00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[Kalec]

Hopefully pop3 can come out again to drink some chicken blood (喝鸡血) XD

He already did.
这个招标网简直成了泄蜜专网了。
This bidding website has simply become a leaking website.
为了所谓的公开透明而公开透明，形式主义。
Openness and transparency for the sake of so-called openness and transparency, formalism.

 

[J.Whitman]

(The 800th post here. Woohoo!)



While the anticipation of China building several carriers at once in light of recent geopolitical developments, there is one important factor which I believe should be factored in - Crew Resources.

The thing is - While using the Forrestal-class as template of how China could've proceeded with their carrier program after CV-18 Fujian based on how more than one CVs can be built at the same time versus only one Nimitz-class can be built at any one time (and therefore, must be built sequentially) is certainly a good guide - The Forrestals were constructed in the 1950s.

The 1950s is - For sake of perspective - Within 10 to 15 years of the end of WW2.

By September 1945 (i.e. when WW2 formally ended in the Pacific), the US Navy had around 19 fleet carriers (CV), 8 light carriers (CVL), and 100+ escort carriers (CVE) in active service.

Needless to say, that huge fleet of flat-decks required a massive pool of sailors and officers to operate. From that pool of sailors and officers, there was a huge portion of the pool that got freed from their posts and duties as those CVEs and CVLs were rapidly decommissioned in the months and years immediately following the conclusion of WW2. This meant that if the US wants to build, say, 10 or 20 United States and/or Forrestal-classes of supercarriers in the 1950s, the amount of manpower required to fill up the posts on those supercarriers were pretty much readily available from the get-go.

In contrast, China basically had to start from scratch with Liaoning in the late-2000s and early-2010s. The PLAN didn't have a massive pool of sailors and officers from previous carriers to pull from, since there were none to begin with. Even with the 2nd carrier Shandong in active service since 2019, China still doesn't have a large enough carrier fleet to train and familiarize the necessary size of the pool of sailors and officers that would be operating on newer Chinese CVs and CVNs into the future.

Then, there're also tens of thousands designers, engineers, shipyard workers, naval base workers, etc etc required to design, construct, host, maintain, repair and refuel those CVs. Let alone the other type of warships and all the land-based facilities and infrastructures required for a larger CV fleet.

This constitutes as one of the major factors on why China hasn't embarked on a massive CV construction spree, even today. While I believe that we will see a surge of CV construction eventually, just that the surge isn't likely to be seen today, and likely not going to be the case for the foreseeable future until the late-2020s at the earliest.

As you write - China had to start from scratch. It will take decades before China has a reasonable carrier fleet at the same technical level as the United States. Building up an experienced crew and Air-Wing will take time. The official Chinese goal seem to be six to eight carriers. It´s a very reasonable number as these ships are extra-ordinary expensive. Carriers are to a degree for show as they can be sunk with modern cruise missiles.

What Soviet Union never understood was that PR matters for Western countries and in particular for the United States. One of the key reason why the United States and France true CATOBAR carriers with nuclear propulsion is to show the world that they are global powers. Thus, China should acquire 12 CATOBAR with nuclear propulsion just to rub it in the face of the United States. China has 4.25x more people than the United States, a much stronger industrial base and do not waste an insane amount of money on a BS domestic and foreign policy. Of course - China is to financially smart to get 12 CATOBAR carriers so I guess Beijing will be happy with six to eight carriers.

 

[Inque]

The USN has 11 supercarriers. The PLAN has 0. It hurts to admit, but it will take decades to catch up, if they ever do. Even if the PLAN doesn't build as many, they cannot afford to fall behind the USN too far if they want to defend themselves.

 

[Equation]

The USN has 11 supercarriers. The PLAN has 0. It hurts to admit, but it will take decades to catch up, if they ever do. Even if the PLAN doesn't build as many, they cannot afford to fall behind the USN too far if they want to defend themselves.

USN has 11 supercarriers as targets for China's ASBM to play with if they're not careful. America's has decades to catch up with China on ASBM technology and hypersonic missile tech as well .

 

[PeoplesPoster]

The USN has 11 supercarriers. The PLAN has 0. It hurts to admit, but it will take decades to catch up, if they ever do. Even if the PLAN doesn't build as many, they cannot afford to fall behind the USN too far if they want to defend themselves.

super carriers aren't needed by China for defense and taking Taiwan.

 

[sunnymaxi]

super carriers aren't needed by China for defense and taking Taiwan.

Taiwan is a gone case.

China need to secure west pacific and Indian ocean just in-case of US blockade. this is the reason why 'Aircraft Carrier' program is underway. type 003 is just the beginning.

China accounts 50 percent+ global shipbuilding industry and industrial superpower. its about prestige as well .

 

[J.Whitman]

The USN has 11 supercarriers. The PLAN has 0. It hurts to admit, but it will take decades to catch up, if they ever do. Even if the PLAN doesn't build as many, they cannot afford to fall behind the USN too far if they want to defend themselves.

The United States is losing the economic and tech war against China and to some degree the military-tech war against Russia. The United States is not a working society with a rapidly growing economy but a declining superpower that cannot even afford gas to their destroyers let alone take out their supercarriers for a spin. The United States is turning to something similar to Mexico - although this make take 100 years or this to happen. China will catch up the United States everywhere and in particular when it come to building supercarriers.

China commissioned it´s first aircraft carrier in 2012 - a STOBAR carrier. In June 2022 China launched their first conventional CATOBAR carrier with EMALS and stealth features. Although its true that China began its carrier program in the 1970s (offically from 1980s) - the last two decades has gone extra-ordinary fast for China. In 1994 China launched the Type 052 destroyer. An great step from the previous Type 051 destroyer. With the 2020 commission of the 055 destroyer - China is now on par with the United States. In fact - the 055 destroyer is superior from hull design to weapons systems compared to the Cold War Arleigh Burke class that the U.S. sail around in.

All East Asian countries - China, Japan and South Korea plus disputed territory Taiwan have moved fast on the technical and economic side compared to any Western country including the United States. China will catch up when it come to supercarriers - at least in terms of technology.

 

[Inque]

USN has 11 supercarriers as targets for China's ASBM to play with if they're not careful. America's has decades to catch up with China on ASBM technology and hypersonic missile tech as well .

Those missiles are largely untested and are by no means guaranteed to be the miracle solution.

super carriers aren't needed by China for defense and taking Taiwan.

Perhaps not for Taiwan, but to defend against an enemy carrier, it's best to have one of your own.

China will catch up when it come to supercarriers - at least in terms of technology.

I don't doubt their technology. I do doubt their ability to build at superhuman speeds. They're human; they can't build ships that quickly. The Fujian began construction in 2015, 8 years ago, and it still isn't completed. Future carriers will not be much faster.

 

[bebops]

Supercarrier takes too long to build. I thought about an all-in-one ship such as a cruiser sized ship that carries 20 fighter jet. Tonnage for this ship is smaller than a supercarrier but it is faster to build. This cruiser ship has the same type of missiles as a destroyer does.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

What Soviet Union never understood was that PR matters for Western countries and in particular for the United States. One of the key reason why the United States and France true CATOBAR carriers with nuclear propulsion is to show the world that they are global powers. Thus, China should acquire 12 CATOBAR with nuclear propulsion just to rub it in the face of the United States. China has 4.25x more people than the United States, a much stronger industrial base and do not waste an insane amount of money on a BS domestic and foreign policy. Of course - China is to financially smart to get 12 CATOBAR carriers so I guess Beijing will be happy with six to eight carriers.

Carriers - Just like any other types of warship - Are procured because they can fight against the enemy, not because they can make the operating country look like a champ in front of the world audience. They are made to be warfighting tools, first-and-foremost.

In fact, this has been true for the US Navy until the end of the Cold War.

Those Essexs, Midways, Forrestals, Kitty Hawks and Nimitzs weren't built because Washington DC wanted to show off to the world how great the US is (or was). They were built because the US wanted to fight and be able to win the Pacific War against the Imperial Japanese Navy during WW2 (for the Essexs and Midways), and to confront the perceived threat by the Soviet Navy throughout the Cold War (for the Forrestals, Kitty Hawks and Nimitzs). They were seen as essential tools that could fight in wars for the US and her allies on the high seas, and it wasn't until after the collapse of the Soviet Union (and hence, the overnight disintegration of threats posed by the Soviet Navy in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans) that the carriers have started being used more to parade around the world as PR stunts to showcase America's global-reaching military might.

Similarly, what determines how many carriers China should procure is actually based on what China truly needs in order to confront the US&LC in a Pacific War 2.0, and be able to secure and protect the regions which Beijing deemed as integral and critical for national security and survival.