The slide’s authenticity was confirmed by a Navy spokesperson, who cautioned that it was not meant to be an in-depth analysis.

The slide shows that Chinese shipyards have a capacity of about 23.2 million tons compared to less than 100,000 tons in the U.S., making Chinese shipbuilding capacity more than 232 times greater than that of the U.S.

The slide also shows the “battle force composition” of the countries’ two navies side-by-side, which includes “combatant ships, submarines, mine warfare ships, major amphibious ships, and large combat support auxiliary ships.” The ONI estimated that China had 355 such naval vessels in 2020 while the U.S. had 296. The disparity is expected to continue to grow every five years until 2035, when China will have an estimated 475 naval ships compared to 305-317 U.S. ships.

Another section of the slide provides an estimate on the percentage each country allocates to naval production in its shipyards, with China garnering roughly 70% of its shipbuilding revenue from naval production, compared to about 95% of American shipbuilding revenue.

Because of China’s centrally planned economy, the country is able to control labor costs and provide subsidies to its shipbuilding infrastructure, allowing the Chinese to outbid most competitors around the world and dominate the commercial shipping industry, Sadler said.

Alternative title - “Central planning is more efficient than markets” confirms US Navy

    • Redrum714@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Are you illiterate? They asked for a US hypersonic missile which an ICBM literally is. That’s why I specified “short range” in the next sentence you dumbfuck

      • panopticon [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        You’re terminally dense. A hypersonic missile is capable of high-G maneuvering and self propulsion in the terminal phase of flight. An ICBM is capable of neither of those things, you’re just dead fucking wrong. Pack it up you donkey, you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.

        Propulsion system of Russian hypersonic missiles in the terminal phase: scramjets

        Propulsion system of an ICBM warhead in the terminal phase: ???

        Just give it up dipshit, be a grown up and take the L

        • Redrum714@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          A hypersonic missile is literally what it’s called. A missile that can reach speeds over Mach 5. Arguing semantics just makes you look like a fucking idiot.

          • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            8 months ago

            Arguing semantics just makes you look like a fucking idiot.

            exactly what you’re doing by pretending people use “hypersonic missile” to refer to ballistic ICBMs, and it worked!