[Hick Industries]

I didn't mean that it was a shared tech just that both have the tech in various forms

so in your considered opinion are aircraft carriers now just expensive targets or still viable?

A single Aircraft Carrier is just a big target. So are a number of them operated poorly.

When the US Military decided to use our Carriers to support the GWOT, we possitioned four of them in the Persian Gulf, and two more in the Red Sea. I suspect we also had 6 or 8 Submarines, and a combined fleet of screening vessels protecting them.

Through history, only three countries have ever opperated aircraft carriers with any level of success. Britian used them through WW2 and still opperates them today, Japan was very good at using them in WW2, and the United States learned rapidly by conflict with Japan and ultimately outbuilt and outfought them.

 

[M.O.A.]

I thought THIS was an Electrolux:

What are you talking about?

 

[tcpip95]

It'll make a nice coral reef.

 

[Scoggin]

Nothing can replace 100 years of carrier experience. China building a carrier is like cavemen building a locomotive. Now use it.

 

[bcvojak]

I always thought 3X as many smaller carriers would be better. . .
But then, I'm no Naval warfare expert.

 

[Rigel]

I always thought 3X as many smaller carriers would be better. . .

The Royal Navy had those but now their new carriers are a lot larger. So they figured larger is better.

Now use it.

On whom?

 

[Bajatacoma]

The Chicoms may have the boat, but can they actually run the damn thing?

U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier Flight Deck Shirt Colors Explained - YouTube

Carrier ops ain't easy and not something you can steal by looking at a video....

They went to Brazil to learn- guess who the Brazilians learned from? They've been learning since as evidenced by their shift away from the Soviet/European ski jump to a flat top that is much closer to an American design. I'd wager that their aircraft are a bigger problem than the vessel itself. The J-15 is currently the only fighter aircraft they're operating off their carriers but the J-20 is supposed to be able to (I haven't kept up with them so not sure where they are on that). The Soviet designed but Chinese built engines on their aircraft are maintenance intensive.

That said, remind me when the new USS Enterprise is scheduled to be commissioned (construction started in 2017 and it's scheduled to be commissioned in 2028 for those wondering)? How long did it take China to build carrier number 3 (they acknowledged it in 2018, photos showed it in 2019 and now it's in the water)? How long will it take China to build and commission their next carrier (which will be nuclear powered) and how long before they start laying up the next one (I've seen multiple people say that they will start laying up the hull sections as soon as possible)? Folks are forgetting that range is not as important to them as it is to us- they expect to fight in their yard, not ours. Couple that with their "String of Pearls" and the island bases/small airbases that they have within their claimed nine-dash line and how many more are they building (uncontested at that) and they have the ability to spread resources around the area while we've been losing ground in the area (big problem- the Philippines just elected another Marcos who's said he wants to work more closely with China). They're working to modernize their subsurface fleet as well as increasing the number of nuclear powered vessels (for those questioning if they can build a nuke power plant)- they have four nuclear powered (and equipped) missile carriers and seven nuclear powered attack submarines and they're on track to basically double the number of each type by 2030; they've got around fifty five diesel-electric attack submarines. Just because the Chinese widget you bought at Walmart is crap doesn't mean what they build for their own military is.

No, they're definitely not peer level yet, but they are putting a ton of resources into building a blue water navy while doing things like feeding their soldiers high protein diets to make them physically larger and toughen them up while we're changing ours into "women" and worried about shaming and using proper pronouns all the while throwing money are ridiculous social projects and non-strategic interests.

 

[Rigel]

The J-15 is currently the only fighter aircraft they're operating off their carriers

It's a Flanker with folding wings. And Flankers are huge.... not suitable for carriers at all.

but the J-20 is supposed to be able to

J-20 will never be on a carrier. It's the other stealth jet you mean... J-31 "Gyrfalcon".

The Soviet designed but Chinese built engines on their aircraft are maintenance intensive.

Which is why they have started dumping those.

 

[ajole]

Please tell the US Navy you think they are idiots.

When they were ramping that ship up….there was no hypersonic stuff, so your point is moot.

At the level of an aircraft carrier, copying will actually be counter-productive. It's much better to make your own.

China's first carrier is a modified Russian heavy cruiser turned into a carrier. Their second is an improvement on that but still derived from that design. They are not happy with those carriers because they don't have a catapult.

That means their planes can only take off with half their weapons and half the fuel. The J-15 is the largest plane to be a used on a carrier anyway... it's big and heavy.

It was a no brainier to make a carrier WITH catapults. And they did not copy the US Navy's steam catapults. These are electric.

Of course they are. That’s what China can do, big electric stuff.

But electricity has a problem steam doesn’t. It’s on, or it’s off. With steam, even if it leaks, it can still function at some reduced level. And we have 70 years of experience making it work well.

Also, have you ever traced wiring? It’s a LOT easier to find a steam leak, than to find or isolate a short or a broken lead or a dead relay/capacitor/solenoid.

There’s a reason for everything under the sun. Being different or more modern isn’t always better.

 

[ttkciar]

Like Rigel mentioned, carriers are a big win for overseas force projection against a non-peer enemy.

If two countries are in a conflict, say Sudan and Chad, and you want to step in and negotiate a peace, it's not too hard to put a carrier group off their nearest coast to give weight to your words.

When developing countries are trying to figure out which world power to choose as an ally, the country which can offer military support in the form of a carrier group has obvious advantages over other candidates.

Of course to do these things, you need a carrier group.

I doubt China is thinking about war with the United States when they build these carriers. More likely they're considering what it takes to be a true world power. The United States has demonstrated how useful a carrier group can be just hanging out near'ish a situation of interest. Since the Chinese copy everything else, it stands to reason they would copy our gunboat diplomacy as well.

 

[Scoggin]

On whom?

The idea is Walk softly and carry a big stick. I served on 4 carriers, 8 deployments; 6 were peaceful keeping the sea lanes free. Two were not peaceful, one sinking Iran’s navy during Operation Praying Mantis, the other supporting OSW missions in Iraq. The U.S. is the dominant empire of our day… we are modern Romans. China is the modern Celtic horde. Chinese carriers are meant to challenge our global military presence. Thankfully so… it shows Chinese weakness in military strategy… any military think tank knows carriers are obsolete in all out modern warfare where the goal is global control. Think of carriers as the conventional speed bump before nukes fly.

 

[Rigel]

it shows Chinese weakness in military strategy… any military think tank knows carriers are obsolete in all out modern warfare

Why are you wasting money on making more then?

 

[Bajatacoma]

It's a Flanker with folding wings. And Flankers are huge.... not suitable for carriers at all.


J-20 will never be on a carrier. It's the other stealth jet you mean... J-31 "Gyrfalcon".

Which is why they have started dumping those.

The J-15s are huge which is why they only carry 24 of them according to most reports (ex. J-15 fighter of Chinese Navy aircraft carrier Liaoning conduct live firing and refueling training exercises). I thought they'd announced the J-20 was going to be adapted for use on the new larger carriers since it was already in production while they worked on a carrier based J-31? I'll be the first to say that I'm no expert on any of this and while I obviously follow it to some extent, it's not something I keep close tabs on other than as a curiosity.

I know they have been working on new engines (stealing or buying other country's designs- anybody remember Chinagate? Pepperidge Farm remembers.) The engines seem to be a bigger issue than the aircraft themselves although they need to get the size/weight of their aircraft down.

 

[Rigel]

I know they have been working on new engines

They have installed them.

Nobody on earth wants to deal with Russian hardware if they can avoid it.

Our own planes are getting Chinese engines. On average they last half as long before they need an overhaul compared to American engines but then it's the same story with Russian engines.

However, the Chinese engines have higher thrust and they are improving with every iteration... unlike Russian ones.

I thought they'd announced the J-20 was going to be adapted for use on the new larger carriers since it was already in production while they worked on a carrier based J-31?

I'm not sure about that. The J-20 is a huge jet. But the J-31 is perfect.

 

[Scoggin]

Also reminds me of the Buran… the entire world wants to imitate us… but imitations are cheap.

 

[Scoggin]

Why are you wasting money on making more then?

Because you need a big speed bump before going nuclear. That’s the deal. Perhaps China knows that too. You might not like the reality of a conventional force but I do.

 

[Rigel]

Also reminds me of the Buran… the entire world wants to imitate us… but imitations are cheap

Buran was actually more functional in design than the American shuttle... which proved itself to be nothing more than an expensive death trap.

Because you need a big speed bump before going nuclear.

So they are giving themselves the same options. And it seems you don't like them doing that.

 

[Scoggin]

Buran was actually more functional in design than the American shuttle... which proved itself to be nothing more than an expensive death trap.


So they are giving themselves the same options. And it seems you don't like them doing that.

Risks always accompany exploration. You can smugly armchair quarterback space failures but until you honor the men that perished in pursuit of space then you literally fail at being human.
i think we are done.

 

[Rigel]

but until you honor the men

There is no honor in killing your own people with shoddy engineering.

Now we are done.

 

[M.O.A.]

There is no honor in killing your own people with shoddy engineering.

Now we are done.

No, you are now muted.

NOW we are done!