China launches first homegrown aircraft carrier

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Alfred_B
It's to control the Indian ambitions in the region.
I think it's more to intimidate the Japanese. And to a lesser extent, the Vietnamese.
 
Quote:
There is only one reason to have carriers: to position power-projection anywhere in the world.

When the fighting starts carrier aircraft will not participate in striking NK. That is up to stealth planes, cruise missles, tomahawk missles, and artilliary to clear the way for other aircraft. Stand off Bombers will also be used initially as cruise missle platforms aswill drones. Its planes will protect itself and the rest of the group. Once the radars and anticraft missles are dispatched the carrier will finally become useful. By that time the NK will be pretty much defeated.
\
Guess how many of our 10 carriers are now at see bc they are too expensive to operate. Tast I knew it was ONE
 
Last edited:
It's not so much the size of aircraft that can be launched with a catapult, but that an aircraft can be launched with more weight vs. its engine power. This makes it possible to load up with multiple bombs for a more effective attack on a land target.
 
Originally Posted By: Al

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

When the fighting starts carrier aircraft will not participate in striking NK. That is up to stealth planes, cruise missles, tomahawk missles, and artilliary to clear the way for other aircraft. Stand off Bombers will also be used initially as cruise missle platforms aswill drones. Its planes will protect itself and the rest of the group. Once the radars and anticraft missles are dispatched the carrier will finally become useful. By that time the NK will be pretty much defeated.
\
Guess how many of our 10 carriers are now at see bc they are too expensive to operate. Tast I knew it was ONE


You're misinformed about our plans.

But China isn't interested in striking NK.

They're interested in demonstrating to the world that they can bring their warplanes anywhere they want.

Just like we can.
 
May be I am pessimistic but I just don't see any protracted WW III happening in next few hundred years. If the WW III does start, it will be over quickly with the demise of the planet but most likely the skirmishes would be limited to regional conflicts as they are now.

Didn't we discuss usefulness of aircraft carriers in real battle in the past? I don't recall reading any convincing cases where it was instrumental in the outcome.
 
Originally Posted By: Astro14

You're misinformed about our plans.

So you are part of the plans bein made to strike NK as we speak? Well see who is right when it happens.

Quote:
But China isn't interested in striking NK.

I guess I knew that.

Quote:
They're interested in demonstrating to the world that they can bring their warplanes anywhere they want.


Just like we can. [/quote]
Yea that's what its about.."demonstrating." Once the Cruise, Tomahawks, and stealth bombers and fighters (which carriers don't carry) do the heavy lifting the the carrier's compliment of strike capable aircraft can join the spoils.
 
Last edited:
Well..Al..let's see...Tomahawks ARE cruise missiles and are carried by the cruisers and destroyers in a USN strike group. So, they're with the carrier. The USN has already bought stealth aircraft in the form of the F-35.

On the subject of strike planning in general and O-plans in particular, I could write a book, but it would still be very, very classified. I really won't comment further.

Of the two of us, one has planned actual combat missions, and flown them from the deck of a carrier in a fighter.

One has not.

But how we strike NK is irrelevant. Because we are talking about the Chinese Navy building a ship. So, back OT:

The carrier that China built, with its current Sukhoi and MiG aircraft, is more capable than the entire air forces of most of the World's countries. THAT is what matters when executing "presence" missions. The ability to strike, to project power.

This carrier is better than those of all, ALL, of the World's Navies.

Except one.

And that's why they have built it.

Not one country in the world has ever responded to being shown a picture of a B-2 in Whiteman AFB. Powerful, but irrelevant and distant. However, dozens of countries, on hundreds of occasions, in the last few decades alone, have responded to the presence of a carrier off their coast.

If stealth bombers thousands of miles away enabled presence operations, then the Chinese would be building those, too. But B-2s are an incredibly expensive way to deliver ordnance. Short of delivering ordnance, they have little influence. They're good for high-end conflict against a peer adversary...but they aren't useful across the spectrum of military operations, particularly on the non-kinetic, low end of the scale, where presence and influence exist. Where carriers excel.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Well..Al..let's see...Tomahawks ARE cruise missiles and are carried by the cruisers and destroyers in a USN strike group. So, they're with the carrier. The USN has already bought stealth aircraft in the form of the F-35.

You don't need a 14 billioin dollar platform to launch a cruise. Currently there are no stealth aircraft on carriers.

Quote:
On the subject of strike planning in general and O-plans in particular, I could write a book, but it would still be very, very classified. I really won't comment further.
lol..


Quote:
Of the two of us, one has planned actual combat missions, and flown them from the deck of a carrier in a fighter.

One has not.

Hopefully they don't send you in to take out aircraft defenses. Well maybe back in the day they did.


Quote:
The carrier that China built, with its current Sukhoi and MiG aircraft, is more capable than the entire air forces of most of the World's countries. THAT is what matters when executing "presence" missions. The ability to strike, to project power.

This carrier is better than those of all, ALL, of the World's Navies.


Of course..bc of the aircraft it carries. BTW there is serious consideration to buildiong smaller carriers.

Quote:
Not one country in the world has ever responded to being shown a picture of a B-2 in Whiteman AFB. Powerful, but irrelevant and distant. However, dozens of countries, on hundreds of occasions, in the last few decades alone, have responded to the presence of a carrier off their coast.

Well they can't respond to Fast attacks bc they don't know where there the are..How can NK complain about a fast attack(s) when they don't know where they are. They can only respond to visible threats. Put a dozen VISIBLEcruisers and guided missle destroyers off their cost and see if they respond. Ships and missles and can be out of harm's way (unkike a carrier) ..B52comes to mind.
smile.gif


Quote:
If stealth bombers thousands of miles away enabled presence operations, then the Chinese would be building those, too. But B-2s are an incredibly expensive way to deliver ordnance. Short of delivering ordnance, they have little influence. They're good for high-end conflict against a peer adversary...but they aren't useful across the spectrum of military operations, particularly on the non-kinetic, low end of the scale, where presence and influence exist. Where carriers excel.

I am not a huge stealth of stealth. But we have them. Again..cruise missles (launched from anything) can do the same job as stealth. BTW..we have 4 Ohio Class boomers that carry 154 cruise missles each. That's (again and again) what you will see first when we attack NK. I don't need to have taken off of a carrier to know that.

BTW what was the weapon of choice in syria?? And yea they were lauched by lowly Destroyers..out of harms way.
 
Last edited:
[Observation lounge]

PICARD: Admiral Jarok has provided me with the locations, strengths and tactical plans of the Romulan fleet. Mister La Forge, he is prepared to give you data regarding engines, weapons and the cloaking systems of the warbird class starship. But I believe his experience as a field commander will be more valuable for its strategic sense than in the technical areas.
LAFORGE: Any edge'll help, Captain.
PICARD: Don't depend on it. For all we know, he may still be lying, but we shall find that out soon enough. Number One, set course for Nelvana Three.
 
Originally Posted By: Al
BTW..we have 4 Ohio Class boomers that carry 154 cruise missles each. That's (again and again) what you will see first when we attack NK. I don't need to have taken off of a carrier to know that.


I hope, and perhaps hope against hope, that it never comes to that, because it would cause massive loss of life to South Korea, and also to the poor people under the regime's rule in North Korea.
And I happen to like Koreans, all Koreans. I've been to Seoul, and I was beyond impressed. They are lovely people with a rich history and high achievement potential. It would be a tragic loss to this world if this crisis came to blows.

That's all. I'll go back to my hidey hole now.
 
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Don't underestimate this ship....


Good point and I understand it, but don't overestimate it either...
 
Seriously, this is really mostly an exercise in both engineering and training. China is led by a pragmatic bunch who realize you have to start somewhere. The US has 80+ years of carrier experience to work most of the bugs out, and like most lessons, experience is the best teacher of all.

The Chinese started small during the anti piracy patrols off Somalia/Africa and discovered quickly that a lot of their equipment, and crew training, and logistics, essentially sucked. They took steps to correct it. Same thing with their Army. Big purge reduced a lot of old seat warmers, army personnel were cut, and resources went into better supplies and training.

If there is one nation on the planet that needs a real navy, it is China. Those thousands of container ships in and out of Chinese harbors are the only thing keeping that economy floating. If any enemy can close your ports, choke your trade, and cripple your economy is allowed to do it unopposed, you got problems, strategic problems. Personally, I don't think the Chinese are exactly in "power projection" mode like the US......yet. I think China realized it's keister is in the air, and are taking steps to cover it in the future.
 
Last edited:
Not quite a carrier but an "aircraft carrying cruiser". Neither the Russians nor the Chinese pretend these are aircraft carriers.
 
The chinese bought an incomplete and stripped Varyag. Since there was no legal need for them to have these ships classified as a cruiser they won't have finished it as such, and the new ship was adapted even more. Liaoning only carries AA missile systems

The Soviet Union needed the ship to be a cruiser to be allowed to pass the Bosporus strait. There's a tonnage limit which doesn't apply to cruisers but does carriers.
 
Last edited:
Thanks to all who served.

People need to remember our cruise missiles are nearly autonomous now. The dozens we sent into Syria loitered at altitude waiting for their brethren to assemble (30 plus minutes to launch them all) then attacked all at once. We don't need to penetrate hardened structures when we can decide which doorway we wish to fly in!

Note that the russians had their latest and greatest anti-aircraft stuff in place. Not a shot fired.

Also take note of the extreme casualty rate of NOKO missiles launched lately. I still suspect we are tapping into their telemetry and screwing things up.

NOKO can be decapitated because we know precisely where their stuff is. All their border "defenses" are easy targets, we have the bunker busters to destroy the underground workspaces, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top