- Joined
- Sep 29, 2024
- Messages
- 5,332
- Likes
- 29,046

View: https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1940236786116305352
PLAN operates/orders very large number of ships of a particular class to bring down time and costs of producing them. Also, I might be wrong, they don't equip their ships with much offensive capabilities at least in the anti-ship domain, similar to what I've noticed with US Navy as well. Both operate subsonic 200km AShM. Primary anti-ship role is supposed to be fulfilled by fighter jets onboard the Aircraft Carriers. While we arm our surface fleet with much expensive BrahMos missiles for anti-ship role. While our own fighter jet fleet has limited anti-ship capability, might change with NASM-MR integration with MiG-29K. So this saves costs for them when it comes to arming their surface combatants. Also, when it comes to ship building, nobody is close to China, they will enjoy lower costs and higher rates of production. Which is why IN should be ordering large number of same class of ships to shrink timelines and costs. Also, we should stop putting BrahMos into every ship, and go for our own NASM-MR in them and make for example a dozen Frigates of 5000 tonne displacement armed with NASM-MR and VL-SRSAM.
Legacy of Soviet doctrine saar.
Soviets had the biggest and longest ranged supersonic ASHMs on their old ships, so big that they had to be put in slant cannisters on all but the largest ships.


This was to counter free & democratic aircraft carriers and their ships.
Another Soviet method to counter the above was submarine-maxxxing.
After collapse of USSR, Chong copied the Western carrier-focused doctrine model which is why they have subsonic ssm mostly.
You can also see this with their surface combatants being top tier but their submarine fleet seemingly neglected in comparison to the peak Soviet submarine fleet.
imo we are slowly transitioning into carrier focused doctrine also but the brahmos type supersonic ssm will still have it's place