China to build aircraft carrier
- Thread starter pshamim
- Start date
China? No AWACS?
Right now they still have no AWACS planes in service but they have started testings for almost a year with two different designs. One is the Y-8 AWACS and the other the KJ-2000 based on the IL-76. There is also a third design with an lengthy radar instead of a dish. But I don't have the pic anymore. But if you want please check at Sinodefence.com. If everything goes well, the PLAAF and PLAN might deploy them within the next 5 years.
Right now they still have no AWACS planes in service but they have started testings for almost a year with two different designs. One is the Y-8 AWACS and the other the KJ-2000 based on the IL-76. There is also a third design with an lengthy radar instead of a dish. But I don't have the pic anymore. But if you want please check at Sinodefence.com. If everything goes well, the PLAAF and PLAN might deploy them within the next 5 years.
Last edited:
wrt to the thread topic, I think they are referring to having organic AWACs for a carrier.PLA2025 said:
normally there would be indications of carrier capable aircraft - and you just can't add them from day 1.
eg are they STOBAR? CATOBAR? If so then what time frames are required to build them and get them developed etc.....
the aircraft selected give a clue as to what carrier will get built.
Last edited:
It is true that Taiwan issue doesn't require any cv from China, and I even doubt it is in their vision.
The study goes farther in the time frame, after Taiwan.
They will need several cvs to support their operations in South China Sea (Spratleys), the Malacca and Okinawa too.
Not for the next ten years though.
The only good thing so far the PLA-N managed to do by painting that hulk in grey is to make all these young chinese boys abroad havin nice wet dreams at night... :lol3
The study goes farther in the time frame, after Taiwan.
They will need several cvs to support their operations in South China Sea (Spratleys), the Malacca and Okinawa too.
Not for the next ten years though.
The only good thing so far the PLA-N managed to do by painting that hulk in grey is to make all these young chinese boys abroad havin nice wet dreams at night... :lol3
Thats true. It makes for excellent propaganda, despite the fact that there are people who can see that carrier hull for what it is.
It makes more sense to actually use it as an amusement park.
It makes more sense to actually use it as an amusement park.
but wouldn't it make more sense to paint the Varyag in Russian paintcolorscheme than painting it to the Chinese PLAN colorscheme if it is intended to become an amusement park or museum?
Of course there is no certainty that the Varyag would be refitted to become combat operational again, but there are just too many sources that hints for China constructing and testing 2 aircraft carriers within the next 10 years. I believe that it would take around 10 or more years to become fully operational since the crews of the carriers and its jets need much training and drill sessions before getting fully combat capable. China does not need carriers of the Varyag class that badly but some smaller helicopter carriers would be very useful though. Not only for combat situations but also to carry transporter choppers in case of humanitarian missions like in Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand etc.
Of course there is no certainty that the Varyag would be refitted to become combat operational again, but there are just too many sources that hints for China constructing and testing 2 aircraft carriers within the next 10 years. I believe that it would take around 10 or more years to become fully operational since the crews of the carriers and its jets need much training and drill sessions before getting fully combat capable. China does not need carriers of the Varyag class that badly but some smaller helicopter carriers would be very useful though. Not only for combat situations but also to carry transporter choppers in case of humanitarian missions like in Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand etc.
The chinese are building a military tailor made for combat with the us.the situation I see developing based on thier ambitions and weapons purchases/r&d program is one were they would try to duplcate the initial sucess of the egyptions in '73 war.This is where they attack and quickly establish themselves behind or inside an umbrella of potent technology as the egyptions did with the then state of the art SAM/ATGM's provided by the soviets (this worked right up until the syrians faltered compeling the egyptions to attack past thier "umbrella').the contest soon becomes one of power prjection similiar to the falkland islands campaign-can china project across to taiwan better then the us can project across the pacific?An aircraft carrier has several uses consistant with chinese ambitions first a helicopter carrier is indispesable
for amphibious operations according to us doctrine.In the face of a well prepared enemy with no secrets as to which landing areas would be best the ability to have highly flexible forces on station to quickly manuver against new threats/opertunities could be decicive.This gives higher command a unengaged reserve to commit even in the case of an uncontested landing as establishing a defensible perimiter and organising the logistics will make it difficult for the landing team to react.I don't expect a confrontation with them for at least ten year i believe some of their weapon systems particulerly
the weapons bought from the russians is just to achieve a kind of critical mass just so they can conduct exercises to make theory come to life if they
find at the time of conflict they cannot produce a worthwhile number of sorties from thier ship/s and have to settle for a helicopter carrier that will still be of great value.as far as defensive arrangments would it help them if
they kept that particular naval combined arms package inside the straight under there own umbrella?
for amphibious operations according to us doctrine.In the face of a well prepared enemy with no secrets as to which landing areas would be best the ability to have highly flexible forces on station to quickly manuver against new threats/opertunities could be decicive.This gives higher command a unengaged reserve to commit even in the case of an uncontested landing as establishing a defensible perimiter and organising the logistics will make it difficult for the landing team to react.I don't expect a confrontation with them for at least ten year i believe some of their weapon systems particulerly
the weapons bought from the russians is just to achieve a kind of critical mass just so they can conduct exercises to make theory come to life if they
find at the time of conflict they cannot produce a worthwhile number of sorties from thier ship/s and have to settle for a helicopter carrier that will still be of great value.as far as defensive arrangments would it help them if
they kept that particular naval combined arms package inside the straight under there own umbrella?
Well, the expected carrier capable ACs would be su-33. I believe there was significant discussion between china and Russia after their military exercise on the purchase of su-33M, which is in all practicalness equivalent to su-30mkk3, but has the capability of taking off from AC and foldable wings. Basically, they are not great planes, not as good as the super hornets, but suitable for Varyag. Many people suspect Varyag to be used as a Carrier trainer, I would pretty much concur. And then, I'm guessing the domestically built AC (I'm sure this is going to happen) will be equipped with naval J-10s with upgraded engine or a twin-engined J-10 that can take off from a carrier. Other expected passengers are Ka-28/Ka-31, Z-9C, L-15.gf0012-aust said:
As for AWACS, it's really kind of confusing these days with PLA. The Y-8 EW aircrafts are popping up out of nowhere almost weekly. http://mil.jschina.com.cn/huitong/y-8x_sh-5_a-50i.htm
I'm sure there will be a Y-8 AWACS coming out when China does have a carrier.
Francois, I know you are a Defense Professional / Analyst. Just want to know whether most of Indian Defense Professional / Analysts think in the same way as you do?Francois said:
I am pretty sure all chinese will be much happier if you are india's defense minister.
Have a nice dry dream:lol3
Actually, there's another thread in this forum (several months ago before Varyag was towed into dry dock) about China's aircraft carrier discussions. Most of your points were discussed in there as well.Wild Weasel said:
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3589
To summarise it, we are discussing 2 things usually:
1. Varyag's fate
A. Casino/Theme Park.
Evidence: A bank-rupted chinese company promised to the world. Also, it's too hard to refit Varyag.
B. PLAN's Training Ship.
Evidence: Compared to the previous 2 carrier theme parks china bought, china spent a fortune to get it and no comercial entity would let it sit in idle for 3 years. Also, all the photos, rumors and news indicate that Varyag is being refitted. If it's for commercial purpose, in now-a-day's china, the owner would probably sponsor a live broadcast of this refit process and reap every cent if possible. On the contrarary, we have not heard a single piece of news about any company would dock Varyag in any city as a theme park/casino.
C. PLAN's combat ship
Evidence: No evidence. Just speculations. I guess it's because there's no standard definition on what an aircraft carrier training ship should be. How can you tell, so it's up to everyone's speculation.
I choose B because I do see more evidences for that.
2. Should China build an aircraft carrier?
Quite a few discussions actually mixed this question with the above one, and used the answer to this question for the above one. There are several posts using one particular underlying logic :
Because he/she thinks that China does not need an aircraft carrier in the near future, that's why Varyag is a casino.
That's why I think it's a good idea to seperate the 2 questions. Because as I said several times in the other thread, whether we think PLAN should have ACs, it does not really matter. Evenif we all agree PLAN should not have one, they may still get one. I do assume PLAN knows more about the pros and cons than we do, because that's their daily job.
Now, my personal view is, Definitely no need to have an Aircraft carrier now or even in the next 5 years. But a semi operational training ship is not a bad idea, although I still think it's a bit too early.
Jeff Head, btw, if you want to paint pennant number on your next Varyag graph, I suggest you use 083, at least for quite a while.
Last edited:
The Viagra has been repainted. There is no evidence of it being refitted.wp2000 said:
If you have any evidence feel free to provide the source.
IMNSHO, I think this tub is getting dressed up for the 2008 Olympics. They will put a few aircraft on it by crane and make it look like they have a real operational carrier.
There are pictures on other forums that shows the external elevator is working. Do you call that a repaint? And do you think they will need to use a crane to put few aircrafts on it?EW3 said:
Here are the works I heard that are being done on Varyag just on top of my head:
1. Electricity supply restored.
2. Most Elevators restored.
3. Military Grade Internal Communications installed.
4. Steam Boiler (I don't know whether that's correct translation or not) is being installed
5. Landing System is being delivered by Russia.
6. Steam Catpult (again, not sure about my translation) will be installed as well (I know what you gonna say, cause I doubt it as well, although I know one chinese company was praised for participating in the steam catpult production)
7. After all these years, most of the russian components originally planned for Varyage are finalised if not already in the warehouse.
Unfortunetely, unlike the painting and the water line, we won't be able to see any works inside Varyag. Unless some body is brave enough to sneak into the shipyard and take a photo inside Varyag.
That's why I list all the possibilities, I've made my selection and I am more than willing to admit I am wrong when enough evidences show up.
And I wouldn't mind to repeat what I said 7 months ago, evenif in the future they are proved to wrong. As far as I heard, in arly 2004, CMC decided to go ahead with aircraft carrier project, Varyag's refit would start in Aug 2005 and finish the works in 2 years, and the real focus is not Varyag. If everything goes smoothly, around 2008 something will show up. And from later informations I gathered, it's not the LPD or the LHA.
There is no way china can hide it for too long if there really is something fishy. But I must say, china does receive unexpected help from some of you guys on hiding her intension.
BTW, before I add more comments, GF, do you agree to make this forum into another strategypage? If so I will contribute a bit more.
cheers
Last edited:
ALL, a humble request:
Let's try to deal with each other's opinions and not turn this thread into some type of joke. Whatever is China's plan, I think she deserves some respect as far as the weapon systems she is developing are concerned. And I think, we would be in much better shape (or state of mind) if we not compare it with USA (or maybe political reasons?). China is just starting to develop its military weapons while USA has been doing it for past six decades...
Enjoy!
Let's try to deal with each other's opinions and not turn this thread into some type of joke. Whatever is China's plan, I think she deserves some respect as far as the weapon systems she is developing are concerned. And I think, we would be in much better shape (or state of mind) if we not compare it with USA (or maybe political reasons?). China is just starting to develop its military weapons while USA has been doing it for past six decades...
Enjoy!
A bit more on this point.wp2000 said:
I remember I said to GF months ago that when Varyag's topic becomes hot, there will be lots of fancy ideas showing up and some of them may sound so convincing that myself would start to re-think.:fly But at the end of the day, it still has to comply with some common sense. That's why,to me,the ones like the news in the beginning of this thread is purely BS. I don't believe Varyag will sail out of the shipyard very soon.
And I think it's these pure speculations that make people un-easy, including me. I would spend more time observing the progress rather than speculating too much especially speculating on speculations. I found on various forums including this one there are many interesting observation, for example the rails on Varyag's recent photo raised quite some discussions in many forums inside and outside china. And someone in china also pointed out a very tecnical thing on that red island, unfortuetely too technical for me to understand.
Basically, to talk about PLAN's AC doing this or doing that in this ocean or that ocean, is really a wet dream. PLA is working on many basic things, although not very many country can even have those things. It's modernising according its own plan, if their aim is to reach US's level, it's going to take a long long time.
I believe you are probably speaking of the transitional CVN-77, the George HW Bush being complete by then, in 2008...she is the last of the Nimitz class with a few of the CVN21 upgrades. CVN-78, the first CVN21, is scheduled to be operational in 2013.Wild Weasel said:
The JSF (Air Force, Navy and Marine variants) are slated to begin coming into service in low rate production in 2008. That will probably initially be the F-35A, Air Force CTOL. The F-35B, Marine STOVL, and the F-35C, Navy CV, versions will come along later, in full production phases after that. IOW, the F-35 may not be available to the Navy or Marines in any numbers by 2009.Wild Weasel said:
Yep, although I believe all four SSGN's will be ready by then. The Ohio will rejoin the fleet this year (November) and the Florida is slated to be complete in April of 2006. Michigan started in early 2005 and is expected to be ready for trials in December of 2006 or Januarty of 2007. Georgia started in 2005 (March) and is expected to be complete and ready for trials in September 2007. I believe all four will be re-commissioned and in service by the 2009 time frame.Wild Weasel said:
I still believe the US needs a longer range, heavier attack plane to replace the old A-6 intruder all-weather attack aircraft. The A-12 was slated for that and would have been a good aircraft, btu cost overruns and bad management doomed it...but, IMHO, the USN still needs something in that ballpark. Also need a replacement for the Phoenix missile...the LRAAM needs to be put back on the burner.Wild Weasel said:
Exactly why the PRC will build like crazy between now and then...and then attempt to use their new sparkling and modern assets to cow and talk others out of conmfronting them should the Taiwan issue come to a head.Wild Weasel said:
Hehehe...most probably a very wise course, but a very critical and strategic issue just the same.Wild Weasel said:I'm staying as far from that discussion as I can possibly get.
Another thing is I'll wait until I see some changes on the deck, otherwise I just can't believe it.aaaditya said:unless varyag is a nuclear carrier i see installation of steam catapults as a headache ,where will it get its steam,it will put too much load on the steam boiler which also needs to power the aircraft carrier(correct me if iam wrong)
Some guys here like WP2000 etc. did hit the point.
It doesn't matter whether we are pro or con about Chinese PLAN getting its own aircraft carriers fully operational or whether it should and should not. The interests lies in the Chinese military and the Chinese nation itselt. So if they need one and want them...just let them. We cannot judge them unless China is starting to become warmonger-like like the imperial Japanese forces or the Reichswehr during the the 2nd world war. China is unlikely to enter any wars (even the conflict with Taiwan is rather a politcial powerplay than a realistic war scenario) but more deploying their troops in UN peacekeeping nations. The acquiring of one or two aircraft carriers is more in the interests to improve the defense capability in the South and East China Seas and it is also unlikely that China's carriers would leave their own Chinese sea territory unless they get invited by a partner state during joint-military exercise etc.
It doesn't matter whether we are pro or con about Chinese PLAN getting its own aircraft carriers fully operational or whether it should and should not. The interests lies in the Chinese military and the Chinese nation itselt. So if they need one and want them...just let them. We cannot judge them unless China is starting to become warmonger-like like the imperial Japanese forces or the Reichswehr during the the 2nd world war. China is unlikely to enter any wars (even the conflict with Taiwan is rather a politcial powerplay than a realistic war scenario) but more deploying their troops in UN peacekeeping nations. The acquiring of one or two aircraft carriers is more in the interests to improve the defense capability in the South and East China Seas and it is also unlikely that China's carriers would leave their own Chinese sea territory unless they get invited by a partner state during joint-military exercise etc.