CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

[Intrepid]

Even ignoring the fact that all the big shrimps so far are saying it will be a sub 80k ton carrier, I'm surprised why you would think a sub 80k ton carrier is unrealistic to begin with. Considering Liaoning and 001A displace 65k tons full and maybe a bit more for that for 001A, it would not be unexpected for the next carrier design to be a bit larger, even if it's only a maximum of 15,000 tons larger, dont' you think?

First I thought, type 002 will be a copy of Ulyanovsk. The CGIs we could see all over the internet went in this direction. Then, when I saw the american style of deck operation on Liaoning, I recognized the possibility to copy an US super carrier. I am quite sure that retired US-Navy sailors now live in China and help to establish a Chinese carrier force. But the hints of the last year show an other picture, a very cautious and deliberate approach. And the displacement values we learned seems to be no technical numbers but only symbolic numbers about the task type 002 will have: the task of a conventional powered super carrier.

 

[Blitzo]

First I thought, type 002 will be a copy of Ulyanovsk. The CGIs we could see all over the internet went in this direction. Then, when I saw the american style of deck operation on Liaoning, I recognized the possibility to copy an US super carrier. I am quite sure that retired US-Navy sailors now live in China and help to establish a Chinese carrier force. But the hints of the last year show an other picture, a very cautious and deliberate approach. And the displacement values we learned seems to be no technical numbers but only symbolic numbers about the task type 002 will have: the task of a conventional powered super carrier.

Well the CGIs on the internet were actually all over the place and indeed still are.

In the end, the wide variety of design and configuration possibilities for 002 mean we have to rely on key rumours as a foundation to build everything else on, and the fact is that the sub 80k ton displacement is a key metric for us.

 

[Intrepid]

When the machinery space of type 001A was visible for the first time on images taken from satellits, nobody believed that this would be just an other Liaoning hull. What displacement did we expect initially for type 001A?

 

[davidau]

re # 740

You have not answered me what is meant by" multiple dimensions". Or is it a new jargon?

"ugly mil sina watermark". What is wrong with the water mark? I believe others have posted same before, but you didn't pick on them.

Previously, you criticized me heavily before regarding wrong websites that I posted some of the information.

I firmly believe there should be a balance between discouragement and encouragement. Did you ever comment of the good stuff I posted. eg. J-15 122? No!

You are a senior member, and you should set good examples.

I further believe some members do like and enjoy the stuff I posted, albeit "old", as you termed it.

Respectfully

 

[Blitzo]

re # 740

You have not answered me what is meant by" multiple dimensions". Or is it a new jargon?

Multiple dimensions? I discussed them in #740, as the three separate paragraphs where I listed them.

"ugly mil sina watermark". What is wrong with the water mark? I believe others have posted same before, but you didn't pick on them.

I've posted pictures from mil sina as well -- but I and others haven't done so anywhere as much as you have.

Your photo posts seem to be almost all exclusively from mil sina, without an effort to seek original pictures from elsewhere, like original sources, and without any meaningful commentary or explanation either.

Previously, you criticized me heavily before regarding wrong websites that I posted some of the information.

I firmly believe there should be a balance between discouragement and encouragement. Did you ever comment of the good stuff I posted. eg. J-15 122? No!

You are a senior member, and you should set good examples.

I further believe some members do like and enjoy the stuff I posted, albeit "old", as you termed it.

Respectfully

Then please make a dedicated thread for your picture posts or something, instead of posting them in threads where other discussions are happening or even in threads where the pictures are incorrectly posted.

And as a senior member I'm exactly trying to set a good example by trying to provide some guidance.
There's a reason why both Deino and I are a bit jarred by the way you've been posting. If you post new and meaningful photos from original sources that no one else has posted in a thread then I'll happily "like" just as I have liked a number of photos in the past before, but if your photos are ones which I've already seen before or which have already been posted in a thread then I'm going to be indifferent to it.

 

[davidau]

re 775

Then why criticize the "ugly water marks of sina", since you do it yourself? It's ok for you but not for others.... As you said"I've posted pictures from mil sina as well -- but I and others haven't done so anywhere as much as you have.." I didn't hide the facts I got the source from sina...and you?

As you are constantly scan al other websites, why don't you criticize others in the same doses. You might have seen the pictures before, how about others in the forum. You are not the only one that's interesting in China Defence Forum...

 

[Blitzo]

re 775

Then why criticize the "ugly water marks of sina", since you do it yourself? It's ok for you but not for others.... As you said"I've posted pictures from mil sina as well -- but I and others haven't done so anywhere as much as you have.." I didn't hide the facts I got the source from sina...and you?

As you are constantly scan al other websites, why don't you criticize others in the same doses. You might have seen the pictures before, how about others in the forum. You are not the only one that's interesting in China Defence Forum...

When the majority of your posts are photos, and when those photos are almost all from mil sina, yeah it gets a bit irritating. When other members or myself post photos from mil sina we do so at a far less significant proportion of our overall photo posts let alone our overall posts.

I understand that I'm obviously getting on your nerves a little, but I'm not the only senior member here who's been feeling jarred at the way you post.
You seem annoyed that it seems you're the only one getting picked on, and it's nothing personal, I just find your manner of posting mostly photos and mostly photos from mil sina to be jarring and would prefer it if you stopped or if you made a dedicated thread for your photo posts. If other members posted in a similar manner to you then I would be asking them kindly to change as well -- and you're quite new here, so you haven't seen the other members in years past who I have also criticized and asked to change as well.

You are free to continue posting how you have been, but myself and Deino will also be free to continue asking you to change.

 

[asif iqbal]

CV-16 and CV-17 each carrying 24 x J15

That's 48 aircraft

CVN-18 and CVN-19 each carrying 36 x J15

That's 72 aircraft

Total 120 units

That's a good air cover

 

[Iron Man]

CV-16 and CV-17 each carrying 24 x J15

That's 48 aircraft

CVN-18 and CVN-19 each carrying 36 x J15

That's 72 aircraft

Total 120 units

That's a good air cover

If CV/N-18 and 19 are about the size of the Kitty Hawk (~83kt full), they should be able to carry 65-70 aircraft (including helos) routinely, or about what the Nimitz CVNs carry nowadays. That would allow something like 48 J-15s, 4 EW J-15s, 4 AEW/C turboprops, and maybe a dozen helos.

Also, counting the total number of aircraft on all of PLAN's carriers is not really a worthwhile endeavor. If you had 4 carriers, over the long term, only one would be active, one would be surgeable on short notice, one more would be surgeable with much greater preparation/time, and one would be completely out of action in dry dock. By way of an example, the USN's 11 carrier force only allow for 3 of them to be active at any given time. Its current force of 10 has fleet commanders complaining about deployment shortfalls in which all 3 are not available at all times.

 

[FORBIN]

First I thought, type 002 will be a copy of Ulyanovsk. The CGIs we could see all over the internet went in this direction. Then, when I saw the american style of deck operation on Liaoning, I recognized the possibility to copy an US super carrier. I am quite sure that retired US-Navy sailors now live in China and help to establish a Chinese carrier force. But the hints of the last year show an other picture, a very cautious and deliberate approach. And the displacement values we learned seems to be no technical numbers but only symbolic numbers about the task type 002 will have: the task of a conventional powered super carrier.

In more can again more make sense considering Ukrainian have sold Su-33 proto, Il-78, ofc Varyag, agreement for An-225 etc... so very possible Ulyanovsk plans.