SinoDefence Forum

Delbert

Can you give us any links or clear info that shows that the Varyag was turning operational?

I hope and wish to see China operates an aircraft carrier in these coming years.

tphuang

okay, i don't think you are reading what I wrote in context. I'm saying that Varyag is clearly turning operational just by looking at the amount of work they are doing on it. I'm not looking at a specific time line, but rather as something that will happen.

aznboi123

China Builds A Pair

January 2, 2009: In Shanghai, China, shipyard employees report that the Chinese Navy has ordered two 60,000 ton aircraft carriers, and preparations are under way to begin construction this year, with completion scheduled for 2015. Fifty Russian Su-33 jet fighters would be imported to serve on the new carriers. Chinese naval aviators would use the former Russian carrier Varyag as a training ship, to learn how to operate the Su-33s off carriers. Recently, Chinese officials visited Ukraine and inspected the naval aviation training facilities that were built there before the Soviet Union dissolved (and Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union). Ukraine wants to use those facilities to establish an international center for training carrier aviators.

Chinese admirals have said they need carriers to assure Chinese access to raw materials, especially oil, that comes by sea. China hopes to get key components for the carrier from Russian manufacturers. If that is possible, completion of the carriers might be speeded up by a year or two.

Three months ago, China announced that its first class of carrier aviators had begun training at the Dalian Naval Academy. The naval officers will undergo a four year course of instruction to turn them into fighter pilots capable of operating off a carrier. China already has an airfield, in the shape of a carrier deck, built at an inland facility. The Russians have warned China that it may take them a decade or more to develop the knowledge and skills needed to efficiently run an aircraft carrier. The Chinese are game, and are slogging forward.

A year ago, the Russian aircraft carrier Varyag was renamed the Shi Lang (after the Chinese general who took possession of Taiwan in 1681, the first time China ever paid any attention to the island) and given the pennant number 83. The Chinese have been refurbishing the Varyag, one of the Kuznetsov class that Russia began building in the 1980s, for several years now. It is expected to be ready for sea trials any day now.

Originally the Kuznetsovs were conceived of as 90,000 ton, nuclear powered ships, similar to American carriers (complete with steam catapults). Instead, because of the cost, and the complexity of modern (American style) carriers, the Russians were forced to scale back their goals, and ended up with the 65,000 ton (full load ) ships that lacked steam catapults, and used a ski jump type flight deck instead. Nuclear power was dropped, but the Kuznetsov class was still a formidable design. The thousand foot long carrier normally carries a dozen navalized Su-27s (called Su-33s), 14 Ka-27PL anti-submarine helicopters, two electronic warfare helicopters and two search and rescue helicopters. But the ship can carry up to 36 Su-33s and sixteen helicopters. The ship carries 2,500 tons of aviation fuel, allowing it to generate 500-1,000 aircraft and helicopter sorties. Crew size is 2,500 (or 3,000 with a full aircraft load.) Only two ships of this class exist; the original Kuznetsov, which is in Russian service, and the Varyag.

The Chinese have been in touch with Russian naval construction firms, and may have purchased plans and technology for equipment installed in the Kuznetsov. Some Chinese leaders have quipped about having a carrier by 2010 (this would have to be a refurbished Varyag). Even that would be an ambitious schedule, and the Chinese have been burned before when they tried to build new military technology in a hurry.

Naval Air: China Builds A Pair

Maggern

Am I wrong to believe this is bull? There's a lot of information in that article that really doesn't reflect the situation..

druid84

Hmmmmm I highly doubt its real, considering china has no experience building carries and they seem to like taking there time when introducing a new system, and, I thought the stories about SU 33's were bogus.

bd popeye

It's bull. The same crap we've been reading the last 4 plus years.. When a shipyard cuts the first piece of steel..let me know..

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

Maggern

About that...when would we actually know? Will the steel producers (and hence the media) know what kind of vessel they're cutting steel for? Or would we have to wait until the keel is laid++ before we can be sure a carrier is being built?

Jeff Head

The following sentence from the article tells the tale as regards how accurate it is.

Uh...not.

bd popeye

I see..I should have explained myself better..

In the US shipyards that is the sign that a ship is being built. In other words I will believe all these CV rumors when the first piece of steel is cut..In other words give us some verifiable evidence.

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

Maggern

Heh, perhaps I'm the one who's not explaining myself properly :P

I understand your point, but what I wondered was how do we know that a certain ship under construction is indeed a carrier? Would the media have access to the steel firms, who in turn confirm "Yes, we have received order for a carrier and we're cutting steel for it as we speak", or would we have to wait until the keel is laid and the construction commenced and then look at the shape of the ship and be able to deduce "Hey, this has to be a carrier, guys". Supposing no official word would come out beforehand, that is...

....or is this a really stupid question? :P

Yes, this is what caught my attention as well...anyone who has followed the Varyag the past few years know it's far away from launch. Still no engines, first of all.

Jeff Head

Significant discussion on this board and others, by individuals with many years of carrier operations experience, both from cat carriers and S/VTOL carriers indicate that both the South Korean and Japanes vessels are capable of VTOL and STOVL operations and expect to see cross deck operations with them. Knowing these individuals and their relative expoerience levels, and having read article from the nations involved alluding to the same, I will go with that. Both nations are gaining expertise in areas (both operational and construction) that the PLAN has not started gaining expertise in, ergo, the PLAN is behind the curve in those areas. IMHO, this is self evident.

We disagree fundamentally on this, both in terms of the recognition of the importance of those gains, and in their relative measure compared to what the PLAN is just starting to learn. I contend that until the PLAN has many years of carrier building and operational experience, they will not be in a position to even start learning the new things that the USN is tackling and adding now. Those new construction, operational, and equipment methodologies and technologies we are speaking of will make a huge difference between the effectiveness, quality, and ability to conduct carrier operations of the two nations. Meaning that in each of those areas, the PLAN is falling further and further behind that curve...and will continue to do so until their efforts actually start producing vessels in the water that prove their construction efforts, and allow them to start applying an dlearning operational techniques.

But, we are now getting into circular arguements on this...in essense saying the same thing back and forth. Since we have both made our points, I am content at this point to let my comments stand as stated.

Wolverine

Have the Koreans and Japanese ever operated Harriers off flattops? If the answer is no, and it is, then I don't care how many wet-dreaming fanboys on this and other forums "indicate" that these countries have VTOL and STOVL capabilities. Your "self-evident" conclusions surprise me, since it's pretty self-evident that not only do the Japanese and Koreans have ZERO experience with VTOL and STOVL carrier ops, they also have ZERO experience building fixed-wing carriers, which are vastly more complicated than helo carriers. Don't try now and go back on your own observation that any Imperial Japanese Navy ship designers are now long gone, because you're right. They are.

And you have yet to showcase even ONE of these "new construction, operational, and equipment methodologies" that can only be newly learnt after decades of experience operating and building carriers.

Similarly for new technologies, you have yet to prove that they require decades of experience to apply. Take EMALS, which has been discussed before. Prove to me that a country is required to go through the stage of designing, building and operating steam catapults first before they could possibly design, build and operate an EMALS, whose only commonality with steam cats is that they both hurl airplanes off carriers. Your job is even harder than that. You need to prove that China needs DECADES of steam cat experience before it could make and use EMALS, the same number of years that US spent using steam cats before it designed EMALS, because ANY shortening of the learning curve on China's part is a failure of your argument.

Jeff Head

As I said, we disagree. Time will tell. Let's see what the PLAN puts on its first carrier...and then watch for a few years to see how well they do with it.

My guess is, starting with the Varyag, or whatever it is named, and extending to the first two indegenous carriers they build, you are most apt to see them working with STOBAR, then CATS for the next design...or perhaps, if they can get it approved and built (which I view as questionable since they have no experience with it) , making a modifgication to the first design to allow for it. My own guess is that it will be after that, with the next design before they go to EMALS (which would be VERY aggressive IMHO) because, if for no other reason, they simply will not have the power to do so before then.

Oh...that's right...that very efficient nuc power on carriers is another USN innovation that has taken decades to get where it is to allow for the power requirements we are talking about.

I stand by my assertions...and time will tell one way or the other.

Wolverine

To be honest it would be surprising to me if the PLAN went with something other than ski jump -> steam catapult -> EMALS, but not because they lack some kind of necessary decades-long operational history with any of these. The technology progression is much safer for them that way, as it wouldn't require any leap-frogging tech-wise. And I will bet the progression from steam cat to EMALS for the PLAN will be MUCH faster than what the USN experienced. Time will tell. If we are still hanging around SDF 20 years from now, I'll bring this up again.....

Jeff Head

Which is essentially what I said, so, we agree. Perhaps for different reasons, but getting to the technology, IMHO, will require that they develop the supporting operational expertise and building expertise to make it work.

As you say, 20 years from now (or sometime in the future) we can kick this ant hill over again.