawed for 12 years)))

This is the lead ship in the series.
Kennedy is scheduled to be handed over on the 25th, Enterprise on the 28th, Miller on the 32nd...

Quote: TermNachTER

operating aircraft carriers are under repair for six years, instead of four. The Los Angeles-class nuclear submarine has been under repair for six years,

What are you trying to prove? That the democrats have problems with a wagon and a small cart? So no one argues. Who doesn't have them? It’s just that everyone has different ones, someone has nothing to eat, and someone has small pearls ...

[TermNachTer]

I'm not talking about the Democrats, etc., but about the Navy. The fact that the Kennedy will not enter combat service in 2025 is already clear. Others can still be guessed at.

[Plover]

"Gerald Ford" - sawed for 12 years

And how much do our ships at times smaller displacement and complexity do? I understand if a person went through the strait at Cape Horn alone, he begins to spit against the wind.
But we didn't stop writing like that. First, you yourself need to make an aircraft carrier of the lead series of similar complexity in less than 12 years, and then describe everything so colorfully.
But the message is clear - they have devastation and degradation. But for us it reads like an excuse for our own deeds

[TermNachTer]

But we did not "rest against the horn" with China, and we do not stick our penny everywhere. For Russia, this is a chance to raise industry, science, and the fleet.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: TermNachTER

But we did not "rest against the horn" with China, and we do not stick our penny everywhere. For Russia, this is a chance to raise industry, science, and the fleet.

There are no more chances.
This war was not invented to tear off Ukraine or drill Putin.
It was invented to exclude the Russian Federation from the world economy and prevent the development of the sixth technological structure in the Russian Federation.
And if we do not give an opportunity for the next 15 years, then we will never enter it on our own.
This is reality.

[Mustached Kok]

There were chances 20 years ago, when, at the end of the crises of the 90s and high oil prices in the 2000s, it was necessary to invest in the development of science, industry and the fleet!
And now everything, the chance is gone! Now the country is mired in political struggle with a weak economy, while "sworn friends" will no longer give us a head start or help, as it could be in the same 2000s

[SovAr238A]

Quote: TermNachTER

Three - four years a new aircraft carrier?)))) "Gerald Ford" - sawed for 12 years))) existing aircraft carriers are under repair for six years, instead of the prescribed four. The Los Angeles-class nuclear submarine has been under repair for six years, instead of the prescribed two. This is me, offhand - not particularly going into details.

What's wrong with Lada? Nakhimov? Chabanenko?
Kuznetsov?
That's just me, offhand, not particularly going into details ...

[TermNachTer]

Everyone will be in order, in due time. But most importantly, they will not have to "cut" 400 Chinese ships, if God forbid, it will come to that. But you won’t envy the most advanced and powerful, because, at some stage, he can meet with the Chinese, without pants at all))) because sailors are now taught not to master their specialty, but to recognize 76 genders)))

[Plover]

China faces stagnation worse than Japan's "lost decades." “It’s time” was about 10 years ago, when there was still at least some competence in the construction of aircraft carriers. Now you need to start everything not even from 0, but from -5. The research cycle will be simply enormous, and taking into account how much time it now takes from laying to launching vessels that are much less technologically advanced, the construction cycle will be colossal. If we take into account the looming problem of a shortage of ships of much smaller classes... In general, your optimism is a little better than sabotage.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Plover

China faces stagnation worse than Japan's "lost decades." “It’s time” was about 10 years ago, when there was still at least some competence in the construction of aircraft carriers. Now you need to start everything not even from 0, but from -5. The research cycle will be simply enormous, and taking into account how much time it now takes from laying to launching vessels that are much less technologically advanced, the construction cycle will be colossal. If we take into account the looming problem of a shortage of ships of much smaller classes... In general, your optimism is a little better than sabotage.

So.
Excessive urya-patriotism, transcendental overestimation of one's forces and means - this is worse than sabotage and betrayal ...
For it violates all reference systems of coordinates and leads to a fairy tale about the "Naked King".

[TermNachTer]

Do not rush to conclusions. China has only a written history of more than 2500 years and has always managed to find a way out. They survived the Mongols, and the Manchurs, and the opium wars and the Japanese. So let's see.

[Plover]

The point of your opus is that the United States is far from doing well with its fleet, and besides, China is still gaining strength. This is a flawed position that says nothing about us, says nothing about what will happen if things are still “normal” with the US Navy, and China has problems.
Those who planned the Northern Military District reasoned in much the same way - Ukraine doesn’t have much of an army and they won’t help them - they’ll be afraid of us. And when it turned out that even “very” and help kept coming and coming, they began to scratch their turnips. They still itch.

[TermNachTer]

What's wrong with SVO? Russia alone opposes NATO, and so far everything is working out, maybe not as fast as we would like. And most importantly, Brussels understands that there are no prospects and that it is necessary to negotiate.

[Plover]

in Brussels they understand that there are no prospects and they need to negotiate

I don’t understand, are you from Brussels or what? How do you KNOW that Western countries will negotiate? The latest news on bmpd - in Germany they built and commissioned a plant for the production of ammunition for the Gepard self-propelled gun. In the USA, production of art will begin in 2024. shells in factories mothballed since the Cold War; AMRAAM production has increased and will continue to increase.
This is where all the “interests” get the information that the opponents are “tired” and “I understand that we need to negotiate”? We need to leave these wet dreams behind.

[TermNachTer]

I'm from Ukraine. I know what’s going on there because my friends live in Poland, Germany, Belgium, Italy, France, England. And if they used to say: “It’s hard,” now: “It’s become really bad.” So, we will have to come to an agreement; on what terms is another matter.

[Plover]

I know what’s going on there because my friends live in: Poland, Germany, Belgium, Italy, France, England

And this is the argument? I also have friends in the USA and Germany. Both from pre-operative ones and those who “left” recently. They don’t work on farms, of course, but the Germans and Americans have no longer worked in greenhouses. They are still very, very far from “totally bad.” If your friends are at the bottom of the social ladder in European countries, then you don’t need to assume that the entire society of these countries is also at the bottom.
At first, everyone in the USSR was waiting for the “inevitable fall of the imperialists,” now you and others like you are waiting for “inevitable negotiations.” This is a flawed strategy that involves expecting something from others. You will never wait, no matter how much you want. Alas.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: TermNachTER

Everyone will be in order, in due time. But most importantly, they will not have to "cut" 400 Chinese ships, if God forbid, it will come to that. But you won’t envy the most advanced and powerful, because, at some stage, he can meet with the Chinese, without pants at all))) because sailors are now taught not to master their specialty, but to recognize 76 genders)))

When you wrote about 76 genders, I realized that you are incurably ill with propaganda, although you are trying to show that you know how to understand technology.
You simply have zero technical arguments and knowledge of management principles.
Just zero.

[TermNachTer]

Regarding gender, I was not joking at all, and not funny at all, to those normal ones, of whom there are still few left in America. And do not talk about Kremlin propaganda. Two of my friends live in the USA, in Wisconsin and California. So, both of them live in small towns, they are still fine, but in big cities, it’s just darkness. One was recently in Detroit - this is horror, without any exaggeration.

[TermNachTer]

They do not introduce a new aircraft carrier every 3-4 years. And it’s not so rosy with the UDC either, the eighth “San Antonio” is still “hanging”, and the fleet already wants to write off two “Island”, but Congress does not yet allow it. SSBNs and MAPLs are also not very smooth)))

[antivirus]

All is well with them.
Owners make more money. And not only in the US state-ve.
And the fleet is superfluous for them. Let the Johns suffer with pennants, an independent force solves its own problems. Each

[Escariot]

That is why the United States is intensely pestering the Allies to rebuild their fleet. South Korea, Japan, Australia - everyone is ready to lend a helping hand

[Vadim S]

This is what a sea power means! Not how many seas wash it. Who sowed the seas with their kings is the one of the sea! Now China too, they can only jostle for first place in everything.

[Avi2023]

Russia must form a single group. It will start with a currency. It will move to a single currency. Open borders. And an army.
"United. Russia should create an anti-Western or neutral bloc. And also develop ten thousand nuclear warheads. Of these, three thousand intercontinental missiles that will reach the West to produce something destructive in response to the West."

[Negro]

Yeah.

After the first pearl, "they lose to China," climbed down. Did Ryabov get to the Chinese fleet?

But no, he's not.

[TermNachTer]

And what is wrong in the presentation or conclusions? Voice it.

[Negro]

These are not conclusions, these are slogans. The capabilities of the Chinese and American fleets are incomparable, and this cannot be changed in the next 30 years by any force. China is building the first full-fledged aircraft carrier, the Chinese Kitty Hawk, which will be combat-ready in 5 years, and is designing a second, conditional Chinese Ford, which will be combat-ready no earlier than the mid-30s. After this, China will be able to form 2 AUGs against the Americans’ 11 at the moment. In order for one AUG to be constantly in combat service in compliance with all schedules, it is necessary to have at least 4 of them in the fleet. You stated here (if you translate your slogans into specifics) that the 11:0 score in attack aircraft carriers is compensated by the overwhelming superiority of the Chinese in corvettes and frigates: about 200 troughs 53, 54, 56 projects versus about 40 LKS. But I would say frankly that in such a situation I would not bet money on corvettes, which by American standards are not ships of the ocean zone at all, against even one AUG.

And problems - everyone has problems. But different.

[TermNachTer]

You will divide the number of AUGs by the water areas that need to be controlled. Regarding 11 mattress AUGs. When did you observe all 11 AUGs at sea at the same time? NEVER))) constantly someone is in repairs. I have been closely watching the mattress Navy for more than 10 years. And the situation is getting worse all the time. In the good old days, up to 6 AUG was constantly present at sea. Now 3, very rarely 4. Specifically, now at sea "Gerald Ford" and fffssssёё))) submarines are even more fun, in repairs and maintenance - 39% of the payroll. Of all MAPLs, almost half are not "on the go". And according to the US Congress, in the near future, the situation will only get worse. Therefore, with your numbers you can scare a kindergarten, but people who do not understand.

[Negro]

Quote: TermNachTER

You will divide the number of AUGs into the water areas that need to be controlled.

The score is not in favor of the Chinese. They have American allies on the sea from the north, east and south (who together, even without the Americans, have approximate parity with China in conventional weapons). But there are no other sick people to compete with the Americans at sea. There is no need for a fleet of two oceans, there is only one enemy. More precisely, there are a couple of great geopoliticians here, but they are completely clowns.

Quote: TermNachTER

In the good old days, up to 6 AUGs were constantly present at sea. Now 3, very rarely 4.

Of course you are lying. Combat service is no more than a quarter of an aircraft carrier's time. Schedules can be disrupted (I remember when Trump decided to scare Kim, he brought in 4 AUGs at once), but this is not good for the cause: either the ship repair deadlines or the air wing training deadlines are missed.

The Americans have from 0 to 3 AUGs on combat duty at the same time. 0 was, but rarely, when the Enterprise was written off and the Ford had not yet been introduced. 4 or more happened a year like this in 90, when the fleet literally had 16 ABs in the fleet for literally six months, versus 11 now. 6 never happened (after the Essex era), only during periods of exacerbation with the breakdown of ship work schedules. That is, for some Storm in the Desert they could have collected 6 (out of 15), but for a short period and with a long-term “tail” of disrupted schedules.

Quote: TermNachTER

in submarines it’s even more fun, in repairs and maintenance - 39% of the payroll. Of all the MAPLs, almost half are not “on the move”

Combat readiness in the region of 50% does not pose any problem. For the Russian Navy, for example, it is unattainable. It has happened better in America, but it has never happened in other places like in America. It doesn't only apply to ships.

Quote: TermNachTER

Therefore, your numbers can scare a kindergarten, but people who don’t understand

How glad people who understand remember the countless Soviet fleet and its real combat effectiveness.

[TermNachTer]

Phrase: you are all lying)))) I really like it))) on the usni.news website they constantly post the location of the AUG and landing groups. Come and see, the site has never been the Kremlin)))

[Negro]

There I will see your 6 AUG "in the old days"? The fact that now they are from 0 to 3, I already know, I don’t need a site for this.

[TermNachTer]

Then I don't understand what we are arguing about? I’m saying that the situation in the US Navy is bad and continues to get worse, while the Chinese fleet, on the contrary, is “on the rise.” And I don’t see any real prospects for mattress covers at this stage. Just increase shipbuilding and repair capacity, but the effect will be in 5-10 years. But I don’t see this yet, except for the attempts of individual companies to “get into” the cut of the Navy budget, which I already wrote about.

[Negro]

Quote: TermNachTER

I'm saying that the situation in the US Navy is bad and continues to get worse

Crappy by American standards and getting worse (in some aspects) or improving (in other aspects) by American standards. The Americans are still in their own league in terms of the fleet. As in many other aspects.

Quote: TermNachTER

The Chinese fleet, on the contrary, is “on the rise.”

The Chinese fleet is on the rise and in 10 years will be able to compete with 1/10 of the American one. This is if you look only at the ship’s composition and do not take into account the 100 years of experience of one of the parties and the complete lack of it on the other.

Quote: TermNachTER

increase shipbuilding and repair capacities, but the effect will be in 5 - 10 years

They can increase their shipbuilding and repair capacities significantly with one signature - and the Japanese/Korean capacities are at their disposal. Recently it was reported that auxiliary vessels are already being serviced at Indian shipyards.

This solution is, of course, worse than restoring national capabilities, but it is fast and free. Your speculations about the real crisis of American commercial shipbuilding are worth no more than, for example, statements that the Americans do not have their own steel industry (after the collapse of US Steel), so they are finished anyway - it is impossible to fight without iron.

[TermNachTer]

Dear, have you seen the shipyard?))) at least from afar?))) when the plant is designed for the construction of tankers or bulk carriers, with one snap of your fingers you can break your fingers or your brains))) combining Japanese (South Korean) hulls with American “stuffing” - these are years. so, it’s too late to drink Borjomi, there was no need to kill your shipbuilding industry. Even the mattress workers themselves say that two Chinese shipyards deliver more ships than the entire mattress shipbuilding industry

[Tim666]

Quote: TermNachTER

And what is wrong in the presentation or conclusions? Voice it.

Everything, the whole article is guardian nonsense, according to the principle everything is bad with them, but everything is OK with us! Tell us better about the technical moment in Chinese cartography, where a piece of the Russian Federation is no longer the Russian Federation. All countries who saw such technical moments in relation to themselves expressed their indignation at the Chinese, but everything is according to plan for us - this is just a technical moment. Maybe if China takes the entire Far East, this will also be a technical moment, well, then the fleet is not needed, because we are not going to cut with the Chinese ...
And you shouldn’t worry about the USA, they calmly write off ships of the same age as Kuznetsov, and do not hope that they will return to service in due time. By the way, there was a cool Chinese response to such "objective" criticism like yours, when someone from the Russian defense industry said that Liaoning was inferior to the promising Storm, the Chinese said, you build it yourself first, and then criticize)))

[TermNachTer]

especially for you, I post the population density of China by province. In the north, the density is minimal and continues to decrease, because in the south the climate is milder, and it is easier to find work and pay more. In China, this problem is considered quite seriously, the state encourages people in every possible way to stay in the north, but it does not work out very well. So, it's time to say that China will lease the northern territories to Russia, when the Chinese finally dump them from there.

[TermNachTer]

Don’t worry about the peers of Kuzi, they write off ships for 5-7 years, because it’s complete bullshit))) in the USA, it’s not the fleet, and not the design engineers, who determine which ship (aircraft, tank) is needed, but Congress. And the congress needs what is more expensive, because the "rollback is fatter"))) that's where the F - 35, and the "littoral ships", and the "zumwalt" and all the other nonsense that they won't order in any normal country come from .

[Wizzzard]

"That's where the F-35s come from" ... And what's wrong with the F-35, even if the F-16s cause a very hysterical reaction?

[TermNachTer]

Everything is fine))) as in that old joke that the ship is good, only afraid of water))) well, and also the price)))

[Doccor18]

Quote: TermNachTER

But Congress needs what is more expensive, because “the rollback is fatter..

If it were so, then Zumwalts/Seawolves and B-2/F22s would have been riveted in batches, but precisely because of the prohibitive cost they went to the cheaper Berks/Virginias and B-21/F35s..

Quote: TermNachTER

that's where the F-35 comes from

The cost of F35 is constantly decreasing, the latter are cheaper than European fours...

Quote: TermNachTER

Zumwalt" and all other nonsense that they wouldn’t order in any normal country

Zumwalt is an experimental ship from A to Z. The number of innovations on it is off the scale, so it is logical that it became a difficult project, very expensive and did not become truly serial.

[TermNachTer]

Shitty experiment))) at a cost of 24 lard, i.e. cost of a full AUG. And by the way, the Zumwalts were planned in a series of 20 units, only when they realized that this bullshit was decided to be limited to three. And now they don’t know what to do with three. The Navy wanted to write it off, but Congress did not allow it. The mattress pads have a wonderful system, even worse than in Russia)))

[Doccor18]

Quote: TermNachTER

And by the way, "zumwalts" were planned in a series of 20 pieces.

Initially - 32 units.

Quote: TermNachTER

only when they realized that this bullshit they decided to limit it to three.

Only when they realized that a lot of innovations turn out to be very expensive (AU and ammunition for them), complex (EU and a new TLU) and very long in development (ATV and a family of new CDs for a large TLU), and there are no worthy opponents at sea left, the congress naturally raised the question: “Why..?” And the program was cut back: 32-20-12-3, budget cuts (which actually put an end to the ship), the power plant and ARVs are being brought to this day to mind, the weapons have been abandoned altogether ..

Quote: TermNachTER

And now they don’t know what to do with three

Of course, in this form they are still experimental platforms. In principle, they are used in this vein now.

Quote: TermNachTER

The fleet wanted to write off

Not certainly in that way. The fleet needs fighters, especially now, and funding is strictly regulated, plus the aggravation of problems with inflation, when even the initially budgeted for price increase does not cover costs now, and will not cover in the future. Therefore, the Navy decided to extend the life of only proven platforms, Zumwalt naturally did not fall into the number of "proven" ones.

Quote: TermNachTER

but Congress did not allow

Politicians sit in Congress, in most cases people far from understanding the needs of the Navy, payroll numbers are important to them, and people and combat readiness are less worried about them.

Quote: TermNachTER

Wonderful mattress system

A system as a system, not without distortions and errors, like any other system invented by people. By the 80s of the 20th century, this system gave birth to hitherto unseen naval power to crush the nascent Soviet naval power, but after the collapse of the USSR, they relaxed, and the system began to falter.
Now at Zumwalt they are working out the power plant and radar, they will also work out a new TLU for a hypersonic missile, and when they bring this to mind, then they will start a new line of destroyers to replace the Berks.

[TermNachTer]

Couldn't you understand before? that the shells come out with a “lemon” of bucks, it was necessary to “cut down” three hulls? They all knew very well, but Fashington hucksters love to eat very much))) all these fairy tales about democracy, transparency of power, equality before the law - all this is bullshit))) look at Hunter - for the list that he is presented with, any other, for a long time would sit. And this is like water off a duck’s back, and as long as dad is in power, he won’t get a damn thing.

[TermNachTer]

They abandoned the series of 32 buildings at the design stage, when they realized that they were “dancing.”

[Yaroslav the Wise]

What 300 ships are we talking about? Especially until the 2050s. They did not gather today or tomorrow to fight with Russia! And this is a hundred percent nuclear war. And then such * Napoleonic * plans! Either they are definitely not going to fight with Russia right now, or they just smelled something wrong again.

[TermNachTer]

The US will never go to war with Russia, because this is a war of mutual destruction. They love their old skins too much)))

[m4rtin.frost]

Why do they need 350 ships? Everyone has long understood that mattress covers are not going to fight for anyone!

[Tim666]

Quote: TermNachTER

especially for you, I post the population density of China by province. In the north, the density is minimal and continues to decrease, because in the south the climate is milder, and it is easier to find work and pay more. In China, this problem is considered quite seriously, the state encourages people in every possible way to stay in the north, but it does not work out very well. So, it's time to say that China will lease the northern territories to Russia, when the Chinese finally dump them from there.

These fairy tales told in recent years somehow do not agree with the construction of a network of excellent roads from the Chinese side. And in order to extract resources, a lot of people are not needed, today one harvester replaces 100 people with chainsaws, not to mention two-handed saws.

[TermNachTer]

A friend whose parents live in Siberia says that yes, in the 90s, there were a lot of Chinese. But as the standard of living in China rose, they began to leave. Now only those who have families and businesses remain. So don't, about Kremlin propaganda)))

[Negro]

Quote: TermNachTER

So no need, about Kremlin propaganda)))

In the heady 90s, salaries north of the Amur were higher than those to the south. Now it’s the other way around, and very much the other way around. You are right, this is not the most convenient moment for Kremlin propaganda.

[TermNachTer]

You contradict yourself. Write that roads are being built and one harvester replaces a hundred people))) so, in order to bring this harvester into the taiga, you need a road, and maybe a bridge if there is a river there. And all this needs to be built. But the harvester needs to be refueled, for this you need a tanker, and for it you need a road, etc. This is in the computer game "Empire" - everything is simple, you click the mouse and everything is built. In real life it is much more difficult)))

[Mustached Kok]

Well, the American fleet really has an amazing crisis situation. They have the best aircraft carriers in the world. They have the F/A-18, the best carrier-based fighter, and are complemented by the not-so-best, but completely new F-35. And this is combined with the fact that their UDCs are also one of the best in the world and also in large quantities. Their fleet is supported by luxurious naval aviation capable of searching for surface, underwater, air and ground targets that are of interest or danger to their fleet. All their naval power is built around aviation (however, their center of aviation is not only in the Navy). Aircraft carriers or UDCs are serious attack ships capable of providing danger even to a large country with a good army.
And they are accompanied by..... troughs. Well, I exaggerated this a little. But this is where the problem lies. Having luxurious and modern first-rank forces, the US Navy is facing a crisis in its escort forces. Their quantity and quality of not only security ships is falling. But even supply ships, the US Navy has FEW transport ships both for supplying ships and for supplying ground forces. And replacing supply ships with airplanes is also not possible; airplanes are not capable of providing even a large army with everything necessary in a short time.
Of course, they themselves understand the problem and are trying to find a program for light vessels (they are already adopting the idea of ​​simply taking European frigate projects) in order to update the fleet of escort forces. But until this program starts working in the mode of serial production of ships, a MINIMUM of 5 years will pass (and even then, this is the most optimistic estimate). And by this time, the number of escort forces afloat will remain EVEN LESS. As a result, they are afraid of a time lag during which their fleet will be weakened as much as possible (a fleet of only first-rankers is a useless but expensive fleet), or rather, the fact that China, which does not have such a problem, will take advantage of it!

As a result, the United States is heading towards a situation where its fleet (for a limited time, it is worth noting) will turn into a heavy, strong fist, but sitting on a frail arm.

And only for us this will not change anything, even this weakening of the Americans is still stronger than our fleets

[TermNachTer]

So far, the F-35 is available anywhere, but not on the decks of mattress aircraft carriers, for which it was made)))

[Evgeny_Sviridenko]

China is vulnerable. Very vulnerable. Why are we vulnerable? Genetics. China is a mononation with all that it implies in terms of the use of biological (genetic) weapons. And naturally, in the USA they know this very well, and are already developing (or have developed) viruses for China that make Covid mere babble. I think there will never be a global real (not media) confrontation between China and the United States. But US arms manufacturers are understandably interested in inflating the image of China as an enemy.

[geologist]

We should be grateful to America for holding back our most dangerous enemies with its huge fleet; Japan, Germany and China. Let us remember the times when, at the end of the 80th century, they predicted a war with China, to which the West was pumping its muscles. We left that war due to the destruction of the USSR, having received a small civilian one in return for a large regional one, which is the least of the troubles. Now let’s imagine an extremely dangerous situation for us when China enters into an alliance with Japan, which will wait until the American bases are closed and both Koreas will be annexed to their union. Germany will create a new Reich based on the EU, which will begin to build its huge fleet to conquer the world. We will find ourselves between a rock and a hard place, and salvation will lie only in our Martian climate and the icebreaker fleet of the Arctic Ocean. In general, as they told our XNUMX-year-old chief geologist at work in connection with the appearance of a young general director from the bandits, “Valera, keep your head down!”