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


lcloo

Senior Member
Anyone who believes there are zero cases in China is deluded or a shill. In any case, get that political BS outta here.
Read two sides of the coin, get a neutral view. You believe there is a nano-pin size Chinese spy chip on Apple phone widely reported by Wetern media last year? Or you believe in Trump BS?

The key point is that COVID-19 did not affect progress of 003, not in any significant way. The political BS is by people made statement that 003's progress is slowed down due to pandemic without providing evidence.
 
Last edited:

lcloo

Senior Member
As long as aircraft carrier programe does not hurt China's economies, and does not drain budget allocations from other military branches that undermine their capabilities, there is no good reason not to do it.

Surface ships has two main serious threat, one is from submarine and the other is from aircraft. And PLAN is already deployed in blue water regions from Somalia in Indian Ocean to West Pacific, far away from the air cover from Mainland China. DDGs, even a large one like type 055 still have a limit on the number of SAM in their launchers, they could have depleted all their SAMs in prolong air attacks before returning to the safety of shore based air cover.

Unless China has many overseas military base, aircraft carriers are the only means of providing air cover. If the sea routes from Middle East - Indian Ocean - Melaka Straits - South China Sea are threatened, any warships send out would need air cover that can be immediately deployed.

It is not really about challenging US Navy in blue water unless US Navy is the one that block China's marine life-line.

And also, the best use of your defence capability is to stop others' desire to start a war with you. Aircraft carriers do have these type of effect.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Senior Member
Registered Member
“US pilots, operators, and engineers are the best in the world. The human element cannot be understated. An aircraft carrier is a tool, and its effectiveness depends on those that wield it. China is still finding its way in terms of carrier operations. The US has the advantage of leaning on generations of acquired and institutional knowledge,” Funaiole concluded.
LMAO cope.
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Ok, let us keep it simple: the next one who - after deleting almost a page of COVID related off topic stuff - posts again a COVID related post, will get a one month vacation!
 

gelgoog

Captain
Registered Member
Carriers will be highly vulnerable to any advanced opponent I think. They are huge and can be tracked from space. I doubt a nation like, say, Russia doesn't know 100% of the time where US carriers are. China likely can do the same. Certainly a nation could spot any carrier which came into range of aircraft weapons deployment to its shores. Carriers aren't that fast anyway. They can't evade that quickly. Imagine you fire a Tsirkon salvo or equivalent at it from underwater position 1000km away at Mach 9 (assuming public specs are accurate). Good luck. The carrier group has no way to either evade or counter this threat unless it is in a body of water which is highly patrolled with ASW assets. Can you even do it against a weapon with 1000km range? Carriers are mostly for use against non advanced opponents.

At best it can be used for deterrent I think. There would be a high threshold where a nation would avoid sinking a carrier to prevent a casus belli even though they are so vulnerable.

If you read Western news it makes one think the US can still fight WWII in the Pacific with carriers against China, or something like that, but it makes no sense in a modern scenario.

The Type 003 will be, I think, used to provide not just air cover but longer distance strike power against other surface targets. Already with the Type 001 we saw the J-15 being tested with anti-ship missiles. So the doctrine will, I think, be a lot different to either Russian doctrine or US doctrine.
 

weig2000

Senior Member
Carriers will be highly vulnerable to any advanced opponent I think. They are huge and can be tracked from space. I doubt a nation like, say, Russia doesn't know 100% of the time where US carriers are. China likely can do the same. Certainly a nation could spot any carrier which came into range of aircraft weapons deployment to its shores. Carriers aren't that fast anyway. They can't evade that quickly. Imagine you fire a Tsirkon salvo or equivalent at it from underwater position 1000km away at Mach 9 (assuming public specs are accurate). Good luck. The carrier group has no way to either evade or counter this threat unless it is in a body of water which is highly patrolled with ASW assets. Can you even do it against a weapon with 1000km range? Carriers are mostly for use against non advanced opponents.

At best it can be used for deterrent I think. There would be a high threshold where a nation would avoid sinking a carrier to prevent a casus belli even though they are so vulnerable.

If you read Western news it makes one think the US can still fight WWII in the Pacific with carriers against China, or something like that, but it makes no sense in a modern scenario.

The Type 003 will be, I think, used to provide not just air cover but longer distance strike power against other surface targets. Already with the Type 001 we saw the J-15 being tested with anti-ship missiles. So the doctrine will, I think, be a lot different to either Russian doctrine or US doctrine.

The above thinking largely reflects the prevailing school of thoughts in Russia, which certainly has its merits.

Carriers are not much a threat to Russia because of Russia's geography and its less/non- dependency on sea routes for trade, before you even think about Russia's strong anti-ship capability.

Carriers are not or at least increasingly less a threat to Chinese shores and homeland because of China's anti-shipping, air force and IAD systems.

Outside Russia and China, the US carriers are still significant threat to most other countries' seashores and homeland. One or a few CBGs can overmatch the target country's entire navy and air force.

But carriers are fundamentally are power projection platform. They project your power and presence far away from your homeland. In the middle of ocean, they're the most powerful force. In that sense, carriers are still threat to China's SLOC and trade routes, even if they're not or less a threat to Chinese homeland. And China is world's largest trading nation and will continue to trade significantly with the rest of the world, while Russia may or may not need to. For this reason, China will continue to develop its carriers to project power and presence, and to protect SLOC.

But the emergence of long-range and powerful anti-ship weapons and platforms do pose challenges to carriers as never before. As a result, some rethinking to the carriers and their escort ships are needed. Maybe a more balanced and distributed force structure between carriers and escort ships reflecting some of the advances in hypersonic missiles and other strike weapons, with less emphasis on carriers. We'll have to see.
 

by78

Lieutenant General
A clearer satellite image. Ignore the words in the image. They say nothing relevant.

51577813192_268f3c7a38_o.jpg


P.S. @li450274625, great news! The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of China's first nuclear carrier are coming along nicely.
 
Last edited:

Top