Fórum Defesa Brasil

Suetham escreveu: ↑Sex Abr 21, 2023 11:36 pm

Suetham escreveu: ↑Sex Abr 21, 2023 10:44 pm

Essas comparações tem sido levantadas por muitos e em momentos diferentes.

Por exemplo:
https://velhogeneral.com.br/2023/04/04/ ... pel-moeda/

O autor do canal do Youtube AdG(Arte da Guerra), Robinson Farinazzo(oficial superior da reserva), fez essa matéria comparando os gastos chineses e americanos como uma abordagem geral de orçamento e comparando os programas de construções navais entre ambos, um erro crasso de cruzamento de dados, pois isso prejudica os gastos reais entre ambos em seus respectivos programas de construções navais.

A seguir, o Ricardo Nunes Barbosa - autor do site Tecnomilitar fez o seguinte comentário bem lúcido:

Artigo ficaria melhor com algumas informações como:

1) uma corveta possui o mesmo valor econômico e militar de um porta aviões?

2) qual a tonelagem de navios jogadas ao mar durante o período?

3) qual o valor gasto em paridade de poder de compra por tonelagem de navio?

4) incluiu o custo de uma ala aérea de um porta-aviões?

Sem essas informações não temos simplesmente nada, afinal, seria como falar que gastamos 5bi no Gripen E para não ter qualquer saldo na FAB, já que mais F-5Ms irão se aposentar. Isso sem levar em consideração a qualitativa de um F-5M e Gripen E.

Esse tipo de questionamento vai ser exatamente o meu foco aqui. Ele está certíssimo quanto a isso.

Fiz o trabalho de pegar os dados de ambos os países e os principais navios que comissionaram entre o período que o Robinson analisou, entre 2005-2020, ainda fiz um incremento colocando mais um período, entre 2005-2022, para fins elaborativos.

Por comparação então:

Superfície:
CV/CVN: 2005-2020
EUA - 1 CVN Nimitz - 106.300 t (+) 1 CVN Gerald Ford - 100.000 t
China - 1 CV Liaoning - 60.900 t + 1 CV Shandong - 70.000 t

EUA - 2 CVNs Nimitz/Gerald Ford - 206.300 t
China - 2 CVs Liaoning/Shandong - 130.900 t

2005-2022
EUA - 2 CVNs Nimitz/Gerald Ford - 206.300 t
China - 2 CVs Liaoning/Shandong - 130.900 t


DDG: 2005-2020
EUA - 24 DDGs AB Flight IIA - 9,300 t
China - 5 DDGs Type 052C - 7,000 t (+) 16 DDGs Type 052D - 7,500 t

EUA - 24 DDGs AB Flight IIA - 228.000 t
China - 21 DDGs Type 052C/D - 155.000 t

2005-2022
EUA - 27 DDGs AB Flight IIA - 251.100 t
China - 30 DDGs Type 052C/D/DL - 222.500 t


CG: 2005-2020
EUA - 0 CGs
China - 1 CG Type 055 - 13.000 t

EUA - 0 CGs
China - 1 CG Type 055 - 13.000 t

2005-2022
EUA - 0 CG
China - 7 CG Type 055 - 91.000 t


FF(G): 2005-2020
EUA - 0 FF
China - 30 FF Type 054A - 4.200 t (+) 2 FF Type 054 - 3.900 t (+) 2 FF Type 053H3 - 2.400 t

EUA - 0 FF
China - 34 FF Type 054A/Type 053H3 - 138.600 t

2005-2022
EUA - 0 FF
China - 34 FF Type 054A/Type 053H3 - 138.600 t


FFL: 2005-2020
EUA - 0 FFL
China - 65 FFL Type 056/A - 1.500 t

EUA - 0 FFL
China - 65 FFL Type 056/A - 97.500 t

2005-2022
EUA - 0 FFL
China - 72 FFL Type 056/A - 108.000 t


LCS: 2005-2020
EUA - 10 LCS Freedom - 3.900 t (+) 11 LCS Independence - 3.422 t
China - 0 LCS

EUA - 21 LCS Freedom/Independence - 76.642 t
China - 0 LCS

2005-2022
EUA - 25 LCS Freedom/Independence - 90.808 t
China - 0 LCS


Superfície total:
EUA - 47 navios - 510.942 t
China - 123 navios - 535.000 t

2005-2022
EUA - 54 navios - 548.208 t
China - 145 navios - 691.000 t


Submarinos:
SSBN: 2005-2020
EUA - 0 SSBNs
China - 5 SSBNs Type 094/A - 11.000 t

EUA - 0 SSBNs
China - 5 SSBNs Type 094/A - 55.000 t

2005-2022
EUA - 0 SSBNs
China - 6 SSBNs Type 094/A - 66.000 t


SSN: 2005-2020
EUA - 18 SSNs Virginia Block I-IV - 7.900 t (+) 1 SSN Seawolf - 12.139 t
China - 6 Type 093/A - 6.096 t

EUA - 19 SSNs Virginia/Seawolf - 154.339 t
China - 6 Type 093/A - 36.576 t

2005-2022
EUA - 21 SSNs Virginia/Seawolf - 178.617 t
China - 6 Type 093/A - 36.576 t


SSK: 2005-2020
EUA - 0 SSKs
China - 17 SSKs Type 039A/B - 3.600 t (+) 5 SSKs Type 039G1 - 2.250 t

EUA - 0 SSKs
China - 22 SSKs Type 039 - 72.450 t

2005-2022
EUA - 0 SSKs
China - 23 SSKs Type 039 - 76.350 t


SSB: 2005-2020
EUA - 0 SSBs
China - 1 SSB Type 032 - 6.628 t

EUA - 0 SSBs
China - 1 SSB Type 032 - 6.628 t

2005-2022
EUA - 0 SSBs
China - 1 SSB Type 032 - 6.628 t


Submarinos total:
EUA - 19 submarinos - 154.339 t
China - 34 submarinos - 170.654 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 21 submarinos - 178.617 t
China - 36 submarinos - 185.554 t


Anfíbio:
LPD: 2005-2020
EUA - 11 LPD San Antonio - 25.300 t
China - 8 LPD Type 071 - 25.000 t

EUA - 11 LPD San Antonio - 278.300 t
China - 8 LPD Type 071 - 200.000 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 12 LPD San Antonio - 303.600 t
China - 8 LPD Type 071 - 200.000 t


LHA/LHD: 2005-2020
EUA - 2 LHA America - 45.693 t + 1 LHD Wasp - 41.150 t
China - 0 LHA/LHD

EUA - 3 LHA/LHD America/Wasp - 132.536 t
China - 0 LHA/LHD

2005-2022:
EUA - 3 LHA/LHD America/Wasp - 132.536 t
China - 3 LHA/LHD Type 075 - 120.000 t


LST: 2005-2020
EUA - 0 LSTs
China - 7 LSTs Type 072A/III - 4.800 t

EUA - 0 LST
China - 7 LSTs Type 072A/III - 33.600 t


Anfíbio total:
EUA - 14 navios - 410.836 t
China - 15 navios - 233.600 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 15 navios - 436.136 t
China - 18 navios - 353.600 t


Total:
EUA - 80 embarcações - 1.076.117 t
China - 194 embarcações - 939.254 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 90 embarcações - 1.162.961 t
China - 199 embarcações - 1.230.154 t

Obs: Deixei de lado os navios de apoio logístico, pois na US Navy, ambos servem no MSC e não propriamente no serviço armado da Marinha dos EUA, ao contrário da China, a qual todos servem ao PLAN, porém ainda posso fazer reticência quanto a isso logo a seguir.

Veja que mesmo colocando o período de 2005-2020, a China não detém alguma paridade com os EUA no comissionamento de navios entre grandes navios combatentes e pequenos navios combatentes, com uma forte vantagem quantitativa e uma ligeira desvantagem em termos de tonelagem, se colocarmos uma média entre tonelagem e o número de embarcações, a China teria 4.841 t para cada navio comissionado, já quanto aos EUA, teriam uma média de 13.451 t por cada navio comissionado. O programa de construção naval da China teve um incremento maior na década de 2010-2020, isto porque foi a década que os sistemas atuais foram desenvolvidos para os grandes combatentes como o radar Type 346A Dragon Eye, além de outros sistemas embarcados, mas vamos deixar isso de lado.

Quero agora analisar a média de tonelagem por navio no período entre 2005-2022, a China teria uma média de 6.181 t, o que sugere um crescimento de 50% na média entre tonelagem e navios comissionados. Esse crescimento de 50% sugere formalmente que o programa de construção naval mais recente está sendo reorientado para grandes navios combatentes. Entre 2021-2022, foi o período onde 6 CG Type 055 foram comissionados, além de 3 LHD Type 075 e também o acréscimo de mais 9 Type 052D/DL. Ainda surgem notícias que o PLAN está orientado a capacidade de construção naval para talvez outro lote de Type 075(B) ou irão partir para um Type 076(LHA) com EMALS, além de começarem os trabalhos para uma versão maior da FFG Type 054A, chamado de Type 054B que tem uma tonelagem na casa acima de 5.000 t, com melhorias no sistema propulsivo e sistemas ASW para acompanhar FT chinês centrado em NAe. Outras notícias surgem também, mas esta já confirmada, um novo lote de 5 Type 055 e 15 Type 052DL, aumentando ainda mais o comissionamento de grandes combatentes no PLAN.

Voltando ao assunto anterior dos navios de apoio logístico, vamos fazer aqui as considerações:

T-AOE 2005-2020:
EUA - 0 T-AOE
China - 2 T-AOE Type 901 - 45.000 t

EUA - 0 T-AOE
China - 2 T-AOE Type 901 - 90.000 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 0 T-AOE
China - 2 T-AOE Type 901 - 90.000 t


T-AKE 2005-2020:
EUA - 14 T-AKE Lewis and Clark - 45.149 t
China - 1 T-AKE Type 904A - 15.000 t (+) 3 T-AKE Type 904B - 15.000 t

EUA - 14 T-AKE Lewis and Clark - 632.086 t
China - 4 T-AKE Type 904A/B - 60.000 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 14 T-AKE Lewis and Clark - 632.086 t
China - 4 T-AKE Type 904A/B - 60.000 t


T-AO 2005-2020:
EUA - 0 T-AO
China - 8 T-AO Type 903 - 23.369 t

EUA - 0 T-AO
China - 8 T-AO Type 903 - 186.952 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 2 T-AO John Lewis - 49.850 t - 99.700 t
China - 8 T-AO Type 903 - 186.952 t


Total:
2005-2020
EUA - 14 navios - 632.086 t
China - 14 navios - 336.952 t

2005-2022:
EUA - 16 navios - 731.786 t
China - 14 navios - 336.952 t


Ou seja, tanto em termos de tonelagem quanto em número de navios, a US Navy ainda leva vantagem, principalmente considerando o período entre 2005-2022.

EXCLUSIVE: 55 Chinese sailors are feared dead after nuclear submarine 'gets caught in a trap intended to snare British and US vessels in the Yellow Sea'

By MARK NICOL, DEFENCE EDITOR

PUBLISHED: 17:25 BST, 3 October 2023 | UPDATED: 23:51 BST, 3 October 2023






Fifty-five Chinese sailors are feared dead after their nuclear submarine apparently got caught in a trap intended to ensnare British sub-surface vessels in the Yellow Sea.

According to a secret UK report the seamen died following a catastrophic failure of the submarine's oxygen systems which poisoned the crew.

The captain of the Chinese PLA Navy submarine '093-417' is understood to be among the deceased, as were 21 other officers.

Officially, China has denied the incident took place. It also appears Beijing refused to request international assistance for its stricken submarine.

The UK report into the fatal mission reads: 'Intelligence reports that on 21st of August there was an onboard accident whilst carrying out a mission in the Yellow Sea.

'Incident happened at 08.12 local resulting in the death of 55 crew members: 22 officers, 7 officer cadets, 9 petty officers, 17 sailors. Dead include the captain Colonel Xue Yong-Peng.

'Our understanding is death caused by hypoxia due to a system fault on the submarine. The submarine hit a chain and anchor obstacle used by the Chinese Navy to trap US and allied submarines.

'This resulted in systems failures that took six hours to repair and surface the vessel. The onboard oxygen system poisoned the crew after a catastrophic failure.'

As yet there is no independent confirmation of the suspected loss of the Chinese submarine in the public domain.

Beijing has dismissed open source speculation about the incident as 'completely false' while Taiwan has also denied internet reports.

Mail Plus approached the Royal Navy to discuss the details contained in the UK report but official sources declined to comment or offer guidance.

The UK report, which is based on defence intelligence, is held at a high classification.

A British submariner offered this explanation: 'It is plausible that this occurred and I doubt the Chinese would have asked for international support for obvious reasons.

'If they were trapped on the net system and the submarine's batteries were running flat (plausible) then eventually the air purifiers and air treatment systems could have failed.

'Which would have reverted to secondary systems and subsequently and plausibly failed to maintain the air. Which led to asphyxia or poisoning.

'We have kit which absorbs co2 and generates oxygen in such a situation. It is probable that other nations do not have this kind of tech.'

The Chinese Type 093 submarines entered service in the last 15 years. The vessels are 351ft-long and are armed with torpedoes.

The Type 093s are among China's more modern submarines and are known for their lower noise levels.

The sinking is understood to have taken place in waters off China's Shandong Province.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... w-sea.html

akivrx78 escreveu: ↑Qua Out 04, 2023 6:11 am

EXCLUSIVE: 55 Chinese sailors are feared dead after nuclear submarine 'gets caught in a trap intended to snare British and US vessels in the Yellow Sea'

By MARK NICOL, DEFENCE EDITOR

PUBLISHED: 17:25 BST, 3 October 2023 | UPDATED: 23:51 BST, 3 October 2023






Fifty-five Chinese sailors are feared dead after their nuclear submarine apparently got caught in a trap intended to ensnare British sub-surface vessels in the Yellow Sea.

According to a secret UK report the seamen died following a catastrophic failure of the submarine's oxygen systems which poisoned the crew.

The captain of the Chinese PLA Navy submarine '093-417' is understood to be among the deceased, as were 21 other officers.

Officially, China has denied the incident took place. It also appears Beijing refused to request international assistance for its stricken submarine.

The UK report into the fatal mission reads: 'Intelligence reports that on 21st of August there was an onboard accident whilst carrying out a mission in the Yellow Sea.

'Incident happened at 08.12 local resulting in the death of 55 crew members: 22 officers, 7 officer cadets, 9 petty officers, 17 sailors. Dead include the captain Colonel Xue Yong-Peng.

'Our understanding is death caused by hypoxia due to a system fault on the submarine. The submarine hit a chain and anchor obstacle used by the Chinese Navy to trap US and allied submarines.

'This resulted in systems failures that took six hours to repair and surface the vessel. The onboard oxygen system poisoned the crew after a catastrophic failure.'

As yet there is no independent confirmation of the suspected loss of the Chinese submarine in the public domain.

Beijing has dismissed open source speculation about the incident as 'completely false' while Taiwan has also denied internet reports.

Mail Plus approached the Royal Navy to discuss the details contained in the UK report but official sources declined to comment or offer guidance.

The UK report, which is based on defence intelligence, is held at a high classification.

A British submariner offered this explanation: 'It is plausible that this occurred and I doubt the Chinese would have asked for international support for obvious reasons.

'If they were trapped on the net system and the submarine's batteries were running flat (plausible) then eventually the air purifiers and air treatment systems could have failed.

'Which would have reverted to secondary systems and subsequently and plausibly failed to maintain the air. Which led to asphyxia or poisoning.

'We have kit which absorbs co2 and generates oxygen in such a situation. It is probable that other nations do not have this kind of tech.'

The Chinese Type 093 submarines entered service in the last 15 years. The vessels are 351ft-long and are armed with torpedoes.

The Type 093s are among China's more modern submarines and are known for their lower noise levels.

The sinking is understood to have taken place in waters off China's Shandong Province.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... w-sea.html

P44 escreveu: ↑Qui Nov 23, 2023 10:47 am

Unknown new PLAN combatant next to 054A frigate at Liaonan Shipyard, Lushun near Dalian.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... -in-china/