China set to launch first Aircraft Carrier

[Patroklos]

It is symbolically important to China for domestic issues, and I am sure the talking heads will fear monger over here, but it is an entirely useless vessel practically. Russia can barely get their active one underway more than once every couple years and it has never been used for any real world operation.

This is a technology demonstrator tha the Chinese will learn quite a bit from in the next years, then maybe they will build a carrier that has utility. Not utility for fighting the US or any other modern Navy, utility for enforcing its interests in Africa and parts of Asia (the poor parts).

Even if China were about to commission a Nimitz with a full equivalent air wing it would still be useless against the US. 1 vs 11 is not a contest, they wouldn't even take it out of port against those odds. It would die a quiet death due to LGBs at a pier somewhere. There is a tipping point in numbers that China will have to reach before it is a threat to the US on the carrier front, that ratio is up for debate but is not 1:11.

To help all of you out, classes currently in service:

Brazil (1)
NAe São Paulo (A12): 32,800 ton ex-French carrier FS Foch (launched 1960), purchased in 2000.

France (1)
Charles de Gaulle (R 91): 42,000 ton nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, commissioned in 2001.

India (1)
INS Viraat: 28,700 ton ex-British carrier HMS Hermes (launched 1953), purchased in 1986 and commissioned in 1987, scheduled to be decommissioned in 2019.[8]

Italy (2)
Giuseppe Garibaldi (551): 14,000 ton Italian STOVL carrier, commissioned in 1985.
Cavour (550): 27,000 ton Italian STOVL carrier, commissioned in 2008.

Russia (1)
Admiral Flota Sovetskovo Soyuza Kuznetsov: 67,500 ton Kuznetsov class STOBAR aircraft carrier. Launched in 1985 as Tbilisi, renamed and operational from 1995.

Spain (2)
Principe de Asturias (R11): 17,200 ton STOVL carrier, commissioned in 1988.
Juan Carlos I (L61): 27,000 ton, launched in 2008, commissioned 30 September 2010.

Thailand (1)
HTMS Chakri Naruebet: 11,400 ton carrier based on Spanish Principe De Asturias design. Commissioned in 1997.

United Kingdom (1)
HMS Illustrious: 22,000 ton STOVL carrier, commissioned in 1982. Originally there were three of her class but the other two have since been retired.

United States (11)
USS Enterprise (CVN-65): 93,500 ton nuclear-powered supercarrier commissioned in 1961. First nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. Scheduled for decommissioning in 2013,[9] may be extended to 2014–2015.
Nimitz class: ten 101,000 ton nuclear-powered supercarriers, the first of which was commissioned in 1975. A Nimitz class carrier is powered by two nuclear reactors and four steam turbines and is 1,092 feet (333 m) long.

In all reality our LHAs/LHDs are just as air capable as most of those carriers and should be counted for the US, so we actually hav 20 carriers.

 

[timtofly]

It's to divert the attention away from the 2012 Himalayans project.

 

[Archbob]

Sure, but China isn't even an American enemy.. They're America's #2 trading partner.. and they're building some crappy aircraft carrier that doesn't even compare to what the Americans are upgrading their carriers to.

There's nothing to see here, really.

You don't see the hidden laser deathrays on that thing?

 

[RedRalph]

It makes sense for them to have a few carriers. After that, as far as I'm concerned, they should concentrate on learning how to destroy carriers. THAT would probably antagonise the US.

 

[Silurian]

Patroklos is correct here.

 

[Shylock]

I hope they make more. They're giant money-sinks by themselves let alone the support fleet they need to be effective or at least not a new coral reef.

Considering the China doesn't have all that much to gain in a World War other than losing the trade partner than made them in the first place it'll just put them on track to join the U.S in the debt-ridden failing empire club.

 

[Silurian]

As Patroklos stated

This is a technology demonstrator tha the Chinese will learn quite a bit from in the next years, then maybe they will build a carrier that has utility. Not utility for fighting the US or any other modern Navy, utility for enforcing its interests in Africa and parts of Asia (the poor parts).

(Reuters) - China has evacuated 12,000, or about one third, of its citizens from turmoil in Libya, many of them workers for Chinese-run projects in the oil-rich nation, official media said on Friday.

The mass evacuation, supported by a Chinese naval frigate, is the latest test for a government that has encouraged firms to seek business across the developing world, often in conditions considered too difficult or poorly paid for Western firms

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...e39-gv&usg=AFQjCNFAvAqBGPWLCPTkmpgy-Gk5-WM_xQ

China could well need aircraft elsewhere in Africa in the future.

 

[Flying Pig]

Isn't this t he old Varyag? Flying Pig's theory of the uselessness of single carriers taken to extremes. Hell, Thailand has a carrier, but that doesn't do very much for it.

And an important note on the British carrier status is that we're right in the middle of a hiatus and have two supercarriers - HMS Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales in the works, as well as two helicopter carriers currently serving.

 

[Fayadi]

Stop using Cold-War mentality for a moment.

China is thriving under the current Western-led system.

In the past, nations raise army goes to war on purposes of grabbing resources. China does not need to go to war to become rich or get resources.

Anyway here is a relevant news, China is planning to build a special economic zone in United States. Getting a piece of America without firing a single-shot.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2010/12/31/1472023/chinese-company-eyes-boise.html

http://endoftheamericandream.com/ar...ile-self-sustaining-city-south-of-boise-idaho

China is buying up lands and raw materials all-around the globe without firing a single shot or maintaining 11 aircraft carriers.

Many Chinese have no objections that United States continue to play the expensive role of being the world policeman as long as it does not interfere in Chinese water. People here cares about making money.

 

[NBAfan]

So they finally caught up to our 60s technology?

 

[Dachs]

Stop using Cold-War mentality for a moment.

China is thriving under the current Western-led system.

Absolutely correct.

In the past, nations raise army goes to war on purposes of grabbing resources.

Absolutely wrong.

 

[woody60707]

Can we make more ski jumps jokes please? And maybe some photo shops?

 

[bombshoo]

How useful is this carrier in a non-combat role? I remember that during the 2004 tsunami American carriers proved very useful, acting as mobile hospitals and relief centers. If China uses their carriers in this sort of role, it's for the better that they have them.

 

[Cutlass]

It makes sense for them to have a few carriers. After that, as far as I'm concerned, they should concentrate on learning how to destroy carriers. THAT would probably antagonise the US.

Knowing how =/= being able to pull it off Everyone knows how. Sneak a submarine in and torpedo it. But that doesn't mean that they have a realistic chance of actually getting it done.

 

[Theige]

Chen Bingde, the Chief of the General Staff of the PLA (from the article):

"This visit to America, I saw America's military power, I feel stunned, not only do we have no ability to challenge America, but also the American warships and aircraft, America's strategy, it's a real deterrent for us."

That really says it all.

 

[Dachs]

Knowing how =/= being able to pull it off Everyone knows how. Sneak a submarine in and torpedo it. But that doesn't mean that they have a realistic chance of actually getting it done.

Alternatively (and more realistically from the Chinese point of view), attempt to saturate its anti-missile defenses with overwhelming numbers of surface-to-surface or antiship missiles.

Not that that'll work any better, of course. (Well, I dunno how well it would work, just that the Chinese are better set up to do it that way.)

 

[Incodcito]

I think that people need to realize that China doesn't really have a need for an aircraft carrier force that can stand up to US aircraft carriers, and need to stop worrying about this proposed carrier that would be inferior in a 1 on 1 contest with a US carrier.

China would rather the US spend its money patrolling the seas and ensuring open trade on the seas. All it wants is a carrier or two for reasons of pride and an extended reach.

As for a theoretical US-China War, well, China doesn't really have a need for them in such a conflict.

 

[Cutlass]

Alternatively (and more realistically from the Chinese point of view), attempt to saturate its anti-missile defenses with overwhelming numbers of surface-to-surface or antiship missiles.

Not that that'll work any better, of course. (Well, I dunno how well it would work, just that the Chinese are better set up to do it that way.)

That's not necessarily easier unless you have the ability to simultaneously launch a couple thousand missiles from beyond the range that the launch platforms can be attacked.

 

[GoodGame]

So whats the forum opinion of this? Is it a bad idea or good idea on China's part?

I reckon it could be a bad idea because it needlessly antagonises the US. In economic terms the US and China have a good relationship. They pay political lipservice to their respective ideologies, but everyone knows they're pretty tight because of the extensive economic ties.

Why should China start challenging the US militarily by building a dope navy when they have congruous economic interests?

I'd been reading it is all about claiming Taiwan and then eventually challenging the USA for pacific domain. I'd read that just by taking Taiwan, China gains influence over Japan and South Korea since a major trade route reaches them by way of Taiwanese waters.

So I'd say the reasoning is: why be in someone else's shadow when you can be your own star?


The slightly humorous aspect is that they don't have naval fixed wing craft to launch from it....yet.

 

[emzie]

I'd been reading it is all about claiming Taiwan and then eventually challenging the USA for pacific domain. I'd read that just by taking Taiwan, China gains influence over Japan and South Korea since a major trade route reaches them by way of Taiwanese waters.

So I'd say the reasoning is: why be in someone else's shadow when you can be your own star?


The slightly humorous aspect is that they don't have naval fixed wing craft to launch from it....yet.

I've always been skeptical of the American pledge to defend Taiwan.

I have no real knowledge in the area, but ti was my impression that the ROC could repel an invasion of Taiwan proper. Were that to ever change, and China were to really press the issue, how much support for a war against China would there be in the west?