PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?
the sources i hear from say the general design of the ship is already being completed. aid probably would be taken from a european carrier builder, since the russians are not really that experienced in carriers. building one shouldn;t be that hard, since china has experince with large tankers and cargo vessels.
Su-27 Pilot said:
the sources i hear from say the general design of the ship is already being completed. aid probably would be taken from a european carrier builder, since the russians are not really that experienced in carriers. building one shouldn;t be that hard, since china has experince with large tankers and cargo vessels.
Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?
I tend to agree that some design is already in final stages (probably in addition to whatever they plan with the Varyag) and believe that they either already have...or soon will cut first steel.
MIGleader said:
I tend to agree that some design is already in final stages (probably in addition to whatever they plan with the Varyag) and believe that they either already have...or soon will cut first steel.
PLABUDDY
Junior Member
Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?
Thank you very much Jeff. I appreciate it very much. Just one thing though..should there be missiles launchers at the front of the Kiev class carrier?
Anyways thank you very much for your help.
Jeff Head said:PLABuddy, I am adding the picture you requested on that other thread here too...of the potential "Heavy" PLAN CBG with a converted Kiev class added, along with a 51C:
Thank you very much Jeff. I appreciate it very much. Just one thing though..should there be missiles launchers at the front of the Kiev class carrier?
Anyways thank you very much for your help.
Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?
Well, I figured if the PLAN does go for refitting and modernizing the Kiev, they would have the Russians do a similar job on her as they are doing for the Gorshkov for the Indians and make it a full carrier.
Since it is all conjecture and "what if" anyway, I went ahead and depcited it that way.
In its actual life in the Russian Navy, it did have all those weapons systems forward.
PLABUDDY said:
Well, I figured if the PLAN does go for refitting and modernizing the Kiev, they would have the Russians do a similar job on her as they are doing for the Gorshkov for the Indians and make it a full carrier.
Since it is all conjecture and "what if" anyway, I went ahead and depcited it that way.
In its actual life in the Russian Navy, it did have all those weapons systems forward.
Re: My trip to the US Navy Reserve Fleet in Bremerton, WA
Sigh...I've never had so much trouble posting in a forum..I've lost probaly 50+ post here. Then half the time the icons don't work for me?? Like right now the only thing I can do is type a post. I think it's a server problem.
Anyway..Jeff posted...""Kitty Hawk CV 63 (one of the last two remaining conventionally powered US carrier in active service) is still out there and going, I guess to be replaced by CVN 77 George Bush in 2008. Hard to believe that is only a little more than 2 years away. She'll be what? 47 years of active service at that time. What a tribute to her builders and the naval personnel operating and and maintaining her!""....
Yes the Kitty Hawk is stil going strong. One of the thinghs that keep it going is the fine work of the Japanese shipyard workers in Yokosuka.
You know it is very expensive for the USN those conventional powered ships going. Just what ship will replace the Kitty Hawk in Yokosuka is unknown. Some think it will be the JFK. Others think it will be a nuclear CVN. The move of a CVN to Japan would have to be negoiated with the Japanese government. it was erronousely reported two years ago that the US and and Japan had reached an agreement on the move of a CVN to Japan.
Personally I think the US will move the entire CVN battle group to Guam if not allowed to place a CVN in Japan. The USN also presently plans on stationing a second carrier in Guam or Hawaii.
Sigh...I've never had so much trouble posting in a forum..I've lost probaly 50+ post here. Then half the time the icons don't work for me?? Like right now the only thing I can do is type a post. I think it's a server problem.
Anyway..Jeff posted...""Kitty Hawk CV 63 (one of the last two remaining conventionally powered US carrier in active service) is still out there and going, I guess to be replaced by CVN 77 George Bush in 2008. Hard to believe that is only a little more than 2 years away. She'll be what? 47 years of active service at that time. What a tribute to her builders and the naval personnel operating and and maintaining her!""....
Yes the Kitty Hawk is stil going strong. One of the thinghs that keep it going is the fine work of the Japanese shipyard workers in Yokosuka.
You know it is very expensive for the USN those conventional powered ships going. Just what ship will replace the Kitty Hawk in Yokosuka is unknown. Some think it will be the JFK. Others think it will be a nuclear CVN. The move of a CVN to Japan would have to be negoiated with the Japanese government. it was erronousely reported two years ago that the US and and Japan had reached an agreement on the move of a CVN to Japan.
Personally I think the US will move the entire CVN battle group to Guam if not allowed to place a CVN in Japan. The USN also presently plans on stationing a second carrier in Guam or Hawaii.
Re: Anti-Carrier Trump Card
This brings to mind something I posted in the old forum.
Manytimes members of this forum site results of actual "War Games" and joint military excersises as proof of vuanerablities of the US Forces. I tried to point out that in some occasions that the US forces diliberatly loses these games in order to build the confidence of our allies and confuse our foes. I've seen it done more tahn once. And never did the US forces not have superior intelligence on the opposition.
A good poker player knows how to bluff.
Jeff Head said:
This brings to mind something I posted in the old forum.
Manytimes members of this forum site results of actual "War Games" and joint military excersises as proof of vuanerablities of the US Forces. I tried to point out that in some occasions that the US forces diliberatly loses these games in order to build the confidence of our allies and confuse our foes. I've seen it done more tahn once. And never did the US forces not have superior intelligence on the opposition.
A good poker player knows how to bluff.
FreeAsia2000
Junior Member
Re: Anti-Carrier Trump Card
Ahem so that's a bit like the wargame where the US army lost the Vietnam
war...of course in real life they...ALSO LOST THE WAR !
Btw information about this wargame was revealed LONG AFTER the america
had been defeated..so how can it have been to bluff anyone ?
bd popeye said:
Ahem so that's a bit like the wargame where the US army lost the Vietnam
war...of course in real life they...ALSO LOST THE WAR !
Btw information about this wargame was revealed LONG AFTER the america
had been defeated..so how can it have been to bluff anyone ?