PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

1°) Probably a mockup, I'm agree. If it was a real one, PLAN would probably use a "yellow one" : I mean with yellow paint and test marks on the cabin (as the J-15 n°555), which is currently use for take off and landing tests from a land base. For the first real take-off & landing tests from the Varyag, Ingeneers must verify if the structure of the J-15 resists to shocks with fly deck. To summarize : this J-15 is not prepare for tests.

2°) Agree also : it's not the first time that you have a J-15 mockup on the fly deck. A J-15 mockup have already been observed severals weeks before (with a Z-8 mockup moreover). I don't remember exactly, but I think in march or in april this year (during spring 2012, sure).

3°) Presence of J-15 mockup is not real surprising. For example, during the modernization of INS Vikramaditya in Russia (ex-Gorshkov, aircraft carrier bought by Indian Navy, currently in sea trials), a Mig-29K mockup have been installed on the fly deck. However, it's true that this mockup have been removed for the sea trials...

4°) Difficult to say if the PLAN will take "the risk" to make a landing and a take-off in the same time. If think that they would probably install a J-15 on the fly deck in Dalian (with a crane), take the sea and make a take-off. Landings needs more time, training and confidence (in the plane & the pilot!).

kamov80, I'd like to welcome you to the forum!

Please read the forum rules before you proceed...

FORUM RULES: Things to Remember Before Posting, important, please read!

And when you get a chance introduce yourself to the rest of the forum....

New members introductions - New members Introduce yourselves

Originally Posted by bd popeye

Yea..that's the billion dollar question? Is it real or memorex??

With that missile hanging on the wing, it's certainly a mockup for doing deck handling tests and what not.

No need, and would be too dangerous to hang ordnance on the wing when they haven't even done any real deck handling quals or exercises yet. Which means the missile is a mock-up too and lends all the more credence to the aircraft being there, as a mock up, to get them started on deck handling...sort of like at the land based mockup of the deck.

Now they can do the same at sea.

9th sea trial, "with the four arrest wires clearly visible".
two container offices on the deck, fuel truck hiding somewhere...

老瓦06.jpg老瓦07.jpg

¸ßÇåͼ£ºÍßÁ¼¸ñº½Ä¸Ëĸù×èÀ¹Ë÷ÇåÎú¿É¼û_Èý¾üÂÛ̳_¾üÊ ÂÛ̳_ÐÂÀËÍø

Originally Posted by danielchin

9th sea trial, "with the four arrest wires clearly visible".
two container offices on the deck, fuel truck hiding somewhere...

Yes...the arrestor wires are clearly visible and it makes one think that they are going to test them in one fashion or another.

Of course, the best way will be when aircraft trap them. Any static tests could be performed dock-side, so my guess is that they are planning something. Hopefully, we shall see some evidence either while ate sea with pics that either the PLAN releases, or from pics gathered in some other fashion.

First of all, I'm no naval fan. However, I see that making such a huge thing move will consume a lot of fuel. So shall I ask a simple question; is it more expensive to operate the carrier by conventional oil or nuclear power? How much does it cost to make the Varyag move a mile?

The markings on the deck have been modified. The big circle is gone, and the white lines have been extended all the way to the front. Those helicopter landing zones have been repainted with yellow paint. All these mean previous sea trials have involved the pilots already and these pilots have been providing feedback.

The extended white markings indicated that J15 pilots probably have been making simulated passes, and their feedback about visibility and distance judging caused the designers to extend the marking to the tip of the angled deck.

I bet a touch and go had long conducted. The fifth sea trial with huge number of people onboard plus firecracker welcoming some great achievement of the truimph returning of ex varyag is high indication that is the moment.

Looks like we will be getting some interesting news in the coming days and weeks

These are new developments

Originally Posted by SteelBird

First of all, I'm no naval fan. However, I see that making such a huge thing move will consume a lot of fuel. So shall I ask a simple question; is it more expensive to operate the carrier by conventional oil or nuclear power? How much does it cost to make the Varyag move a mile?

It cost the USN about $500,000 a day to operate an CVN. These cost include pay & care(food,medical, recreation etc) of the crew. Cost of aircraft fuel and parts. Repairs and supplies. Plus a whole lot of other stuff. That's $16,000,000 a year.

Aircraft Carrier History - Cost To Build A Nuclear Powered Aircraft Carrier | What It Costs

This is the total cost over a lifetime.

The Cost

How much will each of the ten Supercarriers cost on average? According to the United States Government Accounting Office (GAO), a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier cost about 58 percent more than a conventionally powered carrier. In their report, the average life-cycle costs in fiscal year 1997 dollars for the Nimitz carriers are as follows:

Construction Costs - $4.5 billion
Mid life overhaul Costs - $2.3 billion
Operating and Support Costs - $14 billion
Other Costs - $1 billion
Total Average Cost - $22 billion each

Originally Posted by bd popeye

It cost the USN about $500,000 a day to operate an CVN. These cost include pay & care(food,medical, recreation etc) of the crew. Cost of aircraft fuel and parts. Repairs and supplies. Plus a whole lot of other stuff. That's $16,000,000 a year.

Aircraft Carrier History - Cost To Build A Nuclear Powered Aircraft Carrier | What It Costs

Hmm, think you might have missed a zero there mate, as 500k x 365 = 182.5m so perhaps you meant 160m per year for operating costs?

I am guessing support costs are not counted under that 160-182m figure, as the 14bn operating and support costs listed in the GAO report would have required the Nimitz to operate around 77 years to accumulate if it was.

Those arrestor wires where already out of their yellowish wraps when it returned from sea trial number eight.

Originally Posted by SteelBird

First of all, I'm no naval fan. However, I see that making such a huge thing move will consume a lot of fuel. So shall I ask a simple question; is it more expensive to operate the carrier by conventional oil or nuclear power? How much does it cost to make the Varyag move a mile?

The reason for going nuclear is that you are not constrained by fuel...not that the carrier itself will cost less over its life per mile So, for nuclear powered vessels (ships and submarines) you can operate these vessels irrespective of what goes on with the fuel supply from the Middle East or other places.

Now, this also frees up space that would otherwise be used for the "fuel" to drive the ship so it can carry more ordinance, more fuel for aircraft, and more sustainables for the crew and maintenance operations...all sort of things that a huge space for fuel for the ship would otherwise take up.

However, when you factor in the cost of the reactor, the cost of a mid-life refuel of the reactor, and then the cost of disposing of it at the end of its life, you end up with a nuclear carrier costing more to operate over its life than a conventional vessel...but over that life, you find that the nuclear carrier is (outside of its maintenance and major refits/reactor refuels) - which outside of refueling nuclear reactors conventional vessels must also go through) available pretty much whenever you need it for as long as you need it.

The reactors also tend to make electric power for other uses very abundant, particularly the new, ultra efficient reactors the US Navy is producing. Those reactors have enough additional power to power the new EMAL catapaults and to plan for the future when high electrical usage applications like Laser CIWS and rail gun type technology become available.

---------- Post added at 08:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:26 AM ----------

Originally Posted by bd popeye

It cost the USN about $500,000 a day to operate an CVN. These cost include pay & care(food,medical, recreation etc) of the crew. Cost of aircraft fuel and parts. Repairs and supplies. Plus a whole lot of other stuff. That's $16,000,000 a year.

Aircraft Carrier History - Cost To Build A Nuclear Powered Aircraft Carrier | What It Costs

As wolf-dog indicated, if you take the half million a day and mulitply it out (for example, 1/2 million times 36 is 18 million times 10 is 180 million) you end up with a higher number, 182.5 million per year.

But then, if you take the GAO numbers for operations and the 14 billion there over the 50 year expected life, and divide that out, you get 280 million per year. So the math is all wierd somewhere.

And, if you take the overall costs, which include construction, refueling, end of life, etc, of 22 billion life-time costs, and divide that by the expected 50 year life, you end up with 440 million a year overall.

So a nuclear carrier, let alone ten of them, is not for the feint hearted financially. But I expect those numbers vary wildly depending on who is counting...and, quite frankluy from the GAO, though it is not supposed to be politicized, it will also depend on which administration is in office.