CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Intrepid said:
Is this a real module for the 3rd carrier or is it an other demo-module?
Click to expand...

I don't know for sure ... but why should they build yet another demo module?

On the other side I just got quite a harsh reply in another forum - quite interesting from a usually not too active Chinese member - stating it is again only a supertanker.

Also the buildings around do not fit to the expected yard and its dry dock no. 4.

Deino
 
Last edited:
P

PanAsian

Major
weig2000 said:
Are you seriously out of your mind? I'm all for "out-of-box" or independent thinking and all that, but this? I don't even know where to start to refute these assertions. Let's start with some big pictures.

China is the world's second largest economy, and will very likely become the largest in the next decade. China is currently the world's largest trading nation. For many years, China has been world's largest or second largest destinations of foreign investment. Since last year, China's outbound investments has surpassed inbound investments and are set to grow rapidly in the future years. Chinese nationals are everywhere globally; since 2014, China has become the largest tourist originating country in the world. In other words, China's interests are global and it needs a blue-water navy to safeguard and support those interests, and the growing economy pays for it. The central pieces of that blue-water navy are carriers. Not just any carriers, but nuclear-powered super-carriers, eventually.

And those are not just PLAN's dreams and wishes. They're also part of the Chinese leadership's announced national maritime objective, with broad support from Chinese society. In November 2012, then president Hu Jintao declared that China’s objective was to become a strong or great maritime power. Xi Jinping further reinforced the objective. Here are a couple of background readings in case you're interested:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Rear Admiral Michael McDevitt, USN (retired)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Dr. Thomas J. Bickford, China Studies Division of CNA

The circumstance of China's blue-navy ambition and objective are quite different from those of Imperial Germany or Soviet Union. They are the natural results of growing national power, and are justified by the trade, investment, maritime and national security. Furthermore, China's geography is much more favorable than Germany and ex-Soviet Union for developing a global blue-water navy (See
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
by Robert D. Kaplan for some discussion). It's therefore a more sustainable national strategy. PLAN pays close attention to the USN and tries to emulate them as much as possible (really the only model PLAN wants to emulate).
Click to expand...

Thanks to Jura quoting me above I was reminded I never replied to this. Speaking from the perspective of two years ago or even further back in time, carriers that are not properly integrated into an overall sufficiently strong military are prime China threat props that are useless for China in stable peaceful times and resource draining sitting ducks in wartime. Speaking from the perspective of today, properly integrated carriers into an overall sufficiently strong military can serve as a step up in deterrence at high tension junctures and can better take the fight to the opponent in wartime. Obviously developing an effective carrier force integrated with the rest of the military is a process, yet military acquisition also has an effect on international relations. These can be chicken or egg came first questions so I continue to stand by my differing points in the context of their respective discussions.
 
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
While the module may not resemble one of a tanker at first (or any other commercial ship) it is prudent to remain sceptical until a few more modules are added and whole object is more thoroughly photographed.
 
nicky

nicky

Junior Member
recent pix prove that steady expansion to tongxin was planned long ago for nuke carriers construction.
similar to huludao: huge expansion of production facilities for a new sub project(s).
again, amazing scale and steady speed.
china's great.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
PanAsian said:
Thanks to Jura quoting me above I was reminded I never replied to this. Speaking from the perspective of two years ago or even further back in time, carriers that are not properly integrated into an overall sufficiently strong military are prime China threat props that are useless for China in stable peaceful times and resource draining sitting ducks in wartime. Speaking from the perspective of today, properly integrated carriers into an overall sufficiently strong military can serve as a step up in deterrence at high tension junctures and can better take the fight to the opponent in wartime. Obviously developing an effective carrier force integrated with the rest of the military is a process, yet military acquisition also has an effect on international relations. These can be chicken or egg came first questions so I continue to stand by my differing points in the context of their respective discussions.
Click to expand...

I agree that carriers are currently not that useful, because China's core interests are in the Western Pacific and within range of shore-based missiles and aircraft. China needs to secure its coast first, before going out of area.

But in 10 year's time, China should have a much stronger hold on the 1st and 2nd island chains, and then carrier strike groups on the high seas would be very useful indeed.

And realistically, it is going to take that long for China to field a nuclear aircraft carrier strike group.
 
Intrepid

Intrepid

Major
AndrewS said:
But in 10 year's time, China should have a much stronger hold on the 1st and 2nd island chains, and then carrier strike groups on the high seas would be very useful indeed.

And realistically, it is going to take that long for China to field a nuclear aircraft carrier strike group.
Click to expand...
That is the point: China hasn't a developed carrier force yet, it takes at least an other 10 years. And carriers are used out of range of own landbased fighters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top