Expert: China should develop larger aircraft carriers armed with new-concep

[jhungary]

With or without carriers does US dare put up a real fight with China? I doubt it. I know too well of your American boys

LOL you are really funny.

GO GO Starwar
Let's see, one country have been fighting war in the last 100 years and have a war or 2 every 10 years or so.

The other country did not fought any war since 1950s, usually use other to get dirty for them, and is now lectureing other they don't dare to start war to them.

We don't hestitate to start any fight in the world, even Iraqi have more guts than Chinese. At least they resist, what do Chinese do? TEll me, you chinese stud. WHat you say already see Chinese not dare to fight anywar to anyone.

And i would like to see you, you sir, in a battlefield fighting for China, I fought for the US, how about yours? If yo uwill not do that then would yo ukindly shut up and stop trolling.

 

[Type 052D]

I don't know if the Chinese intend to operate their future carriers at a high tempo near or equal to the USN. If so the fires aboard the Forrestal & Enterprise come to mind.

I would suggest the Chinese get well versed in flight deck firefighting technics and ordnance handling safety as they ease into a higher tempo of operations.

from wiki..Lessons learned from the Forrestal Fire.

Lessons learned

Even today the Navy commonly refers to the fire aboard Forrestal, and the lessons learned, when teaching damage control and ammunition safety. The Navy circulated the lessons which the men of Forrestal re-learned at such cost throughout the Fleet, and the flight deck film of the flight operations, subsequently entitled Learn Or Burn, became mandatory viewing for fire fighting trainees for years. All new Navy recruits are required to view a training video titled Trial by Fire: A Carrier Fights for Life, produced from footage of the fire and damage control efforts, both successful and unsuccessful. On the one hand there were damage control teams spraying fire fighting foam on the deck to contain the flames, which was the correct procedure, while on the other hand crewmen on the other side of the deck sprayed seawater, washing away the foam and worsening the situation by washing burning fuel through the hole in the flight deck into the decks below; burning fuel is not easily extinguished and can in fact be spread by water. Due to the first bomb blast which killed nearly all of the specially trained firefighters on the ship, the remaining crew, who had no formal firefighting training, were forced to improvise.

Today, it is said that every US Navy sailor is a firefighter first. A large portion of basic training is dedicated to firefighting and prevention tactics. Though there were many firefighting tools available on Forrestal, including the use of Oxygen Breathing Apparatus, the general crew were not trained in their use and failed to use them correctly.

In response, a "wash down" system was incorporated into all carriers, which floods the flight deck with foam or water. Many other fire safety improvements stemmed from this incident.

The Farrier Fire Fighting School Learning Site in Norfolk is named for Chief Aviation Boatswain's Mate Gerald W. Farrier, the sailor who died in the initial explosion in an attempt to extinguish the fire with a single PKP extinguisher.

Eighteen crewmen were buried at Arlington National Cemetery. Names of the dead are also listed on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Although investigators could not identify the exact chain of events behind the carnage, they revealed potential maintenance issues including concerns in circuitry (stray voltage) associated with LAU-10 rocket launchers and Zunis, as well as the age of the 1,000 lb (450 kg) "fat bombs" loaded for the strike, shards from one of which dated it originally to the Korean War in 1953.

Safety regulations should have prevented the Zuni rocket from firing. A triple ejector rack (TER) electrical safety pin prevented any electrical signal from reaching the rockets but it was known that high winds could sometimes catch the attached tags and blow them free. The backup was the “pigtail” connection of the electrical wiring to the rockets pod. Regulations required they be connected only when the aircraft was attached to the catapult ready to launch. The Navy investigation found that four weeks before the fire, Forrestal's Weapons Coordination Board had a meeting to discuss the possible problem of a faulty pigtail delaying a mission while the aircraft was removed from the launcher. The board ruled that in the future the crew could ignore protocol and connect the pigtails while the aircraft were still queued. Though never made official, the crew immediately acted on the ruling. The inquiry found that the TER (safety)pin was likely blown free while the pigtail(electrical connector) was connected and that the missile fired due to a power surge when the pilot transferred his systems from external to internal power. This incident also led the U.S. Navy to implement safety reviews for weapons systems going on board ships (whether for use or for shipping). Today, this evaluation still exists as the Weapon System Explosives Safety Review Board.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

Develope a bigger carrier is not a projectivity but rather an necessity. Before you ask can Chinese Construct those platform, you should ask yourselve, do Chinese need bigger and better carrier?

Looking at Chinese Foreign Policy, they almost exclusively use their carrier in Homewater or Near-Homewater. The need for those force have a diminishing clause. Up until a point that Chinese want to use their carrier for oversea and ocean going operation, there are no need for China to build a bigger and better carrier.

Of course, you can always waste money on building a supecarrier and train its fighter group. But money are better spend elsewhere.

So my answer is, they can, but they don't need it

Chinese need bigger aircrat carriers to be able to cozy with Cuba and other south latino countries as how American dispatched their aircraft carrier in Asia, we learn a great deal of Cuba crises in 1962. and we also learn a great deal of Americans gunboat diplomacy such 1996 in Taiwan straite with two aircrafts carriers as demonstration. Before PLA navy judged that Aircraft carriers were just sitting duck face one super topido or missile but I think Americans have really prove them wrong...and convice them to have trial with Liaoning, now they enjoy so much and ask for bigger ones.

 

[jhungary]

Chinese need bigger aircrat carriers to be able to cozy with Cuba and other south latino countries as how American dispatched their aircraft carrier in Asia, we learn a great deal of Cuba crises in 1962. and we also learn a great deal of Americans gunboat diplomacy such 1996 in Taiwan straite with two aircrafts carriers as demonstration. Before PLA navy judged that Aircraft carriers were just sitting duck face one super topido or missile but I think Americans have really prove them wrong...and convice them to have trial with Liaoning, now they enjoy so much and ask for bigger ones.

What you lot don't know now (Since you have 0 long haul carrier operation, which is a fact, not a agrue point) and what you may know now is, if you were to make a trans-pacific journey from Asia to US West coast. Even with american Nuclear Carrier group, you need to stop 3 time to refuel the aircraft (Aircraft fuel used up fast) restock on food and drink and also refuel all the ship. For US, if we were to make a trip from Naval Base Kitsap, Brementon, Washington to to Naval base Yokosuka, Japan . a US Carrier Strike group needed to stop 3 times (One at Pearl Harbor, One at South Pacific (Either Palau, Perth or Brisbane Australia) and one at central pacific (Guam or the Marianas) Then you can port at Japan.

Cuase for a 30,000 man task goupr you only have a range of 14-15 days

Right now If you say you want to use Chinese carrier to project power in South America, place like Cuba, you are taking a longer journey than the American Navy. Where are your ship going to stop?? You have to understand, in peacetime, yeah, almost most port are open to you, but in war or at tension time, unless US let you use Pearl Harbor, you cannot make the trip even from China to West Coast of United State (You would be running out of food and water), let alone crossing the panama canal into the Carribean....

How are Chinese going to project power to the world (Mostly to US) if they are depending on the US to allow to use their facilities at Pearl??

 

[rcrmj]

this argument has been going on in China for decades``'whether we should have an AC, if yes how big and how advanced?'

but now this kind of debate is fading away in Chinese defence forums as official clearly stated that China will have AC and it is big, nu-cleared and catapualt

 

[faithfulguy]

The above deleted message was system fault. It replicated many times all by itself. All i did was to post it and suddenly i saw the message repeated many times.

Are you the real Hari sud?

 

[Broccoli]

we have constantly 20-40 silos but a lot more than 100+ mobiles.

Currently those silos are used to protect DF-5 ICBM's, and fueling those old missiles can take up to one hour, compare that to few minutes it takes to launch solid fueled DF-31A.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

What you lot don't know now (Since you have 0 long haul carrier operation, which is a fact, not a agrue point) and what you may know now is, if you were to make a trans-pacific journey from Asia to US West coast. Even with american Nuclear Carrier group, you need to stop 3 time to refuel the aircraft (Aircraft fuel used up fast) restock on food and drink and also refuel all the ship. For US, if we were to make a trip from Naval Base Kitsap, Brementon, Washington to to Naval base Yokosuka, Japan . a US Carrier Strike group needed to stop 3 times (One at Pearl Harbor, One at South Pacific (Either Palau, Perth or Brisbane Australia) and one at central pacific (Guam or the Marianas) Then you can port at Japan.

Cuase for a 30,000 man task goupr you only have a range of 14-15 days

Right now If you say you want to use Chinese carrier to project power in South America, place like Cuba, you are taking a longer journey than the American Navy. Where are your ship going to stop?? You have to understand, in peacetime, yeah, almost most port are open to you, but in war or at tension time, unless US let you use Pearl Harbor, you cannot make the trip even from China to West Coast of United State (You would be running out of food and water), let alone crossing the panama canal into the Carribean....

How are Chinese going to project power to the world (Mostly to US) if they are depending on the US to allow to use their facilities at Pearl??

it doesn't matter, we can use several civilian cargo ships as fuel and food to resupply for the battle group, as long as we get vincinity of U.S pacific coast (of course within internationa water) as pay visit friendly countries to set a NEW milestone for future PLA Navy. We should break our psycological barrier and the myth that we can't go beyond first island chains and America is beyond our reach...and only a carrier battle group will allow us to do that.

 

[jhungary]

it doesn't matter, we can use several civilian cargo ships as fuel and food to resupply for the battle group, as long as we get vincinity of U.S pacific coast (of course within internationa water) as pay visit friendly countries to set a NEW milestone for future PLA Navy. We should break our psycological barrier and the myth that we can't go beyond first island chains and America is beyond our reach...and only a carrier battle group will allow us to do that.

dude, you do know if you do that, you need to have 100+ Cargo ship suporting a single 30 days operation?? This is not feasible....
You are not talking about just use a few supply ship to supply your fleet. Your supply ship needed supply as well, and you need more than a few supply ship to feed the whole carrier battle group.

You know supply ship need resupply itself otherwise they will also run out of fuel. and say you have 20 cargo ship supporting 1 resupply mission to the carrier group. You need 20 another cargo ship to resupply the 20 cargo ship that supplying the group and another 20 ship if you want all your ship to return (Unlesss you want to stranded the whole carrier group when you get to US West Coast.)

So, as i say, for a Nuclear Power Carrier group, you need to stop 3 times to take on water, jet fuel, mail, and food. YOu need to resupply 3 times. Mean you have 3x 20 cargo ship to support your fleet to go to West coast, another 3 x 20 to support them coming back to China. YOu are talking about 120 resupply ship. And that is just an estimation, you probrbly need a lot more as yours is not a nuclear carrier.

Plus need not to say, civilian ship resupply combat ship is a violation of law of the sea, this make your civilian ship a legitimate target and subject to same condition when you dock on neutral port (ie in time or war, your civilian cargo ship can be detained anad confiscated.)

No Navy in the world will do that.......that is stupid and crazy

 

[qwerrty]

wrong thread

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

dude, you do know if you do that, you need to have 100+ Cargo ship suporting a single 30 days operation?? This is not feasible....
You are not talking about just use a few supply ship to supply your fleet. Your supply ship needed supply as well, and you need more than a few supply ship to feed the whole carrier battle group.

You know supply ship need resupply itself otherwise they will also run out of fuel. and say you have 20 cargo ship supporting 1 resupply mission to the carrier group. You need 20 another cargo ship to resupply the 20 cargo ship that supplying the group and another 20 ship if you want all your ship to return (Unlesss you want to stranded the whole carrier group when you get to US West Coast.)

So, as i say, for a Nuclear Power Carrier group, you need to stop 3 times to take on water, jet fuel, mail, and food. YOu need to resupply 3 times. Mean you have 3x 20 cargo ship to support your fleet to go to West coast, another 3 x 20 to support them coming back to China. YOu are talking about 120 resupply ship. And that is just an estimation, you probrbly need a lot more as yours is not a nuclear carrier.

Plus need not to say, civilian ship resupply combat ship is a violation of law of the sea, this make your civilian ship a legitimate target and subject to same condition when you dock on neutral port (ie in time or war, your civilian cargo ship can be detained anad confiscated.)

No Navy in the world will do that.......that is stupid and crazy

We're not talking about long journey sail, I believe several container ship such as these will do the jobs at peacetime, of course that's not a solution for wartime. For now it's empty talk but for funture when China has several aircraft carrier to defense our coast lines, the extra will be be likely sent to U.S west pacific coasts, I certainly beleive that Chinese Navy commanders want to return American's favor, just we don't have any practical solution yet...Time will tell.

 

[jhungary]

We're not talking about long journey sail, I believe several container ship such as these will do the jobs at peacetime, of course that's not a solution for wartime. For now it's empty talk but for funture when China has several aircraft carrier to defense our coast lines, the extra will be be likely sent to U.S west pacific coasts, I certainly beleive that Chinese Navy commanders want to return American's favor, just we don't have any practical solution yet...Time will tell.

lol Chinese want to start a "Backyard" Navy??

Do you mean cargo ship like this??

or replenishment ship like this??

Do you have any idea how naval logistic is done??

The most important thing of all is for your replenishment or logistic ship keep up with the carrier battlegroup. Otherwise if your group is very much ahead of the logistic ship, when it ran out or nearly ran out of food and ammunition and fuel, all your carrier group can do is sit and wait for your oiler to come.

MV Cargo ship like the first one and the one you post on youtube have no more than 15-20 knots speed, slower if they are fully loaded. While replenishment ship like T-AOE-9 Such as USNS Supply have a top speed of 27 knots. Which can roughtly catch up the carrier group. which usually doing 25-30 knots. Liaoning for example have a top speed of 32 knots.

Fueling system and ammunition is not like you bunch them in a container or jerry can and transport them in a cargo ship, there are specific place and portal to go through to secure a line of logistic to be done and to make sure you can refuel and rearm in rough sea.

 

[doidoi2]

dude, you do know if you do that, you need to have 100+ Cargo ship suporting a single 30 days operation?? This is not feasible....

sigh.... pulling numbers outta your *** again. 100+ CARGO ships? cmon man, you know better than that.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

lol Chinese want to start a "Backyard" Navy??

Do you mean cargo ship like this??

or replenishment ship like this??

Do you have any idea how naval logistic is done??

The most important thing of all is for your replenishment or logistic ship keep up with the carrier battlegroup. Otherwise if your group is very much ahead of the logistic ship, when it ran out or nearly ran out of food and ammunition and fuel, all your carrier group can do is sit and wait for your oiler to come.

MV Cargo ship like the first one and the one you post on youtube have no more than 15-20 knots speed, slower if they are fully loaded. While replenishment ship like T-AOE-9 Such as USNS Supply have a top speed of 27 knots. Which can roughtly catch up the carrier group. which usually doing 25-30 knots. Liaoning for example have a top speed of 32 knots.

Fueling system and ammunition is not like you bunch them in a container or jerry can and transport them in a cargo ship, there are specific place and portal to go through to secure a line of logistic to be done and to make sure you can refuel and rearm in rough sea.

I agree with you that cargo ship is not ideal but at least the first step in peace time for PLA carrier battle group to adventure in uncharted area then we can reavaluate and re-assesse our need as resupply...the most important is to set a milestone and bring much experience for Next PLA officers so they can take more practical solution, the journey of thousand mile start with a single step...I guess that's still valide in Military.

 

[jhungary]

sigh.... pulling numbers outta your *** again. 100+ CARGO ships? cmon man, you know better than that.

Dude, before i answer you anything, DO YOU EVEN KNOW HOW MANY OILER, REPLENISHMENT SHIP, TANKER, UNDERWAY SUPPLY VESSEL, OFFSHORE SUPPLY VESSEL. COMBAT LOGISTIC SHIP, SEA LIFT COMMAND SHIP, US NAVY OPERATE?? and dude, we have base all over the world, and we only need to use them once.

I will give you an idea. see this

List of Military Sealift Command ships - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Before the ready reserve, i counted 123 ship of all sort. and i do not count service support, onshore supply ship, tugboat, alignment boat, combat support vessel, navigation vessel and so on, so forth, the 123 ship amada are just for Combat Logistic, Sealift Operation and Prepositioning. US NAVY ITSELF are using 123 ship to support 6 Combat Group (2 carrier each) that make slightly above 20 ship for each CSG.

Now tell me, either Chinese plan to sail with their carrier only, they will need to match that number if you are going in fleet, so if not 20 logistic per group how many are there??

Now, try to multiple it by 6 as you need to refuel 3 times the distant US Navy cover and return, plus we are using Nuclear Plants and your carrier are using Diseal Electric. Actually the factor of 3 is already minimal. We use 20 logistic ship (WE, mean US Navy) to support one combat group or carrier strike group and again we have bases around the world. How many ship to support a Chinese Carrier Group? 6? 8? or 10? How far can you go with 10 support ship? Not even past Guam if you tell me.

dude, know more about Military Sealift, and Maritime Logistic, then we can talk, in the mean time, my advice is STFU.

Underway replenishment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Maritime Prepositioning ship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Military Sealift Command- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with you that cargo ship is not ideal but at least the first step in peace time for PLA carrier battle group to adventure in uncharted area then we can reavaluate and re-assesse our need as resupply...the most important is to set a milestone and bring much experience for Next PLA officers so they can take more practical solution, the journey of thousand mile start with a single step...I guess that's still valide in Military.

but using cargo ship itself is not practical. I would understand if China want the show of force for that one time, but in case of peace time, it would not be much different, as long as you can pay the port charge, many county allow any navy to dock at their country. Military Projection should be done on time as tension and time of war only.

Don't get me wrong, if China were to ask the US to dock their carrier at Guam tomorrow, i think US are gonna allow it, as long as Chinese pays. I mean It's impractical if there are time of war, not peacetime.

I think China should start their own diplomatic policy first, then build more carrier, otherwise, in time of war, when you needed them the most, they aren't going anywhere but up and down Chinese Coast..........