中国福建舰和美国航母，谁更强

US vs. China: What Aircraft Carriers Reveal About the Military Tech Race

美国 vs 中国：关于军事技术竞赛，航母揭示了什么？

The U.S. has by far the largest aircraft-carrier fleet in the world, but China is catching up on technology and design with its new vessel–the Fujian. WSJ compares the two superpowers’ best military ships to understand their strategic goals.

美国目前拥有世界上最庞大的航母舰队。如今在技术和设计上，中国的新航母“福建舰”正在追赶美国。《华尔街日报》比较两个超级大国最强大的航母，了解它们的战略目标。

John Anon

Both vessels won't get into head to head combat in the near future. In a T scenario, Fujian will stay under land-based airforce's prection, and support/guide area denial missiles. Ford is also likely to stay behind Japanese island chain and prect cargos in and out of T. Neither sides can risk losing one airplane carrier.

近期内两国的航母不会发生正面交锋。在目前的台湾局势下，“福建舰”将留在陆基空军的保护下，支持/引导地区拒止导弹。

“福特”号也可能会留在日本岛链后面，保护进出台湾的货物。双方都不会冒失去一艘航母的风险。

 

kristinaF54

How smartly you use what you have (strategy and tactics) will always beat a greater force (like David versus Goliath).

巧妙地使用你所拥有的战略和战术，将助你击败更强大的对手(就像大卫vs歌利亚)。

 

ching chong

remember,  japan didnt recover from midway just because it lost 4 carriers, but 4 carriers worth of crews and technicians.

记住，日本不是因为失去了4艘航母而无法从中途岛海战失败中恢复过来，而是因为失去了4艘航母上的船员和技术人员。

 

TheFlutecart

Carriers rely on a dedicated and experienced crew for flight ops.  It takes decades to build that kind of knowledge and training.  You have to build a professional culture around it.  

航母依靠经验丰富的专业机组人员进行飞行操作。这种知识需要几十年的时间才能积累。

 

Axero

the video didn't mention anything about the EMALS sy em the two ships use. Fu Jian uses DC powered EMALS, whereas Ford uses AC. This is a big difference. These two ships are nothing alike beside basic shapes.

没有提到两艘航母使用的电磁弹射系统。

“福建舰”使用的是直流电磁弹射系统，而“福特”号使用的是交流电，这是一个很大的区别。

除了基本形状之外，这两艘航母没有什么相似之处。

 

Zachary Schulling

"numbers will be our only advantage"

Is this guy serious? The U.S has 100 years of carrier experience. That is our greatest advantage.

“数量将是我们唯一的优势”，这家伙是认真的吗？美国拥有100年的航母经验。这是我们最大的优势。

 

NYRM1974

My mon or underwater drone has completed all sea trials with flying colors. The Chinese Navy has no chance ag inst my drone

我的水下无人机器已经顺利完成了所有海试。中国海军无法对抗我们的无人机

 

Vela van laack

It’s not about the capability, it’s about with or without it. The big countries use these ships to bargain for greater interest

问题不在于能力，而在于有没有能力。大国利用这些航母讨价还价以获得更大的利益

 

David Moore

I think they are both cool. But remember China doesn't specialize in aircraft carriers, they specialize in missiles and rocket sy ems which are made to sink them.

我觉得它们都很酷。但要记住，中国并不擅长航母，他们擅长的是用来击沉航母的导弹和火箭系统。

 

Li Rahman

When I was with the Navy the officers I talked to reconned that the Chinese were building a large but otherwise ch and disposable fleet for one large mission. Three guesses as to where this fleet is headed for.

我曾在海军工作时，我交谈过的军官们都认为，中国人正在为完成一项大型任务而建造一支庞大而廉价的一次性舰队。关于这支舰队的目的地有三种猜测。

 

Chem son

The best ship is friendship

最好的船是友谊之船

 

Nicholas

the ford reactors need to be refueled every 50 years not 20, it was a big reason why the navy choose the a1b reactor

福特号的反应堆每隔50年就需要补充燃料，不是20年，

这是海军选择a1b反应堆的一个重要原因

 

Matthew

Why does everyone forget about the real reason carriers are powerful. It is the ability to launch airplanes and the capability of the airplanes greatly affects it's power.

为什么每个人都忘了航母强大得益于舰载机弹射起飞的能力

 

William Gallant

American military personnel are well trained and well versed in both using their individuality and working together in teams for a wide range of issues and emergencies. The same can not be said of the Chinese military who are mostly conscripts and are po itical show pieces without any real battle experience for over 60 years.

美国军人受过良好的训练，个人能力强，团队配合好，可以应对各种各样的问题和紧急情况。中国军队就不一样了，他们大多是义务兵，政治秀，60多年来没有任何真正的实战经验。

 

Water Mirror

It's beneficial for the US if China makes more carriers since they're big fat targets in that local area. It's problematic if China keeps making the cher numerous & diverse kinds of smaller combat ships notably frigates

如果中国建造更多的航母，对美国是有利的，航母是大目标。

如果中国继续制造各种各样的廉价小型战斗舰艇，特别是护卫舰，那就麻烦了

 

Randall's Drone Channel

The Chinese Navy has very little experience operating aircraft carriers whereas the USN has One Hundred years experience (since 1922).  No comparison.

中国海军几乎没有操作航母的经验，而美国海军有100年的经验(自1922年以来)。二者没有可比性。

 

Rv4 Guy

You are forgetting the competence of the pilots and ground crews. The whole purpose of a carrier is to launch and recover aircraft and to have them capable of fighting. You can have the best carriers in the world, but it will only as good as the pilots. Can they land at night? Can they land on a pitching deck? Can they combine both? Can they fight? The Americans can

你忘了飞行员和地勤人员的能力。航母就是用来起飞和回收战机，具备战斗能力。

你可以拥有世界上最好的航母，但需要优秀的飞行员才行。

他们能在夜间降落吗？

他们能降落在倾斜甲板上吗？

他们能在夜间降落在倾斜的甲板上吗？

他们能战斗吗？

美国人就能

 

Rickonytube

In case people don't know, 's PLA had the aircraft carriers dream after visiting museum at Washington DC disguised as tourists, despite average Chinese living condition was still poor.

人们不知道，中国人民解放军伪装成游客参观了华盛顿的博物馆后，就有了航母梦，尽管普通中国人的生活条件仍然很差。

 

Tim Ferguson

We have a HUGE advantage over China concerning carriers. We've been operating carriers a heck of alot longer.  That's a big advantage!

在航母方面，我们对中国拥有巨大优势。我们操作航母的时间要长得多。这是一个很大的优势

 

dustoff499

If China wants to keep their Carrier fleet (the whole fleet) then it's not wise to tangle ag inst one our Carriers.

如果中国想要保留他们的航母舰队(整个舰队)，那么与我们的航母纠缠是不明智的。

 

K D'Arcy

The main issues are the aircraft, won sy ems, and the men in inside! I suspect China would see a lot of people and hardware on the bottom of the ocean if they try an invasion of T. They might eventually prevail but China's navy would be seriously degraded. A more likely scenario is a naval blockade that tries to starve T into submission.

主要的问题在于战机，武器系统，和上面的人

我怀疑如果中国收复台湾，他们最终可能会占上风，但中国海军实力会被严重削弱。更有可能的情况是海上封锁，迫使台湾屈服。

 

Paul Hat

Logistics is key in a carrier group's ability to extend. Since this ship needs to be refueled regularly, I can't imagine it venturing off into the Pacific very far, seeing as the US would be there waiting with its vastly superior logistics chain.

后勤保障是航母编队扩张能力的关键。

由于航母需要定期加油，我无法想象它会冒险深入太平洋，

美国在那里有优越得多的物流链等，就在那守株待兔。

 

YOGi

These floating air bases/fortresses were pretty much invincible until just a few years ago.

It still has it's merits and usefulness but rather vulnerably exposed if confronting another super power/technology.

Die hard fans just have to accept and learn to live with modern times and technologies.

Several dozen hypersonic (perhaps Ai enhanced) missiles instantaneously fired at each fleet and you can pretty much kiss any and every active fleets good bye.

直到几年前，这些漂浮的空军基地和堡垒还是所向无敌的。

仍然有自己的优点和用处，

但如果面对另一个超级大国，它的弱点就会暴露出来。

死忠粉们必须接受与现代科技共存。

几十枚高超音速(也许是AI增强的)导弹瞬间向舰队发射，几乎可以说再见了。

 

hell bee

Our aircraft-carriers can accommodate airbuses

我们的航空母舰可以容纳空客

 

Yihao Liu

Naming of Chinese carriers: Liaoning (甲午辽宁旅顺海战 Battle of Lüshunkou), Shan (甲午山东威海卫海战 Battle of Weihaiwei), Fujian (福建马尾海战 Battle of Fu). They are named after locations (of the province) of the naval battles that China fought in late-modern period. The following ones would be named Jiangsu or Guang (江阴海战，虎门海战)

中国航母命名：辽宁舰(甲午辽宁旅顺口海战)、山东舰(甲午山东威海卫海战)、福建舰(福建马尾海战福州海战)。

这些是以中国近代后期海战的地点(省份)命名的。接下来是是江苏舰或广东舰(江阴海战，虎门海战)

 

Lily 'scee' jean Moonlight

All countries urgently need to express peace through diplomacy

各国都迫切需要通过外交表达和平

 

ValensBellator

I just wonder how much longer they’ll be useful. Given how fast missiles are these days it seems like aircraft carriers will soon be sitting ducks.

我只是想知道航母还能威武多久。考虑到目前导弹的速度，航母似乎很快就会成为活靶子。

 

Da Ve

Its like you wanna compare a Mercedes S-Class with a SsangYong Tivoli, while Ford is the Mercedes in this comparison. Every donkey out there knows that the US with its yearly over 800 billion spending is impossible to overcome in terms of gear.

这就像拿梅德赛斯奔驰S级和双龙蒂沃利比，而在这个比较中福特号是奔驰。大家知道，美国每年的军费支出超过8000亿美元，在装备方面，他们无可比拟的。

 

Ku Dastardly

I'm a bit surprised that the Fujian, despite its very modern capabilities, is being powered by diesel-powered engines.

我有点惊讶的是，尽管福建舰的性能非常现代化，但它是由柴油发动机驱动的。

 

Jay Maloney

Aircraft carriers are one thing; Carrier Groups are a completely other thing.  This analysis failed to the carrier group.

航母是一回事，航母战斗群完全是另一回事。这一分析未能讨论航母战斗群。

 

NPC #1337

Imagine the wonry both sides aren't showing us

想象一下双方都没有向我们展示的武器

 

Moo Moo

China has 10 years history in operating aircraft carriers. Any comparison should only be made come 2030 or post that.

中国的航母操作历史只有10年，应该等到2030年或之后再做比较。