I can't see the benefits of a carrier with both ski jump and waist catapults. If the catapults are reliable enough to be fit at the waist they are reliable enough to replace the ski jump.
The idea of a high risk and low risk carrier does sound interesting though.
(Addendum, there were a few configurations of the Ulyanovsk class, one of which had bow catapults as well, I believe. So there isn't exactly a " set" design that we can say china may base its carriers off, unless we use the configuration of ski jump+catapult as the defining feature of the Ulyanovsk. EDIT: never mind this part, I mixed up models of the Orel with Ulyanovsk.)
The idea of a high risk and low risk carrier does sound interesting though.
(Addendum, there were a few configurations of the Ulyanovsk class, one of which had bow catapults as well, I believe. So there isn't exactly a " set" design that we can say china may base its carriers off, unless we use the configuration of ski jump+catapult as the defining feature of the Ulyanovsk. EDIT: never mind this part, I mixed up models of the Orel with Ulyanovsk.)
Last edited: