US vs Chinese Aircraft Carriers: Who Will Rule the Waves?

美国航母与中国航母：谁将主宰海洋？

It's been almost three centuries since the lyrics "Rule Britannia! Britannia rule the waves" were first sung. And it's been arguably some six decades since the concepts stopped being true. The British Royal Navy was considered the largest and finest naval force in the first part of the 20th century, but that mantle has now been inherited by the United States Navy.

“统治吧，大不列颠！大不列颠统治海洋”这句歌词首次被唱响至今，差不多已经过去了三个世纪。而歌词所表达的那种理念不再符合现实，大概也有六十年之久了。在20世纪上半叶，英国皇家海军曾被认为是世界上规模最大、实力最强的海军力量，但如今这一殊荣已被美国海军所继承。

The only potentially serious threat to American vessels, the Soviet navy, collapsed more than 30 years ago. The US Navy thus remains the only naval superpower on the planet. Washington relies on its size, quality, and global reach to support diplomatic, economic, and political interests worldwide.

曾对美国舰艇构成潜在严重威胁的唯一力量——苏联海军，早在30多年前就已解体。因此，美国海军仍是地球上唯一的海军超级力量。美国政府依靠其海军的规模、质量以及全球影响力，来维护在世界范围内的外交、经济和政治利益。

And sure, other powers are welcome to challenge this supremacy, which the US Navy will probably dismiss with a laugh as loud and as sinister as the terrifying roar of their capital ships. The US has 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, and each carries about 60 fighter jets.

当然，其他国家也可以来挑战美国海军的这种霸主地位，不过美国海军很可能会对此嗤之以鼻，那笑声之响亮、之险恶，就如同他们那些主力战舰发出的可怕轰鸣声一样。美国拥有11艘核动力航空母舰，每艘航母大约搭载60架战斗机。

以下是外国网友的评论：

someguyontheinternet8384
The real thing to consider about carriers is that they never fight alone.

关于航母，真正需要考虑的一点是，航母从来都不会单独作战。

phillipkennedy-rd2il
That 90 year experience also extends to the fact that US Navy would probably have multiple strategies for dealing CBG's at all levels of advancements, USN takes this hands down

美国海军积累了90年的经验，很可能针对处于不同发展水平的航母战斗群（CBG）都有多种应对策略，美国海军在这方面可以轻松应对。

Sarge-at-Large
I’m curious we you didn’t count other aircraft carriers in the region friendly to the USA in your theoretical battle. Japan is currently build its first aircraft carrier in 80 years, which should be ready in time for such an engagement

我很好奇，在你所设想的这场理论上的战斗中，为什么没有把该地区其他对美国友好国家的航母计算在内呢。日本目前正在建造其80年来的第一艘航母，这艘航母应该能及时投入到中美战斗中。

joelsmith7868
Electric diesel vs nuclear powered. That's the begng and end of the comparison. One can circumnavigate the globe for 6 months the other can't travel more then 2-4 days out before refueling. Not even close to the same ability

柴电动力航母对比核动力航母。这就是比较的关键所在。一方能够环球航行长达6个月，而另一方航行出去不超过2至4天就必须要加油了。二者的能力简直天差地别。

shinkicker404
TBF, it only takes one skilled diesel/electric sub to cause havoc. Both Sweden and Australia (could be others, but IDK who) have "sunk" US carriers in wargames with diesel/electrics. It might only be one in a hundred chance, but a sunk carrier is still la sunk carrier. Point I'm trying to make is underestimating someone could really cost you. I'd rather overestimate and be pleasantly surprised rather than underestimate and lose hardware & personnel.

说句公道话，只需要一艘柴电潜艇就能造成巨大破坏。瑞典和澳大利亚（可能还有其他国家，但我不清楚）都曾在军事演习中用柴电潜艇“击沉”过美国航母。这或许只有百分之一的几率，但被击沉的航母就是被击沉了。

我想说的重点是，低估对手可能会让你付出惨重代价。我宁愿高估对手并收获意外之喜，也不愿低估对手而损失装备和人员。

DAFORCEFilms
@shinkicker404 I think the thing they’re referring to is more-so how far and how long the US can deploy its forces vs China. We can send a smaller, more powerful force across the Pacific that doesn’t need nearly as much restocking and refueling on a more limited notice whereas China doesn’t really have a capacity to project force beyond their coastline and surrounding waters.
Their subs could potentially wreak some havoc on a couple ships, but they’d be fighting a titan with a BB gun as those are the only real force they have to repel incoming ships beyond a few hundred miles of their coast.

我们能够在有限的时间内派遣一支规模较小但更强大的部队穿越太平洋，而且这支部队几乎不需要太多的补给和加油。而中国实际上并没有能力将军事力量投射到其海岸线及周边水域之外。

他们的潜艇或许有可能对几艘舰船造成一些破坏，但那就如同用一把小弹丸枪对抗巨人一样，要想击退距离其海岸几百英里之外的军舰，潜艇是他们仅有的杀手锏

WarlockInTraining
This whole concept of a chinese navy challenging ours has me and stitches. However, I could be bias since I served in the US navy.

中国海军要挑战我们美国海军，这种说法让我忍俊不禁。不过，我可能带有偏见，我曾在美国海军服役。

Pandemiclui
the 12 year old me wants it to see a naval battle like the punic wars kind, but the now me doesnt want the bloodshed or waste, so ill stick to video games for that.

12岁的我渴望看到一场像布匿战争那样的海战，但现在的我不希望看到流血冲突和资源浪费，我还是在电子游戏里体验海战好了。

ForeverSioux
All I heard when you mentioned the new Chinese Aircraft Carrier was “Time for America to do what America does best, overestimate an enemy and build a more advanced platform just like they did the F-15”.

当你提到中国的新航母时，我听到的就是“现在是美国做它最擅长的事情的时候了，那就是高估敌人，然后打造一个更先进的平台，就像他们研发F-15战斗机时那样”。

Nesstor01
What good is a navy if you have no fuel to keep these things powered? Whoever has a better handle of their logistics will win. About 90% of Chinese fuel imports still has to transit from Saudi Arabia and the US is the one protecting and controlling those water ways. Everyone knows which key locations we're all talking about and a blockade of two key bottlenecks and it's game over. The Chinese risk a collapse if they play turtle in the South China Sea and will have to go on the offensive and take those locations from the US who already have dozens of military bases spread across the Indian Ocean to SE Asia so the task itself is monumental. The only fuel line that goes into China is the one coming from Kazakhstan and the fuel China buys from Russia has to go through the Sea of Japan which is between 2 US allies, Japan and South Korea. There's a reason why the US signed so many treaties after WW2 with 100+ nations across the globe. The US has a global logistics network that made it the sole global super power with 900+ military bases. Men win battles, logistics win wars.

如果没有燃料来驱动这些舰艇，海军又有什么用呢？谁能更好地掌控后勤补给，谁就能获胜。

中国大约90%的进口燃油仍需从沙特阿拉伯转运，而美国正是保护和控制那些航道的一方。

大家都知道哪些是关键地点，一旦封锁两个关键的咽喉要道，那一切就都结束了。

如果中国在南海采取守势，就面临着崩溃的风险，他们将不得不采取攻势，从美国手中夺取那些咽喉要道，而美国在从印度洋到东南亚地区已经分布着数十个军事基地，所以这个任务本身极其艰巨。

唯一通往中国的输油线路是经过哈萨克斯坦的那条，而中国从俄罗斯购买的燃油必须经过日本海，而日本海位于美国的两个盟友日本和韩国之间。

美国在二战后与全球100多个国家签署了条约。美国拥有一个全球后勤网络，是拥有900多个军事基地的唯一全球超级大国。人力能赢得战斗，后勤能赢得战争。

rozafrrozafr
Having a bunch of ships that can not leave your littoral waters doesn't count as having more ships.
If you have 5 Chihuahuas and I have two wolves, yes you have more canines but no one is going to think yours can kill mine.

拥有一堆无法离开近海海域的军舰，并不能算什么。

如果你有5只吉娃娃，而我有2只狼，没错，你拥有的犬科动物数量更多，但没人会认为你的吉娃娃能战胜我的狼。

NapoleonBonapaeteusf
Served on a Nimitz class carrier for 3 years. There’s no chance in hell the inexperienced Chinese Navy will ever surpass the USN on the open seas.

我曾在一艘尼米兹级航母上服役3年。毫无经验的中国海军在公海上绝无可能战胜美国海军。

negativeindustrial
My son is a nuclear engineer on the Nimitz currently. They are incredible ships.

我的儿子现在是尼米兹号航母上的一名核工程师。那些航母真的非常了不起。

blackrook268
Please stop calling China's navy the largest. Thats just not true. They have more vessels but about 1/3 the tonnage of the USN. Any nation can throw a million row boats on the ocean call them vessels and suddenly become the largest navy. Tonnage matters more because that determines the type of capabilities your ships can field. That is the only current universal metric to tell if a navy's warships are a valid force or not.

请别再称中国海军为规模最大的海军了。这根本不是事实。他们的舰艇数量更多，但总吨位大约只有美国海军的三分之一。任何一个国家都可以把一百万个划艇扔到海里，然后称它们为舰艇，这样就可以宣称自己拥有了规模最大的海军。但吨位更加重要，吨位决定了你的舰艇能够具备的作战能力类型。这是目前唯一能衡量一支海军的军舰是否具备战斗力的通用标准。

anguswaterhouse9255
Exactly, the U.S. has 74 Burke class destroyers, each of these is superior to any Chinese surface combatant bar the type 055 and the type 052D for the oldest burkes.
And even then, they’re better air warfare ships and only worse at destroying ships with equivalent land attack capabilities

说得太对了，美国拥有74艘伯克级驱逐舰，除了055型和052D型说得过去，美国的这些驱逐舰每一艘都优于中国的其他水面作战舰艇。

即便如此，美国的这些驱逐舰在防空作战方面更出色，只是在摧毁舰艇方面略逊一筹，而在对地攻击能力方面二者相当。

landywilson
Realistically china has 1 aircraft carrier. The first one they refurbished from and old soviet hull that was never finished, and was converted into a casino. The second was a copy of the first to see if they could build one.

实事求是地说，中国只有1艘航母。第一艘是他们从一艘从未完工的苏联旧船体翻新而来的，那艘船体还曾被改造成赌场。第二艘是第一艘的仿制品，目的是看看他们是否有能力建造航母。

guypuglia3375
The major issue isn't technology or fire power its logistics, China doesn't have that kind of experience or supply lines

主要问题不在于技术或火力，而在于后勤保障。中国没有那样的经验，也没有那样的补给线。

blackrook268
They also dont have the sea landing down pat.They typically launch from the carrier but land at naval/air stations. This is a difficult task during peace, now add enemy aircraft, missiles, and sub to the mix. For the next decade atleast whatever aircraft the carrier is launched with from port is its entire payload. Thats not the case for the US. Making them much more lethal.

他们也没有熟练掌握海上降落技术。他们通常从航母上起飞，却在海军或空军基地降落。这在和平时期就是一项艰巨的任务，现在再加上敌方的飞机、导弹和潜艇的威胁。至少在未来十年内，航母从港口出发时搭载的所有飞机就是其全部的作战力量。美国的情况可不是这样。所以美国的航母战斗力更强。

Taydutt13
China has more boats yes. However when you look at tonnage America has 3.5 million tons of sovereign US steel in the ocean while china only has 800k tons of steel

中国的舰艇数量确实更多。然而，从吨位上看，美国海军军舰的吨位是350万吨，而中国只有80万吨。

CedarHunt
The Chinese count every rowboat and coastal dhingy as a ship in their navy.

中国人把每一艘划艇和沿海的小船都算进了他们的海军舰艇数量里。

mdiesel23
@CedarHunt ? What Chinese media have you seen that touts how great the Chinese navy is in comparison to the U.S.? Which military general or spokesperson from China?
Everytime they make a reveal for any ships, aircraft, etc. They are making, they just show it and they don't say how the U.S. Navy is a threat or U.S. airforce is a threat. They just focus on what they need to do.

你看过哪些中国媒体吹嘘中国海军比美国海军厉害呢？是中国的哪位将军或发言人说的呢？

每次他们展示正在建造的舰艇、飞机等装备时，他们只是展示这些装备，并没有说美国海军或美国空军是威胁。他们只是专注于自己需要做的事情。

gman52712
US aircraft carriers outclass the absolute F out of Chinese carriers my dude lol

老兄，美国的航母绝对比中国的航母强太多了，哈哈。

arvinaguila2156
Obviously us navy have the upper hand advantage when it comes to naval battle experience

显然，在海战经验方面，美国海军占据上风。

jimmccauley9099
China should remember that if it wasn't for the U.S., they'd be speaking japanese now.

中国应该记住，如果没有美国，他们现在可能就得说日语了。

Primal-Weed
Do you seriously believe that? It was the Soviets that defeated the Kwantung Army based in Manchuria… defeated them in 2 weeks.

你真的相信那种说法吗？是苏联打败了驻扎在中国东北的关东军。只用了两周时间就打败了他们。

Someone-z8r
Yea I am sure that really matters 80 years later.

是啊，我敢肯定80年后这事儿真的还很重要呢

eskhawk
These Red Chinese carriers aren't even as capable as the US ESSEX and MIDWAY-class carriers were in the 1960s...and those carriers were built during WWII.

这些中国的航母甚至都比不上美国在20世纪60年代的埃塞克斯级和中途岛级航母，而那些美国航母还是在二战期间建造的呢。

harounk8849
Rule 1. NEVER underestimate your opponent.

第一条原则：永远不要低估你的对手。

danfromthesouth5352
DF-21D ballistic missiles might have a max range of 1,678 miles, but they DO NOT out range onboard Jets because those jets can refuel, but even less important than that is the range PLUS the range of the payload. Over 1,500 miles is the strike range of AGM-86 air-launched cruise missiles, which would let them reign down death from above without leaving a 200 mile radius from it’s mother ship and backup crews.

东风-21D弹道导弹的最大射程可能达到1678英里，但它们的射程比不上舰载机的航程，因为舰载机可以空中加油。

AGM-86空射巡航导弹的打击范围超过1500英里，可以在不离开母舰及其后备机组人员200英里半径范围的情况下，从空中发动致命打击。

jhosk
Aircraft carriers are a thing of the past due to drones and new missile technology. The future will be submarines with missiles and drones.

由于无人机和新型导弹技术的发展，航空母舰已经是过去式了。未来将属于装备导弹和无人机的潜艇。

gouravsehrawat6212
True ,india cancelled it's 3rd and 4th carrier in favour of submarines .india is now building and planning more than 30 submarines both nuclear and conventional

没错，印度取消了第三艘和第四艘航母的建造计划，开始青睐潜艇。印度目前正在建造并计划建造30多艘潜艇，包括核潜艇和常规潜艇。

T.Higbee
Chinas navy doesnt need to be better than the US navy, just the pacific fleet

中国海军不需要比美国海军整体更强，只要比美国太平洋舰队强就行。

TheUltimateOpportunist
Even then, it probably won't be better. They focus on quantity over quality.

即便如此，中国海军可能也比不过。他们更注重数量而非质量。

mohamedmahadi3607
@TheUltimateOpportunist the new type 055 cruisers and the type 052D destroyers are highly regarded by the USN. Chinese ships are not Kirovs with outdated radars.

美国海军对中国新型的055型巡洋舰和052D型驱逐舰评价很高。中国的舰艇可不是那些配备过时雷达的基洛夫级巡洋舰。

markchristison4949
“US and Chinese Aircraft Carriers, who will rule the waves?”
Neither, it will be the submarine
I am convinced that given the massive advances in submarines, in a future conflict we will have aircraft carriers but wish we had built more submarines. Like in WW2 everyone had battleships but ended up wishing for aircraft carriers.

“美国和中国的航母，谁将主宰海洋？”

都不是，以后主宰海洋的会是潜艇。

我深信，鉴于潜艇技术的进步巨大，在未来的冲突中，我们虽然会有航空母舰，但可能会希望当初建造了更多的潜艇。就像在二战中，当时大家都有战列舰，但最终却希望拥有更多的航母。

nathansheldahl
US biggest and hardest to replicate advantage is the experience and know how to operate carriers in combat (not in peer to peer combat but battle experience of any kind is better than non when dealing with this type of operations). Plus have China solved their pilot and plane availability issues yet as a carrier is no good without the risk lanes to do most of the work of projecting power.

美国最大且最难复制的优势在于其在战斗中操作航母的经验和专业知识。此外，中国是否已经解决了其飞行员和舰载机的配备问题呢，如果没有足够的舰载机执行投射力量的主要任务，航母的作用就无法充分发挥。

dulio12385
If war were to break out between China and the US you would have the U.S.S. Enterprise and Wasp sailing alongside the JS Kaga, Kongo and the future Akagi. Throw in the Soryu and you can call it taskforce Midway.

如果中美之间爆发战争，美国的企业号和黄蜂号航母将与日本的加贺号、金刚号以及未来的赤城号一同航行。再加上苍龙级潜艇，就可以组成一支中途岛特遣舰队了。

继续阅读：美国航母   海洋   中国航母   航母

此文由 三泰虎 编辑，未经允许不得转载！：首页 > 大国 » 美国航母与中国航母，谁将主宰海洋