Average Warship Age (2018)
This began as a quick look at the average age of the warships of the Russian navy, but the results were interesting so I expanded it to include the top dozen navies. For simplicity's sake, I only considered the following vessels: carriers (including flattop amphibious ships), submarines (excluding ballistic missile submarines), and surface combatants of over 100 meters in length (excluding coast guard and training ships). In the national breakdowns I further separate surface combatants into "large" and "small," with the former being ships of at least 150 meters in length.
Given that warships are generally built with an intended service life of around thirty years, we can predict that a healthy fleet should have an average service life of around fifteen years. A figure noticeably higher than that reveals that the fleet is unable to replace aging ships, while a significantly lower number indicates that the fleet is undergoing rapid expansion. However, this only holds true for large navies as small navies commonly replace their entire fleet at periodic intervals. Thus, I did not bother analyzing fleets with fewer than twenty warships.
As we can see, all of the serious navies have an average fleet age in the 10-20 year range, while the Russians and the third class navies have fleets in the 20-30 year range. However, as we will see in the detailed breakdowns of the top five navies, the overall average age can be somewhat misleading.
With an overall average fleet age of 18.5 years, the United States Navy is approaching the upper bounds of what can be considered a healthy fleet. However, the 22.5 year average age of the carriers is actually fine. Separating the large carriers from the assault ships, we will find that the former has an average age of exactly 25 years and the latter has an average age of 19.3 years. Given their expected service lives of 50 and 40 years respectively, those numbers are ideal.
The problem lies with the submarines and large surface combatants, which are both on the brink of hitting the 20 year mark. This is the result of the Los Angeles-class being commissioned at a rate of 2-3 a year and the Ticonderoga-class and Flight I Arleigh Burke-class at a rate of 3-4 a year while more recent procurement of submarines and destroyers has been just 1-2 of each a year. Given that the USN's currently plans on extending destroyer service life to 40 years or more, the fleet is likely to rapidly reach an age that cannot be considered healthy. The only bright spot are the new LCS - but their procurement is scheduled to end soon in favor of FFG(X) and that shift is virtually certain to result in delays and reduced numbers, further increasing the average age of the fleet.
Unfortunately, the great secrecy surrounding the Chinese submarine force means that there is insufficient information to include it in this comparison. However, we can still draw some useful conclusions by examining the Chinese surface fleet.
With an average age of 12.9 years, the Chinese fleet is the youngest of the major navies. However, this is not entirely a good thing as rapid expansion can mean untested new designs and inexperienced sailors. This is even more likely as the above figures include many ships that are best regarded as stepping stones and failed experiments along China's path to a modern navy. Looking solely at the modern ships that make up the backbone of China's new navy, we will find the twenty seven 054A frigates have an average age of 5.1 years while the fifteen 052C/D destroyers have an average age of just 3.9 years. Thus, the actual combat capability of these ships and their crews is likely somewhat marginal.
The Russian navy is almost entirely the product of the USSR. Indeed, out of the seventy nine vessels included in the above chart, only six diesel submarines and nine frigates were laid down after the creation of the modern Russian Federation. Quite simply, Russia lacks the industry, technology, or economy to maintain a fleet of its current size and I believe that the Russian navy will be forced to reduce numbers to a sustainable size by 2040.
Further, the most powerful portions of the Russian fleet are also the oldest. Fully half of Russia's large surface combatants are 30-36 years old and there are no replacements in sight. Additionally, only two of Russia's twenty five nuclear submarines are less than 22 years old (and one of those two is 17), meaning almost the entire fleet will soon need to be retired while only four more Yasen-class boats are currently planned to replace them. Only the small surface combatant fleet can truly be considered healthy, but the recent additions are mostly vessels of not much more than 100 meters in length.
With an average fleet age of exactly 15 years, on the surface the Japanese have the ideal healthy fleet. However, the detailed breakdown shows the truth is slightly more complicated. The carrier fleet is extremely young, with the oldest of the four ships being just 9 years old. Thus, it is likely that they are still learning how to operate these ships (as can be seen in the significant changes in design doctrine between the Hyuga-class and Izumo-class). However, the age of the submarine fleet is not an indication of rapid expansion as Japan has been building one submarine a year for over 20 years. Instead, it is a result of the Japanese policy of retiring submarines early or converting them to training boats.
The distinction between large and small surface combatants, while always somewhat arbitrary, is particularly poor for the JMSDF as it separates the smaller ships of the Asagiri-class from the rest of the general purpose destroyers. If we include these aging 135m ships with the large surface combatants so a better reflect Japanese doctrine, we get an average age of exactly 17 years. This leaves just the six Abukuma-class escort destroyers in the small surface combatant category, and their 26.8 year average age is explained by escort destroyers falling out of favor with the JMSDF and being replaced by more general purpose destroyers instead.
The 18.9 year average age of Indian navy is deceptive as their fleet is a mix of old and new with rather little in between. Of its forty three vessels, 33% are less than 10 years old, 21% are 10-20, and 47% are over 20 years old. The submarine fleet forms the bulk of the older vessels as it consists almost entirely of boats laid down in the 1980's, while the newer vessels are mostly found in the surface fleet. The average age of the small surface combatants is actually quite misleadingly, as that figure includes the five Kashin-class destroyers, all of which are over 30 years old. Excluding those ships, the figure drops to 10.3 years - in line with the large surface combatants. However, as the first Scorpene-class submarine commissioned last year, the older submarines should start leaving the fleet soon and the overall age of the India navy should begin rapidly falling to a healthier number.
 |
| Note, because of insufficient information the PRC figure does not include submarines |
As we can see, all of the serious navies have an average fleet age in the 10-20 year range, while the Russians and the third class navies have fleets in the 20-30 year range. However, as we will see in the detailed breakdowns of the top five navies, the overall average age can be somewhat misleading.
With an overall average fleet age of 18.5 years, the United States Navy is approaching the upper bounds of what can be considered a healthy fleet. However, the 22.5 year average age of the carriers is actually fine. Separating the large carriers from the assault ships, we will find that the former has an average age of exactly 25 years and the latter has an average age of 19.3 years. Given their expected service lives of 50 and 40 years respectively, those numbers are ideal.
The problem lies with the submarines and large surface combatants, which are both on the brink of hitting the 20 year mark. This is the result of the Los Angeles-class being commissioned at a rate of 2-3 a year and the Ticonderoga-class and Flight I Arleigh Burke-class at a rate of 3-4 a year while more recent procurement of submarines and destroyers has been just 1-2 of each a year. Given that the USN's currently plans on extending destroyer service life to 40 years or more, the fleet is likely to rapidly reach an age that cannot be considered healthy. The only bright spot are the new LCS - but their procurement is scheduled to end soon in favor of FFG(X) and that shift is virtually certain to result in delays and reduced numbers, further increasing the average age of the fleet.
Unfortunately, the great secrecy surrounding the Chinese submarine force means that there is insufficient information to include it in this comparison. However, we can still draw some useful conclusions by examining the Chinese surface fleet.
With an average age of 12.9 years, the Chinese fleet is the youngest of the major navies. However, this is not entirely a good thing as rapid expansion can mean untested new designs and inexperienced sailors. This is even more likely as the above figures include many ships that are best regarded as stepping stones and failed experiments along China's path to a modern navy. Looking solely at the modern ships that make up the backbone of China's new navy, we will find the twenty seven 054A frigates have an average age of 5.1 years while the fifteen 052C/D destroyers have an average age of just 3.9 years. Thus, the actual combat capability of these ships and their crews is likely somewhat marginal.
The Russian navy is almost entirely the product of the USSR. Indeed, out of the seventy nine vessels included in the above chart, only six diesel submarines and nine frigates were laid down after the creation of the modern Russian Federation. Quite simply, Russia lacks the industry, technology, or economy to maintain a fleet of its current size and I believe that the Russian navy will be forced to reduce numbers to a sustainable size by 2040.
Further, the most powerful portions of the Russian fleet are also the oldest. Fully half of Russia's large surface combatants are 30-36 years old and there are no replacements in sight. Additionally, only two of Russia's twenty five nuclear submarines are less than 22 years old (and one of those two is 17), meaning almost the entire fleet will soon need to be retired while only four more Yasen-class boats are currently planned to replace them. Only the small surface combatant fleet can truly be considered healthy, but the recent additions are mostly vessels of not much more than 100 meters in length.
With an average fleet age of exactly 15 years, on the surface the Japanese have the ideal healthy fleet. However, the detailed breakdown shows the truth is slightly more complicated. The carrier fleet is extremely young, with the oldest of the four ships being just 9 years old. Thus, it is likely that they are still learning how to operate these ships (as can be seen in the significant changes in design doctrine between the Hyuga-class and Izumo-class). However, the age of the submarine fleet is not an indication of rapid expansion as Japan has been building one submarine a year for over 20 years. Instead, it is a result of the Japanese policy of retiring submarines early or converting them to training boats.
The distinction between large and small surface combatants, while always somewhat arbitrary, is particularly poor for the JMSDF as it separates the smaller ships of the Asagiri-class from the rest of the general purpose destroyers. If we include these aging 135m ships with the large surface combatants so a better reflect Japanese doctrine, we get an average age of exactly 17 years. This leaves just the six Abukuma-class escort destroyers in the small surface combatant category, and their 26.8 year average age is explained by escort destroyers falling out of favor with the JMSDF and being replaced by more general purpose destroyers instead.
The 18.9 year average age of Indian navy is deceptive as their fleet is a mix of old and new with rather little in between. Of its forty three vessels, 33% are less than 10 years old, 21% are 10-20, and 47% are over 20 years old. The submarine fleet forms the bulk of the older vessels as it consists almost entirely of boats laid down in the 1980's, while the newer vessels are mostly found in the surface fleet. The average age of the small surface combatants is actually quite misleadingly, as that figure includes the five Kashin-class destroyers, all of which are over 30 years old. Excluding those ships, the figure drops to 10.3 years - in line with the large surface combatants. However, as the first Scorpene-class submarine commissioned last year, the older submarines should start leaving the fleet soon and the overall age of the India navy should begin rapidly falling to a healthier number.
