China needs 'three aircraft carriers': General

[StormShadow]

Are you a full-time idiot or a part-time one?

You see how many Harriers were lost, but do you also see the role Indian A/C's played in 1971 ?

Yeah, you make your own A/C's.................first make the first one operational, then come and talk.

Dont feed him dude...just report and leave the rest to mods.

 

[S10]

Because the bloody Jiangnan Shipyard's relocation didn't finish until then.
learn something, stop talking your nonsense.

Right, the fact that China did not have a suitable gas turbine engine in the form of GT25000 did not have anything to do with it. In your bizzaro world, as soon as something is constructed, that must meant it is ready for action right? No need for time to develop crew training, tactics and familiarity with onboard systems. No need for trials to find problems and solve them.

I have little interest in learning ignorance and logical fallacies from you. Last time I recall, people who talk non-sense usually end up banned, aka you.

 

[peaceful]

Are you a full-time idiot or a part-time one?

You see how many Harriers were lost, but do you also see the role Indian A/C's played in 1971 ?

Yeah, you make your own A/C's.................first make the first one operational, then come and talk.

you can keep your troll, india's fancy Harrier record will always be remembered

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

you can believe whatever you want to believe, at the end of day, you are just a loser living in cold canada.

that is it. now shut up and keep quiet.

Hey bro, i live in Canada too.

 

[peaceful]

Right, the fact that China did not have a suitable gas turbine engine in the form of GT25000 did not have anything to do with it. In your bizzaro world, as soon as something is constructed, that must meant it is ready for action right? No need for time to develop crew training, tactics and familiarity with onboard systems. No need for trials to find problems and solve them.

I have little interest in learning ignorance and logical fallacies from you. Last time I recall, people who talk non-sense usually end up banned, aka you.

according to your thug theory, then indian navy can be totally classified as non-exist. canada simple doesn't have a navy, australia will never have a navy. because these countries can't build the engine on its own.

就你这个智商，国内混不下去了，去加国避难的料，傻人一个还真以为自己是个东西了？狗杂碎而已

 

[S10]

according to your thug theory, then indian navy can be totally classified as non-exist. canada simple doesn't have a navy, australia will never have a navy. because these countries can't build the engine on its own.

就你这个智商，国内混不下去了，去加国避难的料，傻人一个还真以为自己是个东西了？狗杂碎而已

Canada and Australia both have unrestricted access to purchasing LM2500 from United States, which is superior to any gas turbine engine China is capable of producing. China on the other hand, must rely on its own. In addition, Canada and Australia do not have significant naval ambition beyond their own coast.

Oh and why don't you post that Chinese part in English and see how fast you get banned? Maybe I'll translate that to accelerate the process:

"From your IQ, you must be unable to hack it in China and went to seek refuge in Canada. A retard that thinks he's something? A dog sh*t."

Let me tell you this S10, your immigration to CA improves the national average IQ of both countries.

While you were banned, the average IQ of this forum jumped up 30 points. That's a fact.

 

[Stormweaver]

because it is not allowed to point out inda's fancy Harrier record here on this forum?

oh, sorry to hurt your feeling, but the harrier record is being laughed by the entire world. just like your failed commonwealth game,

Ok, here's a link:

As you can see, Harriers were all round bad news as far as maintenance was concerned. The F-35 was supposed to remedy that situation.

BTW, it takes more than just cranking out boats... it takes years of experience in carrier ops to actually use them effectively. Also, not only does the US have 11 carriers that are the "Super Carrier" class, it also has smaller ships [relatively] that carry aircraft. Ships that other countries would categorize as full fledged "Carriers". So -atleast- till 2035, the US will still reign supreme in the carrier arena.

 

[Akasa]

The indigenous carriers number one and number two will be the conventional ones.

And the indigenous carriers number three and number four will be the nuclear ones.

That's what I just said.

 

[Akasa]

I would say 3 is reasonable before 2030, since you need time to develop training, tactics and doctrine. Of course, as China's interests grows, so will its need for navy. I would not surprised if we end up with 6 or 7 in 2050.

3 is not enough to make up China's lack of power projection. Unless they are nuclear powered, they would still make China a green water navy.

I seriously doubt that you need 40 years to develop a doctrine. Even if you do, then it will already be outdated by then.

My prediction would be 5 carriers (including the Varyag) by 2030.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

3 is not enough to make up China's lack of power projection. Unless they are nuclear powered, they would still make China a green water navy.

I seriously doubt that you need 40 years to develop a doctrine. Even if you do, then it will already be outdated by then.

My prediction would be 5 carriers (including the Varyag) by 2030.

According to Jiangshan, the first indigenous carrier will also be built in Dalian, which is a modernized version of Varyag with two steam catapults on the diagonal flight deck.

The second indigenous carrier will be built in Shanghai, and it is a 80,000+ tons conventional carrier similar to the Kitty Hawk class with 4 steam catapults.

 

[Akasa]

According to Jiangshan, the first indigenous carrier will also be built in Dalian, which is a modernized version of Varyag with two steam catapults on the diagonal flight deck.

The second indigenous carrier will be built in Shanghai, and it is a 80,000+ tons conventional carrier similar to the Kitty Hawk class with 4 steam catapults.

So only one of them will be a flat top?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

So only one of them will be a flat top?

Because China's catapult technology is not fully mature yet, therefore only one of them will be flat top.

Here should be the flat top carrier of Jiangnan shipyard.

 

[anon45]

3 makes sense if the PLAN wanted 1 carrier on the coasts/seas/ etc. at all times.

 

[no_name]

According to Jiangshan, the first indigenous carrier will also be built in Dalian, which is a modernized version of Varyag with two steam catapults on the diagonal flight deck.

The second indigenous carrier will be built in Shanghai, and it is a 80,000+ tons conventional carrier similar to the Kitty Hawk class with 4 steam catapults.

Look like they need to make sure the catapult technology works on the first indigenous carrier, and it if fails they still have the ski jump.

Are they trying out an EM cat. yet? And any info on whether the carriers are conventional/nuclear/mixed?

 

[Vibs]

Look like they need to make sure the catapult technology works on the first indigenous carrier, and it if fails they still have the ski jump.

Are they trying out an EM cat. yet? And any info on whether the carriers are conventional/nuclear/mixed?

Weren't there reports of a full scale replica of the carrier deck built inland in China? I'd assume they would test the catapult systems there.