China launches first homegrown aircraft carrier

[wemay]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/26/asia/china-second-aircraft-carrier-launch/

From link above
Beijing (CNN)The first aircraft carrier designed and built in China was launched Wednesday amid streamers and champagne.

The as-yet unnamed vessel is China's second aircraft carrier. Early on Wednesday morning it was towed from Dalian Shipyard, in Liaoning Province, to a nearby wharf, China's Ministry of National Defense said.
China first announced the construction of its new carrier in late December 2015. State media said it would be "independently designed in China."

The new vessel still lags behind its US counterparts technologically, but senior fellow at Sydney's Lowy Institute Sam Roggeveen told CNN it is likely just a "stepping stone" to China's next generation of aircraft carriers.
"It's probably been designed to just get China in the aircraft carrier game, and while this design was just an incremental advance (on the country's first carrier), with the next carrier, which could already be under construction, it will be much closer to a US carrier," he said.

News of the launch comes as tensions mount over North Korea, China's unruly neighbor and ally. However, the carrier isn't expected to enter active service until 2020."

A ship is launched when it is first put into the water -- but the carrier still requires considerable work to complete it. Once operational, the new carrier will likely be officially commissioned in a separate ceremony.
Construction began in November 2013, and just over three years later the main hull has been completed, as well as a number of the vessel's primary systems, including power supply.
"Next, the aircraft carrier will debug its system devices and conduct fitting-out as planned, and start mooring tests," China's military said in a statement.

 

[A_Harman]

Ski-jump takeoff ramp shows influence of British carriers.
And I can't see any catapult trench, so it must be limited in the size of aircraft it can launch.

 

[RichardS]

I'm more concerned with that leaning tower up in the right hand corner.

 

[spasm3]

Originally Posted By: RichardS
I'm more concerned with that leaning tower up in the right hand corner.


The photo is probably take with a 18-20mm lens.

 

[CKN]

According to many BITOG members-the quality control of this ship will be poor and will probably fall apart or break down frequently.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: CKN
According to many BITOG members-the quality control of this ship will be poor and will probably fall apart or break down frequently.



I'm sure they've been privy to the plans and materials list.

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: CKN
According to many BITOG members-the quality control of this ship will be poor and will probably fall apart or break down frequently.



Well it doesn't have ling-long tires so we actually

 

[Silk]

We have a lot of Dalian locomotives here...there have been issues, but they are doing the job.

 

[walterjay]

I wonder if they are using dino oil in it.

 

[KeithS_NW_Ohio]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Ski-jump takeoff ramp shows influence of British carriers.
And I can't see any catapult trench, so it must be limited in the size of aircraft it can launch.

The United States Navy, Brazilian Navy, and French Navy are the only modern Navies that use catapults on their Carriers.

 

[tom slick]

I wonder if it has Torch spark plugs.

 

[Olas]

Originally Posted By: CKN
According to many BITOG members-the quality control of this ship will be poor and will probably fall apart or break down frequently.



Potentially yes, but there is a possibility that it comes from one of the high-end manufacturers over there. Not everything that comes out of china is junk, even if a large % is.

 

[Andrew1972]

The Russian's one had a massive electrical fire at one point and as part of fleet has a tug boat to tow it back not if but when it breaks down.

 

[Nickdfresh]

It's a training horse, to get Chinese crews and experience for their real carriers down the road, hypothetically speaking...

 

[Al]

Not much more than an advanced WWII Essex Carrier

To me Carriers are in the clame class as WWI Battleships....White elephants. much of the carrier group's function is toi defend the carrier.

Much more effective are Fast attack submarines..100 percent effective. Latest generation can carry 65 tomahawk missles + any number of surface ships can carry tomahawk missles. They cost less than 2 billion each. The few countries which we need to protect are either capable of defending with their own planes or antiaircraft missles. In additional we can station our own planes and cruise missles on their soil. We can totally destroy any country with the use of cruise missles alone. Carriers are just a favorite expensive showy Navel toy.

 

[oil_film_movies]

With Chinese Quality

 

[L_Sludger]

While carriers have been the USN's bread and butter for something like 70 years, and with the Chinese just NOW getting into it, their learning curve will be a lot shorter than you'd expect.
We've already done the R&D on the stuff they'll incorporate into their next generations of Carriers.
Right now their current carrier is a training ship. If you've seen Liaoning flight operations, you can see that they are taking this game pretty darn seriously.
Check this video out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASboQ_Ipbdg
Not bad for something that was rusting away in a Ukrainian harbor fairly recently.

Phase 1: Obtain and refurbish an old Soviet platform, do training ops on it. Phase 2: Make a carbon copy of that platform, do more training, build your NCO corps, etc. Phase 3: Make a new design with a nuclear reactor and CATOBAR launch and recovery systems. Phase 4: Make a newer design that utilizes EMALS, frickin lasers, electric dynamic armor, and everything else we're pouring into our $10 billion Ford-class.

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: Al
Not much more than an advanced WWII Essex Carrier

To me Carriers are in the clame class as WWI Battleships....White elephants. much of the carrier group's function is toi defend the carrier.

Much more effective are Fast attack submarines..100 percent effective. Latest generation can carry 65 tomahawk missles + any number of surface ships can carry tomahawk missles. They cost less than 2 billion each. The few countries which we need to protect are either capable of defending with their own planes or antiaircraft missles. In additional we can station our own planes and cruise missles on their soil. We can totally destroy any country with the use of cruise missles alone. Carriers are just a favorite expensive showy Navel toy.

The Chinese have done their job well if this carrier gives their restive citizens something to be proud of. Sometimes a billion dollar PR stunt is worth it if it wins domestic hearts and minds.

 

[RTexasF]

Quote:
Not much more than an advanced WWII Essex Carrier


Funny that you mentioned that particular boat. I was a crew member aboard the USS Essex CVS-9 when we picked up Apollo 7. Also aboard during the mothballing process in Boston.

 

[Astro14]

Don't underestimate this ship. Her size, and aircraft complement make her bigger, and likely more capable, than every other nation's carriers, save the US. She's a bit bigger than the two carriers that the Royal Navy has taken 15 years to build.

Further, no one builds a carrier for local operations. The PLAF can cover the South China Sea for a fraction of the cost of this project.

There is only one reason to have carriers: to position power-projection anywhere in the world.

Just having the carrier dramatically changes China's ability to influence geopolitics. They've watched us use carriers for that purpose for decades, and they want that ability, badly. We should be very concerned. While our carrier fleet is unmatched, the Chinese are able to align all the instruments of national power in a way that we cannot. Their national policy, diplomatic efforts, and business, all operate together. Add a carrier, add power projection, to that formidable national power, and the Chinese will have tremendous influence.