When do u think PLAN will have an aircraft carrier?

[doggychow14]

its suppose to be an 052C but even larger with higher capabilities. its rumored that its being constructed at the dalian shipyard. The 054 carries 83s.

http://www.stormpages.com/jetfight/luhai_luhu_luda.htm

 

[Ethan]

There is a simple reason why PLAN has not acquired an aircraft carrier just yet. PLAN has to first develop a credible surface fleet along with the required weapons. This is being done with the evelution of the Type 51 and 52 series destroyers which were built in batches of two. The latest evolution is the type 54C which seems to have the necessary airdefence capability through the HHQ9 SAM, which is a Chinese copy of SA-10 with some infusion of western tecnology. Type 54C will also be armed with long range anti-ship missiles and possibly it's LACM variants like the C-803 which has a range of 250-300 KM. The type 54C has not entered service yet.

China has followed the same evolutionary design idea with the frigates and the latest result seems to be the Type 54A frigate with VLS for SAM and C-802/C-803 series missiles in anti-ship missile role. What remains to be seen is if these designs are successfull. If that is the case and they become the standard Chinese surface destroyers and frigates and have entered service in sizeable numbers then only will China begin the construction of an aircraft carrier.

Above all a carrier is nothing without it's fighter squadrons and other support aircraft. Most likely this is going to be the J-10 variant for the Chinese Navy. The naval version may not enter service at least until a sizeable portion of the J-10 fighters have entered into squadron service with the PLAAF.

All this will most likely take place towards the end of the decade. We may not see a full carrier along with it's full compliment of aircraft and support ships well until the middle of the second decade.

 

[PLAbuddy]

china learns from Soveits, sub fleet rather than carrier fleet,


i ve heard the russian anti-ship missles china bought for subs and destoryers are capable of destroying any U.S carriers..and at the most of time U.S cant detect them?
any one confirm this?

 

[gf0012-aust]

china learns from Soveits, sub fleet rather than carrier fleet,


i ve heard the russian anti-ship missles china bought for subs and destoryers are capable of destroying any U.S carriers..and at the most of time U.S cant detect them?
any one confirm this?

Russia sold China stripped export models of their systems. In the halcyon days of the Russian Navy and VVS they wargamed that they could possibly take out 2 CVN's if they were able to break the defensive shield.

This was prior to FORCENET, prior to SPY2/3 Aegis and when they had a very strong naval and air strike capability. China is nowhere near the footprint that the USSR had circa 1987-88 and the missiles she was sold are also not considered to be as effective. Bear in mind that Russia sold the USAF (via Boeing) KH-31's etc in the late 90's. The US also bought some 500 russian missiles when the bought the Moldovan Mig 29's. Some of them were AShM's bought from the Ukraine. So they have a very good working knowledge of missiles like Yakhont and Klub. Sunburns yield is not difficult to work out, and to sink a Carrier would require a saturated attack.

If you understand how far the ELINT/ASW/AWINT grid extends from a US CSF then you'l, appreciate why the Russians didn't have a high level of confidence - and this is prior to SPY2/3 and FORCENET etc...

Most people have no idea of how broad and integrated the defensive layers of a CSF are. It's enormous and outside of the scope of most navies to even remotely consider trying to penetrate. Let alone a saturated attack. The US AEGIS system is able to process over 1000 concurrent targets. Thats bigger than the launch footprint of most navies - and then you have to remember that a battle committed CSF has a minimum of 4 AEGIS systems in situ. That means they can process over 4000 concurrent targets.

 

[turin]

@gf0012-aust:

Sunburns yield is not difficult to work out, and to sink a Carrier would require a saturated attack.

What I hear from many armchair admirals pretty often in favour of the Moskit/Sunburn is the extremely short reaction time after the launch of the weapon. I mean closing in with about Mach 2,5 surely makes a difference compared to a SLCM at subsonic speed. So guess the Sunburn carrier ship is able to fire this weapon (that already means being able to pemetrate the defensive shield of a CVN since the range is supposed to be between 150 and 250 km depending on attack mode), how likely can that missile be intercepted by fleet air defense? Are SM-2 or ESSM able to handle such a thread with confidence?
edit: Ok, I read through the other thread here ("Sinking an AC...") and the topic was mostly worked through there. Still I'd guess for example the SS-N 19 would be quite a threat from what I can read about it...

China is nowhere near the footprint that the USSR had circa 1987-88 and the missiles she was sold are also not considered to be as effective.

Can you give us some info on the details in downgrading these exported russian missiles? I mean, it surely makes sense to me however I am still curious.

 

[Superbug]

It makes no sense for PLAN to have a carrier at the present time, china follows a totally different military doctrine. Besides, a chinese CSF has no chance when putting up against an US CSF in high sea, let alone a cluster of CSF's, and when comes to TW, the land-based weapon systems will serve the same purpose. I doubt there will be any chinese carrier in next 1-to 20 years. However, that doesn't mean CSF is invincible, a suturated attacked will certainly cripple a CSF. Forget about sunburn, CSF will never allow its launching vechiles to get close enough to amass an attack.

What do u think of china's idea of using ballastic missle to vertically attack a CSF from the top? Is the current Aegis system capable of taking those out?

 

[PLAbuddy]

everybody here agrees aircraft carrier costs a lot money right?
not just build one, to maintain one is very expensive too,

if chinese government can use those money to improve its economy better, that will bring long-termn benifits for chinese ppl,
maybe 50 years later, when china is considered a second or first world nation, having an aircraft carrier will be sustainable and benificial for china's global missions

 

[gf0012-aust]

It makes no sense for PLAN to have a carrier at the present time, china follows a totally different military doctrine. Besides, a chinese CSF has no chance when putting up against an US CSF in high sea, let alone a cluster of CSF's, and when comes to TW, the land-based weapon systems will serve the same purpose. I doubt there will be any chinese carrier in next 1-to 20 years. However, that doesn't mean CSF is invincible, a suturated attacked will certainly cripple a CSF. Forget about sunburn, CSF will never allow its launching vechiles to get close enough to amass an attack.

What do u think of china's idea of using ballastic missle to vertically attack a CSF from the top? Is the current Aegis system capable of taking those out?

The PLAAF currently qualifies all of its fixed wing tail hooked combat pilots on a mock up of HMAS Melbournes flight deck. This has been in place for a few years. Pilots simulate traps and launches as part of their qualifier. One wonders why they bother if there is no intent to go to a Carrier.

There are 3 hulls under construction at the moment which could be either LHA's or CVL's. The other issue is that the ex-Russian Varyag has recently had her Island upgraded, it has been cleaned up and there are new fittings appearing. Although she is not yet in a state of finish to be used as a carrier - she is getting some progressive modifications. One only has to look at photos of the varyag from 12 months ago to last month, and it's apparent that new work is being done that doesn't actually quite gel with the role of a tourist venue.

 

[PLAbuddy]

talking about those missiles imported from Russia, i think they are capable of penetrating U.S aircraft carrier group
it has 3M54E Klub submerged launch anti-ship missiles
http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/sub/kilo.asp
and some missles from su-30 planes

and there is also a possible of using a neutron bomb against an aircraft carrier, is that possible? (china has neutron bombs since 1980s)

china bought those 3 russian retired aircraft carrier to accumilate some experience on building a real one, in case we really need one and by then, we dont have to start all over

 

[gf0012-aust]

Can you give us some info on the details in downgrading these exported russian missiles? I mean, it surely makes sense to me however I am still curious.

The public information is limited, but at the time of the purchase of the Moldovan Airforce Mig 29's, the Russians had also agreed to allow open passage of up to 500 missiles of various types. This was also when the US bought copies of the KH-31 to use as supersonic targets. The Russian documents released to the senate hearing show that they had sold missiles to the chinese with less capabla guidance and seeker systems.

But, not much is available in the public domain re this.

 

[PLAbuddy]

well, never underestimate china's capability of improving its own military,
U.S already got suprised for a couple of times by the speed and quality of CHina's modernization on chinese military

Sun Tzu said , know urself and know ur enemy, u gonna be victorious in a hundred battles .

 

[doggychow14]

The thing is that PLAN will never get close enough to launch her missiles. The Carrier groups will stay far out from the mainland. The USN is capable of intercepting supersonic missiles with the sea sparrow, CIWS, sm-2.

 

[PLAbuddy]

lol..how about subs, by 3 years, china will have 8 kilos, 4 yuans, and two or 3 093s, plus the new songs, old Hans

their TEST-71MKE TV electric homing torpedos and 53-65KE (or the latest UGST) wake-homing torpedoes will swarm over U.S ships

and chinese cruise missiles can also take its shot

subs will be our first line against western ships plus some destroyers like new 052Cs

 

[gf0012-aust]

lol..how about subs, by 3 years, china will have 8 kilos, 4 yuans, and two or 3 093s, plus the new songs, old Hans

their TEST-71MKE TV electric homing torpedos and 53-65KE (or the latest UGST) wake-homing torpedoes will swarm over U.S ships

and chinese cruise missiles can also take its shot

subs will be our first line against western ships plus some destroyers like new 052Cs

The USN has 53 Nukes. 2 of which have more throw power than the entire Chinese air force

The US has 12 Carrier Strike Forces - each carrier has a combat wing that is bigger than most other countries airforces

The US has 10 Expeditionary strike forces - each LHA is bigger than nearly every other current capital ship afloat except for the Charles de Gaulle

The US has the largest intercontinental bomber force on earth - the next biggest is Russsia - with 14 Blackjacks. (hmmm, almost 1/20th of the US intercontinetal fleet)

China doesn't have any amphibious warfare groups - and has no experience in work ups or DFCT - how long do you think it will take for her to learn how to manage a strike force when she doesn't even have an LHA let alone a Carrier?

The US expeditionary groups alone are the second largest navy in the world - and thats against very credible navies like UK, France - China has about 85% of her fleet as older Russian pre 1991 vessels. Note that warfighting changed dramatically after 1991 - and even Chinas dramatic RMA change still does not give her airforce parity with Taiwan - let alone Japan. And you want to challenge the US?

Ever bothered to count the number of nukes that the US, Russia, UK, France and Israel have? China isn't even remotely near any of them and wants to talk it up??

The US has over 50 Aegis fitted DDG's - China has 2 phased array systems - in 3 years time she will have 4.

China has no stealth aircraft of any shape or form - she is still copying Su-27's under a license build - what proven system is in place that can deter stealth intrusions - let alone stealth weapons systems?

I can go on.... but its time you had a reality check.

 

[Raven_Wing278]

the US does have the most power/numerous fleet in the world(no argueing there)..but then again u have to take into consideration that the PLAN was only offically organised when the communists took over the main land in '49..where as the USN were organised after their civil war( E.g ironclads) a fleet with a history 250+ years against a fleet with a history of 55 years..thats 5 times longer then the PLAN ..i wouldnt be surprised if the USN has 5+ times the PLAN's capabilities/ships/training/experience

but for a fleet thats only half a century old...you gotta give the PLAN's credit of fast modernisation even if their equipment are still lagging behind that of western navies and USN

 

[doggychow14]

Ever bothered to count the number of nukes that the US, Russia, UK, France and Israel have? China isn't even remotely near any of them and wants to talk it up??

I think the nuclear count is US, Russia, France, China, UK , israel. The US needs its forces to project its forces all over the world. China just needs to control the taiwan straights.

 

[Superbug]

lol..how about subs, by 3 years, china will have 8 kilos, 4 yuans, and two or 3 093s, plus the new songs, old Hans

their TEST-71MKE TV electric homing torpedos and 53-65KE (or the latest UGST) wake-homing torpedoes will swarm over U.S ships

and chinese cruise missiles can also take its shot

subs will be our first line against western ships plus some destroyers like new 052Cs

The USN has 53 Nukes. 2 of which have more throw power than the entire Chinese air force

The US has 12 Carrier Strike Forces - each carrier has a combat wing that is bigger than most other countries airforces

The US has 10 Expeditionary strike forces - each LHA is bigger than nearly every other current capital ship afloat except for the Charles de Gaulle

The US has the largest intercontinental bomber force on earth - the next biggest is Russsia - with 14 Blackjacks. (hmmm, almost 1/20th of the US intercontinetal fleet)

China doesn't have any amphibious warfare groups - and has no experience in work ups or DFCT - how long do you think it will take for her to learn how to manage a strike force when she doesn't even have an LHA let alone a Carrier?

The US expeditionary groups alone are the second largest navy in the world - and thats against very credible navies like UK, France - China has about 85% of her fleet as older Russian pre 1991 vessels. Note that warfighting changed dramatically after 1991 - and even Chinas dramatic RMA change still does not give her airforce parity with Taiwan - let alone Japan. And you want to challenge the US?

Ever bothered to count the number of nukes that the US, Russia, UK, France and Israel have? China isn't even remotely near any of them and wants to talk it up??

The US has over 50 Aegis fitted DDG's - China has 2 phased array systems - in 3 years time she will have 4.

China has no stealth aircraft of any shape or form - she is still copying Su-27's under a license build - what proven system is in place that can deter stealth intrusions - let alone stealth weapons systems?

I can go on.... but its time you had a reality check.

Are you talking about full scale war again? I don't see any chance of that happening nowadays. Great powers chose to fight in Afghanistan, Korea, Vietanam, etc. decades ago.

I was worried for a second for you that you would put China behind India and Pakistan in nuclear counts. I don't konw Chinese the exact nuclear count, but, if china has less nuclear counts than UK or Isreal, you have greatly under-estimated brain power of CCP.

Nobody thinks China wants to challenge US, but when comes to Taiwan, china is willing to put up its entire military inventory. Don't throw out entire US military aparatus every time, it sounds scary to a lot of people. But, Is US capable of committing and deploying its entire military capability under such circumstances? BTW, one plus one doesn't equal to two, sometimes.

 

[gf0012-aust]

the US does have the most power/numerous fleet in the world(no argueing there)..but then again u have to take into consideration that the PLAN was only offically organised when the communists took over the main land in '49..where as the USN were organised after their civil war( E.g ironclads) a fleet with a history 250+ years against a fleet with a history of 55 years..thats 5 times longer then the PLAN ..i wouldnt be surprised if the USN has 5+ times the PLAN's capabilities/ships/training/experience

but for a fleet thats only half a century old...you gotta give the PLAN's credit of fast modernisation even if their equipment are still lagging behind that of western navies and USN

Don't misunderstand me, the PLAN has made extraordinary strides - but I get a little frustrated at people who have no idea how a military works making statements about what they can do to "x" country with "y's" forces.

You still need to have training, warfighting experience and historical involvement to fall back on.

When people start talking about "neutron bombs" destroying a CSF it becomes very very apparent that they have no idea of the battle footprint of a strike group - The Russians were probably the most capable and formidable foe the USN ever had to contend with - and China is not even a 20th of Russias capability. She does not have a blue water capability, she does not have a multiple intercontinental capability - and most importantly- she doesn't have sea control or logistics strength either.

Amatuers always talk about having a "million men" at arms etc... warfighting since 1991 has shown that you don't need to "sieze and hold" to destabilize the various centres of mass and gravity - so once again I get frustrated at having discussions with people who know bugger all about warfighting and are hinging capability on past glories which are totally irrelelvant.

When the PLA's two prime tacticians are stating that they can't deal with more than 2 x CSF's at once - then you'd think that those who don't have a military background or comprehension of what is involved would learn to keep their counsel.

 

[Superbug]

One thing I do get frustrated is people tend to think 1+1=2. Remember asymmetrical warfare? Real professional should talk like a professional, not with emotions.

 

[gf0012-aust]

One thing I do get frustrated is people tend to think 1+1=2. Remember asymmetrical warfare? Real professional should talk like a professional, not with emotions.

professionals understand its about basics and logistics - not about toys.

I get frustrated when people pass themselves off as knowing the answers and don't even understand the basics. They also don't even apparently understand what their own strategists have written.

btw, I have a copy of "Unrestricted Warfare" by by Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui (its required reading). You assume too much by your above comment.

demonstrate to me that you actually understand the mechanics of why neutron bombs and nukes on a carrier strike force won't work - and then I'll take you more seriously. demonstrate to me why China isn't able to project force for at least 4 years and then I'll accept that you understand the reality of her force disposition - if you don't, then Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui certainly do.