Military – China’s Navy Struggles to Match US in Recovering Downed Aircraft, Experts Warn

Recent analysis from military observers suggests that the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is still significantly behind the United States Navy in its ability to recover downed aircraft at sea — a capability that military planners say is essential for naval aviation operations and safeguarding sensitive technology. The discrepancy comes amid China’s broader push to expand its naval presence beyond regional waters and develop true blue‑water capabilities, even as experts caution that gaps remain in critical areas.
The Growing Risk of Aircraft Losses
As Chinese aircraft carriers and naval aviation units conduct more operations farther from coastal support, the likelihood of aircraft losses over deep water rises. Modern jets and helicopters that crash into the sea — whether due to technical failure, training accidents, or combat losses — pose a complex recovery challenge. Retrieving downed aircraft isn’t only about rescuing crews but also about preventing sensitive technology from being damaged or captured.
Interesting Engineering
The United States Navy has refined its aircraft recovery capabilities over decades. For example, late last year the U.S. military successfully retrieved both an F/A‑18F Super Hornet fighter jet and an MH‑60R Seahawk helicopter that crashed into the South China Sea during carrier operations. Leveraging specialized salvage ships, underwater robotics, and coordinated fleet support, the U.S. recovered both aircraft intact from depths of about 400 feet — a complex mission achieved with careful planning and resource allocation.
In contrast, Chinese naval forces are still developing similar deep‑water salvage and recovery expertise. Most PLAN carriers — including earlier platforms like the Liaoning and Shandong — rely on launch and recovery systems that are fundamentally different from U.S. designs. While China’s newest aircraft carrier, the Fujian, features advanced electromagnetic aircraft launch and recovery systems (CATOBAR) that can support heavier or more sophisticated aircraft, integrating this technology across the fleet remains a work in progress.
Why Aircraft Recovery Matters
The ability to retrieve downed aircraft serves several strategic purposes:
Crew Safety: Recovering pilots and aircrew remains a top priority. Rapid response and coordinated search‑and‑rescue (SAR) capabilities demonstrate not only military effectiveness but also commitment to personnel safety.
Technology Protection: Military aircraft contain sensitive avionics, sensors, and stealth materials. If such technology were left unrecovered in contested waters, an adversary could gain intelligence advantages.
Operational Readiness: Salvaging damaged aircraft preserves valuable hardware and informs engineers about failure modes that can be mitigated in future designs.
Experts have noted that China’s rapid expansion of naval aviation — driven by ambitions to project power in the Pacific and defend territorial claims — increases both the operational tempo and potential for equipment losses. But without equivalent recovery infrastructure, these losses carry broader risks.
RealClearDefense
Comparing Naval Aviation Capabilities
A key factor in recovery capability is experience and infrastructure. The United States has maintained carrier aviation as a cornerstone of naval force projection for more than seven decades, with integrated salvage units, deep‑sea submersibles, and doctrine refined through conflict and peacetime operations. China, while modernizing quickly, lacks similar operational depth. Its navy historically focused on coastal defense and regional power projection, and deep‑water aircraft recovery represents a relatively new challenge.
The Economic Times
China’s fleet of carriers — currently led by the Fujian, Shandong, and Liaoning — is growing, and the PLAN has conducted far‑sea deployments that indicate increasing operational confidence. However, Chinese carriers typically operate fewer aircraft than U.S. carriers. American nuclear‑powered carriers such as the USS Ford‑class can launch and recover larger air wings with greater frequency; their crews also have decades of experience handling flight operations far from home ports.
The Economic Times
Technical and Logistical Gaps
Recovery operations demand a combination of specialized vessels, technical expertise, and logistical coordination that China’s navy is still building. High‑end salvage ships equipped with heavy cranes, remotely operated underwater vehicles (ROVs), and trained recovery divers are essential components that underpin the U.S. Navy’s success in recovering deep‑water losses. Developing these assets at scale takes time and sustained operational experience.
In addition, training scenarios and exercises that simulate aircraft loss and retrieval are far more established in U.S. naval doctrine, whereas China’s focus has been on expanding carrier launch capabilities and integrating newer aircraft types into PLAN aviation.
Strategic Implications
The gap in recovery capability signals more than a technical shortfall; it reflects broader differences in naval doctrine, experience, and global reach. As China continues to refine its carrier operations and expand its naval presence — and as both Beijing and Washington vie for influence in the Indo‑Pacific — these kinds of capability mismatches will remain points of analysis for defense planners in multiple nations.
In the meantime, efforts to enhance recovery capabilities will likely remain both a tactical priority and a symbolic measure of naval maturity — one that underscores the complex balance of power at sea amid rising strategic competition.
Let me know if you’d like a subtitle and a best community recommendation for this article!