CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
conceptual design of CV 002...
For anyone out of the loop, just know that these are fan made CGIs and not official and while they are pretty they most definitely are not official or serious by any means.
@davidau, please don't get me wrong, but why do You always post nearly each and every - most of all dated - image You found esp. at Sina even if there are better ones, more recent ones, more realistic ones and also even if they were just posted a few post before !???
I really don't get it ?
Just regarding INS Vishal and the status of its actual design and state of the programme, I posted an article in the Indian Military thread which addresses this very topic we were discussing with some of the latest news from the Indian Navy, which may be of interest to you and others... and which I think supports my position quite readily
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/indian-military-news-reports-data-etc.t5934/page-360#post-448888
re # 731, my intention was to show members of the forum the unofficial but rather realistic conceptual design of 002 for discussion ( I'm aware they were dated), nothing more, nothing less..definately not for the brownie points!!
Deino, it seems to me what you stated is way out and extremely exaggerated ..."but why do you always post nearly each and every-most of all dated..."
As you are a super moderator, your tone is very discouraging to new comer like me.
Instead of knocking why don't you give encouragement to the ones you like. By the way they are not all outdated as you seem to suggest.
I recall you did post some outdated pics, but I did not raise a fuss, as your intention behind the pics was to show the forum some interesting pictures...
respectfully
davidau, the problem from my point of view has multiple dimensions.
One: almost all of the pictures you post are from mil.sina. The problem is that mil.sina is very accessible to everyone and most people here frequent it often, meaning that any pictures you post here have probably already been seen before on mil.sina.
Two: this problem in my opinion is bigger -- more often than not, the photos which you post and the information you post are all "old" to many people here. For example, many people have already seen the CGIs before in various places, and there is no reason to bring them up again if they are not particularly credible or relevant to a new development. Certainly in this case, the Wuhan mock up of 002's suspected island is new, but the CGIs are not particularly indicative of what 002 may look like and are mostly just speculation with little basis in reality as of yet.
Thirdly: your posts often offer little commentary, often a few words or half a sentence of commentary with little to anything else about what you are posting, why you are posting it etc. Sometimes it is okay to post pictures without much commentary, especially if the pictures are very recent, very credible, or very high quality, or part of a bigger continuous discussion (for example if one is following the revelation of a new project in a near-real-time fashion, most famously with the J-20 revelation back in January 2011). However, if you are posting pictures that everyone has seen before or if you are posting not very "important" pictures that people can easily access on another well frequented site, then it may be better to explain more deeply why you are posting those pictures, or maybe to just not post the pictures in the first place.
Intrepid
Major
Fanboys fantasy is never "rather realistic"!
re # 736
Okay, enlighten me with what you mean by 'multiple dimensions'.
One: "almost all of the pictures you post are from mil.sina." Yes i get the source from mil.sina. What is the big deal if most people frequent the website. Many people read the Guardian newspaper, the New York Times or Washington Post, SCMP etc. does that make it not worthy of reading? May I ask, where do you get your info from? Your own research?
Two: "this problem in my opinion is bigger -- more often than not, the photos which you post and the information you post are all "old" to many people here". Really ? How do you know many people thought they were all 'old'? Or it is purely your self-opinionated judgement?
I take your point about the Wuhan mock up of 002's suspected island is new. I've never said that the unofficial CGIs are indicative of what 002 may look like. It was a point for discussion and to speculate what it may look like when it is built. We know the whole design concept will change in time with more up-to-date technology in propulsion, weapons, radars, cat, aircraft , materials and so on...( also re #737)
Thirdly (Three): "your posts often offer little commentary, often a few words or half a sentence of commentary with little to anything else about what you are posting". It is well known fact a picture is worth more than a thousand words. I put enough info as I know them to accompany the pictures..
I notice you seem to comment a lot and often without accompanied pictures.
Respectfully
Okay, enlighten me with what you mean by 'multiple dimensions'.
One: "almost all of the pictures you post are from mil.sina." Yes i get the source from mil.sina. What is the big deal if most people frequent the website. Many people read the Guardian newspaper, the New York Times or Washington Post, SCMP etc. does that make it not worthy of reading? May I ask, where do you get your info from? Your own research?
Two: "this problem in my opinion is bigger -- more often than not, the photos which you post and the information you post are all "old" to many people here". Really ? How do you know many people thought they were all 'old'? Or it is purely your self-opinionated judgement?
I take your point about the Wuhan mock up of 002's suspected island is new. I've never said that the unofficial CGIs are indicative of what 002 may look like. It was a point for discussion and to speculate what it may look like when it is built. We know the whole design concept will change in time with more up-to-date technology in propulsion, weapons, radars, cat, aircraft , materials and so on...( also re #737)
Thirdly (Three): "your posts often offer little commentary, often a few words or half a sentence of commentary with little to anything else about what you are posting". It is well known fact a picture is worth more than a thousand words. I put enough info as I know them to accompany the pictures..
I notice you seem to comment a lot and often without accompanied pictures.
Respectfully
Last edited:
Respectfully ! The issue is simply that in most cases Your images are dated, often exactly the same ones even in lower resolution or smaller + that nasty Sina-stamp on them or divided into several parts of images that were posted just a few days or at least posts before in better quality and size; so why posting them anyway ??
And for point 2 & 3 it is indeed so, when You post such images, You often simply take the header from Sino without any additional hint or explanation, why reposting them.
Again don't get me wrong and I do not want to discourage new members, but if these new members are most of all reposting older stuff without any content, I think I'm at least allowed to raise my concerns.
That does not mean that others also sometimes post old stuff - and if I notice I note that too - or that they post "lot and often without accompanied pictures", which in simply the way a discussion goes on ...
Deino
And for point 2 & 3 it is indeed so, when You post such images, You often simply take the header from Sino without any additional hint or explanation, why reposting them.
Again don't get me wrong and I do not want to discourage new members, but if these new members are most of all reposting older stuff without any content, I think I'm at least allowed to raise my concerns.
That does not mean that others also sometimes post old stuff - and if I notice I note that too - or that they post "lot and often without accompanied pictures", which in simply the way a discussion goes on ...
Deino
Okay.
One: if you are going to re-post the photos from mil sina, at least try to find the original source of the photo instead of merely the photo with the mil sina watermark. And yes, mil sina is quite highly frequented, if anything I would argue it is one of the more frequented Chinese military websites especially for people who cannot read Chinese, as its interface is relatively easy to understand with many pictures for people who can't read Chinese to look at. Or heck, if you really have to post photos from mil sina can you at least link the original mil sina photo gallery?? The reason why we don't like mil sina photos is because they almost all have an ugly mil sina watermark, and also because it means we don't have access to the original photo which may often be posted from more dedicated Chinese military BBS which are often higher quality as well.
Two: I've been PLA watching for quite a long time now and I've seen a lot of photos come and go on this forum and others. There is a reason why older photos and older and inaccurate CGIs do not tend to make a reappearance unless it is someone who is new to PLA watching -- it is because those old photos and old CGIs are not relevant to the discussion and the newest real world developments.
Three: yes, you put enough info as you know to accompany the pictures -- that's the problem. I believe you don't offer enough information, opinion or commentary about the pictures to support why you are posting a particular set of photos from mil sina. For example, with the CGIs that you posted above/last page, it would have been helpful for us to understand why you're posting them. Something like "I found these CGIs on mil sina and I think they may correspond to what 002 may look like" or "I found these CGIs on mil sina and I'm wondering how accurate they may correspond to what 002 may look like" or something to help and precipitate discussion or to seek an answer to a question would be very helpful, instead of offering a dead end statement like "conceptual design of CV 002" -- because such a statement doesn't tell us what you're trying to say. Are you trying to say you believe those CGIs are reflective of what you think CV 002 will actually look like, or are you asking if CV 002 will look like those CGIs, or are you asking what the source of the CGIs may be and how they may relate to CV 002???
And yes, of course I offer many written words as part of my posts -- the idea of this forum is to offer informed, substantive opinion, debate and discussion about various developments about the Chinese military. That means keeping up to date with new pictures, new information, new rumours, new developments and to make sense of all of that in context of what we know before.
This, and other threads are not dedicated "photo threads" -- if you want to create a dedicated thread for "neat PLA photos that davidau has found from mil sina" then please feel free to make a thread in a separate thread. But if you are just posting random photos that interjects in the middle of a thread without offering any response to the rest of the discussion that has been going on or without offering any real explanation for photo sets that you are posting from mil sina then for those of us who have been PLA watching for years and years and years, it gets a little bit off putting and eventually irritating.
On the other hand, if there is a very much "new" photo of something that hasn't yet been posted here or if it is a high quality version of an existing photo then it is genearlly perfectly fine to post it here, especially if everyone knows what it is. For example, when I posted photos in this post of 001A (here: https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/cv...nt-and-news-thread.t8035/page-114#post-448499) I didn't post much of a commentary, because the photos were time sensitive/new and no one had yet posted them on the forum/thread yet and also more importantly because everyone here who has been following 001A should already have known what the picture depicted (001A having finished its paint job which has been followed over the last month or so), therefore I didn't need to explain what was going on, because everyone already knew what it meant.
I'm not trying to pick on you or anything, this really is nothing personal, but the fact is that there are certain ways of posting new material on SDF and new photos that has become a norm to facilitate easier discussion and dissemination of photos and information, and the way you've been consistently posting photos is quite jarring.