Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures




Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence








Chinese Navy News and Discussion

This is a discussion on Chinese Navy News and Discussion within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by ASSAIL No air pollution there the radical climate scientist keep telling me that Australia's emissions are worse ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old April 24th, 2017   #346
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,393
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASSAIL View Post
No air pollution there the radical climate scientist keep telling me that Australia's emissions are worse than China's.
They don't help their advocacy

Is that because they are counting the coal we sell them and they burn against us?

You hit the nail on the head, those how go for hyperbola damage their brand with thinking people. The problem with radical "anything" is they dumb the message down for those who don't think for themselves in an effort to subvert the mob in their favour but in doing so they lose the interest, if not the trust, of the thinking person. It is impossible to be an expert on everything, not even possible to have a working knowledge or even a limited understanding of everything, there is just too much to know, so you have to rely on experts. When you know the experts are glossing over things or distorting facts to their own ends they are actually denying people who want to know the chance to understand what is happening. That's when the salesmen step in with plausible lies and steel the show.

Its the per capita emissions and has more to do will the average Australian having electricity, a roof over their heads and a car so realistically, even if we adopted every single green house gas reducing process, because there are so few of us and we live on such a large land mass with such great distances to travel and provide infrastructure to, we would still have a higher per capita output. All too hard to explain so those with an agenda just lift the figures but not the context.

China on the other hand is belching all sorts of garbage into the environment and literally poisoning the air they breath, the water they drink and the ground they walk on, without even considering global warming. The thing is though, with the size of their population and the concentration of so much of it, combined with the lower average standard of living their per capita emissions are lower.

I don't think anyone would want to live next door to a Union Carbide chemical plant, or down stream from a BHP tailings dam, or even near a power station of any sort, not even the most ardent climate change denier. Then again I don't think the average inner city Greens voter would last two days without their Wifi or their skinny latte.
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2017   #347
Defense Professional / Analyst
Brigadier General
ASSAIL's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Darwin NT Australia
Posts: 1,893
Threads:
Without pressing the OT tolerance for too much longer, the earths climate damage doesn't give a toss about per capita emissions, it's the total load of crap in the atmosphere which is the critical factor.
Shut down Oz tomorrow and it would make zip difference to the worlds climate.
My opinion naturally.
ASSAIL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2017   #348
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,102
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASSAIL View Post
Without pressing the OT tolerance for too much longer, the earths climate damage doesn't give a toss about per capita emissions, it's the total load of crap in the atmosphere which is the critical factor.
Shut down Oz tomorrow and it would make zip difference to the worlds climate.
My opinion naturally.
Bottom line, there are too many people. Fewer people, less emissions.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2017   #349
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,575
Threads:
Yebbut yebbut Russia has fewer people than Brazil & emits almost four times as much CO2. More than India.

Australia emits more than France, Spain or Poland. Canada emits more than any of them, & also more than the UK, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Indonesia or Italy.

The USA emits more NOx than India, & Mexico much more than Japan.

Which people are best to get rid of?
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2017   #350
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
t68's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,632
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by swerve View Post
Yebbut yebbut Russia has fewer people than Brazil & emits almost four times as much CO2. More than India.

Australia emits more than France, Spain or Poland. Canada emits more than any of them, & also more than the UK, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Indonesia or Italy.

The USA emits more NOx than India, & Mexico much more than Japan.

Which people are best to get rid of?

Think that's more to do with nuclear as base load power.
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2017   #351
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,393
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by swerve View Post
Yebbut yebbut Russia has fewer people than Brazil & emits almost four times as much CO2. More than India.

Australia emits more than France, Spain or Poland. Canada emits more than any of them, & also more than the UK, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Indonesia or Italy.

The USA emits more NOx than India, & Mexico much more than Japan.

Which people are best to get rid of?
You want me to get started on a list?
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017   #352
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,547
Threads:
Got this frm Chinese forum. Frm the forumers there reaction, I guess they think this one is as capable with US carrier and more than French and Brits carriers..

Well they do launch this after 2 years in constructions, will see how long their preparation before operational. It's island is look more sophisticated than Liaoning.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg downloadfile-3.jpg (323.7 KB, 25 views)
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017   #353
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
Milne Bay's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 354
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
Got this frm Chinese forum. Frm the forumers there reaction, I guess they think this one is as capable with US carrier and more than French and Brits carriers..

Well they do launch this after 2 years in constructions, will see how long their preparation before operational. It's island is look more sophisticated than Liaoning.
An impressive looking ship for sure, and full marks to the PLAN in getting this into the water from a cold start.
From what I have read, this will be a one-of-a-kind with the next aircraft carrier to be significantly different again.
Of course a floating ship is nothing without operational doctrine and experience. The Chinese have shown remarkable ability to develop in both fields, but it is a steep learning curve - especially for any kind of high intensity ops.
MB
Milne Bay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017   #354
Moderator
General
ngatimozart's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,068
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
Got this frm Chinese forum. Frm the forumers there reaction, I guess they think this one is as capable with US carrier and more than French and Brits carriers..

Well they do launch this after 2 years in constructions, will see how long their preparation before operational. It's island is look more sophisticated than Liaoning.
Report on the launch from the South China Morning Post. The Post article says that the third carrier will be launched in 2021. That carrier will be CATOBAR with steam powered catapults apparently.
________________
The Rules - read them. Ignorance of them is not an excuse.
The Introduction thread for new members to tell the rest of us something about you.
ngatimozart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017   #355
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,547
Threads:
The Chinese forum adamant that 001A will have 8 more Aircraft than Liaoning current 18-24 J-15. Whille the measurement of 001A is in similar ballpark with 001 (Liaoning).

Altough I ussualy put extreme caution to any source frm Nationalistics forum like the Chinese, Pak-Def, Russian even local Indonesian or other Asian forum..but with several Chinese forumers adamant it can got 8 more J-15..just wondering it's possible or not.

Could both carriers in relative similar dimensions can have significant different internal layout, that enable much larger hangar for 8 more aircraft in the new one?

Add images on dimensions drawing of 001 and 001A, and both superimposed to each other..showing similar dimensions. The drawing also frm Chinese Forum.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg downloadfile-4.jpg (152.8 KB, 13 views)

Last edited by Ananda; April 26th, 2017 at 07:19 AM.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017   #356
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 261
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
The Chinese forum adamant that 001A will have 8 more Aircraft than Liaoning current 18-24 J-15. Whille the measurement of 001A is in similar ballpark with 001 (Liaoning).

Altough I ussualy put extreme caution to any source frm Nationalistics forum like the Chinese, Pak-Def, Russian even local Indonesian or other Asian forum..but with several Chinese forumers adamant it can got 8 more J-15..just wondering it's possible or not.

Could both carriers in relative similar dimensions can have significant different internal layout, that enable much larger hangar for 8 more aircraft in the new one?
Whatever the content and capabilities of their carriers it gives the PLAN an impressive capability today compared to a decade ago. If their aircraft construction continues as planned they will in the next decade have the second largest carrier force in the world by numbers which is an impressive feat to achieve within single a generation.
Yes experience and training is important to successfully operate these carriers but lets not dismiss this momentum of naval carrier aspiration and how this will test the region compared to a generation ago.

Regards S
Stampede is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2017   #357
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
Tsavo Lion's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 193
Threads:
China launches largest surface combatant to date
Quote:
"It is equipped with new air defense, anti-missile, anti-ship and anti-submarine weapons," Xinhua said, without giving further details.
3 more are being built: 1 in Shanghai & 2 in Dalyan. More on its armament: https://regnum.ru/news/it/2294675.html I wonder if they plan to build cruisers next or just bigger ships & still call them "destroyers".
Tsavo Lion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2017   #358
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: qld
Posts: 173
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsavo Lion View Post
China launches largest surface combatant to date

3 more are being built: 1 in Shanghai & 2 in Dalyan. More on its armament: https://regnum.ru/news/it/2294675.html I wonder if they plan to build cruisers next or just bigger ships & still call them "destroyers".
Length 180m, Beam 19m, Draught 6.6m, 128 cells, thats a fairly serious ship, no displacement given but you would have to think 12,000t, same length as the Zumwalt but not as wide or as deep
Redlands18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2017   #359
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: terra
Posts: 408
Threads:
Next-gen PLAN subs may be significantly quieter than current sub designsby adopting a rim-driven pumpjet design. It's speculated that the new US and UK boomers may use the same type of propulsion system and the Chinese may actually beat them to the punch.

China's new submarine engine is poised to revolutionize underwater warfare | Popular Science

China's new submarine engine is poised to revolutionize underwater warfare

This month, Chinese state TV channel CCTV 13 broadcast an interview with a top Chinese naval engineer, Rear Admiral Ma Weiming. The admiral is notably responsible for the development of multiple Chinese naval electromagnetic programs, including the electromagnetic catapult and railguns. In the interview, he stated that the PLAN is fitting its newest nuclear attack submarines with a "shaftless" rim-driven pumpjet, a revolutionary and silent propulsion system.

If the system is being put on the latest vessels, it is likely to be used on the first Type 095 nuclear attack submarine (SSN), which is under construction.

A rim-driven pumpjet has a ring-shaped electrical motor inside the pumpjet shroud, which turns the vane rotor (a vane rotor has the fan blades attached to a rotating band built on a cylinder interior, as opposed to a propeller shaft) inside the pumpjet cavity to create thrust. Previous submarine pumpjets are "shrouded propellers," which consist of a tubular nozzle covering the propeller. By removing the shaft of the propeller, the reduction in the number of moving parts decreases the noise made by the pumpjet, as well as saving hull space. Civilian manufacturers also claim that rim driven pumpjets are easier to maintain, and have less cavitation (bubbles that form during propeller movement), making them even more quiet.

more...
colay1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2017   #360
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 728
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
The Chinese forum adamant that 001A will have 8 more Aircraft than Liaoning current 18-24 J-15. Whille the measurement of 001A is in similar ballpark with 001 (Liaoning).

Altough I ussualy put extreme caution to any source frm Nationalistics forum like the Chinese, Pak-Def, Russian even local Indonesian or other Asian forum..but with several Chinese forumers adamant it can got 8 more J-15..just wondering it's possible or not.

Could both carriers in relative similar dimensions can have significant different internal layout, that enable much larger hangar for 8 more aircraft in the new one?

Add images on dimensions drawing of 001 and 001A, and both superimposed to each other..showing similar dimensions. The drawing also frm Chinese Forum.
If it can operate more aircraft it's probably due to a reworking of the internal layout, in particular the hanger deck which has given them more usable space for additional aircraft.
KiwiRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:39 AM.