What's new

Russian Politician Wants Liaoning Aircraft Carrier Back That China Purchased From Ukraine

walterbibikow

BANNED
Joined
Nov 12, 2022
Messages
959
Reaction score
-4
Country
India
Location
India
1673157793815.png

Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning

When the erstwhile Soviet Union disintegrated, Ukraine sold the Kuznetsov-class cruiser carrier to China. More than two decades later, a Russian political party has made a pitch to the Russian government to buy back the aircraft carrier from Beijing.

On January 5, a leader of the Russian Liberal Democratic Party, Sergey Karginov suggested that the Russian government buy back the Soviet aircraft carrier that Ukraine had previously sold to China, RIA Novosti reported.

The Liberal Democratic Party is a right-wing, ultranationalist party that supports the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Karginov told the media: “The unfinished aircraft carrier Varyag was handed over to Ukraine and then sold to China to convert it into a casino. After China received the ship, it completed its construction and renamed it the Liaoning ship. The ship was originally supposed to become one of the main ships of the USSR.
1673157856642.png

Sergey Karginov
He suggested that the Russian government buy the aircraft carrier from China and induct it into service in the name of Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the founder of his party who died last year. Zhirinovsky was an ultra-nationalist politician who shared Vladimir Putin’s disdain for Ukraine and other former Soviet countries.
1673158245407.png

Varyag Aircraft Cruise Carrier

Karginov made a very blunt suggestion saying, “After the collapse of the USSR, Ukraine preferred to sell it, in fact, for a price of a few bottles of vodka or price of scrap metal. Given the current situation, I propose that Russia buy this aircraft carrier from China, in the name of Zhirinovsky, the founder of the Liberal Democratic Party, and make it the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet.”

The call for inducting the Liaoning carrier into the Black Sea Fleet is significant as the naval force stationed here has been pivotal in launching attacks against Ukraine. The pitch coincidentally comes when Ukraine has said there is currently just one Russian vessel with no Kalibr cruise missile in the Black Sea.

In addition, Ukraine has sporadically launched attacks against Crimea and the Sevastopol Port, which is home to Russia’s Black Sea fleet.
1673158273898.png

Varyag during refitting

It may be a far-fetched idea to purchase China’s first-ever aircraft carrier Liaoning. However, it may be worth going back into the history of how China devised a master plan to acquire the vessel from Ukraine and went completely rogue in the process.

How China Acquired Its First Aircraft Carrier?
China launched its first aircraft carrier Liaoning named after a Chinese province in 2012. The vessel was a refurbished Soviet Kuznetsov-class cruiser carrier purchased in an incomplete state.

Due to its potent arsenal of 12 P-700 Granit anti-ship missile systems, Kuznetsov was technically classified as an “aircraft-carrying cruiser.” This technicality was crucial since the Montreux Convention forbade “aircraft carriers” from traveling from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean via the Bosporus Strait if they weighed more than 15,000 tons.

The second ship in its class, the Varyag, was barely two-thirds finished in Ukraine before the fall of the Soviet Union because it lacked weapons and electrical equipment. When work on the project ended in 1992, the cash-strapped Ukrainian government tried everything in its power to sell the 55,000 tons of useless metal decaying in its Mykolaiv shipyard.

The PLA Navy desired the Varyag, and the team was dispatched by Beijing to inspect it and advised to buy it. However, the Chinese leadership was concerned that acquiring a carrier might exacerbate tensions when the country was looking for foreign investors and opening its economy significantly. The People’s Liberation Army hatched a plan to purchase without raising eyebrows in the West.

In 1996, a group of PLA officers led by intelligence chief Gen. Ji Shengde approached Xu Zengping, a former PLA basketball player who had turned into a successful businessman organizing international events. The strategy was to have Xu purchase the carrier under his name, presumably so that it might serve as a casino. This would eliminate any scope of suspicion on the PLA.

Xu traveled to Ukraine in January 1998 and met with the proprietors of the shipyard. He agreed to buy the carrier for $20 million after four days of negotiations during which massive bribes were offered. The payment was made almost a year later with a late fee of $10 million superimposed on the negotiated amount.

The PLA had decided that the PLA Navy would later acquire and assemble the aircraft after the political environment had improved. A two-part news story revealed the plan by the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post in 2015.

After years of dilly-dallying and several obstructions related to its shipping to China, the carrier finally arrived at the port of Dalian in the province of Liaoning in March 2002. It was placed in a dry dock three years later to enable a thorough refurbishment operation, which included sandblasting away all the rust and restoring and fitting the engines in 2011.

The carrier was tailored to suit China’s requirements and was finally launched in 2012 and is now the mainstay of the PLA Navy. The Russian ultranationalist leader may want the carrier back, but it is doubtful that China would let go of a vessel acquired after several years of struggle and extensive planning.


@Skull and Bones @Raj-Hindustani @VkdIndian @INDIAPOSITIVE @Paitoo
@Sharma Ji

:lol: :haha::omghaha::yay::chilli::victory::yahoo::lol::azn:
 
Last edited:
Well I wouldn't say no to that if 2 conditions are met.

1. Price is right.

2. When China's 004 and 005 carriers are in service and the Kuznetsov type (001, 002) starts being retired around 2030's.
 
Last edited:
When China's 004 and 005 carriers are in service and the Kutnesov type (001, 002) starts being retired.
This is a good example of how copying someone's homework doesn't mean you understand the material. The US carriers that use EM catapults are nuclear powered, meaning there is almost an unlimited amount of electrical power available and makes sense. Nuclear-powered Ford and Nimitz-class ships have much more free storage capacity so they can store more jet fuel, weapons, and so on. While the Chinese carrier is fossil fueled so it normally would have an excess amount of steam and therefore should use steam catapults instead. The EM cats require vast amounts of electricity, meaning you'll be stressing the boilers to drive generators for electricity (losing efficiency) to use the cats. This will limit the sortie rates and cause more frequent fuel replenishment (thus limiting range or station time). This carrier is far from being operational anytime soon. The Chinese do have experience with carrier operations they have been for the past 10 years. But going from a ramp style to a catapult launch system is a very large step and one they are not familiar with.
US navy has been using catapult launch for decades and are the best in the world in carrier operations. Not just in ship board operations but also in aviation operations. China's propulsion technology is still several generations behind
 
I would certainly not blame Russia for this action request.
Just imagine what China has done to the aircraft carrier with 180 degree turn to make it into state of the art IF NOT BETTER than US Nimitz class aircraft carrier with using less manpower and resources.

Once you sell your product than it's gone forever 😂
 
This is a good example of how copying someone's homework doesn't mean you understand the material. The US carriers that use EM catapults are nuclear powered, meaning there is almost an unlimited amount of electrical power available and makes sense. Nuclear-powered Ford and Nimitz-class ships have much more free storage capacity so they can store more jet fuel, weapons, and so on. While the Chinese carrier is fossil fueled so it normally would have an excess amount of steam and therefore should use steam catapults instead. The EM cats require vast amounts of electricity, meaning you'll be stressing the boilers to drive generators for electricity (losing efficiency) to use the cats. This will limit the sortie rates and cause more frequent fuel replenishment (thus limiting range or station time). This carrier is far from being operational anytime soon. The Chinese do have experience with carrier operations they have been for the past 10 years. But going from a ramp style to a catapult launch system is a very large step and one they are not familiar with.
US navy has been using catapult launch for decades and are the best in the world in carrier operations. Not just in ship board operations but also in aviation operations. China's propulsion technology is still several generations behind
Funny story.
 
This is a good example of how copying someone's homework doesn't mean you understand the material. The US carriers that use EM catapults are nuclear powered, meaning there is almost an unlimited amount of electrical power available and makes sense. Nuclear-powered Ford and Nimitz-class ships have much more free storage capacity so they can store more jet fuel, weapons, and so on. While the Chinese carrier is fossil fueled so it normally would have an excess amount of steam and therefore should use steam catapults instead. The EM cats require vast amounts of electricity, meaning you'll be stressing the boilers to drive generators for electricity (losing efficiency) to use the cats. This will limit the sortie rates and cause more frequent fuel replenishment (thus limiting range or station time). This carrier is far from being operational anytime soon. The Chinese do have experience with carrier operations they have been for the past 10 years. But going from a ramp style to a catapult launch system is a very large step and one they are not familiar with.
US navy has been using catapult launch for decades and are the best in the world in carrier operations. Not just in ship board operations but also in aviation operations. China's propulsion technology is still several generations behind
China never copy US AC EMAL Catapult. Its a failure. China innovate and come up with DC. Go study more about US EMAL and China EMAL different before you smart alec reply again.


China Fujian aircraft carrier propulsion system is using IEP and you can claim its several generation behind? LOL, you need to go check your head.
 
This is a good example of how copying someone's homework doesn't mean you understand the material. The US carriers that use EM catapults are nuclear powered, meaning there is almost an unlimited amount of electrical power available and makes sense. Nuclear-powered Ford and Nimitz-class ships have much more free storage capacity so they can store more jet fuel, weapons, and so on. While the Chinese carrier is fossil fueled so it normally would have an excess amount of steam and therefore should use steam catapults instead. The EM cats require vast amounts of electricity, meaning you'll be stressing the boilers to drive generators for electricity (losing efficiency) to use the cats. This will limit the sortie rates and cause more frequent fuel replenishment (thus limiting range or station time). This carrier is far from being operational anytime soon. The Chinese do have experience with carrier operations they have been for the past 10 years. But going from a ramp style to a catapult launch system is a very large step and one they are not familiar with.
US navy has been using catapult launch for decades and are the best in the world in carrier operations. Not just in ship board operations but also in aviation operations. China's propulsion technology is still several generations behind
See how India boasts a Soviet light aircraft carrier that has been copied and assembled in 20 years. I can probably understand the Indian ignorance of aircraft carrier technology.

Indeed. Copying others' homework does not mean that you understand the materials and working principles.

Can you imagine India spending 20 years to copy the aircraft carrier to do such work?


no. This is beyond the capacity of Indians.

A country that has just learned to assemble aircraft carriers will talk about other aircraft carrier technologies. This is ridiculous. isn't it?

@Skull and Bones @Raj-Hindustani @VkdIndian @INDIAPOSITIVE @Paitoo
@Sharma Ji
 
See how India boasts a Soviet light aircraft carrier that has been copied and assembled in 20 years. I can probably understand the Indian ignorance of aircraft carrier technology.

Indeed. Copying others' homework does not mean that you understand the materials and working principles.

Can you imagine India spending 20 years to copy the aircraft carrier to do such work?


no. This is beyond the capacity of Indians.

A country that has just learned to assemble aircraft carriers will talk about other aircraft carrier technologies. This is ridiculous. isn't it?

@Skull and Bones @Raj-Hindustani @VkdIndian @INDIAPOSITIVE @Paitoo
@Sharma Ji
These fools talk things they have totally no idea. And they can claim IEP is several generation behind. LOL.. You can imagine these dumb idiot talking things without zero knowledge.
 
China never copy US AC EMAL Catapult. Its a failure. China innovate and come up with DC. Go study more about US EMAL and China EMAL different before you smart alec reply again.


China Fujian aircraft carrier propulsion system is using IEP and you can claim its several generation behind? LOL, you need to go check your head.
The Fujian, launched on June 17, has a conventional propulsion system not suited to prolonged operation in the high seas, because of the regular refuelling and maintenance involved
China’s naval nuclear reactor technology is not advanced enough to support an aircraft carrier, according to observers

See how India boasts a Soviet light aircraft carrier that has been copied and assembled in 20 years. I can probably understand the Indian ignorance of aircraft carrier technology.

Indeed. Copying others' homework does not mean that you understand the materials and working principles.

Can you imagine India spending 20 years to copy the aircraft carrier to do such work?


no. This is beyond the capacity of Indians.

A country that has just learned to assemble aircraft carriers will talk about other aircraft carrier technologies. This is ridiculous. isn't it?

@Skull and Bones @Raj-Hindustani @VkdIndian @INDIAPOSITIVE @Paitoo
@Sharma Ji
Indian navy pilots can actually land fighters on the deck of aircraft carrier. As opposed to PLAN that has needed Russian pilots to do deck landings on its flat-tops. Some humility is indeed in order....

 
Last edited:
A country that has just learned to assemble aircraft carriers will talk about other aircraft carrier technologies. This is ridiculous.
random forum posts don't count for anything, this place is troll central anyway.

China are much ahead in the AC domain, we're slowly catching up.. no shame in that.
 
These fools talk things they have totally no idea. And they can claim IEP is several generation behind. LOL.. You can imagine these dumb idiot talking things without zero knowledge.
@walterbibikow Can you understand what IEP is? Russia wants to buy an old aircraft carrier using Chinese technology. But the new aircraft carrier copied by India is not considered at all. Russians have their own thoughts... They know very well about Indian abilities.
 
The Fujian, launched on June 17, has a conventional propulsion system not suited to prolonged operation in the high seas, because of the regular refuelling and maintenance involved
China’s naval nuclear reactor technology is not advanced enough to support an aircraft carrier, according to observers


Indian navy pilots can actually land fighters on the deck of aircraft carrier. As opposed to PLAN that has needed Russian pilots to do deck landings on its flat-tops. Some humility is indeed in order....

LOL... Indeed, We even need to call Martian to help us land on aircraft carrier. You are making a big fool of all Indian with your stupid comment. :rofl:

And yes, we landed on Mars with rover with Russian help too. While Russian themselves still struggle how to land a Rover safely on Mars.
 
The Fujian, launched on June 17, has a conventional propulsion system not suited to prolonged operation in the high seas, because of the regular refuelling and maintenance involved
China’s naval nuclear reactor technology is not advanced enough to support an aircraft carrier, according to observers


Indian navy pilots can actually land fighters on the deck of aircraft carrier. As opposed to PLAN that has needed Russian pilots to do deck landings on its flat-tops. Some humility is indeed in order....

It is shocking that Indians talk about "humility". I think Indians believe that the light aircraft carrier they assembled and copied in 20 years is the world's TOP 1.

of course. Russian pilots help Indians learn how to take off from aircraft carriers. After all, we all know that Indians are "experts in ground impact experiments".

oh Tell you a secret. Chinese aircraft carriers have never had any foreigners.
 
I'd really love to see INS Vikrant vs Liaoning carrier head on on battle confrontation?

Both are Russian origin based carriers BUT one is Banta fodder sh!t while other is State of art latest cutting edge Technology.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom