CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

[steve_rolfe]

Just for reference who was responsible for calling the 2nd Chinese carrier 001A in the first place?...was it Chinese military media or military forums such as this one?
Its all getting out of hand really as it could mean that for arguments sake if the Chinese make a series of carriers based on a particular design they could end up being called as an example 003A, 003B, 003C etc!

 

[taxiya]

Just for reference who was responsible for calling the 2nd Chinese carrier 001A in the first place?...was it Chinese military media or military forums such as this one?
Its all getting out of hand really as it could mean that for arguments sake if the Chinese make a series of carriers based on a particular design they could end up being called as an example 003A, 003B, 003C etc!

001A was certainly not from Chinese military. P.S. China do not have official military media that is part of PLA. So Chinese media is as non-authoritive as internet forums or western think tanks. 001A is similar to the NATO naming of Chinese or Russian weapon systems.

There danger of confusion is there and will be there because China rarely release real internal designation before the outsiders come up with their own. 001A was named so because it is primarily based on 001 (Liaoning). It was natural to call it 001A as A stands for improvement. This naming scheme may or may not be official but is logical. Some of China's weapons do follow this pattern officially. But CV seems not.

The point is not about which naming is right or wrong. It is about avoiding confusion when we now see something official (the shipyard, not necessarily PLA yet).

 

[Jura The idiot]

Than you mix 2nd and 2nd, because the carrier now ready for sea trials in Dalian is the 2nd Chinese carrier. The CATOBAR will be the 3rd carrier.

do you understand the meaning of the collocation
domestically built
?

 

[Dante80]

do you understand the meaning of the collocation
domestically built
?

That collocation is unnecessary for a thread title. If you really want to completely remove ambiguity for these threads, then do something like
1. CV-16 Liaoning
2. Second Carrier
3. Third Carrier

When a ship is inducted and given a name, pendant number etc, you rename to it. Problem solved. If we do end up in the future with ship classes, we can use those too (like Nimitz-class aircraft carrier etc)

 

[Jura The idiot]

I'm going to leave it to Readers to decide if it'd be more informative 17 minutes ago

...
2. Second Carrier

or [URL='https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/type-001a-cv-17-shandong-aircraft-carrier-news-discussions.t8035/page-234#post-502947']Apr 8, 2018[/URL]
The 1st Domestically Built Chinese Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions


and if it'd be more informative 17 minutes ago

3. Third Carrier

or Yesterday at 8:54 PM
The 2nd Domestically Built Chinese Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions

 

[Dante80]

Remove the "Domestically Built", move the numbers one forward and you are golden.

Here is the proper (at least judging from my forum administration/moderation experience) way to address this.

CV-16 Liaoning - News, Views & Operations
Second Chinese Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion
Third Chinese Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion

Alternatively, you could do something like this..

CV-16 Liaoning - News, Operations & Discussion
2nd PLAN Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion
3rd PLAN Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion

ln any case, this one is for the mods. I don't think anyone in here is actually confused with the current thread titles, and designation semantics in content moderation is a pretty boring endeavor in the first place.

Let's get back on topic. C:

 

[SinoSoldier]

Remove the "Domestically Built", move the numbers one forward and you are golden.

Here is the proper way to address this.

CV-16 Liaoning - News, Views & Operations
Second Chinese Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion
Third Chinese Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion

Alternatively, you could do something like this..

CV-16 Liaoning - News, Operations & Discussion
2nd PLAN Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion
3rd PLAN Aircraft Carrier - News & Discussion

#s3gt_translate_tooltip_mini { display: none !important; }

I like to do things via analogies:

1. CV-16 Liaoning
2. CV-17 Sino-Kuznetsov
3. CV-18 Sino-Kitty Hawk
4. CV-19 Sino-Gerald Ford

 

[Dante80]

I like to do things via analogies:

1. CV-16 Liaoning
2. CV-17 Sino-Kuznetsov
3. CV-18 Sino-Kitty Hawk
4. CV-19 Sino-Gerald Ford

Yes. That is what I suggested (not the analogy part), when the next carriers get a pedant number and a name.


CV-16 Liaoning - News, Operations & Discussion
CV-XX XXXXXXXX - News, Operations & Discussion
CV-XX XXXXXXXX - News, Operations & Discussion

 

[antiterror13]

Yes. That is what I suggested (not the analogy part), when the next carriers get a pedant number and a name.

hahhaha, I don't think CV-19 will be that good .. not even close to Gerald Ford .... it is true that CV-19 may be powered by nuclear and EMAL ..... but nowhere near Gerald Ford capability overall

And CV-17 is way way better than Kuznetsov and ..... CV-18 I believe will be better than Kitty Hawk

But good try and analogy though

 

[Sczepan]

please, note the difference between "Type" an "running number"

Type 001 = carrier 001 = CV 16 Liaoning (1 ship) = first chinese carrier ever working
Type 001 A = carrier 002 = (suspectet to become CV 17 and to be named "Shandong" - 1 Ship today in Dalian) = first chinese build
= more ships could follow
Type 002 = carrier 003 may be (suspected to become CV 18, flat deck and catapult (steam?))
= more ships could follow
Typ ..?... = carrier ?, suspected to be nuclear powered and catapult (emal ?)

HMAS Melbourne, Minsk an Kiew, which was studied by PLAN Ingeneers, are not part of the list