CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

[Helius]

I don't know the price difference of Type 002 and the new one ''Type 003''.... but to go all the way to build an improved Kuznetsov type design and just build one is a bit sad.

Even more of a waste would be having more of the obsolete and sub-par platform when you can already build and field a more capable and state-of-the-art one, I'd reckon.

 

[steve_rolfe]

excuse my asking, but as I know,
only Liaoning was called "type 001", and carrier 001
next carrier Shandong is only called carrier 002, suspected to be "type 001 A" because of the modifications at the island
the third is carrier 003, but not type 003 - could be type 002 if Shandong was "001 A", now including cat, a bigger hul and again minor modifications at the island - may be more of this type could be build;
which ship is type 003 - the suspected nuclaear powered next big step?

Oh no not again there are only 3 carriers 001, 002 & 003........forget the 001A designation, and the words "class" or "type" and it all falls into place logically. The sooner we see some new images of 003, the better, so we can get off discussing this topic, which was answered many moons ago.

 

[Sczepan]

Type 001 = #16 = Liaoning
Type 002 = #17 = Shandong

Type 001 = #16 = Liaoning confirmed by photo in Sept. 2012

002 (without Type) = # 017 = Shandong also confirmed

 

[Blitzo]

Type 001 = #16 = Liaoning confirmed by photo in Sept. 2012
View attachment 76186
002 (without Type) = # 017 = Shandong also confirmed
View attachment 76187

So, what do you think the lack of "type" in the second picture means?

Do you think it means that CV-17 is actually 001A.... despite no renditions of that designation existing at all, and us having multiple official placards using the 002 designation, and no one in the grapevine calling it 001A at all for years now and everyone calling it 002?

Or, do you think that regardless of whether it is "type" or not, CV-17 should still be correctly identified as 002, and that 001A is an obsolete and incorrect term that should no longer be used?

 

[steve_rolfe]

Just a quick observation, why do some people insist in adding the word "type" to the numerical Carrier designation? I have not seen it on Chinese military forums, and if one looks at the official placards, there are no Chinese symbols that are similar that are next to the number, that could represent the same word i.e type.

 

[Intrepid]

I added "type" because it is used by the fanboys. I don't insist.

Remember: No "CV" is added to the Penannt number, only "16" and "17".

 

[steve_rolfe]

I added "type" because it is used by the fanboys. I don't insist.

Remember: No "CV" is added to the Penannt number, only "16" and "17".

My comment wasn't aimed at you, it was just a general observation. Lets hope no one raises this question again.

 

[latenlazy]

Just a quick observation, why do some people insist in adding the word "type" to the numerical Carrier designation? I have not seen it on Chinese military forums, and if one looks at the official placards, there are no Chinese symbols that are similar that are next to the number, that could represent the same word i.e type.

Because they’re often denoted with the word 型, which translates to model or type. So it would usually be 052D 型, 054 型, etc etc

 

[no_name]

I recon 型 is more equivalent to 'class'.
Type is also used for land vehicles like type 99, but the chinese word here is 式, and the West don't seem to have a word for it, preferring to refer it directly eg M1 Abrams.

 

[Intrepid]

I would like to call it construction number (001) and penannt number (16). The construction number never changes, the penannt number can be changed.