I don't think the next one would be a major population center because we already got the Fujian. Plus it's a bit too on the nose for the PLAN. I think they go with something more historically and politically significant.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
One could consider allegorical geographical names as another possibility too (to use a British example, Albion vs Britannia), as that's not quite mythological, as long as there's a historical grounding.
already taken by the space program for example 神州. also has bad precedent with Imperial Japan i.e. Yamato （大和）being the allegorical name for Japan. Lakes are already taken by AORs. Then there's only bad names left.
They can always use historical geographical names like 荆州 or 兴安 as well, the pool runs deep.
basically you don't want to name your navy ships after those of a loser navy, but Imperial Japan and Qing Dynasty built lots of ships and fucked up hard, so the names are limited.
Last edited:
One thing to consider is that the Dingyuan class pre-dreadnought battleships were considered to be poetically named, but were actually named for counties from the Fleet command they were originally assigned to before being acquired by the Beiyang Fleet, so using that example an actual geographic name also can be a poetic/allegorical name too.
That's the American nickname. The Soviets called it "sarych" or buzzard bird.
Technically speaking, the 003 Fujian is already a supercarrier.
Although, I disagree naming Chinese flatdecks after Chinese municipalities.
Despite Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Chongqing are categorized as municipalities, and are thus at the same rank as provinces and autonomous regions - In the end, they are still very much cities by nature. So I don't think naming Chinese flatdecks after these municipalities is a good idea.
Speaking of which, one of the 051-class destroyers that intercepted the Soviet battlecruiser Frunze in 1985 is named after Chongqing.
Moreover, there are the matters of wartime prestige and morale.
We have already witnessed the blow to Russian morale (to at least a certain degree) when Moskva was sunk by Ukrainian Neptune anti-ship missile in April last year. This is considering that:
1. Moskva is a cruiser;
2. Moskva is the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet;
3. Moskva is the most powerful warship in the entire Black Sea (hence #2); and
4. Mosvka is named after Moscow, which is the capital city of Russia and also the most important city across all of Russia.
Speaking of cruisers - Yes, I think the Moskva (and the Slava-class in general) can be considered as capital ships of the Russian Navy, based on the present (dilapidated) state of the surface fleet of the Russian Navy.
But for the PLA Navy, China's ability to build multiple cruiser-sized surface combatants at once has basically resulted in the 055 large destroyers/"cruisers" being considered as normal surface combatants, similarly to their smaller cousins i.e. the 052D destroyers. Therefore, in my opinion, the title of "capital ships" in the PLA Navy should be reserved for CVs and LHDs.
Therefore, if the sinking of Moskva can already bring such negative effects to the Russian war effort and morale in Ukraine, what do you think would happen if the news broke that the Chinese CV Beijing or the Chinese LHD Shanghai has been sunk due to enemy action?
Based on my personal preferences, if the names from the municipalities are to be used on PLAN warships, the 055 large destroyers and/or their successor class of "true" cruisers (maybe 055A/B) with more VLS cells, railguns and DE-CIWS than the present 055 would be more fitting.
Last edited:
I'm also agreeing based on such geographical names being potentially sensitive to morale during war. I mean just imagine the headache for USA government if aircraft carrier George Washington is sunk during a conflict. Names with too much value in them are a hassle.
It is better to have mythological/given names for warships. At most, the names of sparsely inhabited areas such as prominent mountains, rivers can be used. Obviously the names would be vetted so they're not coincidentally the same as fascist Japanese navy names. So I don't see why it would be a concern.
The only "cruisers" operated by China and which they have plans to operate are just the aircraft carriers. Given their historical mission involves defending Asia while often outnumbered, I'd guess they don't want to put many eggs in a single basket by making cruisers. And this is not going to change in the future.
Destroyers are getting larger but I don't see that as a transformation into cruisers, I just see it as a logical step to counter American/Japanese military build up.
broadsword
Brigadier
Or do the naming panda way, naming them Ping Ping, Pong Pong, etc.