CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

[Hendrik_2000]

It is hard for me to understand what you argue about.

Your point is that the without the Ukrainians China could have working carriers?

Or about that by digitising and copy an existing design the Navy mastered the design and manufacturing of newly designed carrier ?

I mean, there is no existing, Chinese designed carrier, so it is a bit hard to see how you came to this conclusion.

And additionally , the software is just a repository of knowledge, it requiring to gather the experience first to make it works.
Drawing in 3d doesn't make anyone expert in the design of anything. That requiring lot more than that - mainly experience.

What I am saying is Babich has no role in refurbishing of Varyag China did it by herself based on the incomplete drawing and their own ingenuity in reverse engineering the Varyag and building the subcomponent of the carrier themselve. And the fact that they have varyag to dissect and study.
It is so much easier to design or draw something if you have a model all you have to do is measure it and translate it into drawing

Getting varyag certainly help China carrier program and save at least 2 decades. I don't diminish that but that is half the story because Varyag is incomplete all the subcomponent are desing and built by the Chinese themselves

Having digitzed the drawing make it easier to change the design and save times than blue print or manual drawing. What I am saying that by the times of Shandong China already master the desing and building of carrier and does not need any outside help.
So your contention that it take a long time to build type 03 carrier is incorrect China has all the basic design of the hull and can build,debug,test all the subcomponet except the Em catapult

Having 3 D drawing is even better since you can visualize the design and cut down on error that is difficult to find with 2D drawing Believe me I know what I am talking I was involve in conversion desing from 2 D to 3 D and found all kind of error with only 2 D drawing specially in ship building where space is limited and interference are common that is hard to locate with only 2 D drawing.
Another advantage of 3 D is you can design Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, INstrumentation, in the same drawing making a cooperative design possible and Yo can send the drawing online and to you supplier

 

[localizer]

Can someone please mark what were looking at =\

 

[Deino]

Well not sure if the interview with Minnie Chan but the story come from Xu Zengpin himself He could lie but I don't think so He lost a fortune buying the Varyag and never get reimbursement since the people he deal with either dead or out of power

But are you sure in this regard? Was it stated by Xu Zengpin himself or was this only reported by the SCMP?

I need to look, but as far as I remember the reports said - also based on Xu Zengpin - that China had no access to the blue prints.

 

[Dante80]

The interview was certainly with Minnie Chan. I wouldn't be the one to dismiss the content strictly because of that though. It is an exclusive interview, not an insider piece or a speculation/analysis article.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[11226p]

Can someone please mark what were looking at =\

These are the carrier modules

 

[Daniel707]

This is maybe not directly related. But show China's Capability in IEPS.

The Luxury Yacht using Direct Current Electrical Propulsion System (MVDC IEPS)

 

[Anlsvrthng]

What I am saying is Babich has no role in refurbishing of Varyag China did it by herself based on the incomplete drawing and their own ingenuity in reverse engineering the Varyag and building the subcomponent of the carrier themselve. And the fact that they have varyag to dissect and study.
It is so much easier to design or draw something if you have a model all you have to do is measure it and translate it into drawing
...gn Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, INstrumentation, in the same drawing making a cooperative design possible and Yo can send the drawing online and to you supplier

The Kuz already built and commissioned at the time of the purchase of Varyag and all of its associated drawing, means all design / manufacturing issue was corrected at the time of refurbishment .

Could you explain if the CSG makes so easy to design complex structures then why the USA has so many issues, five years(and counting) delay and several billion over-budget with Ford, F-35, Zumwalt and so on ?

remark : it is relatively easy to explain, the design software is an accumulation of the collected experience only. It can free you up to understand the linear algebra, protective geometry, quaternions, euler formula,quatratic surfaces and so on, but can't give you the capability to understand your design and its internal working - it could be gathered thought experience. The models as good as the modeller understanding of the topic .

To make a CSG software doesn't require really much effort, but a working , matured ship design does .


I can cite endless list of examples when a designer used complex engineering tools without understanding the constraints/internal working of them. Issues like perfect parallel surface doesn't exist : D or every mass has to follow a path which second derivative has to be continuous.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

The Kuz already built and commissioned at the time of the purchase of Varyag and all of its associated drawing, means all design / manufacturing issue was corrected at the time of refurbishment .

Could you explain if the CSG makes so easy to design complex structures then why the USA has so many issues, five years(and counting) delay and several billion over-budget with Ford, F-35, Zumwalt and so on ?

remark : it is relatively easy to explain, the design software is an accumulation of the collected experience only. It can free you up to understand the linear algebra, protective geometry, quaternions, euler formula,quatratic surfaces and so on, but can't give you the capability to understand your design and its internal working - it could be gathered thought experience. The models as good as the modeller understanding of the topic .

To make a CSG software doesn't require really much effort, but a working , matured ship design does .


I can cite endless list of examples when a designer used complex engineering tools without understanding the constraints/internal working of them. Issues like perfect parallel surface doesn't exist : D or every mass has to follow a path which second derivative has to be continuous.

And you think China never build a ship ? For your information Chinese shipyard is the biggest in the world They won most of the contract for ship beating Korean, Japanese
China has fewer problem because she has COMPETITIVE commercial shipping and why because she can build a ship that MEET client specification within budget and schedule. BTW design is the easy part actually constructing the ship is the difficult part
US shipyard built exclusively for military and there is no discipline to cut cost or meet the schedule since they have CAPTURED MARKET! There is almost complete absent of civilian shipyard aside from small freighter

Read again client specification that is important because the client will send their inspector, QA inspector, client rep, Insurance companies rep All of them breathing over your neck to make sure that you comply to the spec
Essentially Chinese shipyard learn the latest technology from the spec , QA inspector, Client rep etc
Since China built the ship for the world! They are up to speed with the latest technology be it German, British, Dane, Swede, Japanese .

As well some of those civilian are joint venture between China and Japan
So the skill depth of Chinese shipyard are deep and wide And since the same shipyard also built military ship the skill is transferred to the military side . THAT IS WHY CHINESE SHIPYARD HAS FEWER PROBLEM!

 

[ddd...]

But are you sure in this regard? Was it stated by Xu Zengpin himself or was this only reported by the SCMP?

I need to look, but as far as I remember the reports said - also based on Xu Zengpin - that China had no access to the blue prints.

Xu did say those words to SCMP, but his version of the story is disputed. He was involved in the initial stage, probably on demand of a fraction of the military. But when his financial problems started to endanger the whole project and when the military achieved broader consensus on the carrier program, a state owned fund with military background took over and later also supported by a SOE security firm.

Here is a link (note that Sina is not the source but only citing the orginial articles)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[taxiya]

The interview was certainly with Minnie Chan. I wouldn't be the one to dismiss the content strictly because of that though. It is an exclusive interview, not an insider piece or a speculation/analysis article.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

There is a very simple solution to find the truth. Ask the Ukranians who negotiated and signed the contract. Did Minnie Chan try doing this after interviewing Xu Zengping? No she did not, so the article is an one-sided story worth of nothing. If I was to be evil, I would say that it is possible that Minnie Chan was paid by Xu Zengping to spread his story.