Aircraft carriers allow dominance over weaker militaries

[onebyone]

China launched its domestically built Type 001A aircraft carrier a few months ago. It measures about 315 meters (1,033 ft) long, with a displacement of about 50,000 tonnes (70,000 loaded). The vessel is set to undergo fitting-out and sea trials for several years before it is commissioned sometime around 2020.

Aircraft carriers are and will be vulnerable in a war between major military powers (USA, Russia, China, UK, France, Germany and probably India.) However, advanced aircraft carriers are useful for bullying weaker militaries around the world.

The next Type 002 aircraft carrier is development for which is slated to wrap in 2020 or 2021, will be a 70,000-ton aircraft carrier with catapults designed to launch heavier aircraft. It will comparable to the new british aircraft carriers in size and technology.

The Type 002 will have a larger engine. The CGT-60F is a heavy duty, F-class gas turbine (power output of 170-230 megawatts) is being designed by Tsinghua University’s Gas Turbine Research Center with the Dongfang Electric Group and Shanghai Electric Group.

The Huangdicun base is testing both steam and EMALS catapults for likely installation on the Type 002 aircraft carrier.

China will also add improved radar and electronics.

China is making a third J-31 stealth fighter prototype with the capability to operate on catapult-equipped aircraft carriers. The J-31, while smaller than the J-20 stealth fighter, has improved stealth and avionics capability on its second prototype. Plus, production versions are planned to be equipped with faster WS-17 engines, which could allow for supersonic flight without fuel-thirsty afterburners.

A nuclear-powered Type 003 supercarrier likely won’t enter service until after 2030. It will be a true super-carrier with about 90,000 tons of displacement.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/08/aircraft-carriers-allow-dominance-over-weaker-militaries.html

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

Wow, that website is just straight fraudulent. They took that article from Eastern Arsenal and reposted it verbatim. The only change they made was the title, and to make China look like it's warmongering.

Slimy shits.

 

[Jlaw]

Wow, that website is just straight fraudulent. They took that article from Eastern Arsenal and reposted it verbatim. The only change they made was the title, and to make China look like it's warmongering.

Slimy shits.

Hope he get sued

 

[Hassan Guy]

Maybe China could help us build one

 

[Figaro]

Hope he get sued

NBF rips off shitty articles and mashes them together on his crappy website. To be fair though, the remainder of NBG is quite good, especially when it comes to science/technology (but not PLA though )

 

[Ultima Thule]

Maybe China could help us build one

@Hassan Guy

 

[Figaro]

@Hassan Guy

The last thing Pakistan needs are aircraft carriers for its military ...

 

[Ultima Thule]

The last thing Pakistan needs are aircraft carriers for its military ...

No we don't need an aircraft carrier, we don't have a global ambitions sir and we don't have an industry to build aciraft carrier at home sir

 

[Figaro]

No we don't need an aircraft carrier, we don't have a global ambitions sir and we don't have an industry to build aciraft carrier at home sir

That's exactly my point ... what Pakistan needs desperately is more submarines to counter the Indian surface fleet

 

[gambit]

No we don't need an aircraft carrier, we don't have a global ambitions sir and we don't have an industry to build aciraft carrier at home sir

There is a difference between intimidation and threat.

If you want to intimidate someone, what you really want is to frighten that person into submission -- WITHOUT RESORTING TO VIOLENCE.

On the other hand, a threat is when an action is not merely implied but is very real and is very readied to be wielded.

For example, I can threaten to sue you, but unlike intimidation, I actually have lawyers prepped the paperwork and their messengers waiting for the order to submit the tort. An intimidation is where I merely hinted at the lawsuit and let your imagination do the rest, like saying that I have a knife at home, whereas, a threat is when I am holding that knife behind my back and out of your sight.

If an aircraft carrier appeared at your horizon, that is intimidation.

But if an aircraft carrier is not visible over your horizon but your intelligence services tells you the enemy fleet is arrayed something like this...

That is a threat. The fleet is arrayed for battle. The fleet's outer defenses are at maximum distances from the main weapon -- the aircraft carrier. In essence, he is assuming the worst about you, that you are going to attack him, so he positioned his defenses as far away from the aircraft carrier as possible.

So what does it mean for a country that want to...

1- Intimidate

...And/or...

2- Threaten

...Get a nuclear ballistic missile sub.

A submarine can stay off the enemy's coast for weeks or months. All the enemy has to do is realize that he cannot send an expeditionary fleet to your shores without you knowing details about it.

Nuclear power is for long distance. Instead of a knife, you have a spear, and a bow and arrow, weapons that extends your reach. With a nuclear powered sub, you signals to any potential adversary that, while you are not able to deliver the quantity of destruction like a corps of troops or a squadron of bombers, you can, with a nuclear sub, deliver a high QUALITY of destruction to existing high value locations.

A nuclear sub is not about taking over a piece of territory but about making whoever lives in that territory very nervous. You are not directly controlling an area but have constant disproportionate influence regarding how anyone can live in that area.