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


nlalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
These reasons are more credible for you only.
Anyone can make up claims without providing evidence. That's lazy.

I provided evidence for my claim: the first Type 052D was also the fastest to go from launch to commissioning. Somewhat surprising that first of class would take the shortest amount of time in sea trials, if it's all about crew training and proficiency. But it's not outside the realm of plausible.

The two ships launched in 2016 took 39 months from launch to commissioning. What happened there? Ships prior to that were taking 27 to 33 months. The follow on ships took just 24 and 18 months respectively.

What is your evidence that sea trials alone explain the massive variation of 18 to 39 months from launch to commissioning?

@Hendrik_2000
How would you explain the variation at BIW from 10 months to 25 months from launch to commission? The ship that took 25 months of outfitting&trials was also one of the fastest ones to be launched (11 months).
 
Last edited:

Tam

Colonel
Registered Member
I think at one time Tam said the same thing It has something to do with definition of Commission in Chinese navy it meant the ship and the crew both have to pass proficiency test whereas in US navy the crew can honed their skill as they go along. I don't have a proof but ask Tam

Yes, they changed how they commissioned.

Before, shipyard did trials. If approved, ship goes to naval base and gets commissioned. Navy takes complete responsibility and ownership of the ship therein, trains the crew and so on, enters break in phase.

Now, shipyard does first set of basic trials using shipyard personnel. Then ship goes to its intended naval base for trials done under the Chinese Navy personnel, which at the same time, the Chinese Navy is honing the personnel for this ship. When Navy is satisfied --- and at times the ship still has to go back to the shipyard for fixes --- then the ship is finally commissioned at the naval base, complete with crew already trained for the ship. In this revised commissioning scheme, the ship now spends many months on the naval base doing trials and training with its crew and on the base it serves with before it gets its actual commission.

This change can be marked at the end of the first batch of 052D and at the beginning of the second batch, like 155 Nanjing and 120 Chengdu. Good example now is that 162 Nanning is going to get is formal commissioning soon, and yet she was already in Zhanjiang base doing second phase trials since late last year.

I should not try to compare this with the way the USN "commissions" its ships now. For example, the Zumwalt is "commissioned" for its power plant and its power train, but its weapon systems aren't.
 

Intrepid

Captain
What is your evidence that sea trials alone explain the massive variation of 18 to 39 months from launch to commissioning?
I suspect that experience with the existing ships and the resulting changes, rescheduling and reorganization are the reasons.
 

nlalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yes, they changed how they commissioned.

Before, shipyard did trials. If approved, ship goes to naval base and gets commissioned. Navy takes complete responsibility and ownership of the ship therein, trains the crew and so on, enters break in phase.

Now, shipyard does first set of basic trials using shipyard personnel. Then ship goes to its intended naval base for trials done under the Chinese Navy personnel, which at the same time, the Chinese Navy is honing the personnel for this ship. When Navy is satisfied --- and at times the ship still has to go back to the shipyard for fixes --- then the ship is finally commissioned at the naval base, complete with crew already trained for the ship. In this revised commissioning scheme, the ship now spends many months on the naval base doing trials and training with its crew and on the base it serves with before it gets its actual commission.

This change can be marked at the end of the first batch of 052D and at the beginning of the second batch, like 155 Nanjing and 120 Chengdu. Good example now is that 162 Nanning is going to get is formal commissioning soon, and yet she was already in Zhanjiang base doing second phase trials since late last year.
That's interesting. Where did you hear/read this?

However, I don't see this change reflected in the data. The ships after 120, the 156 and 161 took 18 and 24 months after launch to commission, respectively. The ships prior to 155 took 27-33 months.

EDIT: I ommitted 122, 132 and 123 because they were affected by the pandemic, but 132 took 24 months, and 123 just 21 months, similar to the trend set by 156 and 161 and significantly below the average for the program. If I had to pick a cut off point in the program, that would be the 161 which set a trend for shorter launch to commission times.
 
Last edited:

Tam

Colonel
Registered Member
That's interesting. Where did you hear/read this?

However, I don't see this change reflected in the data. The ships after 120, the 156 and 161 took 18 and 24 months after launch to commission, respectively. The ships prior to 155 took 27-33 months. I ommitted 122, 132 and 123 because they were affected by the pandemic.

Nothing to do with the total length of time, only that a major change in the commissioning procedure is made.

These ships did shipyard trials but after this, they left the shipyard and did all the rest of their trials in their respective naval base. This is all by months of observation, pictures and reporting from forums. One can conclude that compared to the previous system, the Chinese Navy has taken a much more direct hand in the trials of the ship. Sometimes even when things are all done, the ship would stay moored in the naval base doing nothing until its scheduled time for commissioning like what 162 Nanning is doing now.

The best example of this you can see right now is with the first Type 075 which has been already in its intended base for a few months now.
 

nlalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
Nothing to do with the total length of time, only that a major change in the commissioning procedure is made.
Yes, but it doesn't help to explain the variation in the outfitting&trials time.

A stronger indicator is what shipyard built the ships. The first Dalian unit took 38 months from launch to commission, whereas the first Jiangnan unit took 18 months. The second Dalian unit took 39 months vs 31 months for Jiangnan. The third Dalian unit took 37 months vs 29 months for Jiangnan. I think you can see the trend. Since 154, Jiangnan units have been showing a steady trend of acceleration, only slightly disrupted by the pandemic.
 

davidau

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yes, but it doesn't help to explain the variation in the outfitting&trials time.

A stronger indicator is what shipyard built the ships. The first Dalian unit took 38 months from launch to commission, whereas the first Jiangnan unit took 18 months. The second Dalian unit took 39 months vs 31 months for Jiangnan. The third Dalian unit took 37 months vs 29 months for Jiangnan. I think you can see the trend. Since 154, Jiangnan units have been showing a steady trend of acceleration, only slightly disrupted by the pandemic.
I thought we are talking about 003 carrier
 

Top