Blackstone
Brigadier
My comments were for Janiz.
PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
- Status
I'm not dwonplaying it but there lots of users here who don't understand the fact that PLAN doesn't have a fully operational SINGLE carrier and it won't have by the few years coming. They treat it like it's some kind of game and PLAN is on the same level as US Navy as they construct their first carrier with a technology as fresh as 40 years.
I would call that laughable. Not until there are AT LEAST 6 Chinese carriers fully operational and deployed all around the globe. Plus China sees that it's main weakness lays in the naval forces but so far there's no exapmle of it's superiority aside from numbers they produce. Not mentioning showing their own style in it...
And those are facts. Not easy to accept but you will have to bear for the coming 20 years or so.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Don't try and change the subject. I challenged your false claims 1) China has no limit on carrier spending, and 2) China doesn't spend responsibly on carrier, as no one would question how the money is spent. My statement stands, your claims are demonstrably false.
Blackstone
Brigadier
I haven't seen a single rational poster on SDF saying China's single CV is in any way, shape, or form on par with any active US carrier. You made big claims, and I'm calling you out. So, can you furnish evidence to back up your claims?
I don't think anyone is treating the carrier programme like a game -- apart from of course, those of us who are involved in the wager of how many carriers the Navy will have in the water by 2025.
No one has said that the Chinese Navy is at the same level of capability as the US Navy either, nor has anyone made any statement about the present relative capability of the Chinese Navy overall relative to other navies.
[The only thing that was mentioned was Steve Rolfe saying "it seems to have been built at an impressive rate" -- which is a reflection only on the rate of construction of 001A, and going from seeing no modules in the drydock at all before April last year to fitting on the ski jump now, about a year and a half later... well yeah, I think even the skeptical have to give credence and acknowledge the speed seems impressive. Obviously we don't know what state of relative completion the internals of the ship is relative to other ships, but still, let's be fair and say their speed of building a carrier (even one based on an existing design) is not shabby at all.]
Furthermore, if you even go back a few pages (before the recent pictures), you will see that discussions about the number of carriers China should have in the upcoming decades to achieve a consistent and reliable capability -- funnily enough six carriers was mentioned as an optimal number. So I think on this forum people know very well that one carrier does not equate to a mature carrier capability, and that having those sorts of capabilities are the result of many years of continuous investment, training, and development.
However, that doesn't mean people are being illogical by celebrating an important advancement in the construction of this carrier, especially considering where China was merely ten years ago.
So please stop being so patronizing and seeing false claims of boastfulness where there has been none.
What a treat! Somebody knows how much China is spending on it's fleet? No-one knows that! That's a fact! There are no schedules, no information on that as it doesn't operate on public numbers and they don't have to show it to anyone! Isn't that a solid fact? If you won't show me the tables published by PLAN on how much it spends it's valid. You're more than welcome to this task as nobody knows abut it. It would be an interesting read!
So I ask you - how much did PRC spent up to this date on construction of the new carrier? I want numbers. Not estimates. Like people in the US or all around the world do.
I repeat my question - how much did they spend and how much they predict to spend in the future so you could compare it to the US Navy or other countries?
Oh, wait... There's no data about that matter...
There are fanbois who believe that the Liaoning and one or two more could go up against the US Navy.
Every now and then one passes through here on SD and gets educated pretty quick.
But make no mistake, the PRC has embarked on a decades long path that ultimately leads to them challenging the US and its allies in the Western Pacific.
...and you know what? Right now there is no nation on earth that could contemplate or plan such a course.
Will they be successful?
Who knows?
If the US, Japan, Korea, Australia and India hang together...then no, I do not believe they can overcome that type of combined resource, particularly when one is the US.
But if they are successful over the years in splitting some of that support off, and continuing on their ship design and building and their geo-political planning path...then yes, they are going to rise to a place where they are capable of making some challenges and of using it to negotiate for what they feel is their rightful place at the Westpac table.
No need to insult one another over this.
it is clear that the PRC does have more latitude in its spending and costs given their governmental form. Certainly not as much as they once did...but in those older days they were on a path the led (like the Soviets) to bankruptcy.
So they have modified their activities to avoid that too.
Every now and then one passes through here on SD and gets educated pretty quick.
But make no mistake, the PRC has embarked on a decades long path that ultimately leads to them challenging the US and its allies in the Western Pacific.
...and you know what? Right now there is no nation on earth that could contemplate or plan such a course.
Will they be successful?
Who knows?
If the US, Japan, Korea, Australia and India hang together...then no, I do not believe they can overcome that type of combined resource, particularly when one is the US.
But if they are successful over the years in splitting some of that support off, and continuing on their ship design and building and their geo-political planning path...then yes, they are going to rise to a place where they are capable of making some challenges and of using it to negotiate for what they feel is their rightful place at the Westpac table.
No need to insult one another over this.
it is clear that the PRC does have more latitude in its spending and costs given their governmental form. Certainly not as much as they once did...but in those older days they were on a path the led (like the Soviets) to bankruptcy.
So they have modified their activities to avoid that too.
vesicles
Colonel
Wait... I'm confused.
What is your position on these matters?
Based on your post, it seems that there is no data. Then the only conclusion should be "inconclusive". So nothing can be said if no one has any data/evidence...
Okay, let's go back to serious carrier discussion:
I think in the latest pictures we have a good image of the suspected island of 001A, and looking that module and looking at Liaoning's island, I suspect that the 001A's possible island is only half (likely the front half) of the overall island that 001A will have, given its current geometry.
But, that doesn't mean 001A will have an exact same island as Liaoning -- going by the island we see, there are a few superficial similarities, such as a small exposed "platform" on the medial/port side of the island overlooking the flight deck (circled in both in red), and obviously there are also similarities in that we can see some windows/port holes for a deckhouse level on the 001A's suspected island have been cut out (similar to Liaoning's in a similar position).
However, 001A's island's geometry also seems different, especially as its current island appears to have at least "two levels" to the island -- like one being the bridge and the other being pri fly (indicated by arrows)... or even if those two levels are not "levels" in the real sense, we can tell that geometry of the island does not correspond to any part of Liaoning's island.
It is also too early to speculate as to whether 001A's island will have the same deck footprint as Liaoning's island... but I personally believe it will be only a little smaller at most, say up to 20% smaller, but not much smaller than that... if it is any smaller at all.
edit: of course I could be seeing things, and maybe the island I believe is for 001A is for something else... like a casino...?
I think in the latest pictures we have a good image of the suspected island of 001A, and looking that module and looking at Liaoning's island, I suspect that the 001A's possible island is only half (likely the front half) of the overall island that 001A will have, given its current geometry.
But, that doesn't mean 001A will have an exact same island as Liaoning -- going by the island we see, there are a few superficial similarities, such as a small exposed "platform" on the medial/port side of the island overlooking the flight deck (circled in both in red), and obviously there are also similarities in that we can see some windows/port holes for a deckhouse level on the 001A's suspected island have been cut out (similar to Liaoning's in a similar position).
However, 001A's island's geometry also seems different, especially as its current island appears to have at least "two levels" to the island -- like one being the bridge and the other being pri fly (indicated by arrows)... or even if those two levels are not "levels" in the real sense, we can tell that geometry of the island does not correspond to any part of Liaoning's island.
It is also too early to speculate as to whether 001A's island will have the same deck footprint as Liaoning's island... but I personally believe it will be only a little smaller at most, say up to 20% smaller, but not much smaller than that... if it is any smaller at all.
edit: of course I could be seeing things, and maybe the island I believe is for 001A is for something else... like a casino...?
Blackstone
Brigadier
Well put, Jeff. Time to move onto another topic.
- Status