Minsk and Kiev

Status
Not open for further replies.
vincelee said:
Now now, PLABUDDY, it's not nice to tell me to die.

on the issue of engines, to actually replace the engine in the Varyag is going to be problematic;

first you need to take out the engine "block", then the shaft. And although I've never seen the blue prints for the Varyag, I doubt engine accessibility on the scales of your common car was in mind.

And even IF the PLAN some how acquires large maritime engines, these are still civilian use. Remember, TOL operations on carriers constantly require a high steaming speed, and I honestly don't believe Bloody Mary can achieve 30+ knots.

THAT IS NOT HOW VINCE TALKS!
This is definetly a different guy. Even after you guys talking about Taiwan, he still has not send a single thing against China. Weird.
 

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
sooo true!!

i wish we had one of his old posts to compare...

somethings fishy...
but its got to be the same guy or someone that knew the old vince.
otherwise, he'd be swearing at us wondering what was going on.


but still, keep the subject on plan carriers, not vince.
 

Obcession

Junior Member
Vince the engine is not a problem many EU countries would sell them to us. Civilian ones will work as well, and as someone else said previously, 20+ knots is enough. I know you have to take out the engine blocks etc etc. China already has sufficient technology to build carriers, so taking these out wouldn't be a problem.
 

vincelee

Junior Member
obcession, my point was not to disregard the feasibility of an engine replacement by the PLAN, my point, if it was a bit unclear, was that the cost effectiveness of such an endeavor is not in the character of the PLAN. You can explain it by the diminishing marginal return, you can explain it by pure tactical speculations, but the out come is the same: the same amount of resources would bring greater benefits elsewhere.
 
I agree. China does not need to waste money on carriers when it cannot support those carriers. China needs to build more modern destroyers and frigatese like Type 052C before beginning work on carriers.
 
Last edited:

Obcession

Junior Member
vincelee said:
obcession, my point was not to disregard the feasibility of an engine replacement by the PLAN, my point, if it was a bit unclear, was that the cost effectiveness of such an endeavor is not in the character of the PLAN. You can explain it by the diminishing marginal return, you can explain it by pure tactical speculations, but the out come is the same: the same amount of resources would bring greater benefits elsewhere.

Well it depends on your viewpoint. China needs to get a carrier sonner or later, and to make the Varyag operational so the crew can train on it for a couple of years will make ready for the eventual fully operational and modern carrier the PLAN is going to acquire. Having a carrier is not much more than just deterrent if you have a bunch of inexperienced crew who can't use it properly or to its maximum. Sure, you can buy a couple new SU MKK's with it, but IMHO it's better to train on the Varyag for a couple of years and then get a real operational capable carrier.
 

vincelee

Junior Member
stemming from your logic, you're saying that the net benefit of bringing the Varyag back to operational status, which it has NEVER achieved, is greater than building a new carrier?

I, for one, begs to differ.
 

Obcession

Junior Member
vincelee said:
stemming from your logic, you're saying that the net benefit of bringing the Varyag back to operational status, which it has NEVER achieved, is greater than building a new carrier?

I, for one, begs to differ.

I'm saying the only use we have for the Varyag is training, so we can improvise things here and there, to reduce costs, but the Varyag is still needed. Otherwise why buy it? (I know I know, they've learned alot off the Varyag's design, but it's old)

I don't think cost is an issue here, fixing the Varyag won't costs as much as half of what the PLAN needs to buy a new one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top