It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

China's new aircraft carrier (s)

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:38 PM
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

No they won't.

One, Russia doesn't have the expertise required. Very few countries do, and they, for whatever reason, won't be helping 'em.

Two, China and Russia may make noises about cooperation. But make no mistake, as soon as the U.S./NATO are gone, should that come to pass, they won't be besties anymore.

posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 07:37 AM

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: 727Sky

The issues with EMALS were worked out. There are no major issues currently.

Thanks for the update.... the last thing I read, some time ago, was not complementary.... for sure in this case I wish for a happy ending, great launches, and smooth sailing .

posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 07:41 AM
a reply to: 727Sky

Best would be subs...containing remote mini-subs for close shore operations.

As has been said, carriers are great for moving your planes closer to the fight and for resupply, but they are indeed LST.

posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 07:47 AM
a reply to: 727Sky

Cat 2 was tested first and passed easily all the way through max weight, max power. Cat 1 had some issues with components not talking to each other as they started testing, but was back running in under 24 hours. Cat 3 and 4 testing is next summer, after they're completed.

posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 09:03 AM
Not only is China building a CATOBAR hull, they're developing their own EMALS for it.

posted on Nov, 12 2015 @ 04:53 AM
a reply to: Lysergic

I agree with everyone who is talking about how China has this problem and that. They have major quality control problems and I only recently found out why. In typical, traditional Chinese culture (this is where the majority of Chinese business owners are at) they are unable to admit they are wrong, and so no problem gets fixed. This was a major problem with the very first iPhone. The iPhone was 6 months late because of QC problems, because of Chinese culture.

Now the younger people might be improving on this, but they are not the majority of business owners.

Source: An article I read from an American guy who lives in China and deals with Chinese business every day.

edit on 12-11-2015 by bulrush because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 07:26 PM
Displacement: 34000 metric tonnes standard, 48000 tonnes loaded.

Propulsion: 2x Chinese subsea jetpropulsion.

Cruise speed: 28 knots
Flank speed: 44 knots
Full speed: 50 knots

Range: unlimited

Armament: 14x Chinese batteries of 4Xsam (20000 feet, 1500knots)
8 batteries of anti surface missiles (equal to the harpoon in every way - total of 62 missiles)
Torpedoes - miniature Chang shu torpedoes with a nuclear warhead in violation of Apec Chinese agreements. Total of 20 torps.
Gatlin like guns - 16 of them. 20000rpm effective against harpoon with advanced rangefinder and optics. Fully automatic.
8 hub scopes capable of finding targets at a range excess of 16 nautical miles.

Aircraft: fully compatible with all current Russian jets (magrev not withstanding)
Su-20 is the prototype for the Chinese aircraft being operated with Russian engines.
Total of four interlocking hangars and six elevators. Aircraft capacity some 70 Su-20 for comparison. Magrev is solved with jetlaunch - like the thrustrockets of the challenger...
Undersea protection consisting of outlined spheres of 20mm, bulk incorporated at Stern. Total of 200 spheres.
Bulk is starseed and mininuke proof.

Radar and logistics:
Radar is capable of picking up rose quartz coated humvees at excess of 50 nautical miles.
Radar is blocked by signaling at RF 15000 wave without dot, like with patriot on alert. Radar is capable of stealth operation, hiding the waves as seabird shouts. Probably Lf 400nm range.

posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:44 AM
a reply to: FredrikV

We're aware of the fact that the displacement seems very light, but starseed must be lighter than Bessemer is the conclusion.

Yeah and there was an error - the displacement is standard tonnes, not metric. Now corrected.
edit on 30-11-2015 by FredrikV because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 12:26 PM
a reply to: FredrikV

entire claims = utter bollox

posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 02:09 PM

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: FredrikV

entire claims = utter bollox

As Yeltsin said:

"The public knows what the public knows"

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in