New Chinese Carrier, any thoughts?

[The Elven Imperium]

Which, in 2045, will be 50 years behind the U.S.

All wishful thinking on your part. Engineers are the ones who will develop many of the new military items of the future. Read the following. Study by Duke University.

The study also states that in 2011, while roughly 70,000 engineers graduated in the US, 6,00,000 graduated in China and 3,50,000 in India.

Unfortunately nothing shown yet in the field, shows me that China is catching up to the US any time soon. Just look at the spending done by both sides. The US spending is more the half the rest of the world combined. China would need to increase it's military spending ten fold to hope to compete with the US.

[The UK in Exile]

All wishful thinking on your part. Engineers are the ones who will develop many of the new military items of the future. Read the following. Study by Duke University.

Unfortunately nothing shown yet in the field, shows me that China is catching up to the US any time soon. Just look at the spending done by both sides. The US spending is more the half the rest of the world combined. China would need to increase it's military spending ten fold to hope to compete with the US.

it would only need to double it to push the us in to bakruptcy trying to match it though.

[Tahar Joblis]

Unfortunately nothing shown yet in the field, shows me that China is catching up to the US any time soon. Just look at the spending done by both sides. The US spending is more the half the rest of the world combined. China would need to increase it's military spending ten fold to hope to compete with the US.

it would only need to double it to push the us in to bakruptcy trying to match it though.

The Chinese military budget is both underreported by various artful constructions, and also happens to be spent much more efficiently in some ways; if you're measuring the military budget in nominal exchange rate terms, you're underestimating the effective spending level when it comes down to things for which a purchasing power parity figure would be more appropriate.

I mean, for high-end hardware, nominal figures might be more appropriate, since they're manufactured and traded globally, but personnel-related costs are a very large chunk of military spending.

[PapaJacky]

All wishful thinking on your part. Engineers are the ones who will develop many of the new military items of the future. Read the following. Study by Duke University.

Unfortunately nothing shown yet in the field, shows me that China is catching up to the US any time soon. Just look at the spending done by both sides. The US spending is more the half the rest of the world combined. China would need to increase it's military spending ten fold to hope to compete with the US.

Like others have mentioned, it doesn't need to be fielded en masse to represent a threat. All China needs to do is represent a credible threat to "democracy" and you instantly have warhawks over here shouting for more military spending and the like. The defense forums I frequent went cray cray when Russia and China unveiled their stealth fighter prototypes, not from shock but rather from what it means for the F-22/35, and from that, you already have people shifting opinions on what they think is important about the military. Then when China "unveiled" (moreso leaked) of the DF-41D, you again had people going cray cray over here about it, speculating how it threatens our monopoly of power in the Far East. That and other factors has already caused the Pentagon to pivot to Asia along with actually developing war plans against China if it were to come to it (Air-Sea Battle). The reason why this "was allowed to happen" was because in the 1st decade of the 21st century, the main focus of the U.S. defense wise was against insurgencies. In light of this, China and Russia has had basically free reign to develop weapons and tactics to counter us. As you might have noticed, the two wars in the mid-east were pretty costly in of itself, not to mention R&D wise, but if that R&D process was to have occurred in conjunction with major R&D against Russian and Chinese developments, than we would have already been bankrupt.

As we did to the Soviet Union, the Chinese are going to do to us.

[Vitaphone Racing]

It actually changes the balance of power quite a bit, until now China hasn't had a capability to project force. Like the introduction of Chinese stealth fighters, it changes how the US would possibly engage China should the time come.

[Khodoristan]

They still don't have the ability to project force. The Kuznetsov is a dated carrier, no matter how many new bells & whistles the Chicoms put on it. It has a limited capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. It doesn't have the advanced CBG ASW and Air Defence support like the U.S. has. The Chinese don't have the experience of conducting air operations in a combat zone in the dead of night with the flattop pitching and rolling in the high seas. And finally, they lack the knowledge on how to effectively use a carrier to support combined-arms operations; a JMSDF or USN sub, cruise missile, ASM, or CAPTOR mine can make quick work of an ill-prepared PLAN carrier or carrier squadron.

[Dyakovo]

It actually changes the balance of power quite a bit, until now China hasn't had a capability to project force. Like the introduction of Chinese stealth fighters, it changes how the US would possibly engage China should the time come.

They still don't... They have one obsolete carrier which they don't know how to use and for which they have neither planes nor a support group...

[Vitaphone Racing]

They still don't have the ability to project force. The Kuznetsov is a dated carrier, no matter how many new bells & whistles the Chicoms put on it. It has a limited capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. It doesn't have the advanced CBG ASW and Air Defence support like the U.S. has. The Chinese don't have the experience of conducting air operations in a combat zone in the dead of night with the flattop pitching and rolling in the high seas. And finally, they lack the knowledge on how to effectively use a carrier to support combined-arms operations; a JMSDF or USN sub, cruise missile, ASM, or CAPTOR mine can make quick work of an ill-prepared PLAN carrier or carrier squadron.

Dude, if you have a carrier; you can project force. That's what a carrier is; an element of force projection. Kuznetsov can do ASW, can be put into a CBG, and can provide air defence support. It has a full capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters (I don't know what you mean by limited). The only thing you're right about is the lack of chinese experience with carriers however that doesn't change the fact that they have a carrier and it's one more thing to consider when engaging China.

[Vitaphone Racing]

It actually changes the balance of power quite a bit, until now China hasn't had a capability to project force. Like the introduction of Chinese stealth fighters, it changes how the US would possibly engage China should the time come.

They still don't... They have one obsolete carrier which they don't know how to use and for which they have neither planes nor a support group...

How do you know it's obsolete? The only thing built before the Chinese acquired it was the hull; in reality they can put whatever they want in it. China would not have purchased the carrier if it didn't intend to field planes nor assemble a support group for it. Like it or not, they are going to have a relatively modern and functioning carrier in the near future.

[Wamitoria]

They still don't... They have one obsolete carrier which they don't know how to use and for which they have neither planes nor a support group...

How do you know it's obsolete?

Russian SOP is not to sell any new tech.

[The Corparation]

They still don't have the ability to project force. The Kuznetsov is a dated carrier, no matter how many new bells & whistles the Chicoms put on it. It has a limited capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. It doesn't have the advanced CBG ASW and Air Defence support like the U.S. has. The Chinese don't have the experience of conducting air operations in a combat zone in the dead of night with the flattop pitching and rolling in the high seas. And finally, they lack the knowledge on how to effectively use a carrier to support combined-arms operations; a JMSDF or USN sub, cruise missile, ASM, or CAPTOR mine can make quick work of an ill-prepared PLAN carrier or carrier squadron.

Dude, if you have a carrier; you can project force. That's what a carrier is; an element of force projection. Kuznetsov can do ASW, can be put into a CBG, and can provide air defence support. It has a full capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters (I don't know what you mean by limited). The only thing you're right about is the lack of chinese experience with carriers however that doesn't change the fact that they have a carrier and it's one more thing to consider when engaging China.

China really doesn't plan on using this carrier for any sort of force projection. They don't have the aircraft and equipment to use it for ASW, or in a CBG or to provide air defense. And whats more they don't really plan on all that for this carrier. Its a training ship. So that they can get the experience and know how to run a carrier once they build their own.

[Dyakovo]

They still don't have the ability to project force. The Kuznetsov is a dated carrier, no matter how many new bells & whistles the Chicoms put on it. It has a limited capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. It doesn't have the advanced CBG ASW and Air Defence support like the U.S. has. The Chinese don't have the experience of conducting air operations in a combat zone in the dead of night with the flattop pitching and rolling in the high seas. And finally, they lack the knowledge on how to effectively use a carrier to support combined-arms operations; a JMSDF or USN sub, cruise missile, ASM, or CAPTOR mine can make quick work of an ill-prepared PLAN carrier or carrier squadron.

Dude, if you have a carrier; you can project force. That's what a carrier is; an element of force projection. Kuznetsov can do ASW, can be put into a CBG, and can provide air defence support. It has a full capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters (I don't know what you mean by limited). The only thing you're right about is the lack of chinese experience with carriers however that doesn't change the fact that they have a carrier and it's one more thing to consider when engaging China.

Wrong. This real life, not a board game. One very important element for the ability to project force with a carrier is having aircraft to launch from it. Which is something China lacks.
An aircraft carrier without aircraft and without a support group is nothing more than a large, expensive target.

[The Elven Imperium]

It actually changes the balance of power quite a bit, until now China hasn't had a capability to project force. Like the introduction of Chinese stealth fighters, it changes how the US would possibly engage China should the time come.

Unlikely effects US miltary tactics. I seriously doubt the one Carrier battle group china can now filed is still a match for a US carrier battlegroup. The carrier more a problem for other Asian nations like Japan, Taiwan, Philippines, even India.

[Khodoristan]

They still don't have the ability to project force. The Kuznetsov is a dated carrier, no matter how many new bells & whistles the Chicoms put on it. It has a limited capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. It doesn't have the advanced CBG ASW and Air Defence support like the U.S. has. The Chinese don't have the experience of conducting air operations in a combat zone in the dead of night with the flattop pitching and rolling in the high seas. And finally, they lack the knowledge on how to effectively use a carrier to support combined-arms operations; a JMSDF or USN sub, cruise missile, ASM, or CAPTOR mine can make quick work of an ill-prepared PLAN carrier or carrier squadron.

Dude, if you have a carrier; you can project force. That's what a carrier is; an element of force projection. Kuznetsov can do ASW, can be put into a CBG, and can provide air defence support. It has a full capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters (I don't know what you mean by limited). The only thing you're right about is the lack of chinese experience with carriers however that doesn't change the fact that they have a carrier and it's one more thing to consider when engaging China.

Not true. The Thai Navy has an aircraft carrier. What? No, seriously.

The Kuznetsov has very limited ASW capabilities. The Udav-1 anti-submarine rocket system is a dated system only meant to provide close-in ASW protection. A deep-diving torpedo or sea-skimming ASM would neutralize the Liaoning's already limited ASW complement. It cant be put into a CBG. At least not yet. The Chinese still don't understand the dynamics of a CBG and how it is to be used to effect. You can put a carrier with a bunch of ships off the coast of Country X, but if Country X has advanced anti-ship and anti-air capabilities, than that advantage of having ships and aircraft could become a serious liability real fast. As for air defense, the Chinese made significant strides in SHORAD SAM's and CIWS, but I seriously doubt if they can successfully defend against American aircraft, cruise missiles and torpedoes, which I might add, have gotten a lot better over the past few years. No matter how well you protect yourself, if you have a volley of Harpoons/Tomahawks inbound, you're gonna be hard pressed to kill 'em all. Factor in the LRASM that will enter US Navy service in 2015, and no ship on earth will be able to defend itself from a volley of LRASMs, Chinese, Americans, or otherwise.

[GraySoap]

THE WHITE MAN MUST STEP UP TO STOP THE YELLOW PERIL.

THE THREAT OF THE YELLOW RACE MUST NOT BE UNDERESTIMATED.

WE MUST STRIKE NOW, LEST MING THE MERCILESS WILL STRIKE AT US AND USE OUR HELPLESS WOMEN FOR HIS PERSONAL PLEASURE.

End the yellow peril! Import a dragon lady while we're still wealthier.

[Vitaphone Racing]

How do you know it's obsolete?

Russian SOP is not to sell any new tech.

It doesn't have any tech on it. China bought the hull.

Dude, if you have a carrier; you can project force. That's what a carrier is; an element of force projection. Kuznetsov can do ASW, can be put into a CBG, and can provide air defence support. It has a full capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters (I don't know what you mean by limited). The only thing you're right about is the lack of chinese experience with carriers however that doesn't change the fact that they have a carrier and it's one more thing to consider when engaging China.

China really doesn't plan on using this carrier for any sort of force projection. They don't have the aircraft and equipment to use it for ASW, or in a CBG or to provide air defense. And whats more they don't really plan on all that for this carrier. Its a training ship. So that they can get the experience and know how to run a carrier once they build their own.

The Liaoning is most likely going to be their R&D ship, except they are constructing two other carrier hulls that are almost carbon copies of the Kuznetsov class. Intellectual property rights still doesnt' translate into Mandarin obviously. Like I said, sooner or later China wil have a fully operational carrier and aircraft to operate it from.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Dude, if you have a carrier; you can project force. That's what a carrier is; an element of force projection. Kuznetsov can do ASW, can be put into a CBG, and can provide air defence support. It has a full capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters (I don't know what you mean by limited). The only thing you're right about is the lack of chinese experience with carriers however that doesn't change the fact that they have a carrier and it's one more thing to consider when engaging China.

Not true. The Thai Navy has an aircraft carrier. What? No, seriously.

The Kuznetsov has very limited ASW capabilities. The Udav-1 anti-submarine rocket system is a dated system only meant to provide close-in ASW protection.

China isn't going to be fielding a Kuznetsov, they bought the hull and they are going to put their new electronics on it. The only dated part about the Kuznetsov is the very stuff which wasn't fitted to the hull which China purchased. That is why the real Kuznetsov is being retrofitted with new stuff.

A deep-diving torpedo or sea-skimming ASM would neutralize the Liaoning's already limited ASW complement.

Neutralize? It could sink the fucking ship.

It cant be put into a CBG. At least not yet.

What? You don't need to make a carrier "compatible" with other ships before you assemble a CBG.

The Chinese still don't understand the dynamics of a CBG and how it is to be used to effect.

How do you know this? China has been studying carriers for thirty years now.

You can put a carrier with a bunch of ships off the coast of Country X, but if Country X has advanced anti-ship and anti-air capabilities, than that advantage of having ships and aircraft could become a serious liability real fast.

That isn't the point if Country X hasn't had to deal with this threat recently.

As for air defense, the Chinese made significant strides in SHORAD SAM's and CIWS, but I seriously doubt if they can successfully defend against American aircraft, cruise missiles and torpedoes, which I might add, have gotten a lot better over the past few years.

American aircraft, cruise missiles and torpedos aren't invincible nor are they infintely better than anything else fielded in the world. China is stealing shit by the day from Russia, a country where an oil-rich madman named Putin continues to spend big on military.

No matter how well you protect yourself, if you have a volley of Harpoons/Tomahawks inbound, you're gonna be hard pressed to kill 'em all. Factor in the LRASM that will enter US Navy service in 2015, and no ship on earth will be able to defend itself from a volley of LRASMs, Chinese, Americans, or otherwise.

You don't know that yet.

[Khodoristan]

Russian SOP is not to sell any new tech.

It doesn't have any tech on it. China bought the hull.

China really doesn't plan on using this carrier for any sort of force projection. They don't have the aircraft and equipment to use it for ASW, or in a CBG or to provide air defense. And whats more they don't really plan on all that for this carrier. Its a training ship. So that they can get the experience and know how to run a carrier once they build their own.

The Liaoning is most likely going to be their R&D ship, except they are constructing two other carrier hulls that are almost carbon copies of the Kuznetsov class. Intellectual property rights still doesnt' translate into Mandarin obviously. Like I said, sooner or later China wil have a fully operational carrier and aircraft to operate it from.

Yeah, not for the forseable future. The one thing China can't copy from the west is how to use a carrier effectively. They can adopt our tactics, etc, but we had them first, and we know the weaknesses.

[Wamitoria]

Russian SOP is not to sell any new tech.

It doesn't have any tech on it. China bought the hull.

Hulls count as tech in the military.

[Vitaphone Racing]

It doesn't have any tech on it. China bought the hull.

Hulls count as tech in the military.

Believe me, hull design has not changed so radically in these past few years that the Kuznetsov is obsolete.

It doesn't have any tech on it. China bought the hull.


The Liaoning is most likely going to be their R&D ship, except they are constructing two other carrier hulls that are almost carbon copies of the Kuznetsov class. Intellectual property rights still doesnt' translate into Mandarin obviously. Like I said, sooner or later China wil have a fully operational carrier and aircraft to operate it from.

Yeah, not for the forseable future. The one thing China can't copy from the west is how to use a carrier effectively. They can adopt our tactics, etc, but we had them first, and we know the weaknesses.

Germany had the first true single seat fighters in 1915. Why were allied air forces superior in the 1940's?

[The Elven Imperium]

Yeah, not for the forseable future. The one thing China can't copy from the west is how to use a carrier effectively. They can adopt our tactics, etc, but we had them first, and we know the weaknesses.

Germany had the first true single seat fighters in 1915. Why were allied air forces superior in the 1940's?[/quote]

Because Hitler and the Nazi made some really...really dumb moves in the pre and during WWII

[Sidhae]

Yeah, not for the forseable future. The one thing China can't copy from the west is how to use a carrier effectively. They can adopt our tactics, etc, but we had them first, and we know the weaknesses.

Germany had the first true single seat fighters in 1915. Why were allied air forces superior in the 1940's?

Because Hitler and the Nazi made some really...really dumb moves in the pre and during WWII[/quote]

Not so much of dumb moves at first than a difference of doctrine. The Luftwaffe was intended primarily as the air support arm of the Wehrmacht rather than an independent air force, emphasizing close air support and tactical operations over air superiority and strategic bombing like the Allies did. Hence, most German airplanes used in the battle of Britain were ill-suited for air combat, resulting in defeat with all the following consequences.

Thanks to that doctrine, Germans were able to brutally own everyone on the ground in the early war, but ultimately turned out to be unable to defend their own strategic assets and strike at those of the enemy, leading to their defeat.

German doctrine would be more suited for overseas operations when one's industrial assets are in no imminent danger of enemy air raids.

Now as for the Chinese carrier that the OP was about, might be somewhat obsolete when compared to American supercarriers, but knowing the Chinese, it's only a matter of time until they start cooking them up en masse. And what good are a dozen fancy hi-tech supercarriers when the enemy has 10 less advanced ones to match each of them?

[Tahar Joblis]

Hulls count as tech in the military.

Believe me, hull design has not changed so radically in these past few years that the Kuznetsov is obsolete.

Yeah, not for the forseable future. The one thing China can't copy from the west is how to use a carrier effectively. They can adopt our tactics, etc, but we had them first, and we know the weaknesses.

Germany had the first true single seat fighters in 1915. Why were allied air forces superior in the 1940's?

Arguably, the German planes did individually better in the war until they started running out of new planes and skilled pilots. The Allies massively outproduced them and had a much larger pool of potential pilots to draw from, in the end.

People still debate which planes were better, and maybe the Allies did produce better planes, but it's hard to know for sure, and I wouldn't take the word of a random schmuck on the internet about it. The Germans did have a lot of flying aces and good overall kill ratios. The air war was ultimately not won by having better individual single seat fighters, but by having better radar and more planes, and possibly because the Allies rotated aces back to train new pilots; those were much more important than whatever small performance edge, if any, the Allied fighterplanes had over the German fighterplanes.

[PapaJacky]

Dude, if you have a carrier; you can project force. That's what a carrier is; an element of force projection. Kuznetsov can do ASW, can be put into a CBG, and can provide air defence support. It has a full capacity for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters (I don't know what you mean by limited). The only thing you're right about is the lack of chinese experience with carriers however that doesn't change the fact that they have a carrier and it's one more thing to consider when engaging China.

Not true. The Thai Navy has an aircraft carrier. What? No, seriously.

The Kuznetsov has very limited ASW capabilities. The Udav-1 anti-submarine rocket system is a dated system only meant to provide close-in ASW protection. A deep-diving torpedo or sea-skimming ASM would neutralize the Liaoning's already limited ASW complement. It cant be put into a CBG. At least not yet. The Chinese still don't understand the dynamics of a CBG and how it is to be used to effect. You can put a carrier with a bunch of ships off the coast of Country X, but if Country X has advanced anti-ship and anti-air capabilities, than that advantage of having ships and aircraft could become a serious liability real fast. As for air defense, the Chinese made significant strides in SHORAD SAM's and CIWS, but I seriously doubt if they can successfully defend against American aircraft, cruise missiles and torpedoes, which I might add, have gotten a lot better over the past few years. No matter how well you protect yourself, if you have a volley of Harpoons/Tomahawks inbound, you're gonna be hard pressed to kill 'em all. Factor in the LRASM that will enter US Navy service in 2015, and no ship on earth will be able to defend itself from a volley of LRASMs, Chinese, Americans, or otherwise.

Untrue. Current IADS capabilities of even a single heavy aircraft carrying cruiser such as the Kuznetsov can handle a massive barrage in of itself. The reason? Basically, American missiles are slow. I've done the math a while ago, and basically 1v1, a salvo of harpoons from a Ticonderoga class cruiser could be shot down by a single Kuznetsov before any even hit. Seaskimming these days simply isn't enough, and the LRASM, AFAIK, fit that same bill.

[New Rogernomics]

The Kuznetsov is antiquated trash. Hell, the South Koreans possess the ability to sink it. China will fail on the Oceans.

They had to buy it from Ukraine because anything with a Made in China sticker dissolves in water.