PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Jeff Head said:
I believe the PLAN has removed those ASM silos forward on the Varyag and could well have made use of that space. Though the missile launchers appear to be gone, we cannot be sure that the space has been made use of...but they have certainly had plenty of time to do so.

Having studied available plans and photos of the Varyag, I'm of the opinion that the Missile silos are too far forward to actually interfere with the hangar space itself, though they are taking up valuable internal volume better used for other things, which could have the knock on effect of increasing hangar volume. There are several compartments in between the forward hangar bulkhead and the silos and removal of the latter could free up space for re arrangement of these compartments which in turn would allow the hagar bulkhead to be moved forward, allowing for structural issues of course.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Jeff Head said:
I believe the PLAN has removed those ASM silos forward on the Varyag and could well have made use of that space. Though the missile launchers appear to be gone, we cannot be sure that the space has been made use of...but they have certainly had plenty of time to do so.

Having studied available plans and photos of the Varyag, I'm of the opinion that the Missile silos are too far forward to actually interfere with the hangar space itself, though they are taking up valuable internal volume better used for other things, which could have the knock on effect of increasing hangar volume. There are several compartments in between the forward hangar bulkhead and the silos and removal of the latter could free up space for re arrangement of these compartments which in turn would allow the hagar bulkhead to be moved forward, allowing for structural issues of course.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Jeff Head said:
I believe the PLAN has removed those ASM silos forward on the Varyag and could well have made use of that space. Though the missile launchers appear to be gone, we cannot be sure that the space has been made use of...but they have certainly had plenty of time to do so.

Having studied available plans and photos of the Varyag, I'm of the opinion that the Missile silos are too far forward to actually interfere with the hangar space itself, though they are taking up valuable internal volume better used for other things, which could have the knock on effect of increasing hangar volume. There are several compartments in between the forward hangar bulkhead and the silos and removal of the latter could free up space for re arrangement of these compartments which in turn would allow the hagar bulkhead to be moved forward, allowing for structural issues of course.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Obi Wan Russell said:

Jeff Head said:
I believe the PLAN has removed those ASM silos forward on the Varyag and could well have made use of that space. Though the missile launchers appear to be gone, we cannot be sure that the space has been made use of...but they have certainly had plenty of time to do so.

Having studied available plans and photos of the Varyag, I'm of the opinion that the Missile silos are too far forward to actually interfere with the hangar space itself, though they are taking up valuable internal volume better used for other things, which could have the knock on effect of increasing hangar volume. There are several compartments in between the forward hangar bulkhead and the silos and removal of the latter could free up space for re arrangement of these compartments which in turn would allow the hagar bulkhead to be moved forward, allowing for structural issues of course.

Click to expand...

Well, unless and until we get good photos or word from exactly what work has gone on internally (and this is just one of a myriad of questions regarding that), we can only judge by what we see externally.

Clearly the launch tubes have been covered over on deck and will not be used. Given the amount of work that has gone into her externally, and the amount of time they have had her, I presume that the tubes have been removed and good use made of that space.

But time will tell. I am still thinking that between late-2008 and mid-2010 we will see something very definitive with the Varyag.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Obi Wan Russell said:

Jeff Head said:
I believe the PLAN has removed those ASM silos forward on the Varyag and could well have made use of that space. Though the missile launchers appear to be gone, we cannot be sure that the space has been made use of...but they have certainly had plenty of time to do so.

Having studied available plans and photos of the Varyag, I'm of the opinion that the Missile silos are too far forward to actually interfere with the hangar space itself, though they are taking up valuable internal volume better used for other things, which could have the knock on effect of increasing hangar volume. There are several compartments in between the forward hangar bulkhead and the silos and removal of the latter could free up space for re arrangement of these compartments which in turn would allow the hagar bulkhead to be moved forward, allowing for structural issues of course.

Click to expand...

Well, unless and until we get good photos or word from exactly what work has gone on internally (and this is just one of a myriad of questions regarding that), we can only judge by what we see externally.

Clearly the launch tubes have been covered over on deck and will not be used. Given the amount of work that has gone into her externally, and the amount of time they have had her, I presume that the tubes have been removed and good use made of that space.

But time will tell. I am still thinking that between late-2008 and mid-2010 we will see something very definitive with the Varyag.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Obi Wan Russell said:

Jeff Head said:
I believe the PLAN has removed those ASM silos forward on the Varyag and could well have made use of that space. Though the missile launchers appear to be gone, we cannot be sure that the space has been made use of...but they have certainly had plenty of time to do so.

Having studied available plans and photos of the Varyag, I'm of the opinion that the Missile silos are too far forward to actually interfere with the hangar space itself, though they are taking up valuable internal volume better used for other things, which could have the knock on effect of increasing hangar volume. There are several compartments in between the forward hangar bulkhead and the silos and removal of the latter could free up space for re arrangement of these compartments which in turn would allow the hagar bulkhead to be moved forward, allowing for structural issues of course.

Click to expand...

Well, unless and until we get good photos or word from exactly what work has gone on internally (and this is just one of a myriad of questions regarding that), we can only judge by what we see externally.

Clearly the launch tubes have been covered over on deck and will not be used. Given the amount of work that has gone into her externally, and the amount of time they have had her, I presume that the tubes have been removed and good use made of that space.

But time will tell. I am still thinking that between late-2008 and mid-2010 we will see something very definitive with the Varyag.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

I have seen these photos before, but of course they are still interesting. I definitely noticed the lousy paint adhesion on the port side. The Russians are still not there, they cannot even get the most basic things correct. One of the things I like to show friends are photos from a day we encountered the Admiral Spiridanov in the vicinity of Dlego Garcia in 1986. This was the Soviet's first Pacific Fleet Udaloy ( and the first Soviet ship in the Pacific with top plate which was of interest to my then girlfriend an intel officer ), fresh from the yards and already the paint was down to primer on the bow and missing paint and running rust was visible on the superstructure as well. Open portholes on the hull tells us the ship does not have any air conditioning and poor to no NBC protection. In the IO a lack of AC would be pure misery. Then I show a photo of USS Chandler I took on the same flight, tied to a pier on Diego Garcia. Older ship that travelled a similar distance but no rust and perfect paint ( and US warships long ago ceased to have portholes as AC appeared during WWII on large ships and was universal by the 1960's and the need for good NBC protection, portholes a major weak link ). That is professionalism and the Russians are not there.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

I have seen these photos before, but of course they are still interesting. I definitely noticed the lousy paint adhesion on the port side. The Russians are still not there, they cannot even get the most basic things correct. One of the things I like to show friends are photos from a day we encountered the Admiral Spiridanov in the vicinity of Dlego Garcia in 1986. This was the Soviet's first Pacific Fleet Udaloy ( and the first Soviet ship in the Pacific with top plate which was of interest to my then girlfriend an intel officer ), fresh from the yards and already the paint was down to primer on the bow and missing paint and running rust was visible on the superstructure as well. Open portholes on the hull tells us the ship does not have any air conditioning and poor to no NBC protection. In the IO a lack of AC would be pure misery. Then I show a photo of USS Chandler I took on the same flight, tied to a pier on Diego Garcia. Older ship that travelled a similar distance but no rust and perfect paint ( and US warships long ago ceased to have portholes as AC appeared during WWII on large ships and was universal by the 1960's and the need for good NBC protection, portholes a major weak link ). That is professionalism and the Russians are not there.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

I have seen these photos before, but of course they are still interesting. I definitely noticed the lousy paint adhesion on the port side. The Russians are still not there, they cannot even get the most basic things correct. One of the things I like to show friends are photos from a day we encountered the Admiral Spiridanov in the vicinity of Dlego Garcia in 1986. This was the Soviet's first Pacific Fleet Udaloy ( and the first Soviet ship in the Pacific with top plate which was of interest to my then girlfriend an intel officer ), fresh from the yards and already the paint was down to primer on the bow and missing paint and running rust was visible on the superstructure as well. Open portholes on the hull tells us the ship does not have any air conditioning and poor to no NBC protection. In the IO a lack of AC would be pure misery. Then I show a photo of USS Chandler I took on the same flight, tied to a pier on Diego Garcia. Older ship that travelled a similar distance but no rust and perfect paint ( and US warships long ago ceased to have portholes as AC appeared during WWII on large ships and was universal by the 1960's and the need for good NBC protection, portholes a major weak link ). That is professionalism and the Russians are not there.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

tphuang said:

the domestic naval flanker program is well under way. If my interpretation of avic1 articles is correct, then they are assembling their first one right now and probably will finish sometimes this year. I think they did get those two su-33s for studying purposes.

Click to expand...

That's great news. Everybody's been expecting the naval flanker to fly soon. Good thing they just went ahead without keep trying to negotiate with the Russians.

This would be even better news if they can start testing it on the Varyag in time for the August 1 parade in 2009!