This is an odd way to make a comment. But anyway they need to have a new method of using up all the lead paint they have made which they can no longer poison our children with. Except it is still being imported and toys are being sold in off the wall novelty stores all over the U.S.

I thought this info might help your conversation.

Don

Aircraft Carrier Project
On 23 December 2008 Xinhua, China's official news agency, reported that China's Ministry of National Defense had stated that aircraft carriers are "a reflection of a nation's comprehensive power" and were needed to meet the demands of a country's navy. The Chinese government would seriously consider "relevant issues" with "factors in every aspects" on building its first ever aircraft carrier, said spokesman Huang Xueping when responding to a question at a press conference on whether it was a good opportunity at present to build China's aircraft carrier. "China has a long coastline and the sacred duty of China's armed forces is to safeguard the country's marine safety and sovereignty over coastal areas and territorial seas," he said.

The question of China's plans to build aircraft carriers are important for several reasons. Many other countries have aircraft carriers, and little thought is given to Brazil's aircraft carrier, or Argentina's aircraft carrier, when it had one. Unlike other major maritime powers, Japan does not have aircraft carriers, and the Japanese government has regarded this class of ships as being an "offensive" weapon precluded by Japan's peace constitution. Should China acquire aircraft carriers, Japan might reconsider this position, and this might mark the start of a larger reconsideration of Japan's military posture. The United States has twice as many aircraft carriers as the rest of humanity combined, each of which is larger than other country's carriers. China's acquisition of aircraft carriers might be seen as a step towards challenging American preeminence on the high seas. At a minimum, it would mark the acquisition of a power projection capability that would move further afield than the Taiwan scenario, and into the South China Sea and beyond.

China, following the Cold War, continued to have very little in the way of credible power-projection capabilities, though China could project military forces superior to those that Southeast Asian countries could deploy to the South China Sea. The PLA Navy had studied the acquisition of an aircraft carrier beginning in the mid-1980s, followed by persistant reports that China has planned to launch a 40,000 ton class aircraft carrier by 2010, though these reports remained unsubstantiated and appeared to based on woefully inadequate analysis and information.

While some in the Navy had lobbied for a carrier for many years, their proposals were continually overruled by the Central Military Commission. This decision could have been motivated by a desire not to be seen to be adding a major new capability to China's maritime forces, with consequent adverse regional reaction. From a purely military perspective, a Chinese aircraft carrier would be expensive to operate, and carrier would be vulnerable to attack by aircraft, fast surface vessels and submarines. An aircraft carrier could enhance China's ability to lay claim to the islands and coral atolls of the South China Sea, an area potentially rich in oil and other resources. An aircraft carrier would make a potent political and diplomatic statement, potentially creating a major change in the strategic balance in East Asia.

In 1992, the Chinese authorities reportedly authorized a program for studying the development of an aircraft carrier. Chinese leaders at various levels did extensive feasibility studies on this project since then. In 1993, senior leaders of the Chinese Navy announced that China would start developing an aircraft carrier. In January 1993, Chinese political leaders decided to step up their carrier program and allocated several billion dollars for the project. At that time, it was believed that China had planned to finish the first aircraft carrier by 2000, but the plan was delayed repeatedly due to lack of carrier technology. Eventually it was decided to advance the carrier program in two stages.

During the first stage, China proceeded to buy several scrapped carriers from overseas in order to study the parts. China had previously pursued similar policies both in defense and other industries. Between 1985 and 2002, Chinese firms purchased a number of vessels, for ostensibly for a variety of purposes. These included for amusement parks, hotels, scrap metal, as well as likely analysis of design and other developmental purposes. China has a long history of aquiring technology for reverse engineering purposes. Of the vessels, the Varyag, an ex-Soviet carrier, contruction of which was never completed, and sold by Ukraine to what appeared to be a Chinese front company in 1998, has been the source of the greatest speculation. After arriving in Dalian, the hull was placed in drydock for a few months and painted in PLAN colors. Subsequently the hull was moored at a cargo warf. Minor work was reported to have been conducted on the hull, delivered without engines or any other equipment, between 2005 and 2008. However, as of August 2008, there was no visible work being done to make the hull seaworthy. Several years of highly visible construction activity, to include the installation of a propulsion plant, would be required to make this hull seaworthy.

Phase 2 centered on the domestic construction of a carrier by China. China appeared to have chosen to build a Chinese aircraft carrier, rather than purchasing one off-the-shelf. Although China's long-term goal was to acquire one or more aircraft carriers and it had an active program to develop a design, it remained unclear whether Beijing had reached a firm decision on the kind of carrier it would have, given budget constraints and naval funding priorities. Since the first reports of Chinese carrier aspirations in the 1980s and 1990s, various sources have claimed that China was building everything from purely training vessels to super-carriers similar to US Navy types.

In June 2005 Zhang Guangqin, the top official overseeing the country's burgeoning shipbuilding industry, denied that China was assembling an aircraft carrier in Shanghai. "I can say it clearly that there's no such thing at all," said Zhang, the vice-minister at the Commission of Science Technology and Industry for National Defense, at a news briefing in Beijing. "As to building aircraft carrier or not, related governmental departments will take all factors in consideration."

In October 2006 Lieutenant-General Wang Zhiyuan, Vice Chairman of the Science and Technology Committee in the PLA’s General Armament Department stated: "The Chinese army will study how to manufacture aircraft carriers so that we can develop our own… aircraft carriers are indispensable if we want to protect our interests in the oceans." Russian press has reported Chinese interest in acquiring Russian Su-33 carrier-borne fighters, a variant of the Su-27 already transferred to China. In October 2006 a Russian press report suggested early-stage negotiations were underway for China to purchase up to 50 such aircraft at a cost of $2.5 billion. However, there has been no subsequent discussion of such a deal.

In March 2007 a Chinese Admiral of the PLAN was quoted as saying that the Chinese shipbuilding industry was actively conducting R&D in aircraft carrier construction and could be ready to build such a vessel by 2010.

The 2008 "Military Power of the People’s Republic of China" stated "evidence in recent years increasingly suggests China’s leaders may be moving forward with an aircraft carrier program. For example, beginning in early 2006 and with the release of China’s Eleventh Five Year Plan, PRC-owned media reported on statements from high-level government and military officials on China’s intent to build aircraft carriers – including a March 2007 statement from the then-minister of China’s Commission on Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense (COSTIND)."

As of 2008, Russia was believed to have been providing assistance for several years in the construction of three Chinese-designed aircraft carriers. Some analysts have thus predicted that China could have an operational carrier by 2015, while others have considered 2020 to be a more realistic timeframe. No confirmed work on any shipbuilding project of any size had been observed or reported as of the end of 2008.

In 2007 Liu, Wei-Wei; Qu, Xiang-Ju of the School of Aeronautics Science and Technology, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing 100083, China, published a paper "Modeling of carrier-based aircraft ski jump take-off based on tensor" in the Chinese Journal of Aeronautics [v 18 n 4 p 326-335]. However, there are unconfirmed reports that the Chinese had built a ski jump nearly identical to that of the Varyag at Yanliang [Janliang] Airfield, which is China's main aviation test facility. Reportedly it appeared that preparions were in progress to test aircraft on it. As of early 2008 a variant of the Su-27 was being flight tested at this facility

the chinese have laid out their plans for world domination along with a general time line in their own press and manuals.

the west is going to profoundly regret not stepping up to the plate on this in years to come.

To have an Aircraft Carrier is to declare that you intend to have a Fleet for Force Projection.When the Chinese have a Fleet that can TAG along with a Carrier,then we should take notice.Short of that it would be nothing more then another nation stroking it's own ego.Any given day our Sub force would destroy it,now if it had a FLEET to protect it that would be a different thing.All in all ,not to worry!

As a side note ,the Chinese allready have a couple Carriers.One made out of concrete that sit's in a lake,and one Soviet Kiev class(that was going to be used as a hotel/restaurant) I believe.So what's to worry about if they add one more JOKE to thier Navy.

quote:

Originally posted by khyland:
As a side note ,the Chinese allready have a couple Carriers.One made out of concrete that sit's in a lake,and one Soviet Kiev class(that was going to be used as a hotel/restaurant) I believe.So what's to worry about if they add one more JOKE to thier Navy.

Khyland,

Actually you are only partially right.

China has 3 ex-Soviet carriers that are still afloat:

1.) The KUZNETSOV class carrier VARYAG, which was only partially complete when it was towed all the way to Dalian, China. It is rumoured to be now being refitted for use by the PLAN as a training carrier.

2.) The former KIEV class carrier MINSK which is now being used as a theme park and museum ship in Shenzhen, China.(northeast of Hong Kong)

3.) The former KIEV class carrier KIEV (the class leader), which is also being used as a theme park and museum ship in Tianjin, China. (southeast of Beijing)

And good sources to confirm all this info include the ff. sources:

"www.varyagworld.com"

"http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/cv.htm"

And I really think you severely underestimate their military industrial complex considering that they were able to copy such Western/US equipment as the AN/SPY1 radar and the Goalkeeper CIWS, clones of which can be seen on one of their spanking new Type 52 Class Destroyers in the picture below:



This ship in the picture is being sent on a antipiracy mission along with one other destroyer and a supply ship, IIRC, and more info on that can be found on the ff. thread:

http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/672198221/m/9800007902001

They have 5 of those new Type 52 class destroyers (all flights A, B, and C) as well as a host of other new ships (including 4 SOVREMENNY class missile destroyers from Russia) out of a total fleet of 28 destroyers and 51 frigates, so are they are definitely building a new blue water surface fleet that is capable of escorting any future carriers and therefore might be able to challenge the USN in the future. Futhermore, they also have a growing submarine fleet of nearly 70 submarines as of this writing.

Don't be complacent.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Enssantor,

quote:

Originally posted by Enssantor:

quote:

Originally posted by khyland:
As a side note ,the Chinese allready have a couple Carriers.One made out of concrete that sit's in a lake,and one Soviet Kiev class(that was going to be used as a hotel/restaurant) I believe.So what's to worry about if they add one more JOKE to thier Navy.

Khyland,

Actually you are only partially right.

China has 3 ex-Soviet carriers that are still afloat:

1.) The KUZNETSOV class carrier VARYAG, which was only partially complete when it was towed all the way to Dalian, China. It is rumoured to be now being refitted for use by the PLAN as a training carrier.

2.) The former KIEV class carrier MINSK which is now being used as a theme park and museum ship in Shenzhen, China.(northeast of Hong Kong)

3.) The former KIEV class carrier KIEV (the class leader), which is also being used as a theme park and museum ship in Tianjin, China. (southeast of Beijing)

And good sources to confirm all this info include the ff. sources:

"www.varyagworld.com"

"http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/cv.htm"

And I really think you severely underestimate their military industrial complex considering that they were able to copy such Western/US equipment as the AN/SPY1 radar and the Goalkeeper CIWS, clones of which can be seen on one of their spanking new Type 52 Class Destroyers in the picture below:



This ship in the picture is being sent on a antipiracy mission along with one other destroyer and a supply ship, IIRC, and more info on that can be found on the ff. thread:

http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/672198221/m/9800007902001

They have 5 of those new Type 52 class destroyers (all flights A, B, and C) as well as a host of other new ships (including 4 SOVREMENNY class missile destroyers from Russia) out of a total fleet of 28 destroyers and 51 frigates, so are they are definitely building a new blue water surface fleet that is capable of escorting any future carriers and therefore might be able to challenge the USN in the future. Futhermore, they also have a growing submarine fleet of nearly 70 submarines as of this writing.

Don't be complacent.

"Don't be complacent."...
Great words, how many times, if the United States had only followed that very prudent advice, would American lives and fortunes been saved!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

And I really think you severely underestimate their military industrial complex considering that they have copied such things as the SPY1 radar and the Goalkeeper CIWS, both of which can be seen on one of their spanking new Type 52 Class Destroyers in the picture below:

Dont worry, my freind. Neither work near as well as the Chinese had hoped. While they have the technology basics, their reverse engineering reduces design efficiency and "blueprint" tolerances and "clean" research required to have such hi tech systems work as the original design. kind of like you know a product has a certain chip operating at a certain speed and voltage but you dont know why.
They have an F-16 with engine they have dissected but still cant build a reliable engine at the same power nor could they copy with success the Su30 engines.
Its still a wonder to me how such a bright and intellegent people like the Chinese have not been able to achieve great technological success on their own. Why? Is it some by-product of communism?

It will be nice to have the Chinese join in on the anti-piracy efforts. The only fleeting worry I have is of some incident involving the ships of 2 different countries having some kind of accident. The communications issue must be a major obstacle to deal with in coordinating efforts against the pirates.

Chinese and operational carriers? Not even a remote possibility before 2016-18.

FlankerFlyer, I respect your well thought out assessments that often counter conventional wisdom. I also agree with khyland and SUNLINER81 that we must never get complacent. This appears to me to be a critical time with our military taxed to the breaking point, our economy in shambles and the Democrats controlling the White House and both Houses of Congress. That is not a partisan attack but simply an observation that in such times military strength tends to suffer as a greater portion of our tax dollars are used to fund social programs. While the Chinese may not be a challenge for many years, they seem to be going in the right direction while we most definitely are not.

quote:

Originally posted by M123Driver:
FlankerFlyer, I respect your well thought out assessments that often counter conventional wisdom. I also agree with khyland and SUNLINER81 that we must never get complacent.

If you read the whole thread again, you will see that it was Khyland being complacent, and I was the first one here who said that we must never get complacent.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Enssantor,

And it's official.

From the Asahi Shimbun newspaper of Japan:

quote:

China to start construction of 1st aircraft carriers next year
BY KENJI MINEMURA, THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

BEIJING--China will begin construction of the country's first domestically produced aircraft carriers in Shanghai next year, with an eye to completing two mid-sized carriers by 2015, military and shipbuilding sources said.

Beijing is also expected to complete work on a never-finished former Soviet aircraft carrier moored in the northeastern port of Dalian, to provide training for carrier-based pilots and crew.

The two 50,000- to 60,000-ton carriers will rely on conventional propulsion systems, not nuclear power. They will be assigned to the People's Liberation Army Navy south sea fleet, tasked with patrolling the South China Sea, sources said.

China's carrier ambitions and the build-up of its blue-water fleet have long been of interest to Pacific nations.

National defense ministry spokesman Huang Xueping recently commented that China might build its own aircraft carriers.

However, this is the first time the goals of Chinese naval planners have been clarified in such detail.

If China does bolster its naval combat capabilities by deploying aircraft carriers, it could significantly impact the delicate military balance in East Asia.

According to sources close to Shanghai municipal authorities, one of the world's largest shipbuilding facilities was completed this fall on Changxingdao island at the mouth of the Changjiang river near Shanghai.

One of the four docks there is for construction of the aircraft carriers, they said.

Shipbuilding sources said there are plans to import electrical control parts from Russia and that orders have already been placed with domestic military suppliers.

If procurement goes as planned, the carriers could be completed about two years earlier than planned.

Meanwhile, shipbuilders in Dalian are nearing completion of the 60,000-ton former Soviet Kuznetsov-class carrier Varyag, as a training ship for carrier-borne aircraft pilots and crew. The ship, which was about 70 percent complete at the time of its purchase, was first acquired by a Macao tourism firm in 1998. Since 2002, it has been under construction by a Dalian-based shipbuilder with ties to the navy.

A ranking Chinese navy officer told The Asahi Shimbun that as China increasingly relies on Mideast oil, the aircraft carriers would likely see duty guarding sea lanes in the Malacca Strait and in the Indian Ocean. The officer contended that...

The first mission of these carriers will be to take Taiwan....

A carrier cannot survive alone. Building one carrier is of no consequence. A nation needs at least three, in order to maintain one "on station" at sea at all times. Each carrier will require a complement of surface combat ships, submarines, and supply/maintenance vessels.

China will have to commit to building an entire ocean-going navy if it decides to build one aircraft carrier.

There is nothing wrong with that, in itself; and China would have every right to do so, as a legitimate world power. But it makes it necessary for either Japan or for the United States to build and maintain 3 additional carrier groups, in order to offset the emergence of this naval power.

quote:

Originally posted by AGBrina:
A carrier cannot survive alone. Building one carrier is of no consequence. A nation needs at least three, in order to maintain one "on station" at sea at all times. Each carrier will require a complement of surface combat ships, submarines, and supply/maintenance vessels.

China will have to commit to building an entire ocean-going navy if it decides to build one aircraft carrier.

There is nothing wrong with that, in itself; and China would have every right to do so, as a legitimate world power. But it makes it necessary for either Japan or for the United States to build and maintain 3 additional carrier groups, in order to offset the emergence of this naval power.

AGbrina,

Read my previous posts on this thread.

As if the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy's 28 missile destroyers and 51 frigates and nearly 70 submarines that it currently has isn't an ocean-going navy?

It's time for the US and its allies in the Pacific Rim to stop being complacent and start preparing for this future threat.

And Japan already has its own carriers again for the first time since WW2 in the form of the OSUMI class assault carriers and the HYUGA class helicopter aircraft carrier which was recently completed:




This helo carrier may not be very potent unless it has VTOL fighters like Harriers based on it.

quote:

Originally posted by Enssantor:
And it's official.

From the Asahi Shimbun newspaper of Japan:

quote:

China to start construction of 1st aircraft carriers next year
BY KENJI MINEMURA, THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

BEIJING--China will begin construction of the country's first domestically produced aircraft carriers in Shanghai next year, with an eye to completing two mid-sized carriers by 2015, military and shipbuilding sources said.

Beijing is also expected to complete work on a never-finished former Soviet aircraft carrier moored in the northeastern port of Dalian, to provide training for carrier-based pilots and crew.

The two 50,000- to 60,000-ton carriers will rely on conventional propulsion systems, not nuclear power. They will be assigned to the People's Liberation Army Navy south sea fleet, tasked with patrolling the South China Sea, sources said.

China's carrier ambitions and the build-up of its blue-water fleet have long been of interest to Pacific nations.

National defense ministry spokesman Huang Xueping recently commented that China might build its own aircraft carriers.

However, this is the first time the goals of Chinese naval planners have been clarified in such detail.

If China does bolster its naval combat capabilities by deploying aircraft carriers, it could significantly impact the delicate military balance in East Asia.

According to sources close to Shanghai municipal authorities, one of the world's largest shipbuilding facilities was completed this fall on Changxingdao island at the mouth of the Changjiang river near Shanghai.

One of the four docks there is for construction of the aircraft carriers, they said.

Shipbuilding sources said there are plans to import electrical control parts from Russia and that orders have already been placed with domestic military suppliers.

If procurement goes as planned, the carriers could be completed about two years earlier than planned.

Meanwhile, shipbuilders in Dalian are nearing completion of the 60,000-ton former Soviet Kuznetsov-class carrier Varyag, as a training ship for carrier-borne aircraft pilots and crew. The ship, which was about 70 percent complete at the time of its purchase, was first acquired by a Macao tourism firm in 1998. Since 2002, it has been under construction by a Dalian-based shipbuilder with ties to the navy.

A ranking Chinese navy officer told The Asahi Shimbun that as China increasingly relies on Mideast oil, the aircraft carriers would likely see duty guarding sea lanes in the Malacca Strait and in the Indian Ocean. The officer contended that...

They will patrol the South China Sea, now that is truly interesting!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by AGBrina:
A carrier cannot survive alone. Building one carrier is of no consequence. A nation needs at least three, in order to maintain one "on station" at sea at all times. Each carrier will require a complement of surface combat ships, submarines, and supply/maintenance vessels.

China will have to commit to building an entire ocean-going navy if it decides to build one aircraft carrier.

There is nothing wrong with that, in itself; and China would have every right to do so, as a legitimate world power. But it makes it necessary for either Japan or for the United States to build and maintain 3 additional carrier groups, in order to offset the emergence of this naval power.

This act, by the PRC, will change the "dynamic" of the entire region and may in fact, turn the Japanese Maritime Defense Force to an "offensive" status, from it's "traditional defensive" role...
As the fictional character "Sherlock Holmes" would say, "Watson, the game is afoot!"...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by Enssantor:

quote:

Originally posted by AGBrina:
A carrier cannot survive alone. Building one carrier is of no consequence. A nation needs at least three, in order to maintain one "on station" at sea at all times. Each carrier will require a complement of surface combat ships, submarines, and supply/maintenance vessels.

China will have to commit to building an entire ocean-going navy if it decides to build one aircraft carrier.

There is nothing wrong with that, in itself; and China would have every right to do so, as a legitimate world power. But it makes it necessary for either Japan or for the United States to build and maintain 3 additional carrier groups, in order to offset the emergence of this naval power.

AGbrina,

Read my previous posts on this thread.

As if the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy's 28 missile destroyers and 51 frigates and nearly 70 submarines that it currently has isn't an ocean-going navy?

It's time for the US and its allies in the Pacific Rim to stop being complacent and start preparing for this future threat.

And Japan already has its own carriers again for the first time since WW2 in the form of the OSUMI class assault carriers and the HYUGA class helicopter aircraft carrier which was recently completed:




This helo carrier may not be very potent unless it has VTOL fighters like Harriers based on it.

Good candidate for the foreign sale of the "Lightening II"...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Sunliner81:
There is no way of knowing for certain if the VSTOL version of the F-35 can offset the deficiencies of the Harrier in range, speed, maneuverability, durability, weapons and ordnance relative to fixed wing fighters catapulted off a full-sized carrier. (I have read that the catapult has been replaced in new carriers by some form of magnetic energy, which I don't pretend to understand.) But I don't count on it to be able to do so.

VSTOL carriers are adequate to defend the amphibious fleet fro air attack and to suppport ground operations. But they are way less than ideal for either purpose.

Essantor:
I read somewhere in this discussion board that the three Soviet carriers were acquired for the purposes of reverse engineering.

I believe that the U.S. Navy is now maintaining -out of necessity, due to shrinking size of the active carrier force- that they need only ten carriers instead of 15, inorder to maintain 5 onstation. But that hasn't been the case in the past.

The Chinese Navy is only one piece of the puzzle. One year or two is the wink of an eye to a Nation that thinks in decade or centuries. The relative strength of economies spells the measure of the strength of a Nation for supporting large forces and sustain them. So far we have seen China' economy grow at a 10-15% annual rate. That pace catches them up in money but it does not compensate for lack of domestic sources of commodities. Check Japan's great WW II beginning strength and its quick demse when it couldn't match American deep strength and unreachable industries while its domestic industries were soon bombarded and isolated from resources. Twenty-five years from now, will America have either a force or the ability and will to sustain it?

The real "threat" is the possibility/probability that resource rich nations will perceive America's dwindling ability and will to protect its interests and those of its allies around the world, and allow China to establish "bases" on Africa's East coast that offset any American titular/token presence afloat in the Indian Ocean. We are loosing the soft war here and now in Africa.