CV-XX (003 carrier) Thread I ... News & Discussions

Discussion in 'Navy' started by Jeff Head, Aug 1, 2016.

  1. Pika
    Offline

    Pika Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2019
    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    85

    Can't edit original post but the source for this article came from SCMP by a fellow name Minnie Chan. Some of you may regard her as an unreliable source. Makes me wonder whether this is an act of disinformation.
     
    #3111 Pika, Dec 10, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2019
  2. Pika
    Offline

    Pika Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2019
    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    85
    Can't answer your question. Just summarizing the article. The quote in question from the article.

    "These decisions would not just affect aircraft carriers, but China’s advanced new destroyers and amphibious assault ships as well."
     
  3. obj 705A
    Offline

    obj 705A New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2019
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    60
    this is nothing more than wishfull thinking from China haters, the Chinese economy is suffering from no crisis at all, this is the new norm & it's growing at 6% or more just as the government planned even before the trade war, furthermore China only spends 1.3% on military so they have alot of room to maneuvre, the US calls it's allies who spend less than 2% as free riders, the US considers countries that spend less than 2% to be severly careless about defense, so by NATO standards if China was a member of then China would have been considered as being a free rider.

    it is safe to say China will get at the very least 6 CVNs, and after few decades they can easily achieve parity with the US carrier force tonnage wise & numbers wise while still keeping their mitary spending below 2%.
     
    mr.bean, rED_L1ne and externallisting like this.
  4. Anlsvrthng
    Online

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,354
    Likes Received:
    332
  5. ILikeChina
    Offline

    ILikeChina Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    335
    Don't quote Minnie Chan here, please.
     
  6. Anlsvrthng
    Online

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,354
    Likes Received:
    332
    It means that these two picture could be the cross section of the ship. cross section.jpg
     
  7. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Captain
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,741
    Likes Received:
    4,846
    Yes.
     
    Equation likes this.
  8. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,004
    Likes Received:
    9,060
    Wow 80,000 to 100,000 tons

    nice and also conventionally powered?

    with EMALS ?

    that would be a first

    btw it’s better this is not nuclear powered

    because that means

    CV-18 and CV-19 have EMALS
    then

    CVN-20 and CVN-21 are nuclear with EMALS with 100,000+
     
  9. Orthan
    Offline

    Orthan Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Messages:
    432
    Likes Received:
    123
    Taken too afar. I cant discern any detail in the shipyard, except that the main crane has moved forward.

    Possible, but why would they adopt this method of construction? much better to include this section already in the module, instead of having to lift it to the module, if i understood it correctly.

    Why is that ?
     
  10. jimmyjames30x30
    Offline

    jimmyjames30x30 Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2019
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    320
    This is not the first time I myself saw this exact dirty media tactic.

    First time is back in 2014 during the Ukrainian Euromaidan. That was at a time when the 052D class was just rolling out, and there were tons of news back then saying that the US has successfully pressure the Ukrainians to stop supply gas turbine (GT25000) to China, and thus the 052D will become a failed project in which China will not be able to build them anymore. What happened later, of course, is that the public eventually realized the total bullshit as the 052D kept rolling out.

    Second time was at the end the 2016 (beginning of 2017, when China is receiving the first batch of Su-35's) when Pinkov (Kanwa) allegedly wrote an article saying that J-16 development became a total failure and the production seized. The author of the article mocked the Chinese aviation industry for their inability to successfully reverse engineer the Su-30 (this is what they implied J-16 program was about), and speculate that "the Chinese will never be able to copy the Su-35 now that they can't even copy the Su-30" (I am paraphrasing here). What happened later, of course, is that the public forgot about these outlandish bullshit news.

    I don't know why these fake media keep doing this. I don't know what purpose it can possibly hope to serve. But if their purpose is only to get public attention, I have to say that they are winning. Because all three of these examples are at perfect timing. These are the reasons:

    1. They are all released at a time when it was impossible to deny with available facts. Who (among us regular folks) can be sure at the 2014 and 2016 that what those article says are not possibly true?

    2. These topics are something that the people on both sides cares very much about. People who pays attention to China's carrier project (or the J-16 and 052D) either want good news or bad news: the pro-China people is desperate for good news, and the anti-China folks are desperate for bad news.
     
    #3120 jimmyjames30x30, Dec 11, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2019
    John 321, viva zhao, qiao and 5 others like this.

Share This Page