Only western aligned nations counted
Non-western aligned nations information too unreliable and quality questionable
2023 Naval Firepower Ranking
Only western aligned nations counted
Non-western aligned nations information too unreliable and quality questionable
>Another asian subhuman shilling thread
Frick off now, go eat a dog/rat/octopus and die
Go home asiaticshill. Don't you get tired of getting BTFO in every thread.
We know who you are troony weeb lmfao
There is already a thread about that picsntsn
>no china
uh oh they arent going to like this with their mighty fishing boat 100 quadrillion tonnage
wonder if canada is going go ahead with the sub program or if it'll just die and they'll flounder for another decade. probably the latter
ROK + UK are teaming up to give Canada 12 subs
A single sub with SLBM capabilities can sink an entire fleet and destroy a large city without ever being detected, rankings should be 1 US, 2 UK, 3 France, 4 SK, after this its all bush league
>showed his obsession with VLS in the OP pic
>identified asiaticshill
I fricking called it lol
> like clockwork the weeb
Lmfao fricking troony
Lmao
This homie thinks I like Japan
Frick Asians, and especially frick you.
Lmfao fricking brown monkey crying? lol
Show respect to the white man, asiatic
Lmfao
I already told you I hate Asians, asiatic. Stop proving me right that you are all subhumans.
Guess what? They hate you too probably even more than you can imagine
Why do you type lmfao when you're obviously crying and punching yourself in the head like Asian "men" do when they get angry?
> your face now ->
[...]
We know who you are troony weeb lmfao
Lmfao fricking clitdick troony
>Projecting this hard
The absolute state of the asian internet patrol slave, being stuck in a loop of buzzwords and memes
> Japan and South Korea > Britain and France in naval firepower
Is this why our daughters lust after bbc and refuse white "males"?
He is just counting VLS cells and tonnage as if NOTHING else matters.
Japan would still potentially be 2nd or 3rd if you don't give too much weight to larger aircraft carriers. But if you give weight to the capability to project force abroad using aircraft carriers, then yeah the UK and france certainly would rank ahead of ROK/Japan.
Japan being purely defensive with their local region only in mind allows them to focus on destroyers and attack subs, they don't invest much at all into projecting force further afield the UK and France have to both invest heavily into.
Over half of the UK and France military budget is allocated to their aircraft carriers, nuclear subs and nuclear arsenals, this is causing a lot of consternation in both nations as both have land forces that are outside the t20 (ie, 200 mbts) and incapable of waging warfare against peer adversaries and simply using a perverted version of the North Korean playbook of "we have nukes", which increasingly means nothing in the modern/future warfare landscape as there are over 50+ countries today that could develop nukes inside of a few months if mad was the doctrine
It's funny how small their armies are. Only one country has over 3,000 modern (1990s+) tanks, although the US is doing ok at 2,600 or so I suppose. Still, everyone else is tiny or old.
>Japan, France, or the UK third
There is a conspicuously absent country on this list that has more than all three combined and outproduces the US by 3 to 1 now, 100 to 1 if we look at nonmilitary large shipping, which very much matters for surge capacity.
This country alone launched almost more tonnage than the rest of the world combined last year, 44.2%. It will exceed 50% by 2027.
Did you notice the thread is specifically western aligned nations?
No shit China isn't on the list.
Special forces brute strength competition:
ROK > Sweden > UK > US
Maybe ROK but Japan soldiers make Southeast Asians look like giants
Japanese lovu whytu pigu for katana practisu
Lmfao
you would think nips would be less smug after getting 3 cities deleted
Source the SK VLS numbers, by my last count they had ~600-700 at most. Or are you counting like training ships and shit too?
>another shill thread
God Koreans are such insecure people
> US scrapping more ships each year than it builds.
At least you tried.
US > than all countries in the chart
Lmfao
>0 (Zero) aircraft carriers
>No. 3
Lmao, Italy has more and they're in 7th, asiaticoid.
> he thinks the 27000 ton cavour is a real carrier
homie there are landing ships bigger than the fincantieri barge
Still a carrier if it runs F-35Bs.
>size is the only thing that matters
I thought asiatics would know that that isn't the case, being Asians and all.
Spanish, italian and turkish LHD's are enough to guard the Med, Gibraltar and the Suez.
French and UK carriers guard the atlantic (along with USA)
US navy guards the pacific and the rest of the world
> French and UK carriers guard the atlantic
Britain and France plays a support role to the US in the Atlantic to a similar degree that South Korea and Japan do in the Pacific, in other words, not much more than moral support given the US has 90%+ of the firepower on both lakes
There's not much guarding to do in the atlantic, who else could stir trouble there?
Rouge kriegsmarine u-boats, no seriously maybe russian subs. But i think between US/UK they are well tracked.
asiaticshill threads are so weird. Does he really not know how identifiable his typing style, filenames and continuously reused posts are?
I remember a thread where I just posted wordless pictures of the Type-10 tank and he replied to them with seething. He's such an odd character. Charming though.
Eh he spams too much sometimes to be charming, sometimes he has 5 or 6 threads up at a time. When he’s on his own he’s cute in a downie way. He’s like if armatard was sitting at 65 IQ instead of 85
It's funny because even though he hates Japan, the only metric that makes south Korea's navy look that good (pure tonnage + VLS cells) also makes Japan look good. So he can't even do his usual Japan is the worst Asian nation routine he usually devolves into.
I wonder if he actually believes no one can spot him, if he actually believes it’s all one troony jap persecuting him. It’s clear that he is, in a literal clinical sense, mentally moronic, but one must wonder how moronic.
I don't see how he can't know, he does it anyway regardless.
I'm sure he'll be up in a few hours at most to continue his moronation.
>Denmark=Spain
>Danmark>Australia
This is the madness listening to Koreans gets you.
Table is ranked based on vls cells, but yeah australia has subs even if shitty without ballistic missiles still > any surface vessels
What is the frigate column mean? 1 out of 2 for USA, 2 out of 10 Japan etc?
That's the overall ranking, 1st place, 2nd place, etc.
It just happens to be on the same line as frigates in his table.
I am not convinced of this, why is there no legend on this chart?
....how are you "not convinced"?
It goes 1st USA, 2nd, Japan, 3rd ROK, 4th UK, 5th France, 6th Turkey, 7th Italy, 8th Spain, 9th Denmark, 10th Australia, 11th Netherlands, 12th Canada, 13th Germany, 14th Greece, and 15th Norway.
Why the FRICK do you think it would mean 1/2 Frigates, 2/10 Frigates, 3/17 Frigates, 4/11 Frigates, 5/10 Frigates, etc.
It makes no sense, if it was Frigates currently under construction or something, then Japan would have like 8 or 10 in the pipeline currently.
It is clearly just listing what position they are on the list, it's obviously just a bullshit arbitrary list OP made up based on pure tonnage and VLS cells which is NOT how you measure a navy's strength/power.
If you're still confused, no one can help you anon.
>US
>UK
>France
>Jap
>Italy
>SK
What is the source of the graphic? Autismo made or actual source?
Likely autismo, it's obvious from the rest of the thread he is the asiaticshill that regularly hunts around for rankings that show ROK doing better than everyone else, and when he can't find it, he makes his own charts.
Yeh i thought so, this
kind of shit is telling kek.
Japan and ROK are regional navies anyway.
Shipbuilding is essentially China and South Korea with Japan as a distant third, its astounding that these three nations build 99% of ships on the seas
Most of the samegayging is from the weeb but there is also a filipino that has massive butthurt towards south korea and japan because they treated him like shit or something and a pajeet/muzzie from the uk that thinks he's actually a real brit, the weeb does not look like your pic, he's a skinnyfat manlet not a troony but is a homosexual
>All of my posts are anti-Japanese
>I'm a "weeb" because apparently Nips aren't Asian according to your moron logic.
KYS, dog-eater.
You included ships in construction and even ones that haven't been laid down to inflate Korea's numbers. Currently ROK Navy has 884 or so and it takes 3-4 years to reach 1048.
>Submarine
SS KSS-III (6 cell): 2 in service, 1 in construction = 12
SS KSS-III Batch-2 (10 cell): 1 contract awarded = 0
>Destroyer
DDG KDX-III (128 cell): 3 in service = 384
DDG KDX-III Batch-2 (88 cell): 1 in construction = 0
DDG KDX-II (56 cell): 6 in service = 336
DDG KDX-I (16 cell): 3 in service = 48
>Frigate
FFG FFG-III (16 cell): 1 in construction = 0
FFG FFG-II (16 cell): 5 in service, 3 in construction = 80
>Amphibious
LPH LPH-6112 (4 cell): 1 in service = 4
LST LST-686 class (4 cell): 4 in service = 16
>Mine warfare
MLS MLS-570 (4 cell): 1 in service = 4
Also, if we go by that, Japan's number would be 1800-1900.
Frickin called it
It would also boost the UKs numbers much higher since they're planning a bunch of new VLS heavy destroyers.
>DDG KDX-III (128 cell): 3 in service = 384
It should be noted that 48 of those cells are K-VLS cells and are not compatible with MK41 VLS missiles. Currently the K-VLS cells launch a Korean version of ASROC torpedo, and a Korean land attack missile.
So they can't carry or fire for example, quad packed ESSMs, SM-2/6, or similar.
K-VLS missiles are something like 25% more than comparable US missiles, ROK navy could have easily had the 48 compatible MK41 but opted to go with their higher firepower domestic made, partially due to ROK developing a comprehensive rifle to nuke and everything in between MIC industry
moron if you go by future plans ROK will be over 3000-4000 vls cells, the 3 arsenal ships alone each have 500+ vls cells not to mention the 3 other arsenal ships which 80 ballistic missile cells
This doesn't even factor that ROK and the US have a nuclear sharing agreement and their subs will have nukes signed by Biden and Yoon a few weeks ago, ROK is mulling whether to invite Japan or not but word is the US is opposed to it
>This doesn't even factor that ROK and the US have a nuclear sharing agreement and their subs will have nukes signed by Biden and Yoon a few weeks ago, ROK is mulling whether to invite Japan or not but word is the US is opposed to it
Feel free to provide sources for anything you said here
>3 arsenal ships alone each have 500+ vls cells not to mention the 3 other arsenal ships which 80 ballistic missile cells
I haven't seen anything about this, they mention the 80 ballistic missile cell ships, but i've seen nothing about some 500+ VLS cell ship. Not even in the planning phase, let alone contracts awarded and construction being underway.
By that logic the US has another 2000 VLS cells to account for the 20-30+ Frigates they'll get over the next 20 years, i mean where do you stop?
The only sane thing to count is currently active ships and their current capability, not what a future upgrade COULD give them, not what the military WANTS to have in 5-10 years, etc.
The chart is for commissioned + laid down only, directly from wiki and seaforce
Alll of the info is taken directly from wikipedia and sea force, includes commissioned + laid down only, no in progress constructions or future plans
Britain has the capabilities to make a navy as strong as Japans, but their politicians have been moronic since at least the 60's.
They're seemingly doing better with their new destroyers in the planning, but yeah they've sat on their laurels for decades.
Really? Does Britain even have a shipyard anymore? Your claim can be made by any country in the world, are we going to give Spain credit for being able to build a modern Spanish Armada "if they wanted to"?
>Does Britain even have a shipyard anymore?
Google it, moron.