Jura The idiot
General
OK and the second part of my inquiry
"what would be the designation of the third Chinese carrier (the one being built according to ) then?"
please
CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
"what would be the designation of the third Chinese carrier (the one being built according to ) then?"
please
Jura The idiot
General
one, two, three, no problem for me
LOL!
I see
Type 00X/003 (former Type 002) Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/ty...-002-aircraft-carrier-news-discussions.t8048/
Intrepid
Major
So we have:
- The 1st Chinese aircraft carrier, former in Nikolayev launched USSR Project 1143.6 ex Riga ex Varyag, completed in Dalian, expected CV-1 Shi Lang but officially named Liaoning and numbered 16, also known as Type 001 or Project 001
- The 2nd (and 1st newly built, in Dalian) Chinese aircraft carrier, expected CV-17 Shandong but not yet officially named and numbered, also known as Type 001A or Type 002 or Project 002
- The 3rd (and 2nd newly built, expected in Shanghai) Chinese aircraft carrier, expected CV-18 but not yet officially named and numbered, also known as Type 002 or expected as Type 003 or Project 003
Last edited:
I think that once the pennant number is painted on the hull, we should call it by the pennant number or "project" number, since there is no visually definitive type designation for either CV-16 or CV-17. We have all sorts of free reign to call whatever we want now due to lack of clear information, but clearly this is causing confusion all over the place.
Call both of them the Liaoning class. That is the tradition in most of the world's nautical circles, even if it not the official practice.
To be honest, all three should be called kuznetsov class. There is about as many years that separated kuznetsov and Shangdong's commissioning as between the 1st and last Nimitz, and at least from what we know, shangdong does not differ from kuznetsov by more than George HW bush differed from the Nimitz.
To be honest, all three should be called kuznetsov class. There is about as many years that separated kuznetsov and Shangdong's commissioning as between the 1st and last Nimitz, and at least from what we know, shangdong does not differ from kuznetsov by more than George HW bush differed from the Nimitz.
I wanted to respond and thank Deino for working with me.
The understanding we have is that as soon as the PLAN or PRC officially informs us of a designation regarding the vessels of Type 001, Type 001A, Type 002, Type 003, etc, we will change the threads accordingly.
In addition, once we know the pennant number and name, we will change the thread for each carrier to reflect that reality.
I agree with some posters that as Western Nations look at it, ht Kuzentsov, the Liaoning, and the Shandong (or whatever it might be called) are all of the same class, that being the Kuznetsov class.
There are some improvements on the Liaoning (IMHO) above the Kuznetsov, and even more on the latest (Shandong). But like the Nimitz class of ten, they are all the same class even with the improvements.
But we are not a western nation forum. This is the Sino-Defense forum and we will end up doing it, and naming them the way the Chinese/PLAN do.
One of the great things about SD is the fact that we have a moderation team who tak together and rarely...very rarely...have flaming disagreements between the leadership and moderation staff.
With people like Popeye and Deino, Tphuang, and all of the others whom we can respect and who have spent the better part and more of ten years on this forum...that is one of the main reasons SD is as good a forum as it is.
So, again, I thank Deino for working with me on this, and I am committed to ensuring that we keep the names and designations fitting with what the industry and defense leadership of the PRC inform us of.
At this point, all of us know exact what the 001, 001A and 002 are...and what they have stood for for several years.
Should the PRC or PLAN officially inform the world that those designations are something different, we will change them.
Until then, we will leave tham as they have been for several years, and as most defense outlets and publications still call them.
In addition, should what we are calling CV-17 (001A) become a different pennant number or name, then the thread will be called that, just as we have done with the CV-16 Liaoning Thread.
again, thanks for your understanding. I wanted to make sure everyone knew what our decisions are and why...and again to publicly thank Deino for working with me on this.
DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
@Deino @bd popeye @tphuang @SampanViking @FORBIN @Jura @Air Force Brat @vesicles @Intrepid @Iron Man @Richard Santos @TerraN_EmpirE @kwaigonegin
The understanding we have is that as soon as the PLAN or PRC officially informs us of a designation regarding the vessels of Type 001, Type 001A, Type 002, Type 003, etc, we will change the threads accordingly.
In addition, once we know the pennant number and name, we will change the thread for each carrier to reflect that reality.
I agree with some posters that as Western Nations look at it, ht Kuzentsov, the Liaoning, and the Shandong (or whatever it might be called) are all of the same class, that being the Kuznetsov class.
There are some improvements on the Liaoning (IMHO) above the Kuznetsov, and even more on the latest (Shandong). But like the Nimitz class of ten, they are all the same class even with the improvements.
But we are not a western nation forum. This is the Sino-Defense forum and we will end up doing it, and naming them the way the Chinese/PLAN do.
One of the great things about SD is the fact that we have a moderation team who tak together and rarely...very rarely...have flaming disagreements between the leadership and moderation staff.
With people like Popeye and Deino, Tphuang, and all of the others whom we can respect and who have spent the better part and more of ten years on this forum...that is one of the main reasons SD is as good a forum as it is.
So, again, I thank Deino for working with me on this, and I am committed to ensuring that we keep the names and designations fitting with what the industry and defense leadership of the PRC inform us of.
At this point, all of us know exact what the 001, 001A and 002 are...and what they have stood for for several years.
Should the PRC or PLAN officially inform the world that those designations are something different, we will change them.
Until then, we will leave tham as they have been for several years, and as most defense outlets and publications still call them.
In addition, should what we are calling CV-17 (001A) become a different pennant number or name, then the thread will be called that, just as we have done with the CV-16 Liaoning Thread.
again, thanks for your understanding. I wanted to make sure everyone knew what our decisions are and why...and again to publicly thank Deino for working with me on this.
DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
@Deino @bd popeye @tphuang @SampanViking @FORBIN @Jura @Air Force Brat @vesicles @Intrepid @Iron Man @Richard Santos @TerraN_EmpirE @kwaigonegin
Last edited:
- Status