PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?

B.I.B. said:

I'm wondering on whether it is feasible for the PLAN use a supersized bulk carrier of some sort to act as a A/C and train up a couple more a/c battlegroups .The object being to give as many of ships of the other fleets experience in operating as a battle group?

Click to expand...

A super size bulk carrier is quite a bit larger than even a Nimitz and makes only half the speed. It's not a very good match.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

chuck731 said:

QE would be the best indicator for the likely rate of progress for building Liaoning successor. Both are being built by ship builders without prior (comparable) experiences in building very large modern combat vessels.

Click to expand...

The QE II program produces two vessels without thought of further production by a country with a limited shipbuilding capacity. Parts of these vessels are produced all along the UK coastline.
The Chinese vessels are the first of probably a long line of vessels for whose production large investments will have been made these last years. China has one of the largest shipbuilding industries in the world. Thinking of the development of shipbuilding technology in the last half century we shouldn't be surprised if three and a half years would prove to be a considerable over estimate. Concerning the matter "large modern combat vessels" that plays out mostly during the fitting out phase.

Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?

rhino123 said:

Huh? I am sorry... I remember watching a chinese documentary recently, they mentioned that US strike group consist of a ticonderoga crusier, three to four Arleigh Burke Class destroyers, two nuclear submarines and one or two Perry class frigates and of course the Nimtz or later on the Ford class carrier.

Click to expand...

Well, I believe that the documentary you watched was wrong.

Two carries might have such an escort. A combined task force of a CSG and an ARG might have such an escort.

But right now, a single US carrier would not. As I said, normnally the carrier, a Tico, two Burkes and a SSN. Sometimes three Burkes and sometimes two SSNs, but not normally. As I said, the firgates are rarely used any longer. They are rapidly being phased out. Not enough to go around anyway.

At some point in the future when the US Navy either has

1) A very decent ASW module in service with the LCS vessels.

- or -

2) A good number of new multi-mission FFGs.

The US may add a couple of those frigates or LCS to the mix to help in the ASW screen. But that is still a good distance out.

Also, if the US was engaged in a major war with a strong maritime opponent, my guess is you would see the group grow to consist of a CG, 3 DDGs, 2 FFGs, and 2 SSNs escorting a carrier into a combat area. But the US is not engaged in such a war, and most commonly, right now it is the carrier, one CG, two DDGs, and one SSN for each group.

Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?

B.I.B. said:

I'm wondering on whether it is feasible for the PLAN use a supersized bulk carrier of some sort to act as a A/C and train up a couple more a/c battlegroups .The object being to give as many of ships of the other fleets experience in operating as a battle group?

Click to expand...

Too slow, and not built to any decent military standards.

In my novel series:



I did have the PLAN building a modular CV based on a modified container ship design. But they used the very basic design and then from scratch built it up to military standards and armed accordingly, also with the appropriate propulsion.

Looked like this:


...and the PLAN pumped a bunch of them out during that fictional conflict.

But, using a large supersized bulk carrier would not work, unless you made very major changes to it structurally and propulsion wise.

Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?

Jeff Head said:

The documentry you watched was wrong.

Two carries might have such an escort. A combined task force of a CSG and an ARG might have such an escort.

But right now, a single US carrier would not. As I said, normnally the carrier, a Tico, two Burkes and a SSN. Sometimes three Burkes and sometimes two SSNs, but not normally. As I said, the firgates are rarely used any longer. They are rapidly being phased out. Not enough to go around anyway.

At some point in the future when the US Navy either has

1) A very decent ASW module in service with the LCS vessels.

- or -

2) A good number of new multi-mission FFGs.

The US may add a couple of those frigates or LCS to the mix to help in the ASW screen. But that is still a good distance out.

Also, if the US was engaged in a major war with a strong maritime opponent, my guess is you would see the group grow to consist of a CG, 3 DDGs, 2 FFGs, and 2 SSNs escorting a carrier into a combat area. But the US is not engaged in such a war, and most commonly, right now it is the carrier, one CG, two DDGs, and one SSN for each group.

Click to expand...

I think once the last Perry is decomm, USN CSG will no longer have anything similar as an escort not that they play much role in CSG now anyway like you mentioned. I don't forsee LCS playing an integral part of any US CSG though CSG can be form on at any time based on appropriate response to a need or crisis.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Further thoughts:
Last year the trading in the shares of one of the two largest Chinese shipbuilders, CSSC - owner of Jiangnan Shipyard among many others - IIRC, was interrupted from May to August because of the need to reach agreement with the government about investment concerning the production of naval vessels. If it now appears that both the Jiangnan Shipyard as well as the CSIC shipyard in Dalian will build a flattop. This suggest that the Dalian yard was preparing to to build one and had been investing for years to that purpose and that the government added the Jiangnan Shipyard early last year. In view of the vast investment necessary ( proven by the fact that months were needed to hammer out the agreement ) the reason cannot have been to make use of a temporary slack in orders. Also however fast these ships might be built the decision cannot have been based on political circumstances at the time.
One possible reason is that success of the tests with Liaonang showed that China didn't need a second experimental ship before committing to large scale production. An additional reason might be progress with the development of the EM cat. These would then be built into the new vessels and next also introduced into Liaonang. This is also suggested by the delay of the start of the refitting of Adm K from 2014 to 2018. She too might then be given Chinese cats.
What of the future? I don't think China will continue to have two yards churning out aircraft carriers. Perhaps this concerns say four ships altogether after which one yard switches to LHD's and/or helicopter/UCAV carriers and the other to nuclear propelled aircraft carriers, I hope with thorium molten salt reactors

Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?

kwaigonegin said:

I think once the last Perry is decomm, USN CSG will no longer have anything similar as an escort not that they play much role in CSG now anyway like you mentioned. I don't forsee LCS playing an integral part of any US CSG though CSG can be form on at any time based on appropriate response to a need or crisis.

Click to expand...

I believe that if a decent ASW module is forthcoming...and I believe that, along with the Mine Warfare module, it is a good potential because of the ability to carry a couple of ASW helicopters...that the LCS can (and probably will) as needed be made use of as an ASW escort ship for ARGs and CSGs.

The ASuW warfare module is severely lacking right now. They are foucsed on making the vessels capable in attacking "swarming" small, high speed craft. But in so doing they have neglected the meed to also fight corvette and frigate sized vessels in the littorals.

Almost any nation that has a half-way decent corvette sized vessel mounts those vessels with at least 4 decent anti-shipping missiles with a range of 40 or more miles. Right now the LCS mounts the Griffin missile which have a range of less than 12 miles. If they meet up with any other nation's corvette sized vessel now, they may well be toast.

IMHO, this is unacceptable. They simply must mount some decent ASuW missiles on these vessels in addition to the griffin or whateever anti swarming missile they mount. They could start immediately with a single four cannister Harpoon launcher and upgrade their sensors (if necessary) to acocmodate them and make a HUGE difference in trms of the self protection of these vessels.

IMHO, as it stands, my own opinion is that uinless these mission modules are very quickly made available, and that the cost of them is reduced by some economy of scale, that the US Navy should stop the LCS build at 24 vessels (12 of each type) and then spend the billions they were planning on spending on the next 30 LCS, and instead build a 4,500 ton range mutli-mission frigate. Base it on the PF 4921 Naval Frigate variant concept using the USCG Legend class cutter (the new National defense Cutters) hull that Huntington Ingalls has proposed.

This would provide a high degree of commonality with the 6-8 Coast Guard Vessels being built, and help keep the costs down.

Huntington Ingalls has already built three Legend Class Cutters and they are all commisisoned. They are building three more, and another two may be purchased. Here's what they look like:


The PF 4921 naval frigate variant looks like this:


That design adds a 16 cell Mk-41 VLS up front, an integrated mast with high end sensors, and eight Harpoon missiles aft.

Re: What will the 1st PLAN Carrier Battle Group (CBG) look like?

I still believe that participation of LPD in recent Chinese exercise was not a mistake , photo-op or whatever . Simply saying , mission and doctrine of PLAN is vastly different then mission and doctrine of USN . Currently , PLAN is not tailored to project power in distant oceans . Instead , focus will be on disputed territories and first island chain . Primary task of Chinese aircraft carriers would be to support landings and give air cover to them . In their mission , now and in near future , they would be more like escort carriers from WW2 then American super-carriers of today .

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

I'd like both of the first two carriers to be EMALS too, but it is a little fanciful for me to believe and any hypothetical reasoning for both carriers to be CATOBAR can be twisted around to be STOBAR too.

However China has other shipyards that can produce large amphibious warfare ships, but only DL and JN can build carriers in the medium term, so I wouldn't hold my breath for either of them to cease carrier production for other power projection ships

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

delft said:

Further thoughts:
Last year the trading in the shares of one of the two largest Chinese shipbuilders, CSSC - owner of Jiangnan Shipyard among many others - IIRC, was interrupted from May to August because of the need to reach agreement with the government about investment concerning the production of naval vessels. If it now appears that both the Jiangnan Shipyard as well as the CSIC shipyard in Dalian will build a flattop. This suggest that the Dalian yard was preparing to to build one and had been investing for years to that purpose and that the government added the Jiangnan Shipyard early last year. In view of the vast investment necessary ( proven by the fact that months were needed to hammer out the agreement ) the reason cannot have been to make use of a temporary slack in orders. Also however fast these ships might be built the decision cannot have been based on political circumstances at the time.
One possible reason is that success of the tests with Liaonang showed that China didn't need a second experimental ship before committing to large scale production. An additional reason might be progress with the development of the EM cat. These would then be built into the new vessels and next also introduced into Liaonang. This is also suggested by the delay of the start of the refitting of Adm K from 2014 to 2018. She too might then be given Chinese cats.
What of the future? I don't think China will continue to have two yards churning out aircraft carriers. Perhaps this concerns say four ships altogether after which one yard switches to LHD's and/or helicopter/UCAV carriers and the other to nuclear propelled aircraft carriers, I hope with thorium molten salt reactors

Click to expand...

I'm often pushing the idea that China might be further along with its EMALS research than we might think, but I wonder about where all the current needed to operate those things will come from. It may end up being that gas turbines might be the bigger bottleneck that we'll have to look out for.