+amphibious+assault+ships++People's+Liberation+Army+Navy+(PLAN+or+PLA+Navy)+Z-15+WZ-10+Z8+Z-9+ka-27282931+aew+vtolstol+j-18+STOVL+is+an+acronym+for+short+take+off+and+vertical+landing+(4).jpg)
+Navy+(1).jpg)
+Navy+(2).jpg)
I've been waiting for this.
Carriers are cool. But they don't signify a nations intent to be able to take and hold ground in distant lands. Yes, they can control air space, they can launch punitive air raids...they can even level cities...but they can't deliver and deploy forces to take and hold real estate.
An LHA can.
If they build in numbers and continue to work on the other pieces of their Marine Corps then we will be faced with an issue the USMC hasn't dealt with since the Cold War. The USMC will have to face fighting a conventional force, capable of landing at a spot of its choosing, backed with Carrier Aviation, using combined arms against our infantry.
At this moment the Chinese Marine Corps can in my opinion claim to have achieved at the very least equality with our Corps. HQMC can keep pimping humanitarian assistance and disaster relief but it better dust off simulations using the projected Chinese Order of Battle against our own forces before it happens in real life.
SIDE NOTE: Does anyone have a good definition of the difference between an LHA and a LHD? At one time their was a clear distinction between the two. LHA's could only land forces via aviation where a LHD used landing craft & aviation. That no longer seems to be a valid definition. Ideas? Or is this another case of creeping classification to a point where it no longer makes a difference.
