All About The Chinese Aircraft Carrier Thread

[MIGleader]

This thread is basicly a cumination of multiple scattered one througout this forum and the old one. What ship will be the first carrier, what planes should it hol and how many, how will it be armed, what combat system it will feature, which ships and subs would escort it, how it will be deployed, how long it will take to complete and the cost...and the overal effectiveness of this new force.

[BrotherofSnake]

China should repair the Varyag and use it.

[MIGleader]

please elaborate whaen u post, not one liners. i want this topic to develop, not to hit a dead end when someone starts talking bout nukes...

[jackbh]

I for one does not want to see China invest the money and time on a carrier. A good carrier force takes too long to develop. By the time China has a respectable carrier force, the aircraft carrier would have been obsolete. They should concentrate on how to destroy a carrier rather than how to build one.

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Originally Posted by jackbh

I for one does not want to see China invest the money and time on a carrier. A good carrier force takes too long to develop. By the time China has a respectable carrier force, the aircraft carrier would have been obsolete. They should concentrate on how to destroy a carrier rather than how to build one.

Cruisers with ultra-long range sea-skimming hypersonic anti-ship cruise missiles will be the future of naval combat.

[jackbh]

Yes, China should put it's money and research into building an advance missle cruiser. That would be alot cheaper than acquiring a carrier.

[swimmerXC]

am i just hallucinating or is that a FLANKER and little people on the deck?

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/1601/varyag156fp.jpg

[bd popeye]

am i just hallucinating or is that a FLANKER and little people on the deck?

Flanker? That I don't see. But I do see people. Probaly PLAN types surveying the work. Or shipyard workers doing their thing.

MIGleader sugguested that the ship may have a combat system. Some sort of PAR I presume? . PAR would defently be needed as long as the PLAN has a limited number of escorts. It should also defently have CWIS. Perhaps type 730. Four of them one on each quadrant. I do not know what type of surface to air missiles to install. But they will be needed.

As too the number and type of aircraft. I need to do some reserach on that.

[ordinary dude]

To the chinese people, a chinese CBG sailing the high seas will be an huge boost to the chinese morale and deal a big blow to the percived veiw of western superiority. But at this time, China doesn't have the financial resources to procure such an expensive showcase trophy. And I believe the age of carriers as trump card in warfare is coming to an end. With missiles becoming more accurate and deadly, the carriers will become simple target drones unles they are always protected by a fleet of support vessles. China cant even field modern destoryers in large quantaties (Japan has more destoryers). Look at india, brazil, or Thailand, those carriers are just trophies that vie for bragging rights. China dont need more showcase items, she needs a well rounded navy that can exploit the weaknesses of foreign navies, we dont need to copy an US CBG to defeat one, and even if we do defeat one, they still have 11 more.

[TJJH]

I believe that the aircraft carrier still has its uses, but it should no longer be the centrepiece of the Navy. I envision a PLAN fleet to be based around the combined firepower of missile cruisers and submarines with protection in the form of destroyers and air cover provided by a sole carrier. That carrier while being the main source of intimidation will also be the place from which the Command and Control and major meetings will be held.

[IDonT]

Originally Posted by TJJH

I believe that the aircraft carrier still has its uses, but it should no longer be the centrepiece of the Navy. I envision a PLAN fleet to be based around the combined firepower of missile cruisers and submarines with protection in the form of destroyers and air cover provided by a sole carrier. That carrier while being the main source of intimidation will also be the place from which the Command and Control and major meetings will be held.

The main reason why a carrier is the centerpiece of any navy is because the tremendous amount of firepower it can carry and its flexibility. Missile cruisers are limited by its magazines and ammunition types. A sovremmeny destroyer is good against surface ships, not against anything else. Those sunburn cannot hit land and sea targets. In fact, the Sov is not as good in ASW, AAW, and strike as it is in anti-ship. Then once its compliment of 8 sunburns are fired, it has to go home and reload.

US navy destroyers are a little more flexible thanks to the VLS. It can tailor suite its ammo load for its mission. However, it still does not have the firepower of the carrier. It is impossible to reload weapons at sea. Aircraft carriers reload their plane ammo and fuel all the time. (it is easier).

Think of it this way:
A USN carrier is many times more powerful than its escorts.
The Indian carrier Viraat carriers more firepower than the entire IN eastern fleet.
France Carrier is more powerful than its surface fleet.

To sum it up, China needs a carrier.
Carriers have longer strike range, more flexible, longer endurance, and give you pure intimidation factor.

[Gollevainen]

The most uring reason for PLAN to have carrier is the fleet airdefence. Flyable interceptors are still the best way to confront enemy areal threat and multible exampels have proven the infexibility of land based aircover for fleet air defence. After the fleet have balanced umbrella over its head, it can properly function against modern naval components.

[Sczepan]

Originally Posted by swimmerXC

am i just hallucinating or is that a FLANKER and little people on the deck?

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/1601/varyag156fp.jpg

L15上舰了 ???

[bd popeye]

IDont is so right. An aircraft carrier is so powerful. An USN CVN can conduct air strikes 24 hours a day for 3-4 days before it need to be replenished with munitions and fuel for it's planes. It is a mobile platform that can move several hundred miles in a single day. No other surface ship can accomplish sustained firepower for this amount of time. That is why the CVN is the centerpiece of a navy.

The Carrier Mission

To provide a credible, sustainable, independent forward presence and conventional deterrence in peacetime,
To operate as the cornerstone of joint/allied maritime expeditionary forces in times of crisis, and
To operate and support aircraft attacks on enemies, protect friendly forces and engage in sustained independent operations in war.

And I believe the age of carriers as trump card in warfare is coming to an end. With missiles becoming more accurate and deadly, the carriers will become simple target drones unles they are always protected by a fleet of support vessles.

Unless a missile is developed that has a conventional warhead capable of sinking a carrier that will not happen.

...we dont need to copy an US CBG to defeat one, and even if we do defeat one, they still have 11 more.

True!!! Plus 12 LHA/LHD type ships....

[walter]

Originally Posted by ordinary dude

And I believe the age of carriers as trump card in warfare is coming to an end. With missiles becoming more accurate and deadly, the carriers will become simple target drones unles they are always protected by a fleet of support vessles.

There is of course the other side of the equation. Missles are becoming more accurate and deadly, which is why missles can be used to shoot down missles. Missle defense is more or less in its infancy, in a decade or two we will probably see US carrier groups equipped with some sort of directed energy missle defense system, possibly a combination of lasers and microwave weapons. Such a system combined with the ever evolving kinetic energy kill systems will prove very difficult for even an advanced attack missle with evasive capabilities to defeat.