PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

Skywatcher said:

The PLAN could have decided to skip the second of the Liaoning derivatives for whatever reason.

Click to expand...

Or maybe there was never a second Liaoning derivative in the first place

-x files theme plays-

I'm inclined to believe that PLAn's first indigenous carrier will be based off of the Liaoning before they venture into a true CV or CVN territory. Most likely will still have a ski ramp. I just don't see them building a 80k ton CV with all the bells and whistles just yet. By then they probably would've fully tested EMALS and sufficiently comfortable operating carriers to operate a 60-75 plane CVW.

I'm thinking early 2020s for the CV/CVN. Anything sooner I just don't see it happening.

kwaigonegin said:

I'm inclined to believe that PLAN's first indigenous carrier will be based off of the Liaoning before they venture into a true CV or CVN territory. Most likely will still have a ski ramp. I just don't see them building a 80k ton CV with all the bells and whistles just yet.

Click to expand...

In my scenario...they build two Liaoning type carriers first. One starting to build now, another in three to four years perhaps. The first with the same config as the Liaoning, except improvements in the deck handling, island, and hanger spaces.

They second that may have waist cats. That gives them three very similar carriers and allows them to utilize logistical and training considerations for their life.

Then, with their fourth, I see a larger carrier of the 80,000 tons variety which becomes their principle design go forward. Depending on when they build those first two...you would be looking at them starting that fourth no sooner than the early 2020s.

But that's just my opinion.

I still like going from the Liaoning to a conventional CATOBAR CV (50k ton), or even an escort CATOBAR CVE in the 30k ton range. Not counting the USN, the 12 J-15s on the CVE will enable PLAN to project power in the SCS and outclass anything else likely to operate there.

Blackstone said:

I still like going from the Liaoning to a conventional CATOBAR CV (50k ton), or even an escort CATOBAR CVE in the 30k ton range. Not counting the USN, the 12 J-15s on the CVE will enable PLAN to project power in the SCS and outclass anything else likely to operate there.

Click to expand...

I doubt they would find a 30k ton carrier with J-15 as an airwing to be a very efficient or capable carrier. Considering how big J-15 is, I think a Kuznetsov sized STOBAR carrier is the smallest sized flattop you can effectively operate a plane of that size from anyhow.

Jeff Head said:

In my scenario...they build two Liaoning type carriers first. One starting to build now, another in three to four years perhaps. The first with the same config as the Liaoning, except improvements in the deck handling, island, and hanger spaces.

They second that may have waist cats. That gives them three very similar carriers and allows them to utilize logistical and training considerations for their life.

Then, with their fourth, I see a larger carrier of the 80,000 tons variety which becomes their principle design go forward. Depending on when they build those first two...you would be looking at them starting that fourth no sooner than the early 2020s.

But that's just my opinion.

Click to expand...

and until we see some evidence, or hear an "official" announcement, that is what we have, but you gentlemen have all put forth some outstanding ideas, so it will be interesting in 10 to 15 years to come back and see whose "predictions" were the most accurate. Thank you gentlemen, for putting yourselves and your ideas "out there",, they give us some wonderful possibilities, and it does most certainly please me when I find we are thinking alike, makes me feel a little more in the loop.....

I'm praying that our two countries "work out" our issues and get back to making progress in carriers and aircraft, while I know we have differences of opinion, much of this current "ugliness" stems from those on our team talking out of place, and while I have no problem our generals outlining real security concerns, theres no point in stirring a stink as it will only make it worse??? Hope folks learn to show respect and kindness to one another, and I'm talking about all the parties, but I'm not holding my breath.

Bltizo said:

I doubt they would find a 30k ton carrier with J-15 as an airwing to be a very efficient or capable carrier. Considering how big J-15 is, I think a Kuznetsov sized STOBAR carrier is the smallest sized flattop you can effectively operate a plane of that size from anyhow.

Click to expand...

I concur completely, if China had several larger CVs at present, it could make sense to build a smaller carrier, but since they do not, I believe the larger carrier will give them a lot more bang for the buck, and right now they need "capacity" and capability.... brat

Blackstone said:

I still like going from the Liaoning to a conventional CATOBAR CV (50k ton), or even an escort CATOBAR CVE in the 30k ton range. Not counting the USN, the 12 J-15s on the CVE will enable PLAN to project power in the SCS and outclass anything else likely to operate there.

Click to expand...

I rather any flat top in the 30k ton range be a LHA that would field helos and drones instead. With the reclamation work keeping its course in the SCS, your 30k CVEs will be immovable yet unsinkable.

Well, just because the 80,000 ton CVN/CV is numbered "18" doesn't mean that a second Liaoning derivative CV numbered "19" or whatever is out of the question (budgetary rules or some sort of organizational regulation could assign hull numbers).

If, and added emphasis on "if", CV-18 is launched in the early 2020s, it'll be in testing for a very long time while the PLA learns how to operate and how to use such an advancement in carrier technology. If it's out having the bugs worked out in that timeframe, it may make sense to build a second Liaoning derivative with waist catapults(alongside or shortly afterwards CV-18) so the PLAN has three operational aircraft carriers in the 2020-2025 timeframe.

Surely old ... but anyway nice !!! (via =GT CDF)