PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

F

franco-russe

Senior Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Of course China could build two carriers in different yard concurrently - technically. But money is also an issue, carriers are not cheap. The Chinese defense budget has never seen any single procurement that expensive ( not even SSBN's).
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

asif iqbal said:
I expect the coming google map images later in the year will show carrier production at Dalian, I also fully expect the carrier to have similarities to the Liaoning minus the inherit design flaws which PLAN has identified during the rebuild, that makes sense, if we don't see google images we could learn from of the confirmation from government officials before hand
Click to expand...

Or we could all pitch in $100 and order a satellite image ourselves.
 
SinoSoldier

SinoSoldier

Colonel
¦^��: Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

asif iqbal said:
Well we know what makes sense and what doesnt

The carrier build at Dalian is very likely, why wouldn't it be, Liaoning has certified it fists pilots and the programme is in full swing, infact the design was probably finalised few years back with long lead materials ordered in recent time

I expect the coming google map images later in the year will show carrier production at Dalian, I also fully expect the carrier to have similarities to the Liaoning minus the inherit design flaws which PLAN has identified during the rebuild, that makes sense, if we don't see google images we could learn from of the confirmation from government officials before hand

The images of the module at JNCX are possibly older, a flat top at that yard also make sense, building two flat tops is not beyond the scope of Chinese shipyards both at the same time

Also the timing is correct too, before this year is out we will have some solid information on what's at stake here
Click to expand...

Sorry, but isn't it already accepted that the module is simply a demo piece and that the carrier with ski ramp is censored? The current situation should be the construction of one upgraded CV-16, not two Type 002.
 
rhino123

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

franco-russe said:
Of course China could build two carriers in different yard concurrently - technically. But money is also an issue, carriers are not cheap. The Chinese defense budget has never seen any single procurement that expensive ( not even SSBN's).
Click to expand...

Not just the building of the carrier that is expensive. Are the Chinese equipped with enough fighters to be placed on top of both carriers (new one + Liaoning), are the Chinese already equipped with enough knowledge and skills in operating a carrier (its SOP from cooking meals to firefighting to whatever), do the Chinese have enough escort for all their carriers, do the Chinese have comprehensive training with the entire fleet?

Of course the Chinese had the money now, but they might need more time with training of the crews and pilots and the overall system before comfortably launching more carrier.

But since there are evidence (not sure how accurate) that the Chinese are already building the next carrier, I have this feeling that at least 1 batch of trained crews are about to be completed, and these crews could be put on the new carrier.

As of such, i have this nagging feeling that the newest carrier will be an update of the Liaoning, so that the crew needed less time to be familiarise with the latest carrier operation, while catapults will be installed into this new carrier to train more crews and pilots on the catapult operation, so that the third carrier can removed the ski jump and progress to pure catapults only. Just my 2 cents though.
 
X

Xian

New Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

A Question to the specialists here:
Some speculations are about the possibility that the first indigenious carrier could be in consept like the Ulyanovsk - a ski-ramp at the bow AND one or two cats at the angled deck.
So, what is the reason for such ah configuration?
The ski-ramp has the benefit that you need no cats including the whole infrastructure for there operation with the contra that you are limited in the max Take-Off weight of your aircrafts.
But if you already HAVE cats on your carrier, why put a ramp on the bow instead of 2 additional cats?
Is it such ah big issue to modify the J-15 for cat-usage?
 
C

chuck731

Banned Idiot
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

For the Ulysnovsk, I think a major reason could simply be internal political. The fraction that wanted the big carrier would find it easier to get what they want if the big carrier seem to fully leverage the R&D already done for the medium sized carrier, instead of appearing to thumb their noses at the proponents of the already approve medium carrier by suggesting ramp carrier had been a wrong and half asses approach to start with.
 
P

pendragon

Junior Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

If this new carrier is going to be significantly smaller than the existing one, it might wel be to small to operate the j-15 safely in any useable number, leave alone the necessary accompanying aircaft and helo's! The hangar also appears to be to low for larger aircraft. So what on earth are the Chinese hoping to operate from it? ...

Or is it that is meant to be a LHA after all; but then ... even helo's are relatively high constructions [you can't fold down :)] and what's that construction we suppose to be part of the catapult-system?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top