CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations

[Richard Santos]

Well, I am afraid this is pretty much self contradictory:

"China’s second carrier will be based on the Liaoning and will be among the world’s most advanced"

The Liaoning is a 30 year old design. Any STOBAR designed based on it, despite improving its sensors and some other areas, will not be among the world's most advanced carriers.

That will not happen until the get a nice, advanced CATOBAR carrier out there.

Do not get me wrong. The Liaoning is a powerful tool and has some great capabilities and decent airwing.

but until the add strong AEW aircraft, and get a 5th gen strike/fighter aboard her, and then increase her sortee rate and her night time fighting capabilities...even as good a tool as she is is not among the most advanced.

Right now, that is reserved for the US, France, and now the RN with their new carriers.

The RN carrier will have a 5th gen strike/fighter. Although I honestly believe its helo borne AEW will be better than the Chinese...it itself is still not up to par with the fixed wing E-2C/D AEW that the US and French utilize.

Anyhow...there is no doubt in my mind that these two carriers are good vessels and are bringing the PLAN a much better capability than they have ever had in terms of naval air. But I also believe they will be the last STOBAR carriers the Chinese ever build and that their next carriers will step up to be more advanced and capable.

Among is a very flexible qualifier. The new Chinese carrier will certainly be much more advanced than the vast majority of 200 or so carriers ever built and will be one of the 15 or so most advanced ever built.

 

[Lethe]

I have no problem with the assertion that Shandong will be "among" the world's most advanced carriers, certainly if one is willing to classify the RN's new carriers as such despite their lack of catapults or nuclear power.

The real question is what that term ("advanced") actually means in this context. It certainly doesn't mean, for example, that the carrier possesses greater capabilities than e.g. USS Nimitz, anymore than a late-model Mazda 3 has the capabilities of an older Toyota Hilux.

 

[Jeff Head]

I would take that statement more as a nationalistic pride akin to the town's burger joint calling themselves the best 'hamburger' in the world .. or the Cubs calling themselves WORLD champions when MLB is only played in the US.

Oh...I recognize this...and cannot blame them.

They have done some amazing things in puitting together a strong carrier program in just a few years and getting two decent carriers into the sea with very respectable air wings in their own right.

They have every right to be proud.

And when they get first one, then two CATOBAR carriers out there, they will have every reason to further speak up about their price in that accomplishment as well.

 

[vincent]

I would take that statement more as a nationalistic pride akin to the town's burger joint calling themselves the best 'hamburger' in the world .. or the Cubs calling themselves WORLD champions when MLB is only played in the US.

Forgot about Toronto Blue Jays?

 

[Blitzo]

Well, I am afraid this is pretty much self contradictory:

"China’s second carrier will be based on the Liaoning and will be among the world’s most advanced"

The Liaoning is a 30 year old design. Any STOBAR designed based on it, despite improving its sensors and some other areas, will not be among the world's most advanced carriers.

That will not happen until the get a nice, advanced CATOBAR carrier out there.

Do not get me wrong. The Liaoning is a powerful tool and has some great capabilities and decent airwing.

but until the add strong AEW aircraft, and get a 5th gen strike/fighter aboard her, and then increase her sortee rate and her night time fighting capabilities...even as good a tool as she is is not among the most advanced.

Right now, that is reserved for the US, France, and now the RN with their new carriers.

The RN carrier will have a 5th gen strike/fighter. Although I honestly believe its helo borne AEW will be better than the Chinese...it itself is still not up to par with the fixed wing E-2C/D AEW that the US and French utilize.

Anyhow...there is no doubt in my mind that these two carriers are good vessels and are bringing the PLAN a much better capability than they have ever had in terms of naval air. But I also believe they will be the last STOBAR carriers the Chinese ever build and that their next carriers will step up to be more advanced and capable.

I don't think it's that contradictory, because it really also comes down to what we consider to mean as "advanced".

Because when one says "advanced" I think we automatically think of "capability" but the two are not always necessarily the same.


For example, if an 056 class corvette or an LCS today teleported back to World War II, I think it could quite comfortably be called the most "advanced" warship in the world.
However it would be far from the most capable, or the largest, when compared to other ships that exist and the kind of weapons they fielded at the time, such as large cannons aboard battleships...

But what this example is meant to demonstrate is that it is the advancement of the ship's subsystems which is what we should look at when considering how advanced a ship class may be to one another, rather than its "capability" which is a function of a whole host of other factors.
A ship can be more advanced than another but still far less capable, and vice versa.



Similarly, for 001A, I think even though it is based on an old hull design and is using STOBAR as its launch method, I expect other major subsystems such as combat management, command and control, and radar systems to be very advanced.
In other words, the summation of 001A's subsystems and the current level of fleetwide and crew aircraft carrier expertise will not make it among the most capable aircraft carrier hulls in the world... however I think a case can definitely be made that a good portion of its subsystems will be among the world's most advanced.


So I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement, but it does mean people might misinterpret the phrase "among the most advanced" to mean "among the most capable," which is what you seem to have done, and it is an easy mistake to make.


edit: that is not to say 001A may not one day also become among the "most capable" carriers in the world. Depending on what the future airwing looks like and once the navy becomes acquainted with operating a carrier from the strategic doctrine level down to the nuts and bolts crew level, there is not much stopping it from being one of the most capable carriers in the world.

Even the lack of a fixed wing AEW&C isn't exactly a deal breaker, as it really also depends on the capability of Z-18JY and the future surveillance/datalinking capability of the fighter complement as well... in some ways this factor is not dissimilar to what the UK's CVF carriers face with their AW101 Crowsnest helicopter AEW&C and F-35Bs.

 

[delft]

in some ways this factor is not dissimilar to what the UK's CVF carriers face with their AW101 Crowsnest helicopter AEW&C and F-35Bs.

OT
I saw articles in the Daily Express yesterday claiming that RN's new flattops are as good as the USN carriers despite the fact that they lack landing wires and are probably less advanced and capable than 001A.

 

[Jeff Head]

I don't think it's that contradictory, because it really also comes down to what we consider to mean as "advanced".

Because when one says "advanced" I think we automatically think of "capability" but the two are not always necessarily the same.


For example, if an 056 class corvette or an LCS today teleported back to World War II, I think it could quite comfortably be called the most "advanced" warship in the world.
However it would be far from the most capable, or the largest, when compared to other ships that exist and the kind of weapons they fielded at the time, such as large cannons aboard battleships...

But what this example is meant to demonstrate is that it is the advancement of the ship's subsystems which is what we should look at when considering how advanced a ship class may be to one another, rather than its "capability" which is a function of a whole host of other factors.
A ship can be more advanced than another but still far less capable, and vice versa.



Similarly, for 001A, I think even though it is based on an old hull design and is using STOBAR as its launch method, I expect other major subsystems such as combat management, command and control, and radar systems to be very advanced.
In other words, the summation of 001A's subsystems and the current level of fleetwide and crew aircraft carrier expertise will not make it among the most capable aircraft carrier hulls in the world... however I think a case can definitely be made that a good portion of its subsystems will be among the world's most advanced.


So I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement, but it does mean people might misinterpret the phrase "among the most advanced" to mean "among the most capable," which is what you seem to have done, and it is an easy mistake to make.


edit: that is not to say 001A may not one day also become among the "most capable" carriers in the world. Depending on what the future airwing looks like and once the navy becomes acquainted with operating a carrier from the strategic doctrine level down to the nuts and bolts crew level, there is not much stopping it from being one of the most capable carriers in the world.

Even the lack of a fixed wing AEW&C isn't exactly a deal breaker, as it really also depends on the capability of Z-18JY and the future surveillance/datalinking capability of the fighter complement as well... in some ways this factor is not dissimilar to what the UK's CVF carriers face with their AW101 Crowsnest helicopter AEW&C and F-35Bs.

Well, we can agree to disagree.

As I have said, the PLAN deserves to be proud of what it has accomplished with the two Kuzentsov Type carriers...which I believe will be operated better than the Kuznetsov because the Chinese are already showing that their philosophy of utilizing these carriers is not about defensive bastions...but more akin to what the US does.

None the less, without the larger airwingm without the CATS, without the Fixed wing and more capable AEW, without nulear power, etc., etc. they have not arrived at a carrier that is IMHO, among the most advanced in the world.

When they get their first and then second CATOBAR carriers out, they will certainly move a huge step close to that statement IMHO..

...and I understand how if you look at the totality of carrier developed since the Langley that statistically you can say it is "among" the most advanced.

I do not choose to read it that way, and do not believe it was intended that way.

Whatever else it might be though...those two vessels (CV-16 and CV-17) are very good and capable aircraft carriers and have to be respected in their own right...and I certainly will not take that away from them.

 

[Iron Man]

edit: that is not to say 001A may not one day also become among the "most capable" carriers in the world. Depending on what the future airwing looks like and once the navy becomes acquainted with operating a carrier from the strategic doctrine level down to the nuts and bolts crew level, there is not much stopping it from being one of the most capable carriers in the world.

Even the lack of a fixed wing AEW&C isn't exactly a deal breaker, as it really also depends on the capability of Z-18JY and the future surveillance/datalinking capability of the fighter complement as well... in some ways this factor is not dissimilar to what the UK's CVF carriers face with their AW101 Crowsnest helicopter AEW&C and F-35Bs.

Even if you totally ignore the actual number of carriers in the world and just go by carrier class, the CV-17 won't be among the "most capable" carriers in the world given how few actual carrier classes exist in the world. CV-17 is and will always be less capable than the nuclear Nimitz, Gerald R. Ford, and Charles de Gaulle classes and will at most tie with the QE class. It will probably keep a lead over the Kuznetsov class, and can easily best smaller classes like the 45kt Vikramaditya, the 40kt Vikrant, the 27kt Cavour, and the 14kt Giuseppe Garibaldi. That's it for actual carrier classes. It's right in the middle of the pack, not among the "most capable".

 

[Blitzo]

Even if you totally ignore the actual number of carriers in the world and just go by carrier class, the CV-17 won't be among the "most capable" carriers in the world given how few actual carrier classes exist in the world. CV-17 is and will always be less capable than the nuclear Nimitz, Gerald R. Ford, and Charles de Gaulle classes and will at most tie with the QE class. It will probably keep a lead over the Kuznetsov class, and can easily best smaller classes like the 45kt Vikramaditya, the 40kt Vikrant, the 27kt Cavour, and the 14kt Giuseppe Garibaldi. That's it for actual carrier classes. It's right in the middle of the pack, not among the "most capable".

That would depend on how big the differences in capability are between 001A and the carrier classes which are more capable than it and the carrier classes which are less capable than it.

 

[Blitzo]

Well, we can agree to disagree.

Jeff, I think you don't understand what I'm saying.

Being "advanced" is different to being "capable". That is the point I'm emphasizing.

If you're saying that being "advanced" is the same meaning as being "capable" then I think we will have to agree to disagree, but based on the rest of your reply I think you are dismissing the difference between the two words a bit casually.