Global Military Procurement
- Thread starter imperialman
- Start date
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Evidence?
bugwar
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Messages
- 1,246
Well, if your posts reflect only official policy as approved by your PAO, then you have a point.
If, on the other hand, they reflect your personal views, and not those of the U.S. Navy,
then I can understand being a little leery about your objectivity.
I have been around too many officers for far too long to believe that their views are always unbiased.
In their defense, most of them do try to be as objective as possible, as often as possible.
They succeed a lot of the time, to their and the nation's credit.
Having said that, there are far too many commanders being relieved for cause in the recent past for me
to state that the chance of military leaders being immune to failures in judgment are non-existent.
And if ship commanders can make mistakes in judgment, I am pretty sure that other leaders can too.
I kinda think that the USA is numba ONE also, but realize that my views may on rare occasions be less
than optimal. So yea, I can see why others may not see your posts as holy writ.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
It's bigger than the WWII American escort carriers.
But they didn't have jets!
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
So they should fly F4U Corsairs.
You shut up you!
Winner
Diverse in Unity
China's aircraft carrier
58,500 tonnes of coincidence
IT WAS almost certainly just coincidence. But the ceremony attended by Chinas leaders on September 25th in the northern port city of Dalian to mark the entry into service of the countrys first aircraft carrier will have struck many of its jittery neighbours as an ominous sign of intent. With tensions building up with Japan in the past few weeks over the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyutai islands in the East China Sea, the addition of a carrier to Chinas growing naval fleet will have done nothing to lower the temperature. After all, what are carriers for if not to project power?
In fact, the hoopla surrounding the handing over to the Peoples Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) of the Liaoning probably has rather more to do with creating a patriotic backdrop to the once-in-a-decade Communist Party congress that is now expected to be held next month. Furthermore, the 58,500 tonne vessel, a refurbished Admiral Kuznetsov-class carrier that was initially acquired from Ukraine by a Macau tourist venture in 1998 when only 30% completed, will be limited to a training and development role for the foreseeable future. The Chinese are nothing if not realistic. They know that carrier operations are highly complex and that they are starting from scratch. According to one senior Chinese officer, even with substantial investment it could be 30 years before the PLAN will be able to put a carrier battle group to sea approaching the capability of even one of the 11 carrier groups that America currently deploys.
A fairly small carrier fitted with a ski jump ramp rather than a catapult, the Liaoning is no match for Americas Nimitz-class supercarriers, which are almost double the displacement, let alone the new Ford-class ships, the first of which is expected to enter service in 2015. Nor does China yet have any fast jets to fly from the Liaoning. The Shenyang J-15, a not entirely convincing copy of Russias Sukhoi S-33, has flown, but is unlikely to enter service until 2016.
As a military threat to America, the Liaoning is therefore negligible and that will remain true even when it is joined over the next 15 years by two indigenously-built carriers that have been modelled on it. What worries America far more are the impressive anti-access/area denial capabilities that China has built up (mainly with missiles and submarines).
Rather than attempt to match US naval strategy and operational doctrine, it is likely that the PLAN is seeking a more limited power-projection capability that will support both the defence of Chinas regional interests and its growing interests further afield (investments in natural resources and a fast-expanding diaspora of Chinese workers and technical advisers). Hu Jintao, Chinas outgoing president, has also frequently referred to the PLANs new historic missions, which include being able to respond to non-traditional security challenges such as disaster relief, counter-piracy, military diplomacy and patrolling the sea-lanes that have become so vital to the Chinese economy.
Even so, Chinas neighbours are unlikely to respond passively to its carrier programme. They see it as yet another sign of Chinas determination to acquire the military trappings of a great power combined with a willingness to flex its muscles when it believes it is in its interests to do so. The military utility of Chinas carrier programme is questionable at least in the context of any future showdown with America. But it says quite a lot about how China sees itself and how it wishes others to see it.
TE
You've have failed THREE times in this very thread to take into consideration that the Chinese carrier is NOT meant to be an effective warship. At this point, it is more of a training ship/experimental platform.
It's like if a guy bought a Glock, but only carried it around unloaded using it in a shooting range only, and you started posting disparaging comments about the Glock as a pistol calling it useless because you own an assault rifle and the neighbour next door has a loaded revolver in his desk.
Non sequitur is the word I am looking for.
Patroklos
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2003
- Messages
- 12,721
I did no such thing. Training ship or warship it is still a giant defenseless target and not some harbinger of the Chinese invasion and is by every practical measure as useful/useless as the prestige carriers of the like of Thailand.
Perhaps try reading what I post instead of projecting your personal booggie man into that space.
Perhaps try reading what I post instead of projecting your personal booggie man into that space.
bugwar
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Messages
- 1,246
'Winner', I understand.
I also agree with you. 'Patroklos' does not.
I am pretty sure that nothing you write or reference will change that.
imperialman
Admiral
The Brazilian carrier strikes me as more of a prestige symbol than effective platform.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
Winner
Diverse in Unity
Well, it's the former French carrier, right? Why Brazil needs it is beyond me (especially since the aircraft they're flying from it are crap), so you're most probably right.
Shaihulud
Deity
I would love seeing robotic drone aircraft being developed and launched from a dedicated carrier ship. Regarding China's aircraft carrier? It is just a training ship. They have been quite emphatic that it would not be used to placate the neighbours. Maybe they will one day get a proper carrier, but propably in the far future.
imperialman
Admiral
Indeed, I found this quote.
"The Chinese are nothing if not realistic. They know that carrier operations are highly complex and that they are starting from scratch. According to one senior Chinese officer, even with substantial investment it could be 30 years before the PLAN will be able to put a carrier battle group to sea approaching the capability of even 1 of the 11 carrier groups that America currently deploys."
"The Chinese are nothing if not realistic. They know that carrier operations are highly complex and that they are starting from scratch. According to one senior Chinese officer, even with substantial investment it could be 30 years before the PLAN will be able to put a carrier battle group to sea approaching the capability of even 1 of the 11 carrier groups that America currently deploys."
bugwar
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Messages
- 1,246
Found this article on the Chinese carrier:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htnavai/articles/20121001.aspx
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htnavai/articles/20121001.aspx
