CV-17 Shandong - Type 002 Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions

[terranMarine]

I am not disputing anything really, just listing the requirements. Where, when and how was this broadcasted?

You are not disputing? Well this is what you said "There is no credible strategic, doctrine or policy reason for PLAN fielding (and, most importantly, having to service) at least 10 aircraft carriers" Looks to me it's disputing.

And yes it was broadcasted on a Chinese news channel citing source -> BEIJING. How's that for reliability ?

 

[Dante80]

You are not disputing? Well this is what you said "There is no credible strategic, doctrine or policy reason for PLAN fielding (and, most importantly, having to service) at least 10 aircraft carriers" Looks to me it's disputing.

And yes it was broadcasted on a Chinese news channel citing source -> BEIJING. How's that for reliability ?

I seriously have no information about said broadcast. I am willing to bet that if this was said in an official way then we would have had a metric ton of articles about it (especially in the West). And we don't.
Why? What was the context on the broadcast you saw? I am really interested in the subject, since such a departure from Liu Huaqings' vision would be extremely notable.

Any help would be vastly appreciated.

 

[terranMarine]

I seriously have no information about said broadcast. I am willing to bet that if this was said in an official way then we would have had a metric ton of articles about it (especially in the West). And we don't.
Why? What was the context on the information you saw? I am really interested in the subject, since such a departure from Liu Huaqings' vision would be extremely notable.

You don't have to believe me dude, time will proof whether i was making things up or not. It's the same as with the naming of Type 002, only 1-2 news channels mentioned that piece of information which is not broadcasted officially nationwide. Yet one can ask how reliable and what the source is those 2 news channels obtained. I saw the broadcast and it talked quite "in depth" about the 10 AC. So you can decide to believe it or brush it away as garbage. I can't be bothered to explain all the details i saw on that "recent" broadcast.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

I think it's crystal clear that China will have more than 20 carriers by mid-century. China's economy is already 20% larger than the US economy by PPP, by 2050 it will be easily more than twice (probably much more) as large. 2x the economy means it can comfortably support 2x the military, which means 2x the carriers.

 

[terranMarine]

I think it's crystal clear that China will have more than 20 carriers by mid-century. China's economy is already 20% larger than the US economy by PPP, by 2050 it will be easily more than twice (probably much more) as large. 2x the economy means it can comfortably support 2x the military, which means 2x the carriers.

now i wouldn't be so sure about 20, but definitely 10. All i can say is keep watching for the next 20 years and see how many AC China has by that time, perhaps then there's no more doubt that China is planning at least 10.

 

[Dante80]

You don't have to believe me dude, time will proof whether i was making things up or not. It's the same as with the naming of Type 002, only 1-2 news channels mentioned that piece of information which is not broadcasted officially nationwide. Yet one can ask how reliable and what the source is those 2 news channels obtained. I saw the broadcast and it talked quite "in depth" about the 10 AC. So you can decide to believe it or brush it away as garbage. I can't be bothered to explain all the details i saw on that "recent" broadcast.

It is not really about believing it or not, I assume good faith in every conversation. Which means, I believe that you saw that. This should not even be on your mind.

I am asking for context because what you saw runs contrary to PLAN established doctrine (at least as I understand it, and as it has been announced historically so far). China has never even hinted at reaching a sum of 10 simultaneously serviced Aircraft Carriers.

As I wrote above, the current goals are:

One carrier group per fleet (3 fleets)
One carrier group for the far seas(4th fleet)
One group in training
One or two groups in repair/maintenance.

This gives a total of 6 or 7 carriers as the end goal. That does not mean that China will build less than 10 ACs btw. It means that it will service 6 or 7 carriers simultaneously (and new, better designs coming down the line will replace older and obsolete ones). Expansion before modernization.

I think it's crystal clear that China will have more than 20 carriers by mid-century. China's economy is already 20% larger than the US economy by PPP, by 2050 it will be easily more than twice (probably much more) as large. 2x the economy means it can comfortably support 2x the military, which means 2x the carriers.

Crystal clear? 20?
Guys, Aircraft Carriers are major surface combatants that require a ridiculous amount of money to field and service over their lifetime. Navies build said combatants at great cost, and they build them to cover specific needs.
Said needs for 20 ACs are absent in Chinas strategic doctrine. Just because you can do something, does not mean that you want to do it.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

Guys, Aircraft Carriers are major surface combatants that require a ridiculous amount of money to field and service over their lifetime.

Maybe for the US, where defense companies charge the government $500,000 for a toilet seat. For all China's problems, this sort of blatant, rampant corruption in defense procurement simply doesn't exist. China has highly efficient and technologically advanced shipyards - more importantly, it has several that compete against each other, ensuring the proper market price is reached - that can produce these warships.

now i wouldn't be so sure about 20, but definitely 10

I'm confident China can build and operate 20 by 2050, whether or not it chooses to do so is another matter. I hope it does, as I hope many things happen by 2050: complete reunification, UN headquarters moving to Beijing, several US embassies "accidentally" hit by Chinese airstrikes, etc.

 

[terranMarine]

It is not really about believing it or not, I assume good faith in every conversation. Which means, I believe that you saw that. This should not even be on your mind.

I am asking for context because what you saw runs contrary to PLAN established doctrine (at least as I understand it, and as it has been announced historically so far). China has never even hinted at reaching a sum of 10 simultaneously serviced Aircraft Carriers.

As I wrote above, the current goals are:

One carrier group per fleet (3 fleets)
One carrier group for the far seas(4th fleet)
One group in training
One or two groups in repair/maintenance.

This gives a total of 6 or 7 carriers as the end goal. That does not mean that China will build less than 10 ACs btw. It means that it will service 6 or 7 carriers simultaneously (and new, better designs coming down the line will replace older and obsolete ones). Expansion before modernization.



Crystal clear? 20?
Guys, Aircraft Carriers are major surface combatants that require a ridiculous amount of money to field and service over their lifetime. Navies build said combatants at great cost, and they build them to cover specific needs.
Said needs for 20 ACs are absent in Chinas strategic doctrine. Just because you can do something, does not mean that you want to do it.

Since when is China obliged to share everything officially? When the J-20 arrived, no Chinese news said a thing about it prior its revelation. Just because that news channel got some inside info and sharing it with the local city doesn't mean it's unreliable. China does not have to officially announce how many AC she is planning to build either, it happens that the news channel i was watching had quite some details explained (lucky me)

 

[Dante80]

Maybe for the US, where defense companies charge the government $500,000 for a toilet seat. For all China's problems, this sort of blatant, rampant corruption in defense procurement simply doesn't exist. China has highly efficient and technologically advanced shipyards - more importantly, it has several that compete against each other, ensuring the proper market price is reached - that can produce these warships.

It's not about the shipyards though. Aircraft Carriers are mobile cities really, and building the hull is actually the least important thing. The carrier wing costs more than the ship, and the salary, wing maintenance and running costs for each year it is active are about 1/10th of its procurement cost. Per year.

I'm confident China can build and operate 20 by 2050, whether or not it chooses to do so is another matter. .

China can build and operate said numbers. I'm arguing whether it wants to. Until today, I knew (from what China said) it did not.

Since when is China obliged to share everything officially? When the J-20 arrived, no Chinese news said a thing about it prior its revelation. Just because that news channel got some inside info and sharing it with the local city doesn't mean it's unreliable. China does not have to officially announce how many AC she is planning to build either, it happens that the news channel i was watching had quite some details explained (lucky me)

That was lucky indeed. Wish I could have seen that too.

 

[terranMarine]

It's not about the shipyards though. Aircraft Carriers are mobile cities really, and building the hull is actually the least important thing. The carrier wing costs more than the ship, and the salary, wing maintenance and running costs for each year it is active are about 1/10th of its procurement cost.



China can build and operate said numbers. I'm arguing whether it wants to. Until today, I knew (from what China said) it did not.



That was lucky indeed. Wish I could have seen that too.

You can understand Chinese? Or better yet you understand Cantonese?

 

[Dante80]

You can understand Chinese? Or better yet you understand Cantonese?

Sadly no, I could have asked for a tranlation though..after posting it here of course (this would be very big news)..

 

[terranMarine]

Sadly no, I could have asked for a tranlation though..after posting it here of course (this would be very big news)..

You couldn't have asked for translation since it was just vocally announced without any footage and you can't find it on any streaming site (youtube etc..). It was only a brief broadcast with some juicy details explained for the local city. The rest of Mainland probably don't know about it either. I happened to be lucky to saw that part for now you will just have to have patience and watch as the number of AC grows.

 

[samsara]

now i wouldn't be so sure about 20, but definitely 10. All i can say is keep watching for the next 20 years and see how many AC China has by that time, perhaps then there's no more doubt that China is planning at least 10.

Great! The next 20 years I most likely still stay around to witness it with my own eyes And for someone who has been watching the development of the Middle Kingdom affectionately as early as in the early 1980s when she was still backward and quite poor and when information was so scarce, I can tell how great my personal satisfaction to witness her long and winding ways to arrive at that point. [Actually no words are great enough to depict the innermost feeling & emotion.] It's my great pleasure to part this world knowing that China has arrived there. Take it as a beautiful redemption for the so long almost one's own lifetime agonies in witnessing the playing catch-up role, plus all the humiliation as well as disappointment and also angers borne in mind and psyche for so many decades. In the meantime, EVERY New Carrier is worth of a great celebration I'll make sure that I have my personal one just as I did with the CV-16 Liaoning. 天耀中华！！

<sorry for my rant>

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

There is no credible strategic, doctrine or policy reason for PLAN fielding (and, most importantly, having to service) at least 10 aircraft carriers.

None.

To be more specific, the compatible number of carrier groups with the current PLAN doctrine, as expressed by late Admiral Liu Huaqing and supported by CPC is:

One carrier group per fleet (3 fleets)
One carrier group for the far seas
One group in training
One or two groups in repair/maintenance.

This gives a total of 6 or 7 carriers as the end goal.

US is about to put 60% of their military force in Pacific to counter China, combine with Japanese Navy, it's pretty challenge for China as task, 6 or 7 carriers wouldn't be enough, in the critical moment US can reinforce with more force and more aircraft carriers to Pacific. it's laughable if China can handle the situation with 10 AC.

China need at less 3 AC for northern Eastern fleet, 2 on Taiwan, 2 for SCS, 2 for training, 2 for repair/maintenance, I would say 11 minimum.

 

[antonius123]

US is about to put 60% of their military force in Pacific to counter China, combine with Japanese Navy, it's pretty challenge for China as task, 6 or 7 carriers wouldn't be enough, in the critical moment US can reinforce with more force and more aircraft carriers to Pacific. it's laughable if China can handle the situation with 10 AC.

China need at less 3 AC for northern Eastern fleet, 2 on Taiwan, 2 for SCS, 2 for training, 2 for repair/maintenance, I would say 11 minimum.

The best strategy to counter CBG is by deploying silent submarines + destroyers.

China should better go with numerous combination of submersible arsenal (equipped with 300 VLM) + Type 055 + type 095, it will be lethal to super carriers.