CV-16 Liaoning (001 carrier) Thread II ...News, Views and operations

[Intrepid]

In this arrangement planes can take off and land once the helicopter is in the air.

No, they can not!

On the photo I have marked in orange the aircraft, that have to been moved away to clear the landing area:

 

[SanWenYu]

It is not new. The photo was taken on the same occasion, when we first saw 13 aircraft on deck.

What I thought too, but not according to this:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. This photo is put right under the section title "穿越台湾海峡“ ("Passing thru Taiwan Strait"). It is also used as the headline photo of the story.

The story says the group exit the strait in dawn on Jan 12. If this photo was taken then, the lighting looks matching the timing - Liaoning should be going north by east at the time, the sun was rising on the 1 ot 2 o'clock direction, casting shadows to her left.

I personally think this site is quite reliable in reporting news about Chinese military. But I won't be surprised if they used a wrong photo in this case.

Only if I could find that old photo to compare with.

 

[Blackstone]

Here's a new article from the Washington Post on CNS Liaoning, describing a recent CBG training exercise. One error in the article is from a CSIS analysis that claims her Soviet-era steam turbines are "badly designed and poorly maintained," limiting her speed about 20 knots. If accurately quoted, then CSIS' analysis on the carrier's steam turbines failed to take into account modifications and upgrades Chinese engineers made to the Liaoning. CSIS is also wrong on Liaoning's "poor" maintenance, because all available evidence show just the opposite. There's also a recent piece by Henry K. showing evidence the Liaoning sustained speeds of 23+ knots for around 10 hours, and her top speed is most likely higher. Other than the turbines design/maintenance error, the article is a nice introduction of the Liaoning CBG for its readers.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

BEIJING — China’s sole aircraft carrier has returned home following a far-ranging three-week training mission during which its combat capabilities were closely scrutinized and speculation soared over what future role the flat-top will play amid China’s growing military ambitions.

The Defense Ministry said the 60,000-ton Liaoning sailed in to the eastern port of Qingdao on Friday along with its battle group that includes destroyers, frigates, a supply ship and anti-submarine craft.

The ministry quoted the group’s commander, Rear Adm. Chen Yueqi, as saying the drill simulated real combat as closely as possible and “achieved all targets set for it.” China commissioned the carrier in 2012 and declared it combat ready in November, shortly after which it launched its first live-fire exercises.

The cruise that began on Christmas Day took it through the Miyako Strait, south of Okinawa, Japan, and then the Bashi Channel separating Taiwan from the Philippines as it entered the disputed South China Sea that China claims virtually in its entirety.

It headed home through the Taiwan Strait in what was seen by many as a threatening message to the island’s independence-leaning President Tsai Ing-wen. Taiwan’s Defense Ministry said it was closely monitoring the passage but that there was no cause for alarm.

China and Taiwan split amid civil war in 1949 and Beijing has vowed never to renounce its threat to use force to recover what it considers lost territory.

Japanese and Taiwanese surveillance aircraft and ships closely monitored the Liaoning along its journey, seen by some as a sign of how China plans to use it to demonstrate its willingness to back up its territorial claims with military muscle.

The Liaoning originated in 1990 as the unfinished Varyag for the now-defunct Soviet fleet. Purchased as a shell by China in 1998, it was towed from the Black Sea to the northeastern Chinese port of Dalian where it underwent an extensive overhaul of its hull, radar, electronics and other systems.

Designated first as an experimental and training platform, the Liaoning represents a new degree of sophistication in the Chinese armed forces that includes ballistic missile submarines and prototype stealth fighters. It’s also considered a blueprint for future Chinese carriers built using entirely domestic technology, at least one of which has been under construction since 2015.

Yet, analysts point out major limitations in both the carrier’s design and the Chinese navy’s ability to utilize its full capabilities.

Considerably smaller than the 100,000-ton U.S. Nimitz-class carriers, it can carry just 24 fixed-wing aircraft compared to 55 for the American flat-tops, according to a recent report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

While the Liaoning’s J-15 multirole fighters — a Chinese version of the Russian Su-33 — are highly capable, they lack the low-observable stealth technology of fifth-generation fighters such as the U.S. F-35C.

CSIS also says the ship’s Soviet steam turbine power plant was badly designed and poorly maintained, probably limiting it to a typical speed of around 20 knots. That is far slower than the Nimitz-class’ 30 knots, meaning it would take longer to arrive at target and be less able to flee from threats.

Its aircraft are also launched from a “ski jump” style deck rather than the powerful steam catapults that U.S. carriers use, requiring China’s jets to use more fuel for takeoff and limiting them to smaller payloads.

The Liaoning’s pilots and crew are also far less experienced than their American counterparts, although they benefit from lessons learned by the U.S. and others in the decades since carriers entered operation, CSIS said. Other analysts point out that the Liaoning doesn’t appear yet able to launch and recover aircraft at night, a crucial ingredient for combat effectiveness.

The CSIS study concludes that those shortcomings make the Liaoning unsuited for “sustained, high-intensity combat operations,” at least for now. That will likely restrict it to humanitarian aid and disaster relief operations, training and diplomatic missions and cruises in the South China Sea asserting Beijing’s territorial claims.

Despite that, the Liaoning “represents an important step in advancing China’s ability to project naval power,” the study said.

“Regardless of the Liaoning’s future abilities, the ship commands a degree of political utility as a tool of naval diplomacy through various operations, regional and global.”

 

[SanWenYu]

Other than the turbines design/maintenance error, the article is a nice introduction of the Liaoning CBG for its readers.

Not sure if these errors are on purpose, the article gives me the impression of "Liaoning is a paper tiger".

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Not sure if these errors are on purpose, the article gives me the impression of "Liaoning is a paper tiger".

Right full of inaccuracy and outdated data like this
CSIS also says the ship’s Soviet steam turbine power plant was badly designed and poorly maintained, probably limiting it to a typical speed of around 20 knots. That is far slower than the Nimitz-class’ 30 knots, meaning it would take longer to arrive at target and be less able to flee from threats.

We know that on the last trip she clock 30 miles/hr as she sail on the east of Taiwan logging 300 mile in 10 hr
As for reliability, Liaoning has been in operation for 4years and she never had any big accident or snafu other than small release of steam which is normal in any steam plant
She only went to the dock once . And she is out way more than Kutznetzov . Early on she was on sea 5 or 6 months of the year. Yup it is lazy journalism quoting CSIS which is clearly biased

Its aircraft are also launched from a “ski jump” style deck rather than the powerful steam catapults that U.S. carriers use, requiring China’s jets to use more fuel for takeoff and limiting them to smaller payloads.

Another error J15 has 5 ton payload with full complement of fuel . with 2 ton J15 can carry 2X YJ83 and 2X PL12 maybe even 2X PL8

 

[Blackstone]

Not sure if these errors are on purpose, the article gives me the impression of "Liaoning is a paper tiger".

CSIS showcases itself as a serious news-analysis organization, so it's reasonable to accept the publication rather put out accurate news and analysis than inaccurate ones. My take on CSIS Liaoning analysis error is the writers used old information and failed to update their own database or gain up to date understanding of PLAN/PLAAF/PLA modernization efforts and achievements. In other words, it's sloppy work and not intentional distortion of facts.

 

[Insignius]

How do they even know whether the steam plant is badly maintained? Projection because the Kutznesov sucks?

Also, I remember reading in Chinese/Taiwanese media that the Liaoning was spotted by ROCAF sailing with 30+ knots for hours on end, possibly for gaining wind-over-deck for launching heavier planes.

All in all, this article is just your standard propaganda crap: China is still a paper-tiger, but pls fear them since they will use their paper tiger to bully small nations, which is why you all should be loyal to the USA etc.

 

[Blackstone]

How do they even know whether the steam plant is badly maintained? Projection because the Kutznesov sucks?

Also, I remember reading in Chinese/Taiwanese media that the Liaoning was spotted by ROCAF sailing with 30+ knots for hours on end, possibly for gaining wind-over-deck for launching heavier planes.

All in all, this article is just your standard propaganda crap: China is still a paper-tiger, but pls fear them since they will use their paper tiger to bully small nations, which is why you all should be loyal to the USA etc.

I can't be sure, but my guess is CSIS writers saw photos of Kutznesov's boiler room and leaped to the wrong conclusion about Liaoning's boiler room.

 

[B.I.B.]

Not sure if these errors are on purpose, the article gives me the impression of "Liaoning is a paper tiger".

Its a force of habit. Maybe this continual put down is some sign of insecurity.

 

[Blackstone]

Its a force of habit.

There might be some of that, but I think it's just sloppy or lack of research and serious journalism. I don't think CSIS would provide erroneous information due to political dogma. On the other hand, if we look at neocons like McCain, Rubio, Navarro, Bolton, and their supporters, we see just how boneheaded neocons can be, so I can't completely rule out delusional or irrational behaviors.