PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

from the same article:


有外媒此前猜測，中國第二艘航母最早將在2015年下水。劉曉江回應稱，是吹出來的，外媒報道肯定不準。他重申，「工業部門安排的生產流程，很复雜。」

External media sources reported China's second aircraft carrier may be launched in 2015 at the earliest. Liu Xiaogang said those reports are blowing smoke, they are definitely not correct. He emphasized that the production process arranged by the industrial department is very complex.

Navy expert: China's electromagnetic launch technology no inferior to America

(Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) 2015-03-10

　　BEIJING, March 10 (ChinaMil) -- Rear Admiral Ma Weiming, power and electrical engineering specialist of the Navy of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLAN), said recently that China's catapult-assisted take-off technology for carrier-borne aircraft has no problem at all, and is even no inferior to that of America.
...

　　Rear Admiral Ma Weiming, inventor of China's electromagnetic catapult and specialist in electrical engineering, pointed out that China's catapult-assisted take-off technology for the carrier-borne aircraft has no problem at all and has been proved successful in various repeated tests. He emphasized that China's catapult-assisted take-off technology in hand is no inferior to that of America, and is even more advanced.
...

Click to expand...

Sczepan said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Okay I suppose this is the first clearest indication regarding the Chinese emal programme from state media

Sczepan said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"pointed out that China's catapult-assisted take-off technology for the carrier-borne aircraft has no problem at all and has been proved successful in various repeated tests. He emphasized that China's catapult-assisted take-off technology in hand is no inferior to that of America, and is even more advanced."

Click to expand...

As it is often said, the devil is in the details. Without any test statistics, the definition of successful can mean anything. In comparison, the disclosed US tests results at Lakehurst after 1967 launches has 201 failures. By that definition, no one is calling it successful.

Brumby said:

As it is often said, the devil is in the details. Without any test statistics, the definition of successful can mean anything. In comparison, the disclosed US tests results at Lakehurst after 1967 launches has 201 failures. By that definition, no one is calling it successful.

Click to expand...

I think it is more important to read between the lines than to seek details with these kind of articles, and for PLA watching in general, to ascertain general things, given the lack of information we are given.

What it shows is that development of the EMALS is finally confirmed by state media and PLAN to exist, that it is at an advanced stage well beyond R&D probably with at least an operating prototype, and has proven satisfactory to whatever testing parameters they have used.

That still leaves a lot of unknown details, but also confirms a lot of things we didn't know or had speculated about

LesAdieux said:

it's not rumor, it's widely reported in Chinese news.

Ma Weimin, the leading scientist who is in charge of the EM program, was asked by journalists about China's catapult system during the NPC meeting, Ma's reply was: the technology is ready, it's up to the navy to make the final decision.

Click to expand...

Please link to a credible source reporting that they are testing their catapult with actual aircraft.

That's the part I was questioning.

None of the articles talked of here say anything like that. Testing can mean a lot of things...like mathematical or computer models. I am looking for them actually testing aircraft off of the system. Until they do that...many, many, many times, and work out all of the bugs so that their success rate is very close to 100%...it most definitely is not ready for deployment.

It is common knowledge that they have been working on catapult technology for years and none of us here doubts that. but proceeding to the point where they are actually launching aircraft at a ground based facility is the issue..

If it is a Chinese source, please include a translation.

Bltizo said:

, and has proven satisfactory to whatever testing parameters they have used.

Click to expand...

I am trying to reconcile your statement to his "He emphasized that China's catapult-assisted take-off technology in hand is no inferior to that of America, and is even more advanced."

The facts are , the US testing to-date is showing that under operating environment there are major test issues surfacing that goes beyond some lab type environment. In the absence of test details, I am having a problem differentiating between propaganda and reality.

I understand Chinese so I checked the links provided from those two threads. Both articles have the exactly same source, which is the same as the first posting cited from HKCD journalists interviewing PLA senior engineer Ma Weiming. The interview took place during the National Rep Meeting. For those of you follow China closely, I'm sure you know what that means.

The HongKong Commerce Daily journalists interviewed Ma Weiming, whom was claimed by HKCD to be the lead engineer of the EMAL program. During the interview, Ma said, "there are no problems to Chinese naval EMAL technology (meaning capable), successful with multiple tests, confident to be used in field; the technology Chinese possess is on par with American counterpart, maybe even more advanced".

Then when asked by the journalists whether if the EMAL will be installed on the carrier, he smiled and pointed to the single star on his shoulder, "I'm just an employee, just a research general responsible for R&D of applied technology, the real plan is decided by those from higher ups".

Guys, I think the take-home message from these articles is that China has a working catapult model and the designers believe it is ready for the real thing. They specified it themselves that the PLAN might not agree with them at this point (hence the sentence "it is up to the Navy to make the decision"), but it is their personal opinion that catapult system is ready. That is all they are saying at this point. I think even the PLAN is having the exact same worries as listed in the above posts, like whether the system can function as well in the real world, etc etc etc... That might be why the PLAN is taking its time and not installing it on any ships... Thus, I don't think we can look at these interviews as either propaganda or reality. It's personal opinion/feeling from someone who is involved with the project. Let's just leave it at that.

As to how mature China's CV catapult system is, who knows. Assuming the interview actually occurred and the conversation was not embellished in any way by the newspaper, I would say that the system should be quite mature at this point. For someone at his position, a Rear Admiral who is also the designer of China's EMAL system, to say things like that, he ought to be pretty confident about this system. And for him to make statements like that, he should have plenty solid data to back himself up. All their past track record suggests that the PLA officials are usually quite conservative when talking about new systems. I don't think they are in the habit of making crazy/empty statements when he/she has little/weak data to support the statement... This, of course, is all assuming the conversation is real... My 2-cent.