All About The Chinese Aircraft Carrier Thread

[Jeff Head]

Originally Posted by tphuang

Sadly, we might see another naval race between the East Asian countries.

It's already happening. The LPD type ships are already turning out...IMHO, it can only be amatter of time before they start building small carriers. Japan already has a design they have put forward. I believe China will beat them all to the carrier goal though.

Originally Posted by QBZ957

They have bought an retired aricraft carrier from Australia but dont seemed to have advanced in its work.

The old Melbourne was useful; to them, but they have come a long way since then. The topic of this thread (and several others) centers on the VARYAG, a much more modern carrier they purchased form the Ukraine and have had in their shipyards for the last several years.

Originally Posted by QBZ957

The USA has also encouraged China to make their own Carrier as well.

I was not aware of any encouragement in this regard by the US. Do you have a source or link to such information? I would be very surprised to see the US actively encouraging or helping in such an endeavor as it has the strong chance of upsetting the naval balance in the region against several very staunch and long-time US allies.

[QBZ957]

Around 2 months ago a current affiar and news radio show in Hong Kong had stated that some of the higher ranking officers of the American Army had encouraged China to build an aircraft carrier stating that it was a 'living coffin' for enemies that see it. As for an exact source information of that i will need to search for that.

[Jeff Head]

Originally Posted by QBZ957

higher ranking officers of the American Army had encouraged China to build an aircraft carrier

I find it difficult to believe that high ranking US Army officers would make any such recommendations about PLAN Navy matters.

Clearly, as the USN is continuing to build super-carriers, and is introducing a new class of the same in the near future with the first of class already under construction at the same time the last of the Nimitz class is being built. Therefore, the US does not feel in the least that they are floating coffins. To the contrary, they are viewed amongst the US's most strategic and effective power projection assetts.

But, if you find it, please reference the source, it would be interesting to read.

[Sczepan]

Originally Posted by Jeff Head

.... Here's my favorite Varyag page...hehehe.

http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideair...ers/varyag.htm

Many people of many different nationalities are wondering about this......

and there:

.....
Elevators: 2
Ships in class: 1
Unknown PLAN Name
The Chinese purchased the former Soviet carrier,....

according to the very honourable german naval magazine "MARINEFORUM" the Varyag will be named "SHI LANG" (Ship Nr. 83) and will become a trainee-ship of the Dalian Navy-Academy, which primer is teaching naval pilots.
So the SHI LANG would become next after ZHENGHE (81) and SHICHANG (82).

They also reported, that SHICHANG (including helos of Typ Z-8 und Z-9) was transfered to the south fleet, to simulate a Aircraft-(Helo-) Carrier by developing procederes of CBG operatings.
The SHICHUANG will be supposed by two LUJANG-I DDGs, both LUJANG-II (chinese „Aegis“), and both JIANGKAI-class fregátes. Also subs of SONG-class and the newest nuklear powerd Typ 093 should complete the fleet.

In my opinion the PLAN should also operate trainers like the L-15 at a future Varyag / SHI LANG trainee carrier (see http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/trainer/l15.asp ), powered by two DV-2F or AI-222K-25F turbofan engines with afterburner, which also has six (four under-wing and two wingtip) pylons to carry various air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons. If necessary, it can serve for lightweight attack role with minor modifications.
This aircraft could be used for training and to support amphibious operations - and (to repeate) could be future equipment of amphibious carriers, developed by a MELBOURNE based design, including catapulte to serv the aircrafts ....

[swimmerXC]

QBZ957...

Originally Posted by QBZ957

It seems kind of unusual that China isnt able to create its own Aircraft Carrier. An Carrier is like the symbol of a powerful country, even Thailand has bought one and stationed it in their docks.

Yeah of course Thailand has a carrier but most countries with the expection of the US can't even offer a decent protection to their carriers from subs and anti-ship missiles.

China has been trying to develop a carrier but from what i have heard they saying that there unable to develop that technology.

You do know they Spain and France offered China to build (Spain) and re-arm (France) carriers, but she turned them down... Why? I'm guessing unlike some other countries in the world they rather make their own indigenous carrier they buy from the Russians, Spainish, French, and England. It's better to depend on yourself then import your whole military.

They have bought an retired aricraft carrier from Australia but dont seemed to have advanced in its work.

Old news... I think that's already been SCRAPPED in guess which city? DALIAN...

USA has also encouraged China to make their own Carrier as well.

Thats like China encouraging Taiwan to develop nuclear weapons!

[PanAsian]

No kidding, it only makes sense for US officers to be recommending to the Chinese military to build aircraft carriers because it will actually not serve China's interests well.

[Shingy]

Probably because it will take up resources and they know that they won't be able to defend properly most likely.

[Obi Wan Russell]

On the subject of America encouraging China to join the carrier club, I read a report in the late 90's that the U.S. Government had made an offer of two decommissioned Essex class carriers to the PLAN, on the grounds that if China was going to aquire carrier technology anyway the U.S. would rather it was a, theirs and not Russias (I assume this was an example of better the devil you know) and b, the Essex class represent old technology and due to their small size would limit the size and operational capability of any air group operated from them.
Had the deal gone through (and this also applies to the possible transfer of the french cv Clemenceau had it gone through), the PLAN would have had carriers in their fleet, but by american standards they would have been of little military value and would have prevented China from aquiring any real carrier battle groups for probably another 20 years, by absorbing resources. China most likely realised this and rejected the offers of both the Essexes and the Clemenceau as they were holding out for something more substantial, i.e. Varyag, a larger and potentially more flexible platform for power projection. Having bought the vessel incomplete they would be free to alter the ship to their requirements whilst keeping everyone else guessing as to it's new capabilities. China doesn't have to match the U.S.Navy's carrier groups numerically, although the usn has 11 CVBGs as well as the LHA/LHDs, these are spread out all over the world, and normally only one third are operational due to refit cycles. So only three or four CVBGs are sailing the worlds oceans at any given time and that means only one or two are deployed in the pacific. The odds are evening up for the PLAN, are they not?
In my humble opinion, Varyag will be commissioned in due course, at first as a trials and training carrier obviously to build up the necessary skills base and experience (probably including the rotation of many crew through the ship to spread the skills around and build up a sufficient core crew for the next CV) but in due course she will be made fully operational. She is too big and too important to be used as an LPH other than on occassional operations, and I wouldn't rule out the retrofitting of steam catapults to the angled deck area at some point to increase her operational flexibility. The cancelled Soviet CVN Ulyanovsk (apologies if I have misspelled) was basically an enlarged Kuznetzov with an extra deck edge lift on the port side aft and two steam catapults in the waist position, retaining the ski jump forward.
I don't think the Chinese have any more studying to do on the Varyag, that phase must have finished quite a while ago. The technology basic to carrier construction is not that difficult to master, aircraft lifts use the same principles as a fork lift truck, albeit on a much larger scale. The PLAN has much experience building warships based on Soviet technology and in this respect the Varyag is just a larger warship than they are used to. She is powered by steam turbines (hardly cutting edge tech), uses arresting gear to stop aircraft on deck (again basically pre WW2 tech) and currently is configured to launch aircraft using the ski jump, actually a rolling take off with a hump backed bridge at the end, something that can be practiced on land easily.
To those who say that China should develop a missile cruiser instead, remember that to the uneducated public around the world, a cruiser looks like a destroyer, which looks like a frigate and ultimately causes very little impression when on a port visit to another country, whereas a carrier will always turn heads. China has shown itself to be very interested in raising its profile and carriers make an impression like no other.

[AssassinsMace]

Well, that's sort of the argument for ending the arms embargo on China. It's better to have China dependent on someone else for it's military technology than have them develop it on their own. At least that way there will always be some measure of control. But then China's is probably a different case.

[bd popeye]

Obi Wan Russell sez;

On the subject of America encouraging China to join the carrier club, I read a report in the late 90's that the U.S. Government had made an offer of two decommissioned Essex class carriers to the PLAN,

Really the last Essex class CV in service,Oriskany, was decommissioned 30 September 1975. She was stricken from the Naval Vessel Register in July 1989, and sold for scrapping on 9 September 1995. She was was in a deplorable state after being striken and would have not been worthy of futher service. The scrap yards could not scrp her and she was finally sunk as a artifical reef this past May. The remaining Essex class CV's the USN had in storage during the time frame you describe were either scrapped or now musuems because they were stricken= A ship or service craft formally removed from the Naval Vessel Register by SECNAV on recommendation of CNO. A legal preliminary to disposal....... The cost to make one of these ships servicable may have been well more than the PLAN could have afforded.

China doesn't have to match the U.S.Navy's carrier groups numerically, although the usn has 11 CVBGs as well as the LHA/LHDs, these are spread out all over the world, and normally only one third are operational due to refit cycles. So only three or four CVBGs are sailing the worlds oceans at any given time and that means only one or two are deployed in the pacific. The odds are evening up for the PLAN, are they not?

Some what accurate..however in an excersise two years ago the USN conducted an excersise called "Summer Pulse" In which 7 CV's were deployed at once.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...mmer-pulse.htm

Right now ,today, the USN has 3 CSG(Carrier Strike Groups) deployed. Enterprise, Lincoln & Kitty Hawk. CVN's Washington, Reagan, Roosevelt, Eisenhower are in a "Surge" status and can be deployed on a short notice.(3-10 days). Nimitz, Vinson & Truman are in re-fit.

Odds are evening up for the PLAN?? I don't think so. All USN ships are in a constant state of training. They spend days at sea training, and training and training. Can the PLAN say the same? What sort of training does the PLAN conduct? how much time do it's ship's spend at sea?

To those who say that China should develop a missile cruiser instead, remember that to the uneducated public around the world, a cruiser looks like a destroyer, which looks like a frigate and ultimately causes very little impression when on a port visit to another country, whereas a carrier will always turn heads. China has shown itself to be very interested in raising its profile and carriers make an impression like no other.

I agree. 95%. Having served on 5 USN CV's I must say..no fighting ship in the world is as impressive as an aircraft carrier. They are simply awesome.

[FuManChu]

Originally Posted by AssassinsMace

Well, that's sort of the argument for ending the arms embargo on China.

No, it doesn't. Ending the embargo would give China shiny new equipment - the guy before you was talking about selling very old equipment of little use.

It's better to have China dependent on someone else for it's military technology than have them develop it on their own. At least that way there will always be some measure of control. But then China's is probably a different case.

But China will just take that stuff apart and try to learn how it works. That's why Russia doesn't sell China anything it wants. Even Putin knows it's best to keep some secrets from the Chinese.

[AssassinsMace]

Didn't I say China maybe a different case?

You know that was the argument used by those EU countries that wanted to end the embargo?

It's better for China to develop technology on its own. Just like China should stop petitioning to be a part of the international space station and just build their own becuase the US won't be allowing that to happen anytime soon.

The little dark secret of denial is that something like over a decade ago I read that 25% of the R&D engineering community in the US was Chinese. I wonder what it's like now. That's why after the Wen Ho Lee scandal, the US nuclear labs had to reverse new policy that was aimed to close out Chinese in the labs when they found out they were too important to black list.

[Obi Wan Russell]

In reply to bd popeye, I didn't say the Essexes had been offered in the 90's, I said I read about the offer in the 90's which was probably made in the 80's when the ships in question had been in reserve between 10 to 15 years and were still assumed to be in reasonable condition. Closer inspection of the vessels after the offer had been made could well have lead to second thoughts about the deal on both sides. My point was about the reasoning behind the original offer, and I apologise for any confusion.
Yes, the USN can generate seven or more carriers for surge operations but this will have detrimental effects on crew morale in the long term amongst other things, something even the USN admits. My figures on the availability of US carriers under normal peacetime conditions is based on the Navy's own statement that three carriers were needed to keep one forward deployed, ie one in refit, one working up after refit, and one on station. Also remember that those stations are dispersed around the world and not piled up on China's doorstep so the PLAN only has to build its forces to counter those facing it, not the whole US Navy. American CVBGs engaged in other theatres cannot easily be redeployed without weakening the US forces in that area.
Finally, as a wise old sea dog told me many years ago, "Without organic airpower at sea (i.e. aircraft carriers ), you don't have a navy,
you have a coastguard."

[bd popeye]

Finally, as a wise old sea dog told me many years ago, "Without organic airpower at sea (i.e. aircraft carriers ), you don't have a navy,
you have a coastguard."

That's right.... Some old sea hags still think that big guns are the way to go...They are living in the past about 1935....

Very well stated. In normal cases the USN has 3-4 CSG deployed..Sorry about any misunderstanding. My point is ,of course, if need be the USN could deploy 6-7 CSG's. In no way could they ever feild 10 CSG's at one time.

Oh yes the USN started calling CVBG Carrier Strike Groups sometime last year.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/ships/c...house/cvbg.asp

[Roger604]

Originally Posted by AssassinsMace

The little dark secret of denial is that something like over a decade ago I read that 25% of the R&D engineering community in the US was Chinese. I wonder what it's like now. That's why after the Wen Ho Lee scandal, the US nuclear labs had to reverse new policy that was aimed to close out Chinese in the labs when they found out they were too important to black list.

Yes, that's right. Look at silicon valley. It's practically all East Asian and Indian. Development of indigenous science and technology must go hand-in-hand with fostering nationalism and loyalty to the state among ethnic Chinese people. Otherwise, all the talent will leak away.