PLAN Carrier Construction

chuck731 said:

I am thinking it is more likely their operations people have no confidence that their catapults would be ready for prime time when their new carrier is ready, so they instructed their designers to hedged.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree.. there is no hedging here. A catapult is absolutely essential to a carrier so it's either good to go and put it on or it isn't. If it's good to go then it will be a combo ramp and cat on the angle deck like the Liaoning # 2 CGI. If it isn't then there will be none period.
China can be masters of catapult but it still doesn't mean there will be catapult on the forward bow end. I just honestly don't think that PLAN will redesign the entire front end of hull of the ship just to accomodate the forward cat.
They will have plenty of opportunity for them to put cats on their indigenous CATOBAR when the time comes.

Obviously a carrier is of some use even if its intended catapult is not ready. Otherwise the Liaoning would be hard to explain. However, evidently a carrier would be of more use if it had fully functioning catapults, and it would be even better if had catapults for all launch stations. So it is quite reasonable to hedge by giving a carrier both ramp and catapults if one recognize the advantage of catapults, but there is doubt about whether the catapults would be fully ready when the carrier first put to sea.

They might build a liaoning plus first, but it would be nice if they can make the hanger space wider. There was no extension done to liaoning's hangar lengthwise, because it would not have helped much as the main constrain is actually the width, which is why they have turntables for the hangar entrance.

Soviet naval doctrine required all carried aircraft to be able to fit inside the hangars if needed, due to the harsh sea conditions that their fleet is based. Planes on American carriers typically only going into hangars if major work is reuqired, (in the sense that the hangar was more of a workspace) otherwise they are parked on deck as much as possible, with light mainentance done on deck.

no_name said:

They might build a liaoning plus first, but it would be nice if they can make the hanger space wider. There was no extension done to liaoning's hangar lengthwise, because it would not have helped much as the main constrain is actually the width, which is why they have turntables for the hangar entrance.

Soviet naval doctrine required all carried aircraft to be able to fit inside the hangars if needed, due to the harsh see conditions that their fleet is based. Planes on American carriers typically only going into hangars if major work is reuqired, (in the sense that the hangar was more of a workspace) otherwise they are parked on deck as much as possible, with light mainentance done on deck.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm hanging with my own prediction:

2nd Carrier: An improved Liaoning possibly either directly adding two waist cats, or making provisions for them
3rd Carrier: A purpose built conventionally powered CATOBAR carrier with no ski jump. New, larger hull design.
4th Carrier: 2nd vessel of the conventional CATOBAR Class.
5th Carrier: A nuclear powered CATOBAR Carrier, possible based on the earlier catobar hull, or a new, larger hull.
6th Carrier: 2nd nuclear powered CATOBAR Carrier, perfecting the design and establishing the class for furure builds to replace earlier carriers as they reach the end of their service life.

I think we will see proof positive of the 2nd carrier build within 12-18 months. I do not think what we are seeing right now is a carrier, I still believe we are seeing at least one, and possible two LHAs being built. The Type 075.

Time will tell.

I am guessing they will take it slow and after the first domestic carrier is laid down, they won't laid down another carrier until the Liaoning has undertaken operational patrols and their first domestic carrier is or is nearly finished.

So 1st carrier laid down in 2013-2014, about 65,000 tons, based closely on the Varyag.

Big gap of 5-7 years.

2nd and 3rd carriers would be laid down and built in parallel around 2020, about 95,000 tons, nuclear powered, more or less clean slate design.

The engine compartment design of the chinese CVN may be based on the Ulyanovsk, but I don't buy the notion that the overall layout of the indigenous Chinese CVN will be based closely on either the Varyag or the Ulyanovsk.

I am guessing 4th and 5th carrier will also follow only after a big gap, after 2nd and 3rd unit have commissioned and worked up.

So 4th and 5th carriers may not be laid down until 2030. Thereafter they would build at a series production rate of one every 3-4 years.

The carrier demonstration module at JNCX has sat there nearly a year, apparently. Chances are the second carrier will shortly follow the first at shanghai, while the first is constructed at dalian.

Jeff Head said:

Well, I'm hanging with my own prediction:

2nd Carrier: An improved Liaoning possibly either directly adding two waist cats, or making provisions for them
3rd Carrier: A purpose built conventionally powered CATOBAR carrier with no ski jump. New, larger hull design.
4th Carrier: 2nd vessel of the conventional CATOBAR Class.
5th Carrier: A nuclear powered CATOBAR Carrier, possible based on the earlier catobar hull, or a new, larger hull.
6th Carrier: 2nd nuclear powered CATOBAR Carrier, perfecting the design and establishing the class for furure builds to replace earlier carriers as they reach the end of their service life.

I think we will see proof positive of the 2nd carrier build within 12-18 months. I do not think what we are seeing right now is a carrier, I still believe we are seeing at least one, and possible two LHAs being built. The Type 075.

Time will tell.

Click to expand...

That's what I think will happen as well. The only unknown is timeline. Will they wait till one is almost done before they start building the next one or will they overlap somewhat? By the time the 6th carrier commissions we're talking 25 to 35 years from now. Who knows what PLAN will be then and or how robust China's naval shipbuilding industry will be.

IF their GDP is in the $50 trillion mark by mid century as predicted by PwC there is no reason why PLAN can built 3 supercarriers concurrently. By then Liaoning and her sister ship will most likely be replaced as well or very near to it and no doubt they will be replaced by 100K - 120K ton CVNs probably very similar to the Ford class. Assuming she isn't deactivated/loss prematurely the last captain of USS Gerald Ford is not even born yet. Actually heck there is a chance his/her parents are not even born yet either!!!

Here is the issue. Rumors surrounding China's first domestic carrier say that the ship resembles the Liaoning. Resemble can mean a 99% replica of Liaoning, or be as superficial as having a ski-ramp with everything else being different. There is a lot of room left for interpretation.

Keep in mind that the way China uses the Liaoning and the way Soviet intended to use the Kuznetsov class is different. Copying the Liaoning would mean having another hull that does not fully suit the purpose of China. So personally, I don't see there is much chance that China's first domestic carrier will look like the Liaoning appearance-wise.

Now, some of you may say that the exterior can stay the same while the interior can be different. While that is true, I think modification of the external is more simple than rearranging the internals. So if the internals of China's first domestic carrier is going to be different than the Liaoning's, then there is a good chance the exterior would be different as well.

Except for provision for heavy AshM and possible for a large bow sonar, how else do you think the way soviets intended to use the Kuznetsov made its basic design unsuitable for Chinese needs?

I do think the first new Chinese carrier will be visually different from liaoning because it will incorporate faired in, slope sided and faceted signature reduction shaping of almost all contemporary warships including every new Chinese warship for the last 15 years. The Chinese would also likely adopt the design to suite contemporary modular construction techniques, where as soviets appeared to have used traditional framing techniques to build the kuznetsov and Ulyanovsk.

There might also fewer or no even no hullside weapon sponsons as the chinese show no sign of wanting to provide their carrier with 8 CIWS and 192 short range missile silos as the soviets did with Varyag. But these require only superficial changes.

But I suspect the internal layout and underwater passive defence designs of this ship would be based closely on the Varyag's.

¦^��: Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

chuck731 said:

I am guessing they will take it slow and after the first domestic carrier is laid down, they won't laid down another carrier until the Liaoning has undertaken operational patrols and their first domestic carrier is or is nearly finished.

So 1st carrier laid down in 2013-2014, about 65,000 tons, based closely on the Varyag.

Big gap of 5-7 years.

2nd and 3rd carriers would be laid down and built in parallel around 2020, about 95,000 tons, nuclear powered, more or less clean slate design.

The engine compartment design of the chinese CVN may be based on the Ulyanovsk, but I don't buy the notion that the overall layout of the indigenous Chinese CVN will be based closely on either the Varyag or the Ulyanovsk.

I am guessing 4th and 5th carrier will also follow only after a big gap, after 2nd and 3rd unit have commissioned and worked up.

So 4th and 5th carriers may not be laid down until 2030. Thereafter they would build at a series production rate of one every 3-4 years.

Click to expand...

Actually, with the Liaoning in service currently doing trials, I think the learning curve can be a bit steeper here. The first domestic carrier is likely to be an upgraded Liaoning. However, seeing that the mockup had been in the shipyard for a year, it is very likely that the second carrier might either later join parallel construction with the first one or begin shortly after.

My guess is that two conventional flat tops will be built until they move on to the CVNs. There should be no gap between the second and third unit.

It is doubtful that the CVN would be based on the Uly, simply because that stuff is very old tech and China by that time would have the full resources to apply its own systems.

1 x Liaoning upgrade
<gap>
2 x Liaoning replacement
<gap>
1 x CVN

Apparently the moderators at Chinese military forums have photos of the Liaoning upgrade under construction, but they are not allowed to release them.