What's new

Aircraft carrier is a glorified training ship per NY times article

BEIJING — In a ceremony attended by the country’s top leaders, China put its first aircraft carrier into service on Tuesday, a move intended to signal its growing military might as tensions escalate between Beijing and its neighbors over islands in nearby seas.
Enlarge This Image

Officials said that the carrier, a discarded vessel bought from Ukraine in 1998 and refurbished by China, would protect national sovereignty, an issue that has become a touchstone of the government’s dispute with Japan over ownership of islands in the East China Sea.

But despite the triumphant tone of the launch, which was watched by President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, and despite rousing assessments by Chinese military experts about the importance of the carrier, the vessel will only be used for training and testing for the foreseeable future.

The mark “16” emblazoned on the carrier’s side indicates it is limited to training, Chinese and other military experts said. China does not have planes capable of landing on the carrier and so far training for such landings have been carried out on land, they said.

Even so, the public appearance of the carrier at the northeastern port of Dalian was used as an occasion to stir patriotic feelings, which have run at fever pitch in the last 10 days over the dispute between China and Japan over the East China Sea islands, called Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China.

The carrier would “raise the overall operational strength of the Chinese Navy” and help China “to effectively protect national sovereignty, security and development interests,” the Ministry of Defense said.

The Communist Party congress that will begin the country’s once-in-a-decade leadership transition is expected to be held next month, and the public unveiling of the carrier appeared to be part of an effort to forge national unity ahead of the event.

For international purposes, the public unveiling of the carrier seemed intended to signal to smaller nations in the South China Sea, including the Philippines, a U.S. ally, that China has an increasing number of impressive assets to deploy.

American military planners have downplayed the significance of the commissioning of the carrier. Some Navy officials have even said they would encourage China to move ahead with building its own aircraft carrier and the ships to accompany it, because it would be a waste of money.

Other military experts outside China have agreed with that assessment.


“The fact is the aircraft carrier is useless for the Chinese Navy,” You Ji, a visiting senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore, said in an interview. “If it is used against America, it has no survivability. If it is used against China’s neighbors, it’s a sign of bullying.”

Vietnam, a neighbor with whom China has fought wars, operates land-based Russian SU 230 aircraft that could pose a threat to the aircraft carrier, Mr. You said. “In the South China Sea, if the carrier is damaged by the Vietnamese, it’s a huge loss of face,” he said. “It’s not worth it.”

Up to now, Chinese pilots have been limited to practicing simulated carrier landings on concrete strips on land in Chinese J-8 aircraft based on Soviet-made MIG-23s produced about 25 years ago, Mr. You said. The pilots could not undertake the difficult maneuver of landing on a moving carrier because China does not yet have suitable aircraft, Mr. You said.

The question of whether China will move ahead and build its own carrier depends in large part, he said, on whether China can develop aircraft to land on one. “It’s a long, long process for constructing such aircraft,” he said.

In contrast to some of the skepticism expressed by military experts outside China, Li Jie, a researcher at the Chinese Naval Research Institute, said in an interview in the state-run People’s Daily that the carrier would change the Chinese Navy’s traditional mind-set and bring qualitative changes to its operational style and structure, he said.

Although the Chinese military does not publish a breakdown of its military spending, foreign military experts say the navy is less well funded than the army and air force.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/w...rcraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical.html

I stopped reading when the article suggested that China doesn't have any combat carrier aircraft. Here is where the article loses all credibility because they have clearly forgotten that China has configured the J-15 for fighters. They also included the J-31 in the future.

What's even more ridiculous is that the article quotes a person who claims the carrier is "useless". Having a mobile runway filled with modern equipment is anything but useless in a high intensity conflict. The ability to bring destruction to the enemy's home front is one of the key things that separate regional military power and military superpower. EVEN IF the carrier won't be used for combat (which the FL-3000N, Type 1130, J-15, Z-8AEW, Y-7 AWACS, Z-8JH, J-31, JL-9 act as a counterargument against), it will provide invaluable training as well as expertise to integrate modern systems.
 
We bought an empty hull, and fitted everything inside including engine, radar and weapon systems. If you buy a automobile frame, do you call it buying a whole car?

Dumbass
I've seen the photos pre-refurbish...pretty much a whole ship....retard. As to your analogy....if I buy a Honda....put on new exhaust...paint it...put on decals and spinners and chip the engine....it's still a damned Honda.


And why are you guys so scared to admit its for training? (as your own military acknowledges). If you are building carriers down the line...it makes sense to have trained crews and some experience with ship handling deck activities etc.
 
I stopped reading when the article suggested that China doesn't have any combat carrier aircraft. Here is where the article loses all credibility because they have clearly forgotten that China has configured the J-15 for fighters. They also included the J-31 in the future.

The J-15 is still not inducted. :rolleyes:
What's even more ridiculous is that the article quotes a person who claims the carrier is "useless". Having a mobile runway filled with modern equipment is anything but useless in a high intensity conflict. The ability to bring destruction to the enemy's home front is one of the key things that separate regional military power and military superpower. EVEN IF the carrier won't be used for combat (which the FL-3000N, Type 1130, J-15, Z-8AEW, Y-7 AWACS, Z-8JH, J-31, JL-9 act as a counterargument against), it will provide invaluable training as well as expertise to integrate modern systems.

Couldn't agree more with the second para, regardless of whether it is going to be a trainer or not, it is going to help the PLAN. Not to mention that a tiny retrofitting will make it capable of fighting as well.
 
Retard, the hull was Ukranian, not Russian. Second, the ship was nothing more than an empty hull when we bought it. The French even went as far as to send inspectors to ensure everything inside was sabotaged before we were able to buy it. Everything inside that hull is ours, unlike the Indians which relies on Russians to build it for them.
Moron....it was built for the USSR...the Ukranians inherited it...
 
EzioAltaïr;3442016 said:
The J-15 is still not inducted. :rolleyes:

This article implies that Chinese naval pilots won't be able to land effectively since they do not have suitable carrier based aircraft. When Chinese naval pilots are flying, then that means the J-15 woul have already been in service by that time.
 
EzioAltaïr;3442016 said:
Couldn't agree more with the second para, regardless of whether it is going to be a trainer or not, it is going to help the PLAN. Not to mention that a tiny retrofitting will make it capable of fighting as well.

The carrier is fully capable of fighting missions even without any bit of retrofitting. She is fully equipped with air defense weaponry and soon to be air wing.
 
This article implies that Chinese naval pilots won't be able to land effectively since they do not have suitable carrier based aircraft. When Chinese naval pilots are flying, then that means the J-15 woul have already been in service by that time.

Has China previously bought any carrier based aircraft?
 
Moron....it was built for the USSR...the Ukranians inherited it...

You Fool second person to have no knowledge; It was to be built in 1988 when worked started soviet-afghan war gave a heavy dent to soviet economy and as soviet union disintegrated it was transferred to Ukraine which initially tried to build it but very low on funds the partially completed hull was put on auction, China purchased the partially build hull in 1998 and then detailed blue prints and plan was worked upon for few years and worked started to build AC. Here today it is a finished completed AC handed over to Chinese Navy and commissioned.

PS. sometimes it takes a little help from search engine called google to dig information. [not wiki info if you have money subscribe to Janes Defense with correct information.]
 
You Fool second person to have no knowledge; It was to be built in 1988 when worked started soviet-afghan war gave a heavy dent to soviet economy and as soviet union disintegrated it was transferred to Ukraine which initially tried to build it but very low on funds the partially completed hull was put on auction, China purchased the partially build hull in 1998 and then detailed blue prints and plan was worked upon for few years and worked started to build AC. Here today it is a finished completed AC handed over to Chinese Navy and commissioned.

PS. sometimes it takes a little help from search engine called google to dig information.
Exactly as I said....for the USSR...inherited by Ukraine....read English much? (For Pete's sake....is google and wiki that danged hard to use?) PS...you deserve an award for saying I have no knowledge and then repeating what I just said.
 
Exactly as I said....for the USSR...inherited by Ukraine....read English much? (For Pete's sake....is google and wiki that danged hard to use?) PS...you deserve an award for saying I have no knowledge and then repeating what I just said.

Exactly you are wrong, Ukraine did not inherited nor was it in ukraine at the time of soviet disintegration, ukraine negotiated for it took all the transfer and purchase and later due to low on funds Auctioned it. Can't understand? look there you see google good now google it! you may gift awards to your hindustani members, thanks but no thanks.
 
Exactly you are wrong, Ukraine did not inherited nor was it in ukraine at the time of soviet disintegration, ukraine negotiated for it took all the transfer and purchase and later due to low on funds Auctioned it. Can't understand? look there you see google good now google it! you may gift awards to your hindustani members, thanks but no thanks.
It became independant Ukraine after the Soviet dissolution...the Chinese bought it from Ukraine. As you are having a hard time with wiki....will paste for you.

"Construction had ceased by 1992, with the ship structurally complete but without electronics. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, ownership was transferred to Ukraine; the ship was laid up, unmaintained, and then stripped. By early 1998, she lacked engines, a rudder, much of her operating systems, and was put up for auction" "hindustani members?" If that was to be an insult....fail....I'm not Indian. (and in case it's the English that's giving you a hard time....transfering ownership after dissolution is "inheriting")
 
This article implies that Chinese naval pilots won't be able to land effectively since they do not have suitable carrier based aircraft. When Chinese naval pilots are flying, then that means the J-15 woul have already been in service by that time.

huh? the article implies present tense. presently there is no aircraft that land on it...it makes no assumptions about the future. Hence presently the aircraft is a training ship as designated by its m"16" marking. And all the hoop la by the Chinese govt was to pass it as some " combat ready AC of what AC standards are worldwide" for PR propaganda on its people.

EzioAltaïr;3442089 said:
Has China previously bought any carrier based aircraft?

No nobody will sell it to them. They lied about this one when they bought it...saying it was going to be a casino
 
Personally, I dont care if people calls it as training ship as long as it's usefull for CHina...AC is brand new warfare toy for China to learn, we have a long way to go. if those try to comforte themself by calling this AC a training ship with no military purpose..that's fine.
 
Not only is NY times regarded by the world as a prestigious news organization and is cited by many Chinese, and other than your obvious petty defensive mindset... the fact that it is a training ship was also cited by Chinese military experts as reported. But none of that would stop you from cheerleading ignorance I suspect.

As an American, I can tell u that NY Time is a piece of communist crap
 
Back
Top Bottom