Ideal chinese carrier thread

[Gollevainen]

Military strength is invariably reflection of the country industrial base and strength. You can believe me I work in defense industry. Next to our line of military product we have the same line that produce civilian good.We share the same worker the same technology and the same management style

Well exactly...defence industry needs most of all quality and sopistication, not politically appealing pose. Most faults of chinese military producement has come from neglect of inexperience and silly decissions made by believing their own propaganda how 'ideology can replace all levels of practicality and logic', and those, specially made during the Cultural revolution hampers a great deal. You really can start counting the modern chinese military production to take their first steps AFTER the cultural revolution, as all valuable lessons they have learnt from the soviets during the 50's were let to be wasted and run dry...

When you pour so much money in defense related industry you got result. If I'm not wrong Russia spend 50% of the goverment spending on the military when her GDP is only 10% of US. Yes you build all kind of fancy weapon but for how long eventually the reality take over and Russia gone bust because her civilian economy is not competitive.
China case is different.For long time there is no urgency to compete with US on the ideological level There is nothing for China to gain for competing with US on the ideological ground

Yeas thats true, I have never claimed otherwise

I never believe that technology was the constraint in building Carrier but politic and funding does

But my friend, it is the exact opposite. China has all economical capacity to go on for it....but not shipbuilding experience and knowlidge to do so...

China military spending is pegged to 1.5% of GDP or 5% of goverment spending quite modest actually but as the size of Chinese economy grow 1.5% is 45 billion dollar slightly less than France budget Building carrier is expensive because you have take account of support and escort ship to form batttle group. Unless you have urgency you will be hard pressed to justify spending that kind of money when it can be used for other thing

yeas but France have build capital ships since....when they start calling ships capital Like I said, money and ecomincal issues arent the factor that prevents china to proceed in carrier field by the pace that the Korean article claims.

But I believe that in order to allow the new SBN to operate in China sea She need to be protected from the surface ship. and The fact that now China import 50% of all its oil and raw material from overseas China must be able to protect SLOC

Politic is the other consideration because carrier is an offensive weapon It might unnerve the neighboring country and for long time China follow the dictum of DXP to bide for time and never to antagonize the US But I believe the new leadership is confident enough and feel that there is nothing to gain to please the US as Us is going to contain China anyway and kept selling offensive weapon to Taiwan So what the point of restraining yourself.

There you are rigth, there is all needs of carrier to be included in chinese fleet - it is the essential for any fleet - and I hope that chinese leadership would understand that its most prestige value isent from offensive nature of such ships (for that you need CBG, and those are still far away in the future) but the defensive. The fighter umbrella that protects the fleet against enemy ships and aircraft can now move along with the fleet and allow PLAN to conduct its defensive operations untied to the constrains of shore based air cover.



But my obinions arent my own, but an objective scope on PLANs current shipbuilding capacity and level of experience. How can you expect them to start produce carrier now, as mean time its currently biggest and most sophisticated warships are rumoured to suffer thecnical proplems and have revialed other desing faults (such as under-powering.)?????

 

[tphuang]

what common sense got to do with achieving technical goal You either meet your technical specification or you don't there is nothing halfway In every technical endeavour you have to satisfy test I believe the same thing happend with ship to You went for a shake down cruise and see if you meet the performance spec as to speed, endurance, fuel economy, working sensor and reliability. Irrespective whether you built one or a dozen

Common sense goes something like this. Two people both try to do a task. One person has done it everyday for the last year and the other person has done it twice. Who do you think will do a better job of it? I don't question the way China's shipbuilding industry has advanced, but it's just not the same level as South Korea yet. That's why its orders have been mainly for bulk ships and VLCC rather than LNGs and cruise ships. Also, you can check out South Korean ship quality by the amount of money they go for in the second hand market. That's a good indication of how well the ships were built. btw, I'm not just saying this, I read as many articles as I can find on the shipbuilding battle between China and South Korea everyday. Thi is my personal feeling from what I read and see.

I believe you make those comment out of your inferiority complex that anything that South Korea built must be better than China

I am not here to prove anything What I'm saying is this is semi official acknowledgement that China is considering building a carrier and not some fanboy fertile imagination COSTIND is organ of China defense industry. China daily is the mouthpiece of CCCP

lol, I'm the biggest realist you will find out PLAN. Can the South Koreans build 93k tonne carriers? no. Again, nobody here is saying that China is not going to build a carrier, but rather that it will be a while before it can build a 93k nuclear powered carrier.

 

[Sczepan]

....
On the other hand, if the PLAN is using the old soviet hardware models to learn from, and then improve upon (which is what I believe they will do), then you will see the Varyag come out and test and train so that the PLAN gets expertise and operational experience over then 4-6 years following the Varyag's launch.

Then, and the folloing is purely based on my own best guess, 4-6 years after that, you will see the PLAN build a couple of CTOL carriers (meaning with some form of cat) to take advantage of that learning. Probably in the 50-60,000 ton range. After that, now with three opertional carriers, another 6 years and perhaps you will see a large carrie like the spoken of here...but that is now in the 2020 or later time frame.

.....

my five cents:

1) Varjag to be finished by 2010 as trainee-carrier
2) 1 - 2 smaller 20000 ts "Helo" carriers incl. cats for amphibious operations to be finished nearby 2015
3) a big stick > 90000 ts to be finished by 2020 or later

especially the succession of 2 and 3 seems to be economical and sensible, also useful for PLANs need

 

[AmiGanguli]

Common sense goes something like this. Two people both try to do a task. One person has done it everyday for the last year and the other person has done it twice. Who do you think will do a better job of it?

I think this is the crux of the argument. I don't believe this analogy holds up when you increase the scale to thousands of people over several decades. A large military project is a combination of very many skills, and most of these skills have a civilian counterpart. For the ones that don't you 1) hire from other countries, 2) develop the skills with intensive R&D effort, or 3) live with the fact that this particular area (not the whole ship) will be inferior. Even option three isn't the end of the world - nobody said the ship had to be perfect.

A lot of this also depends on just how much China wants to spend. If money was no object they could just start pumping out inferior carriers right now. Just retrofit containerships much like what the U.S. did in 1922. They wouldn't be very useful in a battle, but it would speed up the learning curve immensely. Pump out a new, slightly improved version every year and by 2020 you'd have something fairly decent. I'm not saying they should do that (and certainly they won't), but the point remains that you can speed up R&D by throwing more resources at the problem.

A more realistic way forward would be to launch the Varyag. Over the next six years build cruisers, and a domestic Varyag-like aircraft carrier (or maybe helicopter carriers). With that base of experience start intensive work on a large carrier around 2013.

Anyway, it sounds like the disagreement is really about whether a supercarrier can be built by 2020 (in 13 years) or 2027 (20 years). I think this is mostly an issue of will. Honestly I don't see why they should be in a great rush, but if they are then they can certainly do it.

... Ami.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

I think this is the crux of the argument. I don't believe this analogy holds up when you increase the scale to thousands of people over several decades. A large military project is a combination of very many skills, and most of these skills have a civilian counterpart. For the ones that don't you 1) hire from other countries, 2) develop the skills with intensive R&D effort, or 3) live with the fact that this particular area (not the whole ship) will be inferior. Even option three isn't the end of the world - nobody said the ship had to be perfect.

Exactly! I remember when Canada built the city class frigate in the late 80's She completely lost her warship building capability after long hiatus of 25 years There is not a single shipyard that built warship But She still has St John Shipyard that continue building civilian freighter And She still the world leader in process industry Worst ,There is not single company that built military sensor like radar and
fcs but she has thriving industry in supplying Radar to civilian airport.

In no time at all She build brand new shipyard to built naval warship St John hire many british naval designer and skill trade men by boatload.Form a new company to design Naval sensor in cooperation with leading university.The strength of Canadian industry save the day

 

[tphuang]

Exactly! I remember when Canada built the city class frigate in the late 80's She completely lost her warship building capability after long hiatus of 25 years There is not a single shipyard that built warship But She still has St John Shipyard that continue building civilian freighter And She still the world leader in process industry Worst ,There is not single company that built military sensor like radar and
fcs but she has thriving industry in supplying Radar to civilian airport.

In no time at all She build brand new shipyard to built naval warship St John hire many british naval designer and skill trade men by boatload.Form a new company to design Naval sensor in cooperation with leading university.The strength of Canadian industry save the day

You are comparing building a frigate to building a carrier? What would make you think that a shipyard fully capable of building more complex ships can't do a frigate? And yes, they also get plenty of help from other Western countries.

And getting back to LNG carrier, HD has finally completed its first LNG carrier slightly behind schedule. And it's only 147K tonne. That compares to the South Koreans, who regularly build 300K tonne LNG carriers.

This article is slightly optimistic Korean view, but it probably has more truth than you are putting out.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Hendrik_2000]

You are comparing building a frigate to building a carrier? What would make you think that a shipyard fully capable of building more complex ships can't do a frigate? And yes, they also get plenty of help from other Western countries.

And getting back to LNG carrier, HD has finally completed its first LNG carrier slightly behind schedule. And it's only 147K tonne. That compares to the South Koreans, who regularly build 300K tonne LNG carriers.

This article is slightly optimistic Korean view, but it probably has more truth than you are putting out.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Size doesn't indicate that South Korea is more advance than China.It all depend on customer requirement Once you built a succesfull prototype it doesn't take long to scale up providing that you have big enough shipyard to built it

For your information the city class except it's weapon system and thales radar the majority are mostly domestic design

Doesn't mean that China cannot built 300,000 ton ships here is a news from China daily

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China to deliver 1st LNG ship
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2007-02-20 09:06

China has made substantial breakthroughs in shipbuilding as the first liquefied natural gas (LNG) ship made in China, one of the most advanced in the world, will be delivered in September.

Only the Republic of Korea, Japan and a few European countries have acquired the technologies to build such ocean liners.

Since natural gas can only be turned into the liquefied after the temperature dropped below minus 163 degrees Celsius, LNG ships are often dubbed as the "maritime super freezer".

The boat with a capacity of 47,200 cubic meters is under construction by the Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding, a subsidiary of the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC), China's top and the world's third largest shipping group.

Another four such LNG vessels also under construction would be delivered in the end of this year while the research and development for LNG ships with a capacity of 200,000 cubic meters is underway, sources with the CSSC said. The Shanghai Waigaoqiao Shipbuilding Company, one of its subsidiaries, is going to deliver a floating, production, storage and offloading vessel to the United States-headquartered oil giant ConocoPhilips in May.

The vessel with a designed capacity of 300,000 tons is the largest and most costly vessel of its kind in China.

CSSC will also deliver in September a 8,530 TEU container vessel and a dredger with a capacity of 13,500 cubic meters in May, both the largest of its kind in China.

CSSC, parent company of 60 subsidiaries covering ship building, ship repair, research and development and offshore engineering, posted a profit of more than 5 billion yuan last year,

 

[tphuang]

Size doesn't indicate that South Korea is more advance than China.It all depend on customer requirement Once you built a succesfull prototype it doesn't take long to scale up providing that you have big enough shipyard to built it

For your information the city class except it's weapon system and thales radar the majority are mostly domestic design

Doesn't mean that China cannot built 300,000 ton ships here is a news from China daily

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China to deliver 1st LNG ship
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2007-02-20 09:06

China has made substantial breakthroughs in shipbuilding as the first liquefied natural gas (LNG) ship made in China, one of the most advanced in the world, will be delivered in September.

Only the Republic of Korea, Japan and a few European countries have acquired the technologies to build such ocean liners.

Since natural gas can only be turned into the liquefied after the temperature dropped below minus 163 degrees Celsius, LNG ships are often dubbed as the "maritime super freezer".

The boat with a capacity of 47,200 cubic meters is under construction by the Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding, a subsidiary of the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC), China's top and the world's third largest shipping group.

Another four such LNG vessels also under construction would be delivered in the end of this year while the research and development for LNG ships with a capacity of 200,000 cubic meters is underway, sources with the CSSC said. The Shanghai Waigaoqiao Shipbuilding Company, one of its subsidiaries, is going to deliver a floating, production, storage and offloading vessel to the United States-headquartered oil giant ConocoPhilips in May.

The vessel with a designed capacity of 300,000 tons is the largest and most costly vessel of its kind in China.

CSSC will also deliver in September a 8,530 TEU container vessel and a dredger with a capacity of 13,500 cubic meters in May, both the largest of its kind in China.

CSSC, parent company of 60 subsidiaries covering ship building, ship repair, research and development and offshore engineering, posted a profit of more than 5 billion yuan last year,

Again, why would Canada not be able to design a frigate? It's a frigate, it's not a 93000 tonne carrier. I don't even know why you are bringing Canada and a frigate into the discussion. Canada is one of the most technologically advanced country in the world.

Again, as I said, if you think China can be anywhere near South Korea's level with its first LNG carrier, I don't even know how to comment on that. It's like saying Avic-I is at the same level as Boeing/Airbus once ARJ-21 gets delivered.

 

[AmiGanguli]

Again, as I said, if you think China can be anywhere near South Korea's level with its first LNG carrier, I don't even know how to comment on that.

But this is kind of the point (although we're talking about carriers, not LNG tankers). You're arguing that there exist "stages" of technology that China needs to go through. That it's necessary for them to build (for example) a 1940's era aircraft carrier and practice with it for a while before building a 1960's era carrier, and work their way up that way.

I'm saying (and I think that Hendrik agrees) that China's first attempt, while undoubtedly behind the U.S. state-of-the-art, doesn't need to be inferior to the first Nimitz class that was commissioned in 1975.

China in 2007 has a few things going for it that the U.S. didn't have in 1975:

• Modern computers to use in design and simulation
• A huge civilian shipbuilding industry that's actually building much larger ships than carriers
• More advanced manufacturing technology
• Better technology in most subsystems (especially electronics)
• Experienced Russian engineers from 2007 to act as consultants
• Modern U.S. carriers to use for inspiration/design ideas

Admittedly the U.S. had more experience developing carriers, but you're claiming that this advantage in experience is enough to outweigh all the other factors. So much so that even by 2020 (45 years after the first Nimitz!) China won't be able to overcome it? I don't think this is realistic thinking at all.

... Ami.

 

[Schumacher]

China will most likely be the largest ship builder by 2015 or earlier. Hard to imagine they can't build a 40k or 90k tons carrier by 2020.
Most of the tech involved are from 70s or earlier. Even countries like Australia, Brazil I think, Spain built carriers.
Just like the recently announced large aircraft project, we're not talking abt revolutionary tech here.
I think it's all abt having the industrial base, political will & budget really.