Absolutely. However, I wonder if, given the recent surge in the deployment of activities around new nuclear technologies within China, we might be overly conservative in our estimation of their readiness.
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
It seems that China has or soon will have a design suitable for nuclear powered carriers and perhaps smaller vessels. Then it will have to build the infrastructure to build them efficiently which will likely take several years. Only then will those carriers be produced. In the mean time carriers will have to be build experience will CATOBAR carriers and to have them available for use. I expect these will be powered by gas turbines.
What makes sense for some people doesn't have to make sense for other people. What the PLAN will and won't do isn't predicated on what military enthusiasts think about what nuclear offers over conventional, it will be based on what they think it offers, and when they want it to be offered, and in what form it is offered. Of the five nuclear countries that have or had the resources to pursue a nuclear carrier, the US went for it, the French went for it, the Soviets were going for it until their economy went belly up, and China is probably going for it now that it can. And actually it is unclear if the Brits ever again had the resources since WWII to go for a nuclear carrier. So at least 3, and probably 4 (including China), or perhaps even all 5 think or thought that nuclear carriers offer enough advantages over conventional to be worth pursuing, and at whatever pace they felt was in line with their national security needs.
What "nuclear age"? A quick google search on "nuclear age" confirms "nuclear age" does not have the meaning you are claiming for it. Yes all sorts of things were 'more nuclear' back during the Cold War, but nuclear carriers exist to this day, so as far as carriers are concerned whatever nuclear age you are talking about is still going on now; they were "shoving" nuclear into carriers in 1958 and they are still "shoving" nuclear into carriers in 2017. I also have no idea how you came to the conclusion that the USN decided the Enterprise's design was "pretty silly". That sounds like a value judgement for which you have no basis. Improvements in reactor design does not mean outdated reactor technology was "pretty silly" when it was state of the art for its time. That's like saying the 052B design was "pretty silly" when they could have just built 052Cs instead. Oh no, wait.... they COULDN'T build 052Cs back then. Which is why they built 052Bs instead. I also don't accept your premise of "prestige reasons" for why the French "got into it" unless you can back up your statement, or your conclusion that the CdG design sucks for whatever reason you think it does.
GUYS .... can we stay on topic??
since several posts were are on general nuclear reactors for naval vessels, the noise level of certain ships - including subs - and so on.
STOP: If there's nothing related to the Type 002 - IMO actually 003 - carrier, then simply do not post here in this thread.
Thank You,
Deino
since several posts were are on general nuclear reactors for naval vessels, the noise level of certain ships - including subs - and so on.
STOP: If there's nothing related to the Type 002 - IMO actually 003 - carrier, then simply do not post here in this thread.
Thank You,
Deino
A certain sharp ear cat has just re-affirmed that the 3rd Chinese aircraft carrier (2nd domestic built) had indeed commenced contruction (i.e. steel cutting) in 2016, with some incident (i.e. Steam vs EMAL) causing some delay therafter.
Since metal cutting woulld take around one and half year + time delay for the Steam Vs EMAL competition, 2019 in deed is a good bet for its appearance in the dry dock in Shanghai JNCX ( Dry dock No.4).
In his weibo, he stated:- He had posted in 2013 building of 001A (or 002 as some preferred) commenced, in 2014 he said 8 units of 055 would be built, and in 2015 he also said Dalian shipyard would also build 055 (togerther with Shanghai JNCX).
Credit to Icloo @Pakdef
Since metal cutting woulld take around one and half year + time delay for the Steam Vs EMAL competition, 2019 in deed is a good bet for its appearance in the dry dock in Shanghai JNCX ( Dry dock No.4).
In his weibo, he stated:- He had posted in 2013 building of 001A (or 002 as some preferred) commenced, in 2014 he said 8 units of 055 would be built, and in 2015 he also said Dalian shipyard would also build 055 (togerther with Shanghai JNCX).
Credit to Icloo @Pakdef
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
That is great news if true
Also was it the same guy who said DL would build Type 052D ?
We also had similar words for Type 901 and 12,000 ton cutters
Also was it the same guy who said DL would build Type 052D ?
We also had similar words for Type 901 and 12,000 ton cutters
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
What you guy think about this article ? The usual charge of China stealing, copying etc or is there real meat in this
By Snatching up British Company, China Closes Gap on US Naval Supremacy
Acquisition of controlled technology enables China’s aircraft carriers to project power on par with US
By
December 15, 2017 10:10 pm Last Updated: December 16, 2017 10:34 am
Type 001A, China's second aircraft carrier, is seen during a launch ceremony at Dalian shipyard in Dalian, northeast China's Liaoning Province, April 26, 2017. China has achieved a critical breakthrough in its electromagnetic aircraft launch system that will allow its future carriers to launch heavier and more powerful aircraft. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)
Email that satellite images and publicly released photos of the test sites corroborate the existence of these tests.
While the developments of EMALS in both the United States and China remain highly classified with very little details available to the public, it is believed that to build such a system a critical semiconductor component called an insulated-gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) chip is needed. The chip can switch electrical current to the windings of the motor in milliseconds to enable the launching of aircraft from the carrier flight deck.
Acquisition of Distressed Company
China’s breakthrough in EMALS is due in no small part to the fact that it can now produces its own IGBT chips with the required specifications, according to a by the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post. The same report also says that China secured the critical IGBT technology it needed by acquiring Dynex Semiconductor, a relatively small British semiconductor company that sold 75 percent of its share to Zhuzhou CSR Times Electric, a Chinese state-owned enterprise.
The acquisition, which took place in 2008 in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, was allowed to go through by the then-ruling Gordon Brown government as it did not see it as a national security threat, an unnamed source within the current UK government told The Epoch Times.
This photo taken on Jan. 2, 2017, shows Chinese J-15 fighter jets on the deck of the aircraft carrier Liaoning during military drills in the South China Sea. Both of China’s existing carriers, Liaoning and Type 001A, are constrained with a ski-jump design that imposes performance constraints on the Chinese carrier aircraft. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)
IGBT has been on the category III of the UK Strategic Export Control Lists since 2009 as part of the EU Council Regulation 428/2009. The list means that such a good is determined to have “strategic” purposes and therefore requires an export license to be sent outside of the United Kingdom.
It is unknown whether the transfer of the controlled IGBT technology occurred before or after the EU regulation came into force. In any case, China’s official mouthpiece China Daily has that a huge IGBT manufacturing facility in Zhuzhou, Hunan Province has been operating since 2013 where Dynex engineers work “side by side” with the Chinese state-owned enterprise employees to develop “cutting-edge solutions.”
Dynex Semiconductor has declined repeated requests for comment.
The role of Dynex’s acquisition in helping China’s EMALS program has been openly discussed for some time by a number of Chinese sources. Gong Jiang-hui, an associate professor at the Beijing Normal University who is also a bestselling online novel writer in China under the pen name Qi Cheng, the event in his 2014 novel “Material Empire,” in which he portrays the acquisition of Dynex and its critical IGBT production tools as essentially a premeditated “operation” by China to grab critical military technology from a small and faltering Western company.
Dr. Jayant Baliga, a professor at the North Carolina State University who is well-known for being the original inventor of the IGBT device in 1979, explains that the bulk of manufacturing of the IGBT has moved outside of the United States to Japan and Europe following the U.S. government’s decision in the late 1980s to favor the research of a competing device, which did not become successful.
“This decision probably resulting in the IGBT not being classified [in U.S. export control],” said Baliga, “It is ironic that all the applications envisioned by Department of Defense and the industry are now served by IGBTs.”
‘Tragedy for the United States’
China’s surprise breakthrough in electromagnetic aircraft launch system represents “a tragedy for the United States,” said Richard Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center.
“[United States] had been planning on achieving early breakthroughs that would help sustain U.S. military superiority. China’s extensive investments in electromagnetic launch and laser weapon systems may very likely reduce this period of U.S. superiority,” said Fisher.
By Snatching up British Company, China Closes Gap on US Naval Supremacy
Acquisition of controlled technology enables China’s aircraft carriers to project power on par with US
By
December 15, 2017 10:10 pm Last Updated: December 16, 2017 10:34 am
Type 001A, China's second aircraft carrier, is seen during a launch ceremony at Dalian shipyard in Dalian, northeast China's Liaoning Province, April 26, 2017. China has achieved a critical breakthrough in its electromagnetic aircraft launch system that will allow its future carriers to launch heavier and more powerful aircraft. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)
Email that satellite images and publicly released photos of the test sites corroborate the existence of these tests.
While the developments of EMALS in both the United States and China remain highly classified with very little details available to the public, it is believed that to build such a system a critical semiconductor component called an insulated-gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) chip is needed. The chip can switch electrical current to the windings of the motor in milliseconds to enable the launching of aircraft from the carrier flight deck.
Acquisition of Distressed Company
China’s breakthrough in EMALS is due in no small part to the fact that it can now produces its own IGBT chips with the required specifications, according to a by the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post. The same report also says that China secured the critical IGBT technology it needed by acquiring Dynex Semiconductor, a relatively small British semiconductor company that sold 75 percent of its share to Zhuzhou CSR Times Electric, a Chinese state-owned enterprise.
The acquisition, which took place in 2008 in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, was allowed to go through by the then-ruling Gordon Brown government as it did not see it as a national security threat, an unnamed source within the current UK government told The Epoch Times.
This photo taken on Jan. 2, 2017, shows Chinese J-15 fighter jets on the deck of the aircraft carrier Liaoning during military drills in the South China Sea. Both of China’s existing carriers, Liaoning and Type 001A, are constrained with a ski-jump design that imposes performance constraints on the Chinese carrier aircraft. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)
IGBT has been on the category III of the UK Strategic Export Control Lists since 2009 as part of the EU Council Regulation 428/2009. The list means that such a good is determined to have “strategic” purposes and therefore requires an export license to be sent outside of the United Kingdom.
It is unknown whether the transfer of the controlled IGBT technology occurred before or after the EU regulation came into force. In any case, China’s official mouthpiece China Daily has that a huge IGBT manufacturing facility in Zhuzhou, Hunan Province has been operating since 2013 where Dynex engineers work “side by side” with the Chinese state-owned enterprise employees to develop “cutting-edge solutions.”
Dynex Semiconductor has declined repeated requests for comment.
The role of Dynex’s acquisition in helping China’s EMALS program has been openly discussed for some time by a number of Chinese sources. Gong Jiang-hui, an associate professor at the Beijing Normal University who is also a bestselling online novel writer in China under the pen name Qi Cheng, the event in his 2014 novel “Material Empire,” in which he portrays the acquisition of Dynex and its critical IGBT production tools as essentially a premeditated “operation” by China to grab critical military technology from a small and faltering Western company.
Dr. Jayant Baliga, a professor at the North Carolina State University who is well-known for being the original inventor of the IGBT device in 1979, explains that the bulk of manufacturing of the IGBT has moved outside of the United States to Japan and Europe following the U.S. government’s decision in the late 1980s to favor the research of a competing device, which did not become successful.
“This decision probably resulting in the IGBT not being classified [in U.S. export control],” said Baliga, “It is ironic that all the applications envisioned by Department of Defense and the industry are now served by IGBTs.”
‘Tragedy for the United States’
China’s surprise breakthrough in electromagnetic aircraft launch system represents “a tragedy for the United States,” said Richard Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center.
“[United States] had been planning on achieving early breakthroughs that would help sustain U.S. military superiority. China’s extensive investments in electromagnetic launch and laser weapon systems may very likely reduce this period of U.S. superiority,” said Fisher.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
(cont)
The U.S. Navy currently operates 10 Nimitz class aircraft carriers that rely on the decades’ old but powerful steam catapult design to launch aircraft, enabling the navy to project power around the globe. China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), on the other hand, operates two smaller carriers based on a design from the former Soviet Union that can only launch aircrafts from a ski-jump ramp, which is far less efficient and imposes performance constraints on the Chinese carrier aircraft.
U.S. Navy sailors aboard the U.S. aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) on April 8, 2017, in Newport News, Virginia. The Ford-class aircraft carrier features the experimental electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS), a technology that both China and the United States have engaged in a relentless race to develop. (Chief Mass Communication Specialist Christopher Delano/U.S. Navy via Getty Images)
China’s two existing carriers, the Liaoning and Type 001A both carry Shenyang J-15 fighter jets which are based on the Russian-designed Sukhoi Su-33. The ski-jump design on both ships reduces the number of aircraft that can be launched simultaneously. Even more importantly, it imposes a limit on the takeoff weight of J-15 fighter, as every successful takeoff will require some level of tradeoff between armaments or fuel, or both.
The Chinese regime has leapfrogged the current steam catapult technology used by the U.S. Navy by investing heavily in developing the next generation EMALS, which requires less maintenance and space while offering higher efficiency in launching and landing aircraft.
While the outdated design of both the Liaoning and Type 001A carriers means that they are unlikely to be retrofitted with the advanced EMALS, which requires a sophisticated power source, Richard Fisher said that successful development of EMALS would allow China to put it on its future nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and make them potentially as effective as the latest U.S. Ford class, accelerating the PLA’s drive toward global power projection.
China is believed to be planning to construct at least two and possibly as many as ten additional nuclear-powered aircraft carriers by 2049—the centenary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, according to an estimate by the defense studies website . One of them, the Type 002, is already under construction at a shipyard outside Shanghai and has reached 90 percent completion, according to in November.
The Chinese regime makes no secret that its ambitious aircraft carrier program is aimed at building the capabilities to deter or defeat the United States military from intervening in the Asia-Pacific region during a crisis or conflict, according to U.S. Department of Defense’s 2017 to Congress. Such crisis or conflict includes the scenario of a “Taiwan contingency,” an attack or invasion of Taiwan by China, or other military conflict against the United States or U.S. allies in the East or South China Seas.
Email
The U.S. Navy currently operates 10 Nimitz class aircraft carriers that rely on the decades’ old but powerful steam catapult design to launch aircraft, enabling the navy to project power around the globe. China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), on the other hand, operates two smaller carriers based on a design from the former Soviet Union that can only launch aircrafts from a ski-jump ramp, which is far less efficient and imposes performance constraints on the Chinese carrier aircraft.
U.S. Navy sailors aboard the U.S. aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) on April 8, 2017, in Newport News, Virginia. The Ford-class aircraft carrier features the experimental electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS), a technology that both China and the United States have engaged in a relentless race to develop. (Chief Mass Communication Specialist Christopher Delano/U.S. Navy via Getty Images)
China’s two existing carriers, the Liaoning and Type 001A both carry Shenyang J-15 fighter jets which are based on the Russian-designed Sukhoi Su-33. The ski-jump design on both ships reduces the number of aircraft that can be launched simultaneously. Even more importantly, it imposes a limit on the takeoff weight of J-15 fighter, as every successful takeoff will require some level of tradeoff between armaments or fuel, or both.
The Chinese regime has leapfrogged the current steam catapult technology used by the U.S. Navy by investing heavily in developing the next generation EMALS, which requires less maintenance and space while offering higher efficiency in launching and landing aircraft.
While the outdated design of both the Liaoning and Type 001A carriers means that they are unlikely to be retrofitted with the advanced EMALS, which requires a sophisticated power source, Richard Fisher said that successful development of EMALS would allow China to put it on its future nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and make them potentially as effective as the latest U.S. Ford class, accelerating the PLA’s drive toward global power projection.
China is believed to be planning to construct at least two and possibly as many as ten additional nuclear-powered aircraft carriers by 2049—the centenary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, according to an estimate by the defense studies website . One of them, the Type 002, is already under construction at a shipyard outside Shanghai and has reached 90 percent completion, according to in November.
The Chinese regime makes no secret that its ambitious aircraft carrier program is aimed at building the capabilities to deter or defeat the United States military from intervening in the Asia-Pacific region during a crisis or conflict, according to U.S. Department of Defense’s 2017 to Congress. Such crisis or conflict includes the scenario of a “Taiwan contingency,” an attack or invasion of Taiwan by China, or other military conflict against the United States or U.S. allies in the East or South China Seas.
This article reads like a National Enquirer article about the Chinese military. Particularly low-class are pejoratives like "regime" which shallow Western journalists like to use to randomly dump on China's government (even though it enjoys greater popular support than most Western governments), factual errors like the 002 (by which he means CV-18) is 90% complete, and groundless exaggerations like the PLAN plans to build up to nuclear 10 carriers. This author Paul Huang sounds like he needs to choose another career; clicking on the link to his articles suggests he is another Gordon Chang.
Despite this generally low-class article, the main point seems to have multiple sources to corroborate the transfer of IGBT technology from the UK to China. OTOH this seems to have been a straight up legitimate purchase of technology rather than theft/espionage or copying.
Despite this generally low-class article, the main point seems to have multiple sources to corroborate the transfer of IGBT technology from the UK to China. OTOH this seems to have been a straight up legitimate purchase of technology rather than theft/espionage or copying.
Last edited:
The lesson here is supposed to be about not selling China technology or, more specifically, letting China acquire firms and IP (though of course these same people probably complain about not having access to Chinese markets...). That said, I think one of the most glaring problems with arguments like the one made in this article is that they treat instance as deterministically essential and fail to consider counterfactuals. Whether Dynex’s technology is being used for the Chinese EM catapult or not, IGBTs themselves aren’t special secret technologies, and regardless of whether there was anything particular or special about Dynex’s IP, without Dynex it’s likely that China would have found some solution to fit their needs sooner or later. If the technology was that indispensable I wouldn’t be surprised if China was pursuing parallel tracks to acquire it.