Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
The Korean Dokdo, 6111, has conducted operations with helos, both alone as Korean forces, and with the US Navy. They still talk about building a second one, but I have seen no evidence of it starting.
The Japanese DDH-181, Hyuga and DDH-182, Ise are regularly out conducting operations and they look very good doing so. They have particpated with the US too, more often than the Koreans.
The 22DDH, which will be DDH-183, is definitely under construction. She will have a full load displacment of 27,000 tons. The official keel laying was in January of this year, 2012. If you googl, "22DDH Keel Laying ceremony," you can read all about it.
Photos of the ongoing construction are very hard to come by. I have not seen any.
After the 22DDH, they already have approved funding for the next one, same basic lines, but even bigger. The 24DDH, DDH-184, which will have a full load displacement of well over 30,000 tons.
Any of you boys seen an aircraft carrier around here? Cougar, COUGAR! we're on VAPOR Cougar! Lets Land this thing!
Given that the typical reaction to the Liaoning from western analysts appears to be to play up the challenges of carrier ops, I want to know what countries have mastered this esoteric art? US, UK, France, Italy, Spain, Russia, Brazil, Thailand and India are all current operators of aircraft carriers. How much would you say their expertise is worth?
I'm particularly interested in the comparison between Russia and India. US based analysts always seem so dismissive of Russian carriers, but once those same carriers falls in the hands of Indians, it seemingly magically becomes a potent instrument of seapower. Are Indians really so much better than the Russians at operating carriers?
I'm particularly interested in the comparison between Russia and India. US based analysts always seem so dismissive of Russian carriers, but once those same carriers falls in the hands of Indians, it seemingly magically becomes a potent instrument of seapower. Are Indians really so much better than the Russians at operating carriers?
The US has more carrier experience than all the rest of the countries listed have combined. Thailand has little experience where as their lone CV, and Chakri Naruebet is seldom sent to sea and is more of a Royal showpiece than an operating CV..
Any experience operating a CV is valuable.
In my opinion yes. They have been operating CVs since 1961. The Russians since 71 with the Kiev. Since the fall of the USSR the Russians have had very limited CV operations where as the Indian CV, INS Viraat, puts to sea regularly.
Actually the Soviets began operating carriers around 1975 - 76 with the Kiev class carriers the first Kiev class carrier was commissioned on 28 december 1975 and before that in 1967 the Soviet navy had its first LHP with the Moskva class.
As for the Indians they had operated two Britisch made light carriers from 1961 to 1997 they had the INS Vikrant a CATOBAR carrier which they use to operate Sea Harriers from and from 1987 to present they operate a VSTOL carrier the INS Viraat. I believe India too will have a learning curve with the Vikramaditya but perhabs far less steap than China with the Liaoning. But the effectiveness of the Vikramaditya will be limited because of her design drawbacks compared to the Liaoning.
actually the soviet navy never had any real carrier experience, because the kiev class were VTOL carriers (they used the yak-38, an VTOL aircraft) and kuznetzov only entered service after the colapse of the USSR.
Not only india has more experience than china operating carriers, but it also is building one, while china is still years away from getting one. Of couse it can imagined that most (if not almost all) of the components of the indian carrier will have to be imported.
thats due to the complely secrecy envolving china´s AC program. Analyst are left with the challenges.
But, despite the huge philosophical differences and conflict, you have to give the Soviets credit. They were methodically marching towards developing true carrier capability. Moskva for helo ops on a fairly large scale. Kievs for VTOL operations, mixed with helo air ops. Then the Kuzznetsov class leading to good STOBAR experience and introducing a true fixed wing strike/fighter to the mix. And their next step (which they were already building) would have been CATOBAR.
They just did not have at all an economy to sustain it, and this was the Reagan administration's genius to essentially challenge them to keep up with a proposed 600 ship navy, Star Wars, etc., etc. It simply bankrupted them.
If they had not gone bankrupt, I expect by this date they would be operating the two Kuzentsov class, and 3-4 of the follow on CATOBAR class and have already learned a lot about true carrier ops.
But they did go bankrupt and they never got there and are now really just a husk of what they once were.
The Chinese now have essentially their own plan to get there. The difference is, they have the economy, the market, and the resulting funds to sustain it over the long haul...and I believe they will. I expect to see several years of STOBAR operations...but that it will be overlapped in the next 6-8 years by the beginning of a true CATOBAR carrier and the growing experience that will come from first one, then two, and perhaps three or four CATOBAR carriers ultimately.
Just my opinion unless some economic or other downturn makes it economically not feasible.
- Status