Ideal chinese carrier thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

PrOeLiTeZ

Junior Member
Registered Member
For the future Chinese aircraft carriers
I do not believe that chinese were able to create a advanced designs (catamaran, trimaran hull) at the beginning!

Why?
1) because China currently do not have a operationnel aircraft carrier (experience is decisive)
2) a advanced ships is very very expensive to develop !
3) Chinese engineers lack experience in aircraft carriers design (even't if melbourne, kiev and varyag design were extensively studied)

I think that the first Chinese aircraft carrier look like the former varyag, but with Chinese equipment (weapons, sensor), an island with more stealthy design, and a conventional propulsion

= probably in 50000/65000 tons range
it should appear towards 2013/2017 ?

by against, I think that the next aircraft carrier had followed were probably different. But I do not believe that chinese develop super aircraft carrier similar that US 80000/100000 tons ships.

But a smaller and more flexible designs (20000/45000 tons range), with a possible different hull (trimaran, catamaran ?)...............2018/2025 ?
well from all the former and current carriers no navy has felt necessary to have more then 3 in their inventory nor build it to exceed 80,000tonnes. China's naval build up and military in general doesnt require it to follow the technology footsteps and doctrines of the United States to convert itself into a modern military nation.

The biggest carrier for China's needs is at most simular to that of Varyg and maybe smaller. Superior technology nation doesnt need to go unit for unit. At most China needs at around 6 carriers. As it has more unstable bordered nations that still needs to be resolved. Unlike Europe where 2 carriers are deemed fit. Remember China as a bigger terroritory to protect, and more countries bordering them that are enemy allies.
 

Sczepan

Senior Member
VIP Professional
If you look around, you will found different types of carriers all over the world.
There are the "big sticks", like US CVN Carriers (up to 90 000 ts and more)
and also smaller ones like the US LH (Tarawa for example), with arround 40 000 ts or smaller, like italy (Cavour: 27 000 ts, Giuseppe Garbaldi: 13 000 ts), Spain (Principe de Asturias, 17 000 ts), Thailand (Chakri Naruebet, 12 000 ts) and so on ... which are for amphibious and escort operations.

I prefer the smaller design for the first indegenious chinese carrier.
1. To minimize the risk (crawl, walk, run - one undesirable trend would be very expansiv by big sticks)
2. Small amphibious carriers are a "must", more than needed - more needed as the big sticks
3. In politcal relations this small carriers ar not seen as "threat" to chinese neighbours (indeed, they are, but optical ...)
4. China studied the Melbourne, a small carrier including catapult - which is a proofed design;

So I think the first indegenious chinese carrier will be a modern "Melbourne like" derivat, including angled deck and catapult to support amphibious operations and to escort chinese trading ships
 
Last edited:

PrOeLiTeZ

Junior Member
Registered Member
If you look around, you will found different types of carriers all over the world.
There are the "big sticks", like US CVN Carriers (up to 90 000 ts and more)
and also smaller ones like the US LH (Tarawa for example), with arround 40 000 ts or smaller, like italy (Cavour: 27 000 ts, Giuseppe Garbaldi: 13 000 ts), Spain (Principe de Asturias, 17 000 ts), Thailand (Chakri Naruebet, 12 000 ts) and so on ... which are for amphibious and escort operations.

I prefer the smaller design for the first indegenious chinese carrier.
1. To minimize the risk (crawl, walk, run - one undesirable trend would be very expansiv by big sticks)
2. Small amphibious carriers are a "must", more than needed - more needed as the big sticks
3. In politcal relations this small carriers ar not seen as "threat" to chinese neighbours (indeed, they are, but optical ...)
4. China studied the Melbourne, a small carrier including catapult - which is a proofed design;

So I think the first indegenious chinese carrier will be a modern "Melbourne like" derivat, including angled deck and catapult to support amphibious operations and to escort chinese trading ships
well with current technology and funding i think an attack helo carrier is viable. it doesnt require much funding as carriers, and requires less experience and know how. crawl, walk and run. with china is more like crawl and run. aviation jumped from cold war era to modern era. ground units from world war 2 to modern-advance. naval lagging abit behind the other 2 fighting units but recieving larger proportion of funding.

as for first carrier (domestic) not refit, i personally think a smaller version of the varyag with removable ski jump, holding one squadron of 24 fixed wing aircraft.
 

Rising China

Junior Member
It's sort of official now. China will build 2 AC by 2015.

Report: China to build 2 carriers by 2015

By Philip Ewing - Staff writer
Posted : Saturday Jan 3, 2009 9:19:51 EST

China plans to begin building two aircraft carriers next year, a Japanese newspaper reported Wednesday, in what would be its first attempt at fixed-wing naval aviation and a potentially major new variable in the strategic calculus of the Pacific.

The two flattops each would be between 50,000 and 60,000 tons, be conventionally powered and patrol the South China Sea, according to the report in Japan’s Asahi Shimbun newspaper, which cited Chinese “shipbuilding sources.” The carriers could be in the fleet by 2015, the story said.

China is one of the world’s largest builders of commercial ships, although its biggest indigenous warship so far has been no more than about 17,000 tons. The Asahi Shimbun reported that the carriers would be built at a new shipyard outside Shanghai and include components already on order from Russia.

A Chinese naval officer told the newspaper that one of the carriers’ primary missions would be to guard the sea lanes that connect energy-ravenous China with oil and mineral resources in the Middle East and Africa.

The story is the latest in a series of reports from around the world about Chinese ambitions to field an aircraft carrier. The official People’s Liberation Army Daily newspaper reported in September that 50 pilots from the Dalian Naval Academy were training for “ship borne aircraft flight.” Official Russian press agencies reported in October that China had purchased as many as 50 Su-33 Flanker-D fighter jets, an updated version of the Su-27K carried aboard Russia’s sole aircraft carrier. Since then, British and American news agencies have quoted top Chinese officials as expressing great interest in seaborne airpower.

“The Chinese government would seriously consider ‘relevant issues’ with “factors in every aspects” on building its first ever aircraft carrier, said navy spokesman Huang Xueping,” according to a Dec. 23 report by the official Xinhua news agency. “China has a long coastline and the sacred duty of China’s armed forces is to safeguard the country’s marine safety and sovereignty over coastal areas and territorial seas,” he said.

China’s carriers — if the Japanese report is accurate — would likely be comparable to the Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class ships, now just beginning construction. Slightly larger, at 65,000 tons, the Queen Elizabeth is designed for a complement of around 1,400 sailors, including its ship’s company and air wing, and designed to carry about 40 strike aircraft, plus additional helicopters, according to “Combat Fleets of the World.”

Because the Chinese carriers are smaller and shorter-ranged than their American counterparts, the U.S. shouldn’t view them as a threat, the Chinese naval official told the Asahi Shimbun.


:china::china::china:
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Because the Chinese carriers are smaller and shorter-ranged than their American counterparts, the U.S. shouldn’t view them as a threat, the Chinese naval official told the Asahi Shimbun.

Gad, did I hear this right? The Chinese are trying to make their carriers so PC (Politically Correct).
 

joshuatree

Captain
Does the plan for a conventional carrier reflect the lack of confidence in a nuclear propulsion system? One would figure since the displacement is around 50,000-60,000 tons, minimizing space for fuel would be even more critical than a 100,000 ton carrier.
 

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
Well well this is pretty interesting and excellent news. It seems the PLAN has more or less officially said they will build fairly large aircraft carriers. This still might not pan out to be totally legit. Even if it is entirely true the PLAN will probably keep everything more or less secret for the next few years, rather than putting it out in public like most countries. Nice find Rising China. I hope this is entirely true.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
China plans to begin building two aircraft carriers next year, a Japanese newspaper reported Wednesday,...The carriers could be in the fleet by 2015, the story said.

This is where this stroy falls apart. I find it impossible to believe that they will start the carriers "next year", ie. 2010 and have them both "in the fleet" by 2015, fice years later...built and commissioned.

I expect that the carriers may start building this year, finish building in 2015, and be in the fleet maybe by 2017 or 2018 in terms of operational with their carrier air wings.

Until they have those air wings on board, I will not consider them carriers, "in the fleet".

Then will come many years of making that carrier air wing effective.

If they finish the Varyag this year or next year, she could certainly be "in the fleet" and operational with an airwing (albeit not very effective as they too would require years of training) by 2012-2013.

This story is also being reported
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

joshuatree

Captain
Until they have those air wings on board, I will not consider them carriers, "in the fleet".

Then will come many years of making that carrier air wing effective.

If they finish the Varyag this year or next year, she could certainly be "in the fleet" and operational with an airwing (albeit not very effective as they too would require years of training) by 2012-2013.

If the Varyag is available for training for the next 3-4 years, why can't she have multiple air wings to rotate and train? Then, when the two indigenous carriers are available, you already have air wings standing by. And yes, the effectiveness equation is another matter. :D
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
If the Varyag is available for training for the next 3-4 years, why can't she have multiple air wings to rotate and train? Then, when the two indigenous carriers are available, you already have air wings standing by. And yes, the effectiveness equation is another matter. :D
If the Varyag is indeed ready and used heavilyy to train air wings...then they may be able to get the two new carriers operational by 2017 at the earliest IMHO with limited effectiveness as regards going up against a US or UK carrier, but clearly exceeding anything else locally in the region..

I do not believe they will build two carriers from scratch in five years. The US and other countries with far more expertise take 6-7 byears simply to build them.

We shall see.

But if they start building in 2010, then it will most likely be at least 2016 before they are completed building.

Even if an air wing is ready, it will take 1-2 years to commission the carrier with all of its systems and operations being tested in preparation for commissioning. I'd say maybe 2017, more likely 2018...but that's just my opinion.

The Varyag on the other hand could be ready by 2012-2013 if they finish her this year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top