IMHO, there's no need to separate carriers in different fleets, at least while they have only 2 of them. So, I would expect a single squadron/division for both carriers ( presumably South China Sea Fleet, they don't need carriers in other two fleets ). Once CV002 enters service, we could see forming of another unit in maybe another fleet, but not before.
CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
It makes sense to use the shore facilities built in two fleet areas so they can home port one carrier in each. Even so the two carriers will often train together.
CV-16 home port is at 35°43'02.3"N 120°00'21.9"E. It is within East Sea Fleet.
One common faulty IMHO assumption is that the Chinese CVs are meant for taking and keeping Taiwan or islands in SCS. In my opinion, these targets do not deserve or qualify a CV for they are too close to mainland. PLAN CVs are meant for protecting Chinese marine time lanes further away where land based aircraft can not reach. So I am saying areas near Malacca straight and beyond that means indian ocean, Pacific beyond first island chain.
Also, I believe everyone must drop or begin to drop the connection between "sea" part of fleet name and their mission. These fleets are extending their coverage beyond the seas to the oceans. They would be more accurately named by their mission as East Fleet, South Fleet and North Fleet. Although PLAN may choose to keep the name unchanged for whatever reasons, it would be misguiding if we keep the "sea" in our mind.
So at the present, I agree with you that two CVs sharing the same home port. But that is not because any of the fleets have a specific reason to have the CVs more than others. It is only because of logistical reasons. In the long run, I believe both East and South Fleets will have CVs. North fleet may or may not need CV depending on the situation on the Korean peninsular as China need a strong air defense for Beijing while US airbase in SK is too close a threat, today it is like the door is open.
Last edited:
Intrepid
Major
Even the Panama Canal is a Chinese interest area. And every Chinese citizen who is in trouble somewhere in the world - analogous to the American hostages in Iran from 1979 to 1981.
Very true, but I think that is a much long way to go.
Intrepid
Major
It shows the kind of carriers we can expect in the future. Liaoning and sisters for learning and training purpose. It is a fourty-years-course of learning and training and it had begun 15 years ago. It is a very complex plan, and the Chinese are right on schedule.
Nah, interior machinery that does not need a full gantry crane will be fitted in after launch, just like for every other carrier that's built.
GREAT! moving along very nicely now with the super structure and the the APRAS.
With all the internal work still to be done, I am still project a March July 2017 launch. IOW, 2nd quarter to very early 3rd quart. Probably somewhere towards the first 1/2 of that time frame.
But will we hear some much understood praising and hollering from clear on the otter side of the world for this event.
Last edited:
OK, let's see, wich PLAN Fleet is closest to Strait of Malacca and Indian Ocean ( aka Chinese energetic lifeline )? Wich Fleet has only semi-free exit towards open Pacific ( not blocked by Japan, S. Korea and Taiwan )? Wich Fleet has highest probability to use carrier in real combat operations?
IMO, that's South Sea Fleet.
And having carrier based in Qingdao is, IMHO unnecesarry, because carriers from Sanya can quickly sail into a Yellow Sea if necesarry ( 1 or 2 days of sailing ) and it's much closer to it's presumed main area of operations ( SCS, Strait of Malacca and Indian ocean ).
Also, areas in Yellow sea and ECS are too small for efficient use of carrier. Any eventual conflict in that area ( like Senkaku's ) is easily handled with ground-based aviation ( 350 km from Chinese mainland ), while Spratley's are about 1000+ km from Hainan ( so there's need for carrier there ). Same thing for any conflict about Taiwan.
Any use of aircraft carrier as defence against US aircraft in S. Korea IMHO isn't serious idea, so please let's return to serious discussion.
PLAN built a carrier base in Qingdao, an expensive project, because it thought is was a good idea to have such a base there. I can imagine several reasons - technical, political - why it did so but, just as you I suppose, I don't know.
Let's look at a political one. It might be useful to have a base there in twenty years time but if you start building when you see the need coming it might be seen as provocative or has other awkward side effects. Much better to have a base and improve it. It wasn't politically awkward to build it now.
Then having the base you can train the ship operating in and out of the harbour, being supplied or whatever the ship does in port, in winter weather. When will that experience be necessary? No idea, but it's good to be prepared.
- Status