It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

chinas new aircraft carrier?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:05 AM
link   
ahh so that's what happened to the varyag!! she went missing a while back and then turned up in the dock






posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 06:41 AM
link   
I was just looking at that carrier posted by drfunk...
It seems that it has 2 catapults launchers for the same ski jump..
Do US carriers have that facility too?



posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 11:20 AM
link   
You have to be out of your mind to get a carrier from Russia. The only way you can make it continually work is to refit it yourself..the basic hull design..with machinery you yourself have control over. This meaning spare parts.

REmember ..this is a very different thing from going to the Russians for 2 million AK 47s. If one breaks you just canabalize from another. Where do you get spare aircraft carrier parts. Home Depot???? Lowes???
Not just anyone makes them.
You have to do a extensive refit with this in mind Engines , Pumps, Steam systems ..even steam systems for the galley. Toilets , Laundry , Fuels systems to purify the fuel...or the planes wont be going anywhere. US Navy aircraft carriers purify fuel from storage tanks in high speed Centrifuagl purifiers removing impurities and water before sending it up to the flight decks for loading on the planes. Only a handful of companys in America even produce this equipment. How man companys make parts for steam catapults. How about high pressure hydraulic systems like a steering system. Im not talking about a power steering system for a automobile but two huge engines for turning rudders. Engines which would take up the size of a large living room.
This is a very extensive refit..not just the immediate refit..but planning for future refits and the parts necessary at any time in between to keep the ship running. This is a huge task for any nation...and I mean any nation..period.
I am sure that if the Chinese are refiting this carrier it is a huge task in planning ..one for which they will have to overcome many obstacles already learned by other Navys. My Hat is off to them if they figure it out.

Thanks ,
Orangetom



posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
You have to be out of your mind to get a carrier from Russia. The only way you can make it continually work is to refit it yourself..the basic hull design..with


It's interesting you should say that. That's exactly the configuration the Varyag is in rightnow. No engines, no system, just an empty shell. So my question/discussion is would it be feasible for the Chinese to outfit the entire carrier by themselves?

Let me think. This is pure speculation. The Russians may have contracts with China not to refit the carrier with war fighting equipment, etc.

Radar & systems: Chinese just deployed two "Aegis" PAR systems. Would they be useful and could they be modified and fitted to the carrier? ATC capability would be needed. Could a landbased system be adopted?

Aircraft fuel: Could a landbased system be adapted & used?

Catapaults & steam systems: The Russians don't use them. The Sukhoi's take off with the help of the ski-jump.

Armaments: SSM's Chinese have those. SAMs/CIWS Chinese have those.

Aircraft: SU-27's & SU-30's? There are rumours of a fully indiginized version (engines, systems, airframe) in development. The Russians took several years to adapt the airframe for their carrier. ASW using Ka helicopters bought from the Russians. AWACS & aerial refueling are still in its infancy in China and will be an issue. They could look into buying the aircraft from Russia?

Engines & steering: Not sure if commercial systems can be adapted. China does have the know-how to build large ships.

Support fleet: This would take a few years to build, but China already has the ability to build its own fleets. Building more than one CBG might be a problem considering the backlog to buildup the rest of the aging fleet to credible levels. But then again you only have one carrier.

Am I missing anything?

Why would you want to build a single CBG? Maybe to learn how to do it. Train pilots and sailors able to operate in a battle group? One carrier is better than none? China is years away from having a credible blue water navy. But it's economy is already global and far a head of what its navy can support. Could a CBG be an stop-gap solution?



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 03:40 AM
link   
Oh yeah..IMHO China has the infrastructure to assemble a carrier group all by itself..If India can/is doing it then China can definitely have a go..

Only thing is that it may be counter productive because in the event of a war with any country( mostly US) it will only act as a "meat shield" or a "firepower drawing decoy".. Won't be able to project power etc. etc..
I don't think a carrier can serve in any operational capacity in the current structure of the PLAN..



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Excellent questions you posted here.

The answer is yes..I believe the Chinese can refit this carrier to work. I also agree with you that they need to start somewhere. One reasonably does not start at the top of the evolutionary ladder and work their way to the bottom. One starts at the bottom and learns and works their way to the type of carriers that are more suitable and complex as one learns the fundamentals. I suspect that the Chinese will learn and learn quickly. Will they make mistakes ..most certainly ..as did we.
Equipment for Navy ships is built to a slightly different standard than is for commercial usage. This would be more so for the Chinese...as we say often in this country it must be somewhat GI proof. Like us..alot of the kids using this stuff will be barely out of high school and the officer material not much more experienced.
Some of this equipment is commercially available but much of it needs to be modified to combat standards..rough and heavy usage..in abnormal conditions. Like beyond normal redline for long periods.
Also as I have stated spare parts is going to be a problem and places to wharehouse them.
A catapult is a very complex system when all of the individual units are in operation and aligned correctly. Few nations are capable of building and maintaining them. Very expensive. Keeping spare parts for this system is a large proposition in itself. Not many companys make the parts for these too. I have worked on these systems from the steam side at the catapult risers to the water brakes at the end of the catapult trough. Very complex..and spread out all over the ship.
Land based fuel systems would require special adaptations to make them servicable on a rolling heaving ship The US Navy has specific requirements for this.

I tend to agree with your assessment ..that this will be a training carrier off of which other carriers will be spun off. That is if they decide to refit her thusly. My question in my mind is whether this is a boiler fired or gas turbine set up. Gas turbines use up alot of fuel and must be under way replenished often. This takes away from alot of the fuel needed for the aircraft ..especially if you are flying alot of sorties. Nuclear power will overcome alot of this fuel usage.
STeering..what they want more of in military usage is overide systems...which can take over and be used in a casualty situation. Redundancy is the word I think. This means increased costs in this steering arena.

Good questions Lemon Aide.Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Oh yeah..IMHO China has the infrastructure to assemble a carrier group all by itself..If India can/is doing it then China can definitely have a go..

Only thing is that it may be counter productive because in the event of a war with any country( mostly US) it will only act as a "meat shield" or a "firepower drawing decoy".. Won't be able to project power etc. etc..
I don't think a carrier can serve in any operational capacity in the current structure of the PLAN..


Are you so sure the next war would be with the US? Are you so sure it will happen so soon that China will only have one carrier at the time? Most people think China will go to war over Taiwan next. But I'm not so sure.
Certainly the current plans for taking Taiwan don't include a carrier. There's nothing to say the Chinese wouldn't just back the carrier off and stick with an invasion without the carrier if it comes to war over Taiwan.

What use is it? Show the flag. Either start building relationships around the world or scare the crap out of your neighbours. What do the Spanish or French or Italians do with their carrier? It's mostly UN missions and show the flag around isn't it? As the Chinese economy goes global why can't China do that? Locally, you show your neighbours your new toy, make them aware you are there and they don't have to always look towards the US for support. It's all maybe baby steps to building a global presence.

Anyway, it's all speculation until she gets cleaned up and underway.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join