QA回答：如果中国开始每年建造2艘新航母，美国会作何反应？

Jacob Baumgardner
Surprise, confusion, and a serious inquiry into who in intelligence provided such inaccurate information.
（美方）会感到震惊、困惑，并严查情报部门究竟是谁提供了如此失实的信息。


Type 003 launch
003 型航母下水

China is a damn powerhouse when it comes to ship production. They have more than tripled their commercial shipping capacity since 2005 and by increasing their civilian dockyard has allowed China to expand their military shipbuilding massively, now the largest producer in yearly military and civilian ship production by tonnage.
在船舶建造方面，中国简直是一股强大力量。自 2005 年以来，中国的商船运力已增长了三倍多，通过扩建民用船坞，中国大规模提升了军事造船能力，如今按年吨位计，中国已成为全球军用和民用船舶年产量最大的国家。


The massive Shanghai dockyards
庞大的上海造船厂

Two aircraft carriers a year though, that’s just unrealistic. An American carrier is north of $10 billion and takes on average 6 years to build, and they've been doing it for nearly a century. China has a lot of experience to gain over the next 10 years. China managed to produce their first Type 003 in 7 years (edit: I read the source incorrectly, they plan to have the first Type 004 ready in 7 years), which is mightily impressive for a first try. If they can keep this pace up they could have 6 catobar carriers by the mid 2030’s, and will seriously threaten US hegemony in the Indo‑Pacific.
不过一年两艘航母，这实在不现实。一艘美国航母造价超过 100亿美元，平均需要 6年时间建造，而且美国已这样干了近一个世纪。未来 10年里，中国还有很多经验要积累。中国用 7年时间造出了首舰 003 型（更正：我看错了来源，其实计划在 7年内首艘 004 型航母就绪），这对首次尝试而言极为令人印象深刻。如果能保持这个速度，到 2030 年中期，他们可能拥有 6 艘弹射起飞航母，这将严重威胁印太地区的美国霸权。



Time will tell, though, and I personally will be keeping a close eye on this future.
时间会证明一切，我个人将密切关注这一进程。


Bill Chen
US response?
美国的回应？

Nothing much.
几乎没什么。

The defense budget already stands at 800 billion, while the budget deficit grows ever higher into the trillions.
国防预算已达 8千亿美元，而预算赤字却不断攀升至数万亿美元级别。

American shipbuilding for commercial ocean-crossing vessels is practically dead, while there is only one shipyard capable of building carriers in Newport News.
美国用于跨洋商船建造的产业几乎已死，而能够建造航母的船厂在诺福克新港也只有一家。

Despite all the bluster about the Ford class, the lead ship is still not ready for deployment 5 years after commission, 9 years post-launch and 13 years after being laid down. [The Chinese went from 0 carriers to 2 deployed ski-jump and one launched Emals catobar in those same 13years.]
尽管福特级吹得天花乱坠，首舰服役 5 年后仍未能部署，距下水已 9 年，距开工已 13 年。【同一 13 年间，中国从零航母发展到部署两艘滑跃式航母并下水一艘电磁弹射航母。】

The current timeline calls for a carrier every 4 years, to replace the 50+ year old Nimitz class. The timeline looks optimistic, given the problems with the lead ship.
目前的计划是每 4 年建造一艘航母，以替换服役 50 多年的尼米兹级。考虑到首舰的问题，这一进度看上去颇具乐观色彩。

The problem being no way to speed up the process, because additional shipyards do not exist.
问题在于无法加快建造进程，因为根本不存在额外的造船厂。

The Chinese meanwhile, have ~40 shipyards with facilities large enough to build carriers, because Chinese shipyards are responsible for half the global merchant marine tonnage produced annually. One shipyard delivered a 24,000 teu container ship recently, the world's largest.
与此同时，中国拥有约 40 座足以建造航母的造船厂，因为中国造船厂每年生产的远洋商船吨位占全球一半。近日，一家造船厂交付了全球最大、载箱量 2.4万标箱的集装箱船。

At some point, the USN will give up the competition, and withdraw from provocation because they cannot keep up with the operational tempo set by the Chinese when they have catobar carrier battle groups of their own.
在某个时刻，美国海军将放弃这场竞赛，并停止挑衅，因为他们无法跟上中国若拥有自己电磁弹射航母战斗群所设定的作战节奏。

That, or start a shooting war before it comes to pass.
否则，就只能在此之前发动一场战争。


Ross Hall
US response?
美国的回应？

Journalists would love it. Years of articles and hand-wringing about the rise of the Chinese (naval) dragon.
新闻记者乐开花，可以写上好几年的文章，为中国（海军）巨龙的崛起哀叹不止。

The Pentagon would love it — great reason to ramp up weapons purchases.
五角大楼也乐开了——这可是大肆采购武器的好借口。

Lots of federal spending for your local district to buy all those weapons …
联邦大笔开支让各地选区都能买到这些武器……

US Navy official position: “Freedom of the Seas” … “naval superiority” … “grave danger”.
美国海军官方立场：“航行自由”……“海上霸权”……“严重危机”。

US Navy (unofficial position).
美国海军（非官方立场）。

Let’s get real. Two carriers a year is a good start for bankrupting the country. Furthermore, it will take 20–30 years just to become proficient enough to fly on and off the carrier, then develop airwing tactics, then become proficient at a host of other things such as at-sea replenishment, battle group escorts and supply ships, battle group maneuvers and strategy, etc.
实话实说，一年两艘航母倒是可让国家破产。更何况，仅仅熟练掌握航母上的起降操作就得 20–30 年，然后还要发展舰载航空兵战术，再学习一系列其他技能，比如海上补给、战斗群护航与补给舰、战斗群机动和战略等。

Then, after you get good at flying your airplanes around, what are you going to do with them? Drop a ton of bombs on the US West Coast? That’s like getting stung by a bee — it pisses you off. No … next step is to develop a credible amphibious force. Good luck with that. You’ll need a whole fleet of amphibious ships (and the whole logistics tail that goes with it), and a whole bunch of badasses that have developed amphibious tactics over decades (plus several major wars).
接着等你飞得炉火纯青，你打算拿它们做什么？轰炸美国西海岸？那就像被蜜蜂蛰一下——只会激怒对方。不……下一步得发展一支可信的两栖作战力量。祝你好运。你需要整整一支两栖船舰舰队（及其庞大后勤链），还得培养一批几十年磨炼出来的两栖战术精英（再加上几场大战的实战经验）。

But it doesn’t stop there. The list goes on. You will need overseas bases; airlift and sealift capabilities; long-range bombers, and the ability to forward deploy air and surface forces.
可这还不够。名单还在继续：你需要海外基地；空运与海运能力；远程轰炸机；以及前沿部署的空中与水面作战力量。

Why?
Because you have decided to build aircraft carriers. And their purpose is to project power. At long (oceanic) distances. Therefore, you have changed your national strategy to power projection, rather than just reinforcement of your sphere of influence (can you say “South China Sea”?).
为什么？
因为你已经决定建航母。而航母的目的就是进行远程（海洋）投送和投射力量。因此，你的国家战略已从“巩固势力范围”转向“远程力量投射”（能想到“南海”吗？）。

So, after getting up from the floor with a bellyache, what does the US Navy do? Build a number of additional attack submarines, and prepare for the next Marianas Turkey Shoot.
于是，当美国海军从震惊中缓过神来，会做什么？建造更多攻击型潜艇，为下一次“马里亚纳大屠杀”（空战演习）做准备。


Rahul Jayantilal Patel
In public the DoD would demand more money to build more to keep up with China. In private they would be laughing their asses off. The reason for this is because the Chinese doesn't have experience in building (remember their current one is a non-nuclear and is revamped carrier bought from Russia which then was retrofitted) carriers. The nuclear propulsion technology the US uses is HIGHLY classified. The US has been designing and building aircraft carriers and other ships since World War 2 and they still have issues. Even if China starts laying down the keels for aircraft carriers they still have a multitude of issues to overcome to make a carrier comparable to the US. During that time the US would continue to enhance the technology on their own carriers. China had to reverse engineer the technology for a steam catapult, while the new Ford class has electro magnetic catapults. Not the mention they would have redesign their aircraft to be launched and land on a carrier.
私下里，国防部会笑得前仰后合；公开场合，他们得要求更多预算，以追赶中国。原因在于，中国并无建造航母的经验（别忘了，他们现有的航母是买自俄罗斯的非核动力航母，后经改造）；而美国使用的核动力技术高度机密。自二战起，美国就开始设计和建造航母及各种舰船，现在仍然面临各种问题。即便中国开始敲定航母龙骨，也要克服诸多难题，才能造出与美军相当的航母。期间，美国会不断增强自身航母的技术。中国不得不逆向工程出蒸汽弹射器技术，而福特级则采用电磁弹射。更别提，他们还得重新设计舰载机，以适应航母起降。

Secondly China will have to go through the growing pains of how man and logistics of how supply a carrier at sea. Then the maintenance of a carrier is a big job. The US has 10 active carries and one going through testing, about 1/3 is in maintenance at anytime. Maintenance takes a whole different set of skills than building a carrier.
其次，中国还得经历如何在海上为航母提供人力与后勤保障的阵痛。航母的维护更是大工程。美国现役航母 10 艘，另有 1 艘正在测试，随时约有三分之一处于维护状态。维护所需技能与造船截然不同。

Logistics is another huge piece of the puzzle. Sure you may have a nuclear propulsion system that does not need to be refueled. You still have supply the people on the ship. Which in my opinion is the hardest part about running a military.
后勤是另一块大难题。当然，核动力不需加燃料，但船上人员物资仍需持续补给——在我看来，这是维持军事运行最难的部分。

A carrier is not deployed alone, the carrier is the main piece of a strike group. So China would have build the ships that are part of the group. Which would take time also, then training the sailors of the different ships to work as a group will also time and effort. Not the mention the training the pilots to launch and land on a carrier properly is a lot of work.
航母绝非孤立部署，航母只是战斗群的核心。因此，中国还得建造群内配套舰艇，这也需要时间，然后再训练不同舰船的水手协同作战。此外，还得花大量精力训练舰载机飞行员掌握起降技术。

It am not saying China can't do it, it will take some time for China to become as proficient as the US.
我并不是说中国做不到，只是要花些时间才能达到美国的那种熟练程度。


Nolan Perreira
All the people that answered this question are “Thinking inside the Box”. Forget for a minute what the US would do. Think instead what the Chinese would do. If I were doing a little strategic thinking for the Chinese Navy, my first thought would be how to build the least complicated and least expensive way of delivering fighter and attack aircraft to any location within the Seven Dashed Line area, basically most of the South China Sea. I do the following: Begin fortifying every atoll I can, as it is doing now. Each atoll will function as an immobile aircraft carrier. To provide extended range, and mobile strike forces, I start building large catamarans, capable of holding 4 to 6 VTOL fighters. By installing a sloped deck, and a high cruise speed, I can significantly increase the load on the VTOLs by having them take off in STOL mode with the ship steaming at 60 knots. I build the ships of low reflectivity materials so they will be hard to find. This allows me to sidestep the problems with elevators, steam catapults, and large crews. It also allows me to build perhaps 20 per year, With a displacement of perhaps 10,000 tons, I can deploy the equivalent of one supercarrier per year, and have a building time of perhaps 6 months from laying the keel to launch. Because they are small, I can adapt the design quickly. My learning curve would be very rapid. The need for support ships would be low, once I complete my chain of atoll bases. Since the US Navy needs to be deployed far from home, they need big ships. The Chinese are close to home. They can deploy small ships. Asymmetric warfare at sea,
所有回答都陷入“盒子思维”，不如先抛开美国会怎么做，想想中国会怎么做。若为中国海军献策，首要考虑如何以最简单、最低成本将战斗/攻击机投送到“七道线”内（即南海大部）任何地点。我会这样做：首先，强化所有可用环礁（正如现在所为），使每个环礁都成为一座固定航母。接着，为了延展航程并组建机动打击力量，我打造大型双体船，可搭载 4–6 架垂直/短距起降战机。通过斜坡甲板和高速航行（60 节），可让战机以短距起飞模式起飞，大幅提升载荷。我还选用低雷达反射材料，使舰艇难以被发现。这样一来，就省去了升降机、蒸汽弹射和大编制船员的问题。并且每年可建约 20 艘、排水量约 1 万吨的小型舰艇，相当于每年建成一艘超级航母，且从开建到下水仅需约 6 个月。因为舰体小，设计迭代迅速。环礁基地链一旦完备，对支援舰艇的需求就很低。美国海军需远距部署，就要大船；中国近海作战，可用小船，打出海上不对称战。

Joseph Wang
Try to create an East Asian equivalent to NATO, and turn his into its diplomatic advantage.
尝试打造一个东亚版“北约”，并将其作为外交筹码。

China is already scaring people with one aircraft carrier. If it were able and willing to build 2 aircraft carriers a year, then everyone in East Asia would start panicking, and the US could come in as a "white knight" and ask for (and likely get) basing rights in the Philippines and Vietnam. Japan would remilitarize, and you'd have Indonesia and Malaysia turn against China.
中国仅凭一艘航母就已令各方不安。倘若真有能力且有意愿每年建造两艘航母，整个东亚都将陷入恐慌——届时美国便可扮演"白衣骑士"角色，顺势要求（并极可能获得）在菲律宾和越南的驻军权。日本将加速重整军备，印尼与马来西亚也会转而对抗中国。

In fact, China has to maintain a very tricky balance. Too much military buildup would actually be quite bad for its security. People will argue at what level a military buildup would be counterproductive, and there are people (who I strongly disagree with) that argue that China's current rate of military buildup is counterproductive. Right now when China does something, people scream for about 2 months and forget about it, leaving China with a larger military.
事实上，中国必须维持一种极其微妙的平衡。过度扩张军力反而会损害自身安全。关于军事建设达到何种程度就会适得其反，各方争论不休——有些人（我坚决反对这种观点）甚至认为中国当前的军力发展速度已在产生反效果。目前中国的每次行动虽会引发约两个月的舆论哗然，但风波过后，中国总能实实在在地增强军事实力。

As it is, one carrier allows China to completely outclass every other regional navy in Asia except for Japan. This limits the US response (i.e. is the US really going to go to war for the Philippines if no US interests were involved). If China started to seriously threaten US or Japanese interests you will see a nasty backlash.
就目前而言，一艘航母已足以让中国在亚洲区域海军中（除日本外）独占鳌头。这也限制了美国的反应力度（毕竟如果不涉及到美国利益，真要为菲律宾开战吗？）。一旦中国开始严重威胁美日利益，势必迎来强硬反击。

How much is too much is something people will argue over, and I think that the Chinese government is being careful to build up its military under the threshold.
何谓“过度”将永远争论不休，我认为中国政府在谨慎控制军备规模，确保尚在可接受范围内。

However, if you moved up to 2 carriers per year, then that's clearly way, way over the line. Also if China could build 2 carriers per year, then either it's going to collapse economically in about a decade, or else people have way, way underestimated the Chinese economy.
不过若真一年两艘，那显然远超底线。再者，即便中国能一年建两艘航母，也要么在 10 年内面临经济崩溃，要么说明外界对中国经济实力大大低估。

King of Bir Tawil
When China has 4 aircraft carriers, US would be worried and demand more resources from congress to maintain superiority.
当中国拥有 4 艘航母时，美国将忧心忡忡，向国会争取更多资源以维持优势。

When China has 8, US would rallying support from allies to contain China.
当中国有 8 艘时，美国会联合盟友共同遏制。

When China has 12, US would be discussing split the Pacific Ocean with China, and retreat to Hawaii.
当中国有 12 艘时，美国或将讨论与中国瓜分太平洋，并退守夏威夷。

When China has 16, US would be a peace loving nation and treat every nation with humble and respect.
当中国有 16 艘时，美国将成“爱好和平”的国家，以谦和与尊重对待所有国家。

When China has 20, US would be asking China to treat US as equal power, but would be okay if China put on a military base in Cuba.
当中国有 20 艘时，美国会请求中国将其视为平等大国，也会接受中国在古巴设军事基地。

When China has 24, US would ask China for preferential treatment into Chinese market, and provide cost effective products to Chinese consumers, pay by Chinese Yuan.
当中国有 24 艘时，美国会请求中国给予市场优先准入，并向中国消费者提供性价比产品，以人民币结算。

When China has 120, US would be requesting to be a province of China, because of shared value and interest.
当中国有 120 艘时，美国或将因利益与价值观相同，向中国申请作为其一个省份。

this is a joke, don’t take it too seriously.
以上纯属玩笑，请勿当真。

May we live in peace.
愿我们和平共处。

Chien‑Sheng Tsai
I don't know where the 2 carrier per year idea comes from. As far as I can glean, they would probably build 6 carriers and have three strike groups. China does not need to have the number of carriers that USA has because it has no intention of cruising the world looking for battles. The carriers are only for defense and guarding worldwide economic interests.
我不知道“一年两艘航母”从何而来。据我所知，他们可能造 6 艘，组建 3 个航母战斗群。中国无需像美国那样拥有大量航母，因为中国无意环游世界寻机开战。航母只是为防御和维护全球经济利益而设。

It appears that China made a smart move with the Liaoning, enabling China to ramp up quickly through reverse engineering--such cut years off of the effort. It was also smart to have the second carrier resemble the Liaoning so that training of a pool of carrier pilots can speed up. I personally think they should build a second (third) one like the Liaoning before going nuclear and catapult, just to have three operational carriers.
辽宁号的引进堪称明智之举，使中国通过逆向工程快速提升——省下了数年时间。紧接着第二艘航母与辽宁号保持高度相似，也有助于加速培养一批航母飞行员。我个人认为，在迈向核动力和电磁弹射之前，至少应再造一艘（或第三艘）“辽宁式”航母，以凑齐三艘可投入运营的航母。

The support ships are all being built, and also additional carrier aircraft, likely J-31. China is making rapid progress, perhaps faster than any have anticipated, and is fully cognizant that they are far behind the US, which has been building carriers for almost 100 years, while China is just starting out—and needs to catch up. They do know their weaknesses and are thus continuing with their carrier killer missile development--not up to Russian level, but close.
配套支援舰船正陆续建造，舰载机可能选用 J‑31。中国正迅速推进，速度或超出诸多预期，也十分清楚自己远落后于已建航母近百年的美国，需加紧追赶。他们也充分认识自身弱点，故持续研发“航母杀手”导弹——虽未及俄制水平，但已相当接近。

The Chinese are prudent and not starry-eyed like the Indians.
中国的做法稳健，不像印度那般好高骛远。