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


Tam

Captain
Registered Member
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.

When shepherd boy cries "wolf" too many times, people ended up disregarding him. It happened to Pinkov and Kanwa, it is happening to Minnie and to National Interest.

The media needs to learn that trust is an expendable capital, not an infinite resource.
 

jimmyjames30x30

Junior Member
Registered Member
When shepherd boy cries "wolf" too many times, people ended up disregarding him. It happened to Pinkov and Kanwa, it is happening to Minnie and to National Interest.

The media needs to learn that trust is an expendable capital, not an infinite resource.
Well, you are certainly an optimistic person. I, on the other hand, believe that ignorance is fundamental human nature. People want to hear what they want to hear, regardless of whether those are truthful or not. The like of Pinkov and National Interest will never be out of season. In fact, it is precisely the rise of China and the success of China that will keep the nay-saying and basher alive and relevant. If one day China fell and became past, these guys will all of a sudden start to lament, mourn and become depressed. Just like there are still tons of ROC (民国)fans and even Qing dynasty fans, although it is obvious that these guys will hate the ROC and the Qing Dynasty if they actually lived through the time. They always love that which already passed, and curse the present.

When Rome reign supreme, they curse and resent her; when Rome fell, they cry and lament in anguish. This is human nature.
 

MwRYum

Captain
Why is that ?
Minnie Chan and SCMP ain't the reliable source of Chinese military news: while SCMP is known, at best, just regurgitate anything and everything that we've debated to death weeks before, Minnie Chan is one infamous for writing fake news, most likely what she gleaned from Chinese BBS sites. Sure many of us here doing the same (even CJDBY acknowledged that, if not mused us as spies at times), but unlike us who'd know what's fake and what's real, Minnie Chan seems to either sorely lack of such quality (which is a demerit for journalist) or she's just there to hunt saucy stories and burp out fake and China-bashing articles to get her pay.

As for Pinkov...years ago he was exposed as a fraud when he bite a bait, all "hook, line, and sinker" on how he did fake news. In any regard, the only thing he could sell is his "Russian connection" but in at late as the last decade China's development made his connections ever more less relevant. And Kanwa is pulling its commercial circulation at the end of this year, perhaps an indication of its failings?
 

Biscuits

Junior Member
Registered Member
It’s pretty obviously a lie unless backed up with concrete proof, of which we have seen none.

As far as the PLA is concerned, a 4th, 5th and 6th carrier isn’t even in the public budget yet. The existence of those platforms are only in the mind of military watchers predicting what they’ll build later.

I doubt there are plans for anything other than the 002 being built in Shanghai right now. After that, they’ll build more ships with the next budget.

Leaving the topic of fake news aside, it’s pure speculation, but given that the 002 shapes up to be very big by conventional standard, what are the chances that it actually uses nuclear propulsion and the official specs are a misdirection?

The reason for thinking that is that traditionally speaking, it’s a leap to go from submarine sized nuclear reactor to aircraft carrier sized reactor directly. Early CVN like Enterprise used many submarine nuclear reactors instead of a few large reactors.

Of course, China might have the technical capacity to directly skip to an A1B sized reactor, or something more exotic like a thorium ship reactor for the next ships, I’m not discounting that. But the PLA has a history of building conservatively, and in this case, the more conservative move would be building a carrier powered by 8 submarine reactors first.
 

Dante80

New Member
Registered Member
Leaving the topic of fake news aside, it’s pure speculation, but given that the 002 shapes up to be very big by conventional standard, what are the chances that it actually uses nuclear propulsion and the official specs are a misdirection?
Pretty low. Most available public -and/or speculative- information points to non nuclear propulsion, probably some form of IEP coupled with the Chinese EMALS system. China would certainly NOT go in the way of multiple nuclear derived reactors for something like this btw.
 

Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
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.
We don't know what happens now in that shipyard, what problems they face / expect,and what capabilities/ weak points the design/manufacturing team have.


It can be like they wait for machines to include into the modules, and meantime they finish them as far as possible.

Or they can be afraid the about manufacturing issues, and try to test assembly everything prior of welding together.


If the modules belong to an 80-100k military ship then it should be the most complex and challenging design and manufacturing task that the design office and shipyard ever had.
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
It means that these two picture could be the cross section of the ship.View attachment 55801
Pardon to ask again, but why should the build a module and leave out a smaller box which is built separately and then put the smaller box into the bigger one? It makes no sense and contradicts everything we've seen for the Type 002 at Dalian and what - albeit admitted limited - know about carrier construction in general.

Or did I misunderstand Your idea?
 

Intrepid

Senior Member
If you have ressources available but the design process is not yet finished you will start your building process at a very low speed. It looks to me like that. They are building parts of the hull, but the technic inside isn't ready to be installed.
 

MwRYum

Captain
The reason for thinking that is that traditionally speaking, it’s a leap to go from submarine sized nuclear reactor to aircraft carrier sized reactor directly. Early CVN like Enterprise used many submarine nuclear reactors instead of a few large reactors.

Of course, China might have the technical capacity to directly skip to an A1B sized reactor, or something more exotic like a thorium ship reactor for the next ships, I’m not discounting that. But the PLA has a history of building conservatively, and in this case, the more conservative move would be building a carrier powered by 8 submarine reactors first.
The lessons about using submarine's nuclear reactors on surface vessels, like those of USS Enterprise and Charles de Gaulle would most likely made them try out on other platforms first before pushing for their CVN programme. Which is why many eyes are on China's upcoming nuclear powered ice breaker programme.

Given China doesn't have the requirement of power projection halfway around the world, but for the decades hence not going anywhere far, the PLAN can actually wait, go with conventional supercarriers for the time being, then move on towards CVN once the pieces are in place.
 

Top