This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
For China Size, Not Quality, Matters As First Aircraft Carrier Launched
In what is likely the biggest sabre being rattled this week in the war-of-words that is occurring in the Pacific, China announced today the launch of its first aircraft carrier. China bought the 300-meter Soviet-built vessel in 1998 from Ukraine and had it refitted at Dalian. It is named Liaoning (which looks almost too much like 'leaning') after China's northeast province where the port is located. The defense ministry said the aircraft carrier, is an important step in "raising the overall fighting capacity" of its naval forces.
Rear Admiral Yang Yi noted that "it is natural that China should have its own aircraft carrier," arguing that all major world powers already own similar vessels. Of course, the coincidental timing is no surprise as Reuters notes "China will never tolerate any bilateral actions by Japan that harm Chinese territorial sovereignty," Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun told his Japanese counterpart on Tuesday as the two met in a bid to ease tensions.
"Japan must banish illusions, undertake searching reflection and use concrete actions to amend its errors, returning to the consensus and understandings reached between our two countries' leaders."
Stratfor provides some more color on the current state-of-play (and some history)... as Taiwanese water-squirting was underway (no, seriously!!)
»
- 25668 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
The whales must be enjoying the downtime. Pretty soon they will be laughing their ass off.
john holms said the very same thing
Any US aircraft carriers near the South China Sea?
will make for a great reef, japs will be diving on that bitch in 50 years. They may need mixed gas, it's deep out there.
Don't worry, Japan will simply refit their Shonan Maru whalers.
If that carrier is made like the items they sell us,it will fall apart after the first shell hits it
It's for show, more so against Japan. Park the thing near the disputed waters, fly planes around and antagonize the Japanese.
As for aircraft carriers, China went for subs, stealth, and far more deadly against aircraft carriers, ships etc. Good play.
They didn't build that. It's soviet.
JiuGang II
Beware of water gunboats.
that ship and its systems will have been meticuously studied. Chinese Aircraft Carrier 2.0 will be a whole new thing and made in china. That thing is the U of AC - Shanghai
Hmm. Like how the Russians captured one of our B-29s and had copies made by Tupolov?
zackly. isn't there a free market in intel. Sold to the highest bidder. So that russian AC contained all relevant tech info stolen or bought by the russians up till the time of design build. I aam sure the chinese have some more current info but there is nothing like a real test bed. Documents are so conceptual. They will have some accidents and make mistakes but the chinese will drill drill drill.
Why are the "sailers" on an aircraft carrier holding rifles?
Why do you spell "sailors" with an "e?"
Bring Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer out of "drydock". Top Guns reside in Canada and Australia but the U.S. makes great movies.
The Carrier is of great value for power projection against weak nations. It is of dubious value against any mordern naval force. Submarines would make short work of this big slow noisy target. The Chinese must know this as they themselves have as a number one naval priority the defeat of the US Carrier Force. Submarines are the primary weapon of choice against a Carrier. Using either torpedo or anti shipping missiles.
Aircraft using supersonic anti shipping missiles would also do the job. I think Japan has a good outfit of these weapons and China would be well aware that this Carrier should stay in port during any conflict with the naval and air forces of Japan.
The last time a Carrier put to sea against another Carrier equipped naval force was Argentina's Carrier putting to sea in an attempt to launch an air strike on Britain's Falklands task force. The winds were too weak to allow a launch of it's aircraft and she put back to port when a british sub sank the southern arm of their naval force. British subs tried to find and attack the Argentinian Carrier but were unable to locate her, so she got lucky.
One torpedo into the rudder makes the carrier worthless. They don't even need to sink them.
Our carriers can take multiple hits and function.
But if they can't turn into the wind and run at 35 knots, they can't launch aircraft. Maybe ours our resistant to torpedoes in the aft, but it is always the target of a sub.
Are you fucking serious? Are you really comparing that 50`s british toy to our SOTA CBGs?
You have no idea what you are talking about. Our lowlyest LHSs out class that single piece of shit.
I totally agree...a fleet of aircraft carriers does not fit the strategic objectives of China in my opinion......they want to defend their interests in Asia, Africa or even Latin America rather than project power.
Heavy spending in submarine and surface missles woudl be better for them.....they do not want to project power, they want to stop the US from projecting power....very different.
Think what happen to US capabilities if they can quickly sink 3 or 4 of them....throw enough missles at them and they will go down...you basically mortally wound US power projection ability without the need to escalate to nuclear war....
Sophisticated subs and missles is where I would spend money if I were China....
Not sure China even has a carrier based fighter. Even if it has, their pilots will probably dive right into the ocean rather than land onto the carrier.
This can be at best a target in a U. S. naval exercise. No chance in real battles.
You are in America now you do not "dive right into the ocean" you "dove right into the ocean" . Like in a dove bar , you know we went doving, she dove off. what the fuck.
30 Million Chinese Men With No Prospect of Marrying
http://kgcdirect.squarespace.com/journal/2011/11/17/30-million-chinese-men-with-no-prospect-of-marrying.html
That should make for the beginning of some very interesting times.
Yes, this result of the one child policy and the aborting of females has set up China for a great social crisis. Imagine 30 million young men with no chance to have a family or a normal life. They are likely to be quite unstable social elements. A big war soon would allow China to reduce this threat. Seriously, what happens to society when women have all the social power due to their highly sought after status and these men with no power at all other than as workers and soldiers with no hope for family life.
But don't worry all the people in positions of power will be married , unless they are lke our "leaders" and like little boy's,
"Seriously, what happens to society when women have all the social power due to their highly sought after status and these men with no power at all other than as workers and soldiers with no hope for family life."
That sounds like the situation in the US as well.
What's Mandarin for Blue Balls?
Going long on Fleshlights...
Just be sure you keep your light on if you live in the Foxconn dorm.
eman, nice link.
Free Trade can solve this problem. Young woman in the US want to marry successful men. We can always send American women to China, then we can we can import women from other countries that speak English. It's a win-win situation. Chinese men get married, American men get women who live in reality and not some fairy tale/movie and the women from the countries we import women from get to come to the US.
Seriously I found this statement from your link funny: "We are the best place on earth and our best days are ahead not behind us! The best and brightest people from all over the world are going to pour into our country because the rest of the world, the European Union, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Sub-Sahara Africa and all of Asia are going to be difficult places to live and because they want to be part of the success of the Americas. "
What delusional fool would say that?
I remember this game I had as a kid called "battling tops". These spinning tops would duke it out in the middle of an arena until the last top is standing. I wonder....
Those things really got going. Cool game.
OT...quote of the day from Ralph Nader about Mitt Romney..."He’s basically a corporation running for president masquerading as a human being."
Fuck off lib troll.
Great qoute DOA. These right wingnutz better watch out our they will get Mitt, the sissy, for four years. Oh the horror!!!! Secret underwear freak in the WH!
99.9% of voters have no idea Mittens belongs to a secret underwear cult.
The "Hang Ten".
Hopefully it runs as well as their high speed (35mph) trains. Otherwise, it is fortunate that we have such a world class combat leader in Barry Soetero...
I've rode on one of those Chinese high speed trains and it sure as hell is better than any train in the USA!
Quit talking out of your arse. China has eclipsed the USA as THE world power.
Don't fuck with the Chinese!
Have you forgotten you were schooled in Korea by Mao?
How easily you forget! I drive by the war memorial listing the names daily.
China will bury you if you fuck with her!! Don't you see Barry bowing when he approaches Wen Jiabo?
Last time the PLA took the field it was against Vietnam in 1979. They didn't do very well.
On the contrary, the PRC has won every war it has gotten involved in, or at least achieved the objectives.
Vietnam was most definitely a victory. A specific goal, achieved in 18 days before moving back to the border and destroying everything behind them. It also demonstrated that the USSR was entirely unwilling to get involved with their ally Vietnam.
Dude, shall we draw up a list if all the countries that have fucked China IN CHINA?
Mao killed 10s of millions if his own people. Real hero you've got there. . .
Sit down now, the grownups are talking.
So you are well aware that they will annilate you without a thought!
Their trains are still 1000% BETTER than anything in the USA!
While we waste precious resources in ill concieved, idiotic, wars to enrich Israel and one family in Texas the Chinese are investing all the money we spend on flat screen TVs to build their infrastructure and military.
For every two dollars in US currency the Chinese recieve from trade they spend one dollar to buy Treasuries. (NPR)
If China will kill 10,000,000 of their own; do you think they will think twice about throwing an army of 10,000,000 against the West?
Get a clue! Our leadership, since WWII, has failed and screwed the American people. They sold us out to make themselves rich.
What a pity!
I think once somebody here posted this before but it's worthy of a repeat. This is what the Chinese know about naval architecture.
ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayKOlLhlQsc
if its built like the shit they send us for our devalued dollar, it sunk by now
Most of you commenters above have no idea what you are talking about.
The chinese have an array of anti ship missiles including ballistic anti ship missiles with a 2000 mile range. They exit the atmosphere and then reenter virtually straight down into the targeted ship going 8000 miles per hour. There is no defensive system that could stop them and even if the missile is struck the kinetic energy of the debris would destroy the target vessel. They also have sunburn type air to ship missiles with a stand back range of 100 miles. The missile flies at mach 2 and can execute radical maneuvers on the way into its target to foil countermeasures such as gattling guns.
Don't let your sons join the navy. Surface vessels are floating coffins.
Finally, when you adjust defense budgets for the labor cost differential between the U.S. and China, it appears that China spends as much on defense research and capital goods as the U.S.
Veterans know not to be arrogant about such things. Underestimating the Chinese, or the anti ship weapons they may have in stock (and may have given Iran for that matter) would be a serious mistake.
...going 8000 miles per hour.
I call bullshit. No link you stink.
"The Chinese military has developed a ballistic missile, Dong Feng 21, specifically designed to kill U.S. aircraft carriers:
Well Mr buzzsaw, can we get a mea culpa?
You wrote 8000 mph straight down to sea level. BULLSHIT! Nothing goes 8000 mph at sea level.
Mach 10 at high altitude is not the same as going 8000 mph straight down to sea level. Even a rifle bullet only goes like mach 3 at sea level.
It's true, they fired the thing in 2011. It's fast, but it's essentially a straight forward rocket. After it's Ballistic Phase and re-entry it's unguided.
Here is your link:
http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/new-chinese-antiship-ballistic-missiles-s...
Anti ship missiles are cheaper than aircraft carriers. Here is your link
http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/new-chinese-antiship-ballistic-missiles-s...
Senkaku Island is fake.
It was made of paper mache and set on a log raft as an art project by some kids on a kibbutz who are now making religious videos.
"They exit the atmosphere and then reenter virtually straight down into the targeted ship going 8000 miles per hour."
This would be a high-hypersonic Mach 10+ missle. Don't think so.
US has tested the FALCON plane which hit 13,000 mph. That plane crashed a few months ago while testing.
Guess how they know it's a Mach 10 + missile, no I mean it guess....
I'll tell you, it's because they've already demonstrated it...
It's made out of unobtanium, invisible steel from invisible warehouses, and stolen iphone parts from the Foxconn factory. Don't be a doubter, man.
A 'ballistic' missile would be useless against a carrier moving at 30 knots. You would have to know where the carrier would be at the end of the ballistic trajectory not where it was when you launched it. Ballistic missiles can be fairly accuate when you need to hit a city 2000 miles away or even a square km within a city but to try and hit a building or ship forget it.
Some of the deadliest missiles can swim... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shkval
Tank you very much Brill Crinton, Loral and Bernie Schwartz for the missle technology.
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/11974/hsu-had-ties-former-clinton-scandal-figure-bernie-schwartz-loral#
does it float
What is the over/under on how long it takes to sink?
Except ... it does not have any aircraft!
[Small detail, noted by BBC news this evening.]
they can always borrow the bernank's helicopter and bomb their enemies with usa clownbux ;)
I love zero hedge..
Aircraft are not stored on the ship when in port.
sporty for a russian aircraft carrier
The Chinese shoulda named that thing the, " S.S.Who Flung Poo"!
The age of the Carrier is over. We already have a hypersonic aircraft and hypersonic unmanned projectiles that will vaporize anything, anywhere within 4 hours of the U.S. This is the ultimate in standoff.
The F-22 and the F-35 are 20 year old technologies, and we have not been standing still since then.
But we're still dumping $100bn a year into research for both the F-22 and F-35
White elephant strategy.......
Build a cheap/less expensive elephant to force other's into the game..... of building sophiticated/expensive ones
In the end, a carrier can be sunk with one missile.....while costs fortune to maintain afloat......
China can sustain it with 1.3 billion head.....Japan must cover it with only 0.1 billion head....US with 0.33 billion.. Rumor has it China has 5 carriers under construction to be debued in 2015.......
Over time, China wins while others eaten alive by white elephants............. slow moving, useless carriers with prohibitive maintenance........
Great point actually. Kinda like our arms race with the Soviets in reverse. In the end there's always massive waves of Infantry. Just ask any Korean War vet how that goes. Numbers mean something, and when there's more enemy than you have bullets, or reload time, or ability to outflank them it's over.
Chinese are reducing the size of the PLA and going for a smaller professional army. The thing about today is with modern precision guided missiles you'll go to war with what you have and if you cannot defend the air over your homeland that's all you'll ever have. Your factories, transportation and energy grid will be taken out one PGM after another. No time to become the Arsenal of Democracy or retreat behind the Urals and live to fight another day.
And air interdiction of Chinese supply lines didn't produce a whole lot. All they needed was one fistfull of rice a day per man to keep moving.
White elephant strategy.......
Dumb! redundant posting!
21 hours ago ... Getting a pair of new Oakley sunglasses outlet could place quite a Foakleys ding in your wallet publication, these wonderful hues are very well created ...
big target...
that moves slow...
Launching lots of small targets
that move fast....
Great a diesel cruiser with aircraft launching capabilities. Just so no republicon in the US doesn't try to convince you, this thing doesn't have the range to make it to Hawaii. It is not a threat whatsoever to the US.
Does it have to be? Iran is no threat to the US either, but we (an by we I mean the Israelis who run our government) are choosing to make that land our country's death trap.
At least you can arm yourself with laughter
Carriers?
That is SOOOOOOO WW2.
Sorry, we can't decrease "defense" spending, we need to build more aircraft carriers.
You take Washington DC. No you take it. I'll piss on you if you don't get it out of here. Let's give it to Korea. Korea doesn't want more debt. I'll piss on you. No, I'll piss on you.
China be keeping up with the Jones....
It's a starter carrier. No reason to try and reinvent the wheel here. It was cheap to buy, cheap to refurb and it'll provide the experience needed to build the domestic fleet later on. As far as no planes... they have already been training for years on a land-based deck.
Cheap to buy, not so cheap to refurb (no engines, radar, electronics, or aircraft).
Reminds me of a cheap car i bought with no transmission. Spent 3 times as much for the transmission as for the car. Sexy sheat metal is pretty cheap compared to drive components.
It was basically bought at scrap price and is a hell of a lot cheaper than building one with no experience. Faster too. The experience gained from this will significantly reduce the learning curve when it comes time to start constructing the domestic carriers.
And, one carrier alone, even with a battle fleet, can't do a whole lot. We're been at it since 1920, so the PLAN has a lot of catching up to do. So far their naval aircraft are simply shipboard modified land based aircraft. They don't have an aircraft specifically made for carrier ops. Those landings and take offs, even with the ski slope, require very special designs.
Agent AnAngelAnus
please report to the brig for de-briefing
You didn't build that.
US builds drones, China builds a boat. China builds empty cities.
I worked with a former ComSubPac and he told me that at least twice Chinese Subs have surfaced undetected in the middle up US Carrier Groups conducting exercises in the Western Pacific.
Actually a Soviet sub damaged the Kitty Hawk ( CV-63) in 1984 when it collided with the carrier while surfacing. The Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Watkins had this to say about the incident “The reason behind the Soviet submarine captain’s slip in judgment is the only mystery here. He showed uncharacteristically poor seamanship in not staying clear of Kitty Hawk. That should cause concern in Moscow.”
Of course we don't know when or if US Navy forces knew about the Soviet sub as this was not wartime and shadowing US Navy vessels was allowed under the rules of engagement but still a Soviet sub surfacing under an American carrier was alarming to the informed public.
I dare say we will lose some carriers were we to go to war with China. You always lose ships. It depends on how it happens. If a US carrier can mount a couple of hundred sorties against Chinese targets it could be considered a 'win' for the US even if the ship is lost. Afterall, if Japan had lost a carrier attacking Pearl Harbor, all else being equal, we could hardly have called it a 'win' for the US given the destruction to our Pacific fleet.
<dup>
Kelsey Grammer would find it and sink it before your popcorn was gone.
Sonar: "It's the Orlando, sir. Someone just dropped 45 cents!"
"45 cents?"
"Yes, sir, a quarter and two dimes!"
Rip Torn: "I want a man with a tatoo on his dick!"
Well, take a look at the Shenyang J-21 and Dong-Feng 21 variant D.
The worst thing anyone can do is to underestimate potential opponents.
There is a reason why the US no longer patrols the strait between China and Taiwan. The western press doesn't really cover it but the DF-21 is a very large part of it.
The Chicoms have protested carrier transits through between Taiwan and the mainland for decades. We avoid it for diplomatic reasons though we've done it at least once ( I think when Clinton was president) to reassert our right to do so. It isn't really necessary though as carrier strike aircraft have the range to stay outside the 200 nm limit ( which Taiwan technically resides within under the agreed 'One China' policy). Remember Quemoy and Matsu, two islands that were withing artillary range of the Chinsese mainland. They were abandoned not because we abandoned Taiwan but because trying to maintain the outposts was both too costly militarily and diplomatically.
Here's an interesting chinese site with other opinions. Lots of photos of their carrier while being fitted out.
http://centurychina.com/plaboard/
The US could take countermeasures by speeding up the construction of the USS Inflatable and USS Tugboat. I am long vulcanized rubber.
According to a spokesperson of the US Navy: "The USS Inflatable will provide the US Navy with a broader range of offensive capabilities against terrorist activities in moderately calm international waters. The stealth valve elastic technology, also known as SVELT, allows for continuous reinflation by means of 1237 seethrough valves (2120 valves optional)."
Update: President Obama just issued a statement declaring that the Chinese didn't build that carrier. The Chinese government has, as of yet, not denied this statement.
Weak propaganda pic - 100 guys with rifles on a carrier deck, rather than fighter jets with missiles, bombs and gattling guns.
Holy Shit....ARE THOSE BOLT-ACTIONS?!?! LOL
No, they're classy SKS's for dress uniforms. Just like how some of our honor guards are still wielding Garands.
Correct. These are for ceremony. The military uses QBZ rifles which makes our crap look like muzzle loaded muskets. Not saying they are bettter, just the bullpup design looks more futuristic.
Rifles circa 1946
It looks like it's a floating brothel/resort for the PLA Navy bosses.
An aircraft carrier without aircrafts. Good job China. That's just a barge, a large one for sure, but just a barge.
They are just doing this to fake us out ... their real navy is underwater
No experience with these things, no combat experience. The Chinese have a steep learning curve.
Meh, what they lose in margins, they'll make up for in volume.
Okay. I'll say it. What in the hell does the size of China have to do with the price of a carrier?
Does anyone really believe China gives their best? China and quality are, well...oxymorons.
Mission accomplished!
IMPENDING SELL OFF...
Due to recent central bank intervention and short covering spikes, these daily charts are extremely overextended and significant correction expected very soon:
SPX, DOW, NASDAQ, NZDUSD, GBPUSD, AUDUSD, COPPER, CRUDE, GOLD, SILVER. [USD strength will return]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-24/market-analysis
http://trader618.com