外国博主：中国正在建造一艘与美国福特级航母同等大小的核动力航母
正文翻译
没有
评论翻译
@nicolasheung441
Funnily enough, the "Strategic Trolling Department" and their "heavenly gate" program (or in literal translation, south heaven gate) suggested PPT designs for an airborne aircraft carrier to go along with their stratosphere/space fighters, space docks, and mechs.
有趣的是，“战略忽悠局”和他们的“天门”计划（直译为南天门计划）展示了一些空天母舰的PPT设计，此外还有平流层/太空战斗机、空间站船坞和机甲。
@HammerTime2000
China is copying and pasting from the best.
Fujian is a third rate carrier, not impressed.
Now if China successfully builds a nuclear powered super carrier, then I would be impressed.
The US launched the first one in 1960, USS Enterprise, a colossal nuclear powered super carrier.
中国是在对最强者进行复制粘贴。
福建舰只是三流航母，没什么了不起。
要是中国能成功造出核动力超级航母，那我才会刮目相看。
美国在1960年就下水了第一艘核动力超级航母“企业号”，那是个庞然大物。
@matitjamatheson4395
is your "confidence" so small you gotta measure aircraft carriers?
你的“自信心”已经小到需要靠测量航母大小来衡量了吗。
@xjhao3125
Fujian is enough to top any non-US ships in the world, the type 004 will let China has the same carrier hardware to that of the US.
福建舰足以超越世界上除美国以外的任何舰艇，004型航母将使中国拥有与美国同等级别的航母硬件。
@whaleinblack
Who needs proof? Everyone on earth knows that China is building a Nuke Carrier sooner or later.
谁还需要证据。地球上每个人都知道中国早晚会建造核动力航母。
@christosbekas7446
In the zhunhai air show China have unveiled two mockups that they both belong to project nantianmen one belongs to luan niao a flying carrier 120000 tons yes is is a sci fi but China's ambitious is to build it
在珠海航展上，中国展示了两个属于南天门计划的模型，其中一个是12万吨级的飞行母舰“鸾鸟”。没错，这目前还是科幻，但中国的雄心就是把它造出来。
——
@Meowingtiger
I suspect carriers are already obsolete. If the US place a big fleet outside Greenland it will be easily sunk by drones, missiles and submarines. Ive said this for years and various "experts" have corrected me. But the events in the Ukraine show again and again how vulnerable the big ships are.
我怀疑航空母舰已经过时了。如果美国在格陵兰岛外海部署一支庞大的舰队，它很容易被无人机、导弹和潜艇击沉。多年来我一直这么说，各种“专家”也一直在纠正我。但乌克兰发生的事件一再表明大型舰船是多么脆弱。
@Poo_Brain_Horse
Drones don't have the range, missiles don't have real time tracking, and subs have been a thing for a century now.
Carriers can be vulnerable but unless you can offer a better way to project air power from the sea they're going to stick around. Perhaps the future is naval drone ships. But until they enter service we're stuck with carriers.
无人机没有那么远的航程，导弹没有实时跟踪能力，而潜艇已经存在一个世纪了。航母确实可能很脆弱，但除非你能提供更好的从海上投射空中力量的方法，否则它们会一直存在。也许未来是海军无人舰艇。但在它们服役之前，我们还得依靠航母。
@fezparker2401
The ships sunk in the black sea are close to both combatants. Usually along side. In open water things will be different
在黑海被击沉的船只离交战双方都很近。通常就在岸边。在开阔水域情况会有所不同。
@mickvastesaegher2140
You'd need hundreds or thousands of capable drones to even get through the CSG. besides, the drones would have to be pretty big and carry a large warhead to even damage a carrier meaningfully. The ships in Ukraine are mostly old Soviet ships that are sailing on their own or with a very limited number of escorts. Anti-ship missiles take them out because the distances are limited, the ships are old and sailing alone and their defences are not up to speed. A CSG can really only be sunk by throwing hundreds of missiles at it or have a sub waiting on the ocean floor.
Any other way of sinking a carrier is not viable.
你需要成百上千架性能出众的无人机才可能突破航母战斗群。此外，无人机必须足够大并携带大型战斗部，才能对航母造成实质性损害。在乌克兰被击沉的船只大多是旧苏联船只，它们独自航行或只有极少数护航舰。
反舰导弹之所以能干掉它们，是因为距离有限，船只陈旧且单独航行，防御系统也跟不上时代。要击沉航母战斗群，唯一的办法是向其发射数百枚导弹，或者让潜艇在海底埋伏。其他任何击沉航母的方式都是不可行的。
@paullomax4038
@mickvastesaegher2140 a carrier with a non functional flight deck is pretty much pointless and even small drones can cause damage to catapults and the deck. It’s not sunk, but functionally useless.
@mickvastesaegher2140 一艘飞行甲板失效的航母几乎毫无意义，即使是小型无人机也能对弹射器和甲板造成损害。它虽然没沉，但在功能上已经废了。
@Meowingtiger
@mickvastesaegher2140 one silent Swedish sub or similar hitting the rudder and propellers and the superweapon turns into a useless super expensive barge. From there its a easy target.
@mickvastesaegher2140 只要一艘静音的瑞典潜艇或类似的潜艇击中舵和螺旋桨，这种超级武器就会变成一艘毫无用处的超级昂贵驳船。它就是一个容易被攻击的目标。
@AartSnikkelbaard03
As long as the capability of putting an airfield in your opponent's virtual backyard remains relevant, aircraft carriers will remain a thing, even if they become more vulnerable.
Drone defenses will become more effective though. Especially since DEW are swiftly becoming a good option for navies.
只要把机场直接搬到对手“后院”的能力依然重要，航空母舰就会继续存在，即使它们变得更加脆弱。不过，针对无人机的防御也会变得更加有效。尤其是定向能武器正迅速成为各国海军的一个优选方案。
——
@Spartan-jg4bf
The problem with China is that it doesn't have the same sort of basing rights like the West and therefore lacks long range logistics capabilities
中国的问题在于它不像西方那样拥有同种类型的基地使用权，因此缺乏远距离物流保障能力。
@mirage2154
As a Chinese I hope we never do. I mean why would we have the need to put our navy in someone else’s front door?It’s been a humiliation for us for over 200 years. We couldn’t sail our ship around Taiwan until 90th. Why would we ever want to do that to any other nation? We just need to make a massive navy that can go far enough to intercept enemy fleet so it can’t attack our coast, where the wealthiest part of China are located.
作为一个中国人，我希望我们永远不要这样做。我的意思是，我们为什么需要把海军部署到别人的家门口呢。这对我们来说是延续了200多年的耻辱。直到90年代，我们的船只才能够绕台湾（地区）航行。我们为什么要对其他国家这样做。我们只需要建立一支庞大的海军，能够远航至足以拦截敌方舰队、使其无法攻击我们沿海地区的地方，因为那里是中国最富庶的地区。
@Spartan-jg4bf
@mirage2154 OK, that's fair enough.
@mirage2154 好吧，这很合情合理。
@mirage2154
@Spartan-jg4bf respect to you sir, I mean I could be wrong, it’s not like I am the policy makers in China. But I sincerely hope so, “do not do to others what you do not want done to you”, is as old as time as “eye for an eye.” in many cultures I think.Only time will tell. At least we did not start a war in 40 years, I hope it reaches 400.
@Spartan-jg4bf 对您表示尊重。我的意思是我也可能不对，毕竟我不是中国的决策者。但我由衷地希望如此，“己所不欲，勿施于人”在许多文化中都和“以眼还眼”一样古老。只有时间能证明一切。至少我们40年没有发动战争了，我希望这个数字能达到400年。
@RadicalFloat_95
@mirage2154 out of all the languages that you chose to speak you chose to speak facts and you actually couldn't have said that actually any better than me and people like you are actually rare who are few and far between.
@mirage2154 在所有你可以选择的表达方式中，你选择了陈述事实，你说的比我能想到的好得多，像你这样的人真的很罕见。
@马甲-c3d
China will not engage in military colonization of other countries.
中国不会对他国进行军事殖民。
@mappingshaman5280
I mean they have a base in Djibouti but I'm not sure if they could put navies there or not. I also would wager that their debt trapping countries is part of a plan to acquire bases in said countries
我是说，他们在吉布提确实有一个基地，但我不确定他们是否能在那里部署海军。我还可以打赌，他们所谓的让国家陷入债务陷阱是计划的一部分，目的是在这些国家获取基地。
@Alanzzzz
Chinese is doing this for defence, they dont have like military bases like US.
中国这样做是为了国防，他们不像美国那样拥有那么多军事基地。
——
@tompraisan7642
Look like preemptive strike on Hawaii or Guam is coming in about 10 years.
看起来在大约10年内，会对夏威夷或关岛发起先发制人的打击。
@mirage2154
You think we Chinese are that stupid, I know we are the root of all evils and all. But that doesn’t mean we are stupid, Japan attacked the US because it has blockaded its resources supply line. Look at trade war, does the US has ability to threaten Chinese resources supply without starting a world war? And why on earth would we consider attacking nuclear power, and what could we gain from it?
你觉得我们中国人有那么蠢吗，我知道我们被当成万恶之源之类的。但这并不代表我们傻，日本当年攻击美国是因为美国封锁了它的资源供应链。看看贸易战，美国有能力在不引发世界大战的情况下威胁中国的资源供应吗。而且我们究竟为什么要考虑攻击一个核大国，我们能从中得到什么好处。
@Spartan-jg4bf
That went well last time
上一次这么做的结果可是相当“不错”呢。
@nomercynodragonforyou9688
Damn, the pla is trying really hard to impress us.
天呐，解放军为了给我们留下深刻印象还真是够拼的。
@decepticons_destroy
They’re minding their own business. You’re the one that’s obsessed with anything China
他们只是在做自己的事。反而是你对任何关于中国的事情都过于痴迷。
@mingdazhang4732
China never try to impress nobody. They got plans
中国从不试图给谁留下印象。他们自有计划。
@Spartan-jg4bf
Pride comes before a fall
骄兵必败。
@Phoenix-bq7lw
Not a moment too soon! Considering how Trump behaves in Venezuela. But perhaps, not that urgent, considering TACO Trump let Chinese ships enter and leave Venezuela unharassed, and comically, unreported. Either Trump fears China would send warship escorts, or because Trump fears China would choke America of rare earth again. Whatever works, right.
一点也不嫌早。考虑到特朗普在委内瑞拉的表现。但也可能没那么紧迫，因为他让中国船只不受干扰地进出委内瑞拉，滑稽的是竟然还没有报道。要么是特朗普担心中国会派遣军舰护航，要么是他担心中国会再次切断对美国的稀土供应。管他什么原因，管用就行。
@華生-z9i
Trump is more afraid that China will intercept and confiscate US ships transporting weapons to Taiwan, and he knows China has this capability.
特朗普更担心的是中国会拦截并没收向台湾（地区）运送武器的美国船只，而且他知道中国有这个能力。
@dzcav3
Some of the oil tankers that the US stopped were transporting oil to China to pay Venezuelan debts.
美国拦截的一些油轮当时正载着石油运往中国，用于偿还委内瑞拉的债务。
——
@singatakberpura
China is late to the AC game - America,UK,Russia,France and India all had carrier operations since the 60s
中国在航母领域起步很晚——美国、英国、俄罗斯、法国和印度从60年代起就已经有航母作战经验了。
@user-99a
是的 中国都是最新的，你说的那几个慢慢退出历史舞台。
@singatakberpura
Stupid Chinese India has 2 aircraft carrier INS Vikrant is launched in 2021 and INS Vikramaditya which is launched in 2001..What i was speaking about is blue water experience..All those countries have experience..China doesn't..
愚蠢的中国人，印度有两艘航母，维克兰特号是2021年下水的，维克拉玛蒂亚号是2001年下水的。我说的是远洋经验……所有这些国家都有经验，而中国没有。
@zulkanainbaharuddin2185
India aircraft carrier commission then decommission, then commission again in 1984.
印度的航母服役后退役，然后在1984年再次服役。
@yangwang7201
Yes. Yes. India no. 1.
是是是，印度第一。
@singatakberpura
cry harder
哭大声点。
@marksdavid8974
hello indian
你好，印度人。
@ling-y7l
If you don’t include India, I’d even say what you’re saying makes sense as a reasonable person.
如果你不把印度算进去，作为一个理智的人，我甚至会觉得你说的还有点道理。
@田文Yoonsukyeol
60年代的老古董？能应对21世纪的海战？
——
@jchantw
Lol, u think having so many weapons you are the strongest?? These no need money to run, experienced people to fight? Lol, having shiny toys don't mean you can use it well.. you haven't even a decade of real Combat use, n just sail here n there.. when you meet real combatants, the inexperienced will pay dearly in deaths n blood.. lol
笑死，你觉得武器多就是最强的？这些不需要钱来维持吗，不需要有经验的人来战斗吗？笑死，有闪亮的玩具不代表你能用好……你连十年的实战经验都没有，只是到处航行而已。当你遇到真正的战斗人员时，缺乏经验的人将付出死亡和鲜血的惨重代价。
@Jmgnlxt
Why is having wars all over the world a brag to you?
为什么在世界各地发动战争对你来说是一件值得炫耀的事？
@Phoenix-bq7lw
Korean War proved that it does not take long for the Chinese to gain experience that Americans took for a very long time. So far, they do not make the same mistakes on carrier operations like the Americans did. Only because Americans made blunders, does not mean that other people would make the same blunders. Or perhaps they study American's blunders to get around it. Whatever works.
朝鲜战争证明，中国人获得美国人花了很长时间才积累的经验并不需要太久。到目前为止，他们在航母操作上没有犯美国人犯过的那些错误。仅仅因为美国人犯了错，并不意味着其他人也会犯同样的错。或许他们研究了美国人的失误来避坑。管他呢，有效就行。
@ZihadHossainAraf
This same logic was placed against Imperial Japan durring 1900s.. When japan was building rapidly its navy and Air force Brittish, russian, french and US empire Ignored it saying an Asian country can not over shadow them.. but Japan became the worst nightmare for Them in Pacefic theater.. Russian Black sea fleet was destroyed in tsushima, Dutch navy was destroyed in Java sea, Royal navy was overwhelmed by Japan in Pacefic and they with draw from east asia to India.. USA also struggled a lot... But japan lacked Manpower and State of the art Building capacity and Materials thats why they could not compete with US war machine... But China does not lacks there.. China have the Manpower and worlds Largest Manifacturing hub also materials.. They will get there Fuel from Russia above if Malacca straight gets blocked.. Also if war brooks out It would be Just US and some what Japan against China with russian support.. UK, Germany and franc does not held there past power any more.. Im not saying China would defeat USA but It wouldn't be vice versa..
这种逻辑在20世纪初也被用在当时的大日本帝国身上。当日本迅速建立海军和空军时，英、俄、法、美等帝国对此不屑一顾，说一个亚洲国家不可能超越他们。但日本成了他们在太平洋战场上最可怕的噩梦。俄国黑海舰队在对马海峡被摧毁，荷兰海军在爪哇海被歼灭，英国海军在太平洋被日本压制并撤回印度。美国也一度陷入苦战。
但日本当时缺乏人力、顶尖的建造能力和原材料，所以无法与美国的战争机器竞争。但中国并不缺这些。中国拥有人力、全球最大的制造中心以及原材料。如果马六甲海峡被封锁，他们可以从北方的俄罗斯获得燃料。而且如果战争爆发，可能只是美国和某种程度上的日本对抗有俄罗斯支持的中国。英、德、法已不再拥有往日的实力。我不是说中国会打败美国，但反之亦然（美国也不可能轻易打败中国）。
@斯卡雷特米亚
麻烦再加上独生子政策士兵怕死、temu飞机一飞就坠毁、鱼礁航母是WWE人NU隶在底舱划桨、今年邪恶***即将经济崩溃，不然我看着不得劲
@Qilin麒麟阁
美国士兵手上沾满全球人的鲜血，摧毁无数城市，造成无数家庭破灭，那些侵略别国的经验让你无比自豪？说明你内心是一个极其空虚，而且有极端暴力倾向的人，我敢肯定你没有真正的朋友，因为你会从内心把他们当成战利品！你的人生是枯燥无味的，你可能无法感知什么叫幸福！
@ex0duzz
Dude, China has been fighting wars for 5000 years and wrote the art of war which you still read today, still using missile and rockets and guns which China invented. If you want to fight China, go for it. China will come out on top everytime. Even if they lose, they still come out on top in the end, see mongols, manchus etc. China being on top for overwhelming majority of recorded human history and only ancient civilization still on top is not a coincidence.
Even China at its weakest, when USA had nukes and China couldnt even build a bicycle, when usa had sk and 17 other countries combined fighting with them, China still prevailed in korean war.
老兄，中国打了5000年的仗，写出了你今天还在读的《孙子兵法》，现在还在用中国发明的导弹、火箭和枪支。如果你想和中国打，那就试试吧。中国每次都会胜出。即使他们输了，最后还是会占据上风，看看蒙古人、满族人等。中国在人类有记载的历史绝大部分时间里都处于领先地位，且是唯一至今依然屹立不倒的古代文明，这并非巧合。即使在中国最虚弱的时候，当美国有核武器而中国连自行车都造不出时，当美国联合韩国和其他17个国家一起战斗时，中国在朝鲜战争中依然挺过来了。
@8qk67acq5
And experience will come when the fight comes.
当战斗来临时，经验自然也会随之而来。
@llllll-mp1zr
China’s practical combat experience began with the elimination of Taiwan and ended with the defeat of American hegemony and the destruction of the U.S. Navy. Just think—how could the once-mighty and experienced Spanish Armada be completely annihilated by the British Navy, which had no practical combat experience? Hahaha. Industry is the catalyst of military power, not so-called experience. Otherwise, the British Navy wouldn’t have been defeated by the U.S.
中国的实战经验始于收复台湾（地区），终于击败美国霸权并摧毁美国海军。想想看，曾经强大且经验丰富的西班牙无敌舰队怎么会被没有实战经验的英国海军彻底歼灭？哈哈哈。工业才是军事力量的催化剂，而不是所谓的经验。否则，英国海军也不会被美国击败。
@shisan-d4p
我们没有战争 已经证明我们士兵很优秀了
@HawawwawaH
China has the largest shipbuilding industry in the world. Even if America sank 20 super carriers for each one lost China would be able to build them too quickly for America to win in that exchange long-term. China is in the same position that America was in in the 1920s, an underwhelming real military but so massively industrialized that they can simply outbuild the rest of the world.
中国拥有全球最大的造船业。即使美国每损失一艘航母就能击沉中国20艘超级航母，中国也能以极快的速度重建，美国从长远来看无法赢得这场消耗战。中国现在的处境就像20世纪20年代的美国：虽然实际军力尚不亮眼，但工业化程度极高，足以在建造能力上碾压世界其他地方。
@gilbert643
Your real combatants will face Chinese hypersonic missiles No need 10 years real combat
你们那些“真正的战斗人员”将面对中国的超音速导弹。不需要10年的实战（经验）也能解决。
@ulooqulg
real.combatants like Rive Farmers & Goat Herders on Toyotas that kick worlds best arse.
像那些开着丰田皮卡的稻农和牧羊人一样的“真正战斗人员”，照样能把世界上最顶尖的力量揍得落花流水。
——
@Hegemonbeater101
Hooray China. For defense only, not bullying, invading incursion or kidnapping.
中国万岁。只为防御，不霸凌、不入侵、不侵略也不绑架。
@manimtimlourenzo9311
nahh always powers would be end in hegemony know ur history, my friend. It just happens it's their time. They bully and coerce cmon
不，强权总是以霸权告终，了解一下历史吧，我的朋友。现在只是轮到他们了。他们也在霸凌和胁迫。
@chiaojian6122
@manimtimlourenzo9311 Apparently, you don’t even know anything about Chinese history at all! Just don’t pretend you know a thing!
@manimtimlourenzo9311 显然，你对中国历史一窍不通！别在那装得好像很懂一样！
@Hegemonbeater101
@manimtimlourenzo9311 I definitely know modern era history. Yankeeland is a proven , indisputable hegemon-tyrant-bully.
@manimtimlourenzo9311 我绝对了解现代史。美帝是一个经过证实的、无可争辩的霸权暴君和恶霸。
@latta04
Really, I can’t differentiate if this is a serious comment or a sarcastic one.
说真的，我分不清这条评论是认真的还是在冷嘲热讽。
Funnily enough, the "Strategic Trolling Department" and their "heavenly gate" program (or in literal translation, south heaven gate) suggested PPT designs for an airborne aircraft carrier to go along with their stratosphere/space fighters, space docks, and mechs.
有趣的是，“战略忽悠局”和他们的“天门”计划（直译为南天门计划）展示了一些空天母舰的PPT设计，此外还有平流层/太空战斗机、空间站船坞和机甲。
@HammerTime2000
China is copying and pasting from the best.
Fujian is a third rate carrier, not impressed.
Now if China successfully builds a nuclear powered super carrier, then I would be impressed.
The US launched the first one in 1960, USS Enterprise, a colossal nuclear powered super carrier.
中国是在对最强者进行复制粘贴。
福建舰只是三流航母，没什么了不起。
要是中国能成功造出核动力超级航母，那我才会刮目相看。
美国在1960年就下水了第一艘核动力超级航母“企业号”，那是个庞然大物。
@matitjamatheson4395
is your "confidence" so small you gotta measure aircraft carriers?
你的“自信心”已经小到需要靠测量航母大小来衡量了吗。
@xjhao3125
Fujian is enough to top any non-US ships in the world, the type 004 will let China has the same carrier hardware to that of the US.
福建舰足以超越世界上除美国以外的任何舰艇，004型航母将使中国拥有与美国同等级别的航母硬件。
@whaleinblack
Who needs proof? Everyone on earth knows that China is building a Nuke Carrier sooner or later.
谁还需要证据。地球上每个人都知道中国早晚会建造核动力航母。
@christosbekas7446
In the zhunhai air show China have unveiled two mockups that they both belong to project nantianmen one belongs to luan niao a flying carrier 120000 tons yes is is a sci fi but China's ambitious is to build it
在珠海航展上，中国展示了两个属于南天门计划的模型，其中一个是12万吨级的飞行母舰“鸾鸟”。没错，这目前还是科幻，但中国的雄心就是把它造出来。
——
@Meowingtiger
I suspect carriers are already obsolete. If the US place a big fleet outside Greenland it will be easily sunk by drones, missiles and submarines. Ive said this for years and various "experts" have corrected me. But the events in the Ukraine show again and again how vulnerable the big ships are.
我怀疑航空母舰已经过时了。如果美国在格陵兰岛外海部署一支庞大的舰队，它很容易被无人机、导弹和潜艇击沉。多年来我一直这么说，各种“专家”也一直在纠正我。但乌克兰发生的事件一再表明大型舰船是多么脆弱。
@Poo_Brain_Horse
Drones don't have the range, missiles don't have real time tracking, and subs have been a thing for a century now.
Carriers can be vulnerable but unless you can offer a better way to project air power from the sea they're going to stick around. Perhaps the future is naval drone ships. But until they enter service we're stuck with carriers.
无人机没有那么远的航程，导弹没有实时跟踪能力，而潜艇已经存在一个世纪了。航母确实可能很脆弱，但除非你能提供更好的从海上投射空中力量的方法，否则它们会一直存在。也许未来是海军无人舰艇。但在它们服役之前，我们还得依靠航母。
@fezparker2401
The ships sunk in the black sea are close to both combatants. Usually along side. In open water things will be different
在黑海被击沉的船只离交战双方都很近。通常就在岸边。在开阔水域情况会有所不同。
@mickvastesaegher2140
You'd need hundreds or thousands of capable drones to even get through the CSG. besides, the drones would have to be pretty big and carry a large warhead to even damage a carrier meaningfully. The ships in Ukraine are mostly old Soviet ships that are sailing on their own or with a very limited number of escorts. Anti-ship missiles take them out because the distances are limited, the ships are old and sailing alone and their defences are not up to speed. A CSG can really only be sunk by throwing hundreds of missiles at it or have a sub waiting on the ocean floor.
Any other way of sinking a carrier is not viable.
你需要成百上千架性能出众的无人机才可能突破航母战斗群。此外，无人机必须足够大并携带大型战斗部，才能对航母造成实质性损害。在乌克兰被击沉的船只大多是旧苏联船只，它们独自航行或只有极少数护航舰。
反舰导弹之所以能干掉它们，是因为距离有限，船只陈旧且单独航行，防御系统也跟不上时代。要击沉航母战斗群，唯一的办法是向其发射数百枚导弹，或者让潜艇在海底埋伏。其他任何击沉航母的方式都是不可行的。
@paullomax4038
@mickvastesaegher2140 a carrier with a non functional flight deck is pretty much pointless and even small drones can cause damage to catapults and the deck. It’s not sunk, but functionally useless.
@mickvastesaegher2140 一艘飞行甲板失效的航母几乎毫无意义，即使是小型无人机也能对弹射器和甲板造成损害。它虽然没沉，但在功能上已经废了。
@Meowingtiger
@mickvastesaegher2140 one silent Swedish sub or similar hitting the rudder and propellers and the superweapon turns into a useless super expensive barge. From there its a easy target.
@mickvastesaegher2140 只要一艘静音的瑞典潜艇或类似的潜艇击中舵和螺旋桨，这种超级武器就会变成一艘毫无用处的超级昂贵驳船。它就是一个容易被攻击的目标。
@AartSnikkelbaard03
As long as the capability of putting an airfield in your opponent's virtual backyard remains relevant, aircraft carriers will remain a thing, even if they become more vulnerable.
Drone defenses will become more effective though. Especially since DEW are swiftly becoming a good option for navies.
只要把机场直接搬到对手“后院”的能力依然重要，航空母舰就会继续存在，即使它们变得更加脆弱。不过，针对无人机的防御也会变得更加有效。尤其是定向能武器正迅速成为各国海军的一个优选方案。
——
@Spartan-jg4bf
The problem with China is that it doesn't have the same sort of basing rights like the West and therefore lacks long range logistics capabilities
中国的问题在于它不像西方那样拥有同种类型的基地使用权，因此缺乏远距离物流保障能力。
@mirage2154
As a Chinese I hope we never do. I mean why would we have the need to put our navy in someone else’s front door?It’s been a humiliation for us for over 200 years. We couldn’t sail our ship around Taiwan until 90th. Why would we ever want to do that to any other nation? We just need to make a massive navy that can go far enough to intercept enemy fleet so it can’t attack our coast, where the wealthiest part of China are located.
作为一个中国人，我希望我们永远不要这样做。我的意思是，我们为什么需要把海军部署到别人的家门口呢。这对我们来说是延续了200多年的耻辱。直到90年代，我们的船只才能够绕台湾（地区）航行。我们为什么要对其他国家这样做。我们只需要建立一支庞大的海军，能够远航至足以拦截敌方舰队、使其无法攻击我们沿海地区的地方，因为那里是中国最富庶的地区。
@Spartan-jg4bf
@mirage2154 OK, that's fair enough.
@mirage2154 好吧，这很合情合理。
@mirage2154
@Spartan-jg4bf respect to you sir, I mean I could be wrong, it’s not like I am the policy makers in China. But I sincerely hope so, “do not do to others what you do not want done to you”, is as old as time as “eye for an eye.” in many cultures I think.Only time will tell. At least we did not start a war in 40 years, I hope it reaches 400.
@Spartan-jg4bf 对您表示尊重。我的意思是我也可能不对，毕竟我不是中国的决策者。但我由衷地希望如此，“己所不欲，勿施于人”在许多文化中都和“以眼还眼”一样古老。只有时间能证明一切。至少我们40年没有发动战争了，我希望这个数字能达到400年。
@RadicalFloat_95
@mirage2154 out of all the languages that you chose to speak you chose to speak facts and you actually couldn't have said that actually any better than me and people like you are actually rare who are few and far between.
@mirage2154 在所有你可以选择的表达方式中，你选择了陈述事实，你说的比我能想到的好得多，像你这样的人真的很罕见。
@马甲-c3d
China will not engage in military colonization of other countries.
中国不会对他国进行军事殖民。
@mappingshaman5280
I mean they have a base in Djibouti but I'm not sure if they could put navies there or not. I also would wager that their debt trapping countries is part of a plan to acquire bases in said countries
我是说，他们在吉布提确实有一个基地，但我不确定他们是否能在那里部署海军。我还可以打赌，他们所谓的让国家陷入债务陷阱是计划的一部分，目的是在这些国家获取基地。
@Alanzzzz
Chinese is doing this for defence, they dont have like military bases like US.
中国这样做是为了国防，他们不像美国那样拥有那么多军事基地。
——
@tompraisan7642
Look like preemptive strike on Hawaii or Guam is coming in about 10 years.
看起来在大约10年内，会对夏威夷或关岛发起先发制人的打击。
@mirage2154
You think we Chinese are that stupid, I know we are the root of all evils and all. But that doesn’t mean we are stupid, Japan attacked the US because it has blockaded its resources supply line. Look at trade war, does the US has ability to threaten Chinese resources supply without starting a world war? And why on earth would we consider attacking nuclear power, and what could we gain from it?
你觉得我们中国人有那么蠢吗，我知道我们被当成万恶之源之类的。但这并不代表我们傻，日本当年攻击美国是因为美国封锁了它的资源供应链。看看贸易战，美国有能力在不引发世界大战的情况下威胁中国的资源供应吗。而且我们究竟为什么要考虑攻击一个核大国，我们能从中得到什么好处。
@Spartan-jg4bf
That went well last time
上一次这么做的结果可是相当“不错”呢。
@nomercynodragonforyou9688
Damn, the pla is trying really hard to impress us.
天呐，解放军为了给我们留下深刻印象还真是够拼的。
@decepticons_destroy
They’re minding their own business. You’re the one that’s obsessed with anything China
他们只是在做自己的事。反而是你对任何关于中国的事情都过于痴迷。
@mingdazhang4732
China never try to impress nobody. They got plans
中国从不试图给谁留下印象。他们自有计划。
@Spartan-jg4bf
Pride comes before a fall
骄兵必败。
@Phoenix-bq7lw
Not a moment too soon! Considering how Trump behaves in Venezuela. But perhaps, not that urgent, considering TACO Trump let Chinese ships enter and leave Venezuela unharassed, and comically, unreported. Either Trump fears China would send warship escorts, or because Trump fears China would choke America of rare earth again. Whatever works, right.
一点也不嫌早。考虑到特朗普在委内瑞拉的表现。但也可能没那么紧迫，因为他让中国船只不受干扰地进出委内瑞拉，滑稽的是竟然还没有报道。要么是特朗普担心中国会派遣军舰护航，要么是他担心中国会再次切断对美国的稀土供应。管他什么原因，管用就行。
@華生-z9i
Trump is more afraid that China will intercept and confiscate US ships transporting weapons to Taiwan, and he knows China has this capability.
特朗普更担心的是中国会拦截并没收向台湾（地区）运送武器的美国船只，而且他知道中国有这个能力。
@dzcav3
Some of the oil tankers that the US stopped were transporting oil to China to pay Venezuelan debts.
美国拦截的一些油轮当时正载着石油运往中国，用于偿还委内瑞拉的债务。
——
@singatakberpura
China is late to the AC game - America,UK,Russia,France and India all had carrier operations since the 60s
中国在航母领域起步很晚——美国、英国、俄罗斯、法国和印度从60年代起就已经有航母作战经验了。
@user-99a
是的 中国都是最新的，你说的那几个慢慢退出历史舞台。
@singatakberpura
Stupid Chinese India has 2 aircraft carrier INS Vikrant is launched in 2021 and INS Vikramaditya which is launched in 2001..What i was speaking about is blue water experience..All those countries have experience..China doesn't..
愚蠢的中国人，印度有两艘航母，维克兰特号是2021年下水的，维克拉玛蒂亚号是2001年下水的。我说的是远洋经验……所有这些国家都有经验，而中国没有。
@zulkanainbaharuddin2185
India aircraft carrier commission then decommission, then commission again in 1984.
印度的航母服役后退役，然后在1984年再次服役。
@yangwang7201
Yes. Yes. India no. 1.
是是是，印度第一。
@singatakberpura
cry harder
哭大声点。
@marksdavid8974
hello indian
你好，印度人。
@ling-y7l
If you don’t include India, I’d even say what you’re saying makes sense as a reasonable person.
如果你不把印度算进去，作为一个理智的人，我甚至会觉得你说的还有点道理。
@田文Yoonsukyeol
60年代的老古董？能应对21世纪的海战？
——
@jchantw
Lol, u think having so many weapons you are the strongest?? These no need money to run, experienced people to fight? Lol, having shiny toys don't mean you can use it well.. you haven't even a decade of real Combat use, n just sail here n there.. when you meet real combatants, the inexperienced will pay dearly in deaths n blood.. lol
笑死，你觉得武器多就是最强的？这些不需要钱来维持吗，不需要有经验的人来战斗吗？笑死，有闪亮的玩具不代表你能用好……你连十年的实战经验都没有，只是到处航行而已。当你遇到真正的战斗人员时，缺乏经验的人将付出死亡和鲜血的惨重代价。
@Jmgnlxt
Why is having wars all over the world a brag to you?
为什么在世界各地发动战争对你来说是一件值得炫耀的事？
@Phoenix-bq7lw
Korean War proved that it does not take long for the Chinese to gain experience that Americans took for a very long time. So far, they do not make the same mistakes on carrier operations like the Americans did. Only because Americans made blunders, does not mean that other people would make the same blunders. Or perhaps they study American's blunders to get around it. Whatever works.
朝鲜战争证明，中国人获得美国人花了很长时间才积累的经验并不需要太久。到目前为止，他们在航母操作上没有犯美国人犯过的那些错误。仅仅因为美国人犯了错，并不意味着其他人也会犯同样的错。或许他们研究了美国人的失误来避坑。管他呢，有效就行。
@ZihadHossainAraf
This same logic was placed against Imperial Japan durring 1900s.. When japan was building rapidly its navy and Air force Brittish, russian, french and US empire Ignored it saying an Asian country can not over shadow them.. but Japan became the worst nightmare for Them in Pacefic theater.. Russian Black sea fleet was destroyed in tsushima, Dutch navy was destroyed in Java sea, Royal navy was overwhelmed by Japan in Pacefic and they with draw from east asia to India.. USA also struggled a lot... But japan lacked Manpower and State of the art Building capacity and Materials thats why they could not compete with US war machine... But China does not lacks there.. China have the Manpower and worlds Largest Manifacturing hub also materials.. They will get there Fuel from Russia above if Malacca straight gets blocked.. Also if war brooks out It would be Just US and some what Japan against China with russian support.. UK, Germany and franc does not held there past power any more.. Im not saying China would defeat USA but It wouldn't be vice versa..
这种逻辑在20世纪初也被用在当时的大日本帝国身上。当日本迅速建立海军和空军时，英、俄、法、美等帝国对此不屑一顾，说一个亚洲国家不可能超越他们。但日本成了他们在太平洋战场上最可怕的噩梦。俄国黑海舰队在对马海峡被摧毁，荷兰海军在爪哇海被歼灭，英国海军在太平洋被日本压制并撤回印度。美国也一度陷入苦战。
但日本当时缺乏人力、顶尖的建造能力和原材料，所以无法与美国的战争机器竞争。但中国并不缺这些。中国拥有人力、全球最大的制造中心以及原材料。如果马六甲海峡被封锁，他们可以从北方的俄罗斯获得燃料。而且如果战争爆发，可能只是美国和某种程度上的日本对抗有俄罗斯支持的中国。英、德、法已不再拥有往日的实力。我不是说中国会打败美国，但反之亦然（美国也不可能轻易打败中国）。
@斯卡雷特米亚
麻烦再加上独生子政策士兵怕死、temu飞机一飞就坠毁、鱼礁航母是WWE人NU隶在底舱划桨、今年邪恶***即将经济崩溃，不然我看着不得劲
@Qilin麒麟阁
美国士兵手上沾满全球人的鲜血，摧毁无数城市，造成无数家庭破灭，那些侵略别国的经验让你无比自豪？说明你内心是一个极其空虚，而且有极端暴力倾向的人，我敢肯定你没有真正的朋友，因为你会从内心把他们当成战利品！你的人生是枯燥无味的，你可能无法感知什么叫幸福！
@ex0duzz
Dude, China has been fighting wars for 5000 years and wrote the art of war which you still read today, still using missile and rockets and guns which China invented. If you want to fight China, go for it. China will come out on top everytime. Even if they lose, they still come out on top in the end, see mongols, manchus etc. China being on top for overwhelming majority of recorded human history and only ancient civilization still on top is not a coincidence.
Even China at its weakest, when USA had nukes and China couldnt even build a bicycle, when usa had sk and 17 other countries combined fighting with them, China still prevailed in korean war.
老兄，中国打了5000年的仗，写出了你今天还在读的《孙子兵法》，现在还在用中国发明的导弹、火箭和枪支。如果你想和中国打，那就试试吧。中国每次都会胜出。即使他们输了，最后还是会占据上风，看看蒙古人、满族人等。中国在人类有记载的历史绝大部分时间里都处于领先地位，且是唯一至今依然屹立不倒的古代文明，这并非巧合。即使在中国最虚弱的时候，当美国有核武器而中国连自行车都造不出时，当美国联合韩国和其他17个国家一起战斗时，中国在朝鲜战争中依然挺过来了。
@8qk67acq5
And experience will come when the fight comes.
当战斗来临时，经验自然也会随之而来。
@llllll-mp1zr
China’s practical combat experience began with the elimination of Taiwan and ended with the defeat of American hegemony and the destruction of the U.S. Navy. Just think—how could the once-mighty and experienced Spanish Armada be completely annihilated by the British Navy, which had no practical combat experience? Hahaha. Industry is the catalyst of military power, not so-called experience. Otherwise, the British Navy wouldn’t have been defeated by the U.S.
中国的实战经验始于收复台湾（地区），终于击败美国霸权并摧毁美国海军。想想看，曾经强大且经验丰富的西班牙无敌舰队怎么会被没有实战经验的英国海军彻底歼灭？哈哈哈。工业才是军事力量的催化剂，而不是所谓的经验。否则，英国海军也不会被美国击败。
@shisan-d4p
我们没有战争 已经证明我们士兵很优秀了
@HawawwawaH
China has the largest shipbuilding industry in the world. Even if America sank 20 super carriers for each one lost China would be able to build them too quickly for America to win in that exchange long-term. China is in the same position that America was in in the 1920s, an underwhelming real military but so massively industrialized that they can simply outbuild the rest of the world.
中国拥有全球最大的造船业。即使美国每损失一艘航母就能击沉中国20艘超级航母，中国也能以极快的速度重建，美国从长远来看无法赢得这场消耗战。中国现在的处境就像20世纪20年代的美国：虽然实际军力尚不亮眼，但工业化程度极高，足以在建造能力上碾压世界其他地方。
@gilbert643
Your real combatants will face Chinese hypersonic missiles No need 10 years real combat
你们那些“真正的战斗人员”将面对中国的超音速导弹。不需要10年的实战（经验）也能解决。
@ulooqulg
real.combatants like Rive Farmers & Goat Herders on Toyotas that kick worlds best arse.
像那些开着丰田皮卡的稻农和牧羊人一样的“真正战斗人员”，照样能把世界上最顶尖的力量揍得落花流水。
——
@Hegemonbeater101
Hooray China. For defense only, not bullying, invading incursion or kidnapping.
中国万岁。只为防御，不霸凌、不入侵、不侵略也不绑架。
@manimtimlourenzo9311
nahh always powers would be end in hegemony know ur history, my friend. It just happens it's their time. They bully and coerce cmon
不，强权总是以霸权告终，了解一下历史吧，我的朋友。现在只是轮到他们了。他们也在霸凌和胁迫。
@chiaojian6122
@manimtimlourenzo9311 Apparently, you don’t even know anything about Chinese history at all! Just don’t pretend you know a thing!
@manimtimlourenzo9311 显然，你对中国历史一窍不通！别在那装得好像很懂一样！
@Hegemonbeater101
@manimtimlourenzo9311 I definitely know modern era history. Yankeeland is a proven , indisputable hegemon-tyrant-bully.
@manimtimlourenzo9311 我绝对了解现代史。美帝是一个经过证实的、无可争辩的霸权暴君和恶霸。
@latta04
Really, I can’t differentiate if this is a serious comment or a sarcastic one.
说真的，我分不清这条评论是认真的还是在冷嘲热讽。
