PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Pmichael said:
Sure, stating things as facts is sure a way of exchange opinions.

Makes one wonder how every aircraft nation except China was capable of designing own aircraft carriers without building without reverse engineering a 30 years old design.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it makes you wonder this PMichael, and that's fine.

But do not make the mistake of projecting that on the rest of us.

The Chinese are very capable...but building carriers is not a cookie cutter experience, and their very first one now is going to be a carrier design from the 1980s of STOBAR design like the one that they already have...with some improvements

That's just smart.

With an air wing of 24 J-15s, and with the defenses they have aboard, and with the escorts they are amassing for such vessels, they are making significant progress and their aircraft carrier will probably be more powerful than any other outside of the US Nimitz nuclear carriers, the new QE carriers, and the French nuclear carrier.

That's a very significant accomplishment for a country that has never had a carrier up until just 3 years ago.

With the knowledge they are going to gain with this build, they will move on to an even better design...probably a CATOBAR design...with their next iteration.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Jeff Head said:
Yes you did, and I also said in my answer:

"My point is that while it is being built in that fashion, if you know what to look for, you will see that support structure going in, and to date, we have not seen that."


Only foi you cannot see it...or do not know what to look for.
Click to expand...

Okay, in that case, do you have any pictures to indicate what the structures are supposed to look like, and are they visible enough such that they would be obvious in the blurred, indistinct photos that we occasionally get?

If the answer is no to both of those, then I think using the internal elevator structures as an indicator of the ship's status is not very sensible. We need to know what the indicator looks like, and we also need to be able to obviously see it in our photos, for it to be useful as an indicator.


As it is, since we both agree that the original premise that the construction from the keel up has not reached the hanger bay as the original poster indicated...at this point it is moot in any case.
Click to expand...

But from what I understand, you're saying that the internal elevator support structures would be built before construction reaches the hangar deck level, which should be right now.

I am saying we may not be able to positively ID the internal elevator construction even when it occurs.
 
Last edited:
P

Pmichael

Junior Member
Jeff Head said:
Perhaps it makes you wonder this PMichael, and that's fine.

But do not make the mistake of projecting that on the rest of us.

The Chinese are very capable...but building carriers is not a cookie cutter experience, and their very first one now is going to be a carrier design from the 1980s of STOBAR design like the one that they already have...with some improvements

That's just smart.

With an air wing of 24 J-15s, and with the defenses they have aboard, and with the escorts they are amassing for such vessels, they are making significant progress and their aircraft carrier will probably be more powerful than any other outside of the US Nimitz nuclear carriers, the new QE carriers, and the French nuclear carrier.

That's a very significant accomplishment for a country that has never had a carrier up until just 3 years ago.

With the knowledge they are going to gain with this build, they will move on to an even better design...probably a CATOBAR design...with their next iteration.
Click to expand...

So smart that China is the only nation with an indigenous carrier programme that operates this way. So the other nations weren't smart but quite the opposite?
 
D

delft

Brigadier
Bltizo said:
If you know what exactly the internal structural support for elevators should look like then I'd be very interested to know
Click to expand...
There are many ways to skin a cat. There will be several ways to support the elevators so if you know a few of them it is still not guaranteed that you would recognize it in a ship built according to different principles.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
delft said:
There are many ways to skin a cat. There will be several ways to support the elevators so if you know a few of them it is still not guaranteed that you would recognize it in a ship built according to different principles.
Click to expand...

Which is another good reason why I think that using the internal structural support for elevators as an indicator of the ship's status and/or construction schedule is not very useful.
 
Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
The way I see it, the way the support structures/beams/bulkheads are being built are totally different between the right and left sides of the ship. We can see the left side of the ship is already covered with beams and bulkheads whereas the left side are still mostly spacious.

It won't be surprising if, after the completion of the building, the end result would have an asymmetrical shape longitudinally, which would include an aircraft carrier. In fact, there are few other types of large ships, especially the commercial type, that are asymmetrical longitudinally.
 
Last edited:
vesicles

vesicles

Colonel
Pmichael said:
So smart that China is the only nation with an indigenous carrier programme that operates this way. So the other nations weren't smart but quite the opposite?
Click to expand...

All other CV-operating nations either have a long tradition of building their own CVs from the beginning or have full access to CV-building experts and facilities. They can learn from the experts and go to those shipyards to get hands-on experience on building a CV. China, on the other hand, has none of these. China is still under arms embargo. It has no access to any CV-building experience. It has to learn from the scratch on its own. That's why they have to do it this way. They have to figure everything out on their own. The only way to do that is the way that they are doing now since they can't depend on someone else to show/tell them what to do.
 
P

Pmichael

Junior Member
And China didn't start from scratch. They got a Kuznetsov class carrier, blueprints and gained experience through the refitting, while got evaluate the carrier for several years.

>>> Flame Bait comments Removed <<<<
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Intrepid

Intrepid

Major
Pmichael said:
As example in my first post in the discussion I used the hull design as example, building a ship which doesn't feature radar reducing measures and design elements in the 10's is not playing it safe but anachronistic.
Espencially China is capable of designing ships with such design goals without problems, so the idea that they didn't go the same design process like for every other ship in the navy is not a sign of being smart or playing it safe but backward and hostile to innovation and a sign that China doesn't trust its own engineering skills.
Click to expand...
You told this to us already. It is your opinion. We have an other opinion. Where is the problem?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top