First Chinese Domestic Carrier Launched

smh.com.au/world/asia/china-s-first-home-grown-aircraft-carrier-launches-20180514-p4zf38.html
archive.fo/xWePt

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1024x577 457.17 KB, 466.38K)

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.fo/OCO0z
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_and_Clover
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

news site blocked archive
archive.fo/OCO0z

Can the chinks do nothing right?

They haven't named it due to polticial fighting.

Type 002 should get off to sea next year.
Type 003 in the next.

But don't worry burger-kun, China will only have 2 carriers by 2025.
I mean they have 2 at sea in 2018 and 2 more in construction but they're just trainers.
See, we don't even give them names.
Oh wait now the press is starting to say we need 6…

How limiting is this? Are we talking 'regionally limited' or simply difficult to effectively maintain outside of that range?
Assuming this is true, what's the next step? Do carriers become vulnerable enough that extreme long range land-based aircraft carrying super AShM are viable enough in penetrating defense networks?

What good are carriers when the locations where they're maintained would get wiped out?

The strategic goal is to break the "first island chain. Taiwain, Japan. That is the goal of these carriers. The goal of the future nuclear carrier if they can build one is to project strength past the second island chain, which is consisting of the outlying US islands of Guam, wake, Philipeans, Midway.

Couldn't they just name it after rivers or mountains? That can't be possibly tied to politics. Or have the Chinks actually lost all connections to nature like the ants they are?

Attached: HEYYEYAAEYAAAEYAEYAA_-_Legend_of_the_Galactic_Heroes.webm (800x600, 12.46M)

Didn't they name all their rivers/mountains after politicians post-commie bullshit?

There once was a plane, so big and heavy, that it could carry a weapon capable of defending any carrier group from almost any threat in the air at ranges no man would even think of. Legends say it was abandoned due to the inability of the salesman who represented it, allowing men from Seattle to blind the men in power, poisoning them, making them believe that the solution from Seattle was all that was needed.
Now, the legend has ended. All tooling has been destroyed for fear of such an awe inspiring plane being used by a former ally, now an enemy - which hasn't stopped that particular enemy. They're just making their own parts.
The plane that it could have become was never realized, it never reached its true potential.
Had it gotten a modern multi phased array radar, its nose was so big it could have been equipped with the best the world had to offer. It would have been able to see further than any Sentry.
Had it gotten the thrust vectoring nozzles, it would have turned on a dime, capable of maneuvering like a plane from the east, making the Air Force look really, really lame.
Had it gotten the desired engine upgrade, no Fulcrum would have escaped it's wrath, no SuperAShM would have been in Range for the Carrier group before a Phoenix found it's way to its launch plattform.

But alas, the price tag was too high and the sales pitch too bad (the guy apparently just went in and said "here", handing them a brochure, naming a price and left while Boeing and Subcontractors had a team explaining everything to the procurement committee) and so the ASF-14 only flies in our and Grumman's dreams.


That would be a direct attack on chinese mainland. You'd be much better off picking away their fighters with creative MANPAD system placement. Oceans are big, submarines hard to find, things just get lost.
A carrier without airplanes is just an awkward freighter.

Submarine carriers.

With God-tier logistics and planning it could just be "Really fucking annoying and expensive" if you tried to use it in the same way as a nuke AC. Without God-tier logistics (and with the hold-ups and complications that happen 10 times an hour during a war) then … best of luck.

Giving ASM longer range and either a high enough speed or reduced enough radar signature to get past CIWS. Once that's happened you shouldn't need the aircraft to carry the weapons closer to the target before firing them, and thus wouldn't need a fuckhueg ship to carry the aircraft close enough to manage that.

Think bigger Type 212 submarines with the ability to launch more drones at once.

Well can't they just give them some cool adjective as a name, bong style? Like HMS Indefeatable, HMS indefatigable, HMS Insufferable, HMS Intolerable, HMS Unusable etc. only in chinese? Or just name them after cool natural phenomena like whatever is the chinese word for 'Thunder' or 'Meteor' or whatever?

Sinking the enemy's carriers… WITH CARGO SHIPS!

So when does a US Cargo Ship sink it?

Shandong (it's a province) was supposed to be it's name, they can leave it nameless until commission if they want.
The thing about the chairman wanting to give it a politician name is really weird, Chinese ships are mainly named after cities (with 151 cities above 1M inhabitants, it's not like they're gonna run out of names…) sometimes named after mountains or rivers (with no mixing within a class), the ex-Varyag has a province name (Liaoning), so it should be a province name.

Retards who think the chinks can win wars against first-world nations need to be publicly humiliated.

You mean publicly beaten, like in Singapore. Anyone who thinks the Chicoms are even close to the level of humans deserves to be caned for their retardery.

dubs of truth

Domestically built, t's still a Russian design. They even made it weaker by having fewer CIWS and shipboard weapons, they made other design changes to get it built quicker which make it inferior to the Kuznetsov. It's clearly a stopgap design until they get something serious in service. Their first real Chinese carrier won't be built until 2022, it's supposed to use a rail from one of their electomagnetic trains as a launch catapult, so it will likely be a flattop.

The funny thing is that by 2030 carriers will likely be obsolete. They technically have been obsolete for awhile now, but still serviceable for killing durkas and bullying tiny nations. But by 2030 even durkas might get their hands on a Russian scramjet missile, and the proliferation of in air refueling and the ever increasing range of air dominance fighters will make using a carrier pointless.

Not at all. Powering a carrier with nuclear reactors is a gimmick considering the entire carrier screen is still using oil, meaning when the screen stops to refuel so must the carrier. Also most of the point of a carrier is it being seen, so having it get topped off in a port somewhere is exactly part of its mission parameter. Nuke reactor might cause some reduction in fuel tenders needed, at some counterbalance of initial cost, but there is no true practical benefit that outweighs the bother of it.

Powering submarines with nuclear reactors makes actual sense, since they don't have a conventionally powered screen, they're operating detached, and their mission profile is to stay out of sight - away from refueling ships and refueling ports.

How feasible are these in the era of drones?

Attached: MQ-25-Program-Office-Tests-Simulated-Mission-Control-System.jpg (4240x2830, 6.65M)

It looks like more of a boast than a serious military project. As you said, if they wanted to own the airspace over their local waters and out into the closest parts of the Philippine chunk of the Pacific then there are a few thousand places to build much cheaper airbases and very few people who would object to that. This reeks of "HEY, LOOK AT OUR SHINY NEW AIRCRAFT CARRIER, WE BUILT THAT, CHINA STRONK!".


Probably a lot more feasible than when the last time someone was trying it. You'd need to keep the sub at surface or a very shallow depth to let it send signals to and receive from the drone though - which could be a risk for the sub. You'd probably get more use out of the budget by trying to increase the range of sub-surface launched ASM.

Very.
All WWII submarine cruiser, as their above sea equivalent, carried planes (that's something everyone forgot… all blue sea ships had planes). Japanese I-400 had as much as 3…
It's insane that while seaplanes were one of the most valuable tactical asset of the war they've been completely abandoned for military applications. When you see shit like the Icon A5 or the Vickers Wave there is no reason why you could make a subsonic light recon/bomber with a similar compact design, and pack a submarine to the gills with them.

With drones it's even simpler.

It baffles me that you people think they're aren't doing BOTH.

China own the air space in all the south china sea, it's a fucking fact. Flips and cie can cry all they want it's already done.
They built deep sea ports and airbase literally from scratch FFS.
The carriers are OBVIOUSLY to go beyond that…
If you think than building carriers is cheaper than building massive bases from literal nothing, think again.
Carriers are hard to R&D and costly to maintain, to build not so much.
That's the only reason you're still building two UK (with one going to mothball immediately), you already had put the down payment, the construction cost is ultimately negligible, it's a few billions payed in installment over several years. Any developed country can fit the bill for building a bunch anytime.
Maintaining them is the pain to the wallet.
Hell just the monthly wages of sea pay of the 5 000 crew on a US carriers must reach a stupid number.

Attached: After china 2.jpg (1310x717 78.39 KB, 83.01K)

I am still amazed you retarded niggers think that an Aircraft Carrier is being built to challenge the West. It's not. It may be portrayed as such but nobody really uses them against nations with anything resembling a navy. What the Aircraft Carrier is great for is projecting your power across the globe mainly against Third World Shitholes. I guarantee that the first proper use of the Chink Carrier will be up and down the coast of Africa keeping niggers in line, or anywhere else Chinks "buy" raw materials from.

If the US office of naval intelligence's report was correct regarding the PLA(N) recent trends in naval development, this is basically going to be just a prototype or a test bench for onboard systems, logistics and for the manufacturing process. Ofcourse, it's going to work just fine for colonial work in Africa, as the idea probably is to provide air support for their military units working in Africa, should things start boiling over in there.

I suspect that after the next one is finished, and it has completed all of it's trials successfully, they are going to start a bigger production run of carriers.


It's going to be simply more difficult to effectively maintain it. After all, it basically boils down to having a trail of cow ships feeding that carrier, and a supply base or two in africa to supply those cow ships. It's probably only going to be a problem when shit boils down to state of a world war. And in that case it's going to be doubtful how meaningful having a nuclear powered carrier is going to be for China, as they are presumably going to focus on making sure things don't get out of hand in their pacific trade routes.

Attached: shall we play a game gtw.jpg (400x300, 58.3K)

Nope. Usually named after cities/proviences/historical events.
>Long March is from the part mythical long march duh

what actually happened during the long march?

Zig Forums related by really noteworthy enough for its own thread?

Sides expanded!

How formidable is that Chinese Nuke tunnel complex?

Total defeat, painted as a victory.
Nationalists troops massacred the commies armies, Mao tried to escape going trough the worst parts of China.
They had 3 armies when it started, less than division when they stopped.
But since the commie leadership survived and still had enough troops to terrorize the countryside and gang-press peasants they called it a victory.

don't forget massive soviet backing as well as western (read: Jewish) support and volunteers

Nah that came much latter. The long march is in the mid-thirties.
It would have been a total victory for the nationalists if not for the factors you cite that allowed them to rebuild their forces in the decade that followed but at that time the commie threat to China was properly stomped out.

Doesn't really matter considering carriers will be obsolete by then.
Ford is the last American carrier, which is why only 2 are being built where Nimitz class had 10. Even carrier-dependant navies like USN realize that the age of the carrier is drawing to an end.

We're likelier to get battleships back than carriers…. although they're probably going to look like a 2x sized Kirov class.

Attached: kirovtopj.jpg (3562x1714, 864.65K)

If anything Russia is reconsidering capital ships altogether.
Both the shipyard activity observed and the Russian State Armament Program for 2018-2027 clearly mentions they will NOT build any.
The biggest mentioned would be a lengthened Gorshkov-class destroyer (Gorshkov-class having the issue of it's engine being made in Ukraine they're seriously late, more Grigorovich-class frigate should act as stop gaps).
The Nakhimov is in rebuild and should take the place of the Pyotr Velikiy as flagship of the northern fleet, then the Pyotr Velikiy would be rebuilt after that maybe they will rebuild the Lazarev but if they do it won't be ready by 2027. Basically all they construct is going to small ships and subs.

Sub in normal amount, lots of small ships and clear plans to find solution to extend the autonomy and range of said small ships to make them more blue waters worthy.

Also it's dubious that they would rebuilt the cruisers, without was is largely Putin whim to rebuild the soviet cruisers as a symbol for internal politics ("we're not letting rot away the USSR inheritance, we're making it better and improved") and just concentrate on making lots of small ships and better subs.

I'm just saying, battleships are more likely than carriers to dominate the 21st century and beyond, and battleships in the nearer term would more likely be equipped with missiles than guns. Even when we have space forces, a battleship on water can serve as a mobile orbital defense unit that would be harder to hit with an RFG than a mountain based installation.

I'm not saying that Russia of all people will adopt larger ships, they border four isolated bodies of water, there's no way in hell they should sink money into large ships. Kirov was just an example of a large missile carrying ship, it's use in that image was coincidental.

At that stage, wouldn't it be reign of the destroyers/crusiers? Literally just slap on as many missles as possible for crusiers while leaving ASW to destroyers while giving them a few.
Also apparently the Kirov is roughly classified as a heavy nuclear-powered guided missile cruiser to fuck with the treaties on the bosphorus lol.

Obsolete or not, they are floating airfields and therefore more or less useful for African bushfires where logistics for inland airbases might get wonky due to everything in Africa being more unreliable than weather in sea. But then again, France doesn't seem to have utterly catastrophic problems running their airbases in Africa.

They're floating airports not airfields. They have hangar and repair facilities.

An airfield is generally light on those, it would be more similar to picrel
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_and_Clover

And a floating runway would be even simpler.

Attached: white-knuckle-runway-2-1.jpg (600x370 13.14 KB, 110.45K)

Attached: i-400 a3bc6f0482173af3390941cebcd8140c.jpg (970x546 88.99 KB, 128.84K)

But will there be enough civilian cargo subs for the USN to collide with?

Attached: breddy gud.png (371x400, 28.17K)

Guess who sold the Chinese the technology they needed for their Aircraft Carrier?

Attached: me.jpg (640x480, 17.6K)

Can we stop with the anti-semitic spam already? It get's tiring to state that the sky is blue every third post.

Jewkraine?

kike shill.

...

The Soviets?

You're implying Jews have technology to sell.

Don't worry, there's an almost infinite supply of seabed for the USN Submersible Aircraft Carriers to collide with. It's more likely that they'll just vanish randomly in the middle of a patrol.

Yes be a gud goy.

Who do you thinks owns defense companies goyim? Israel is the only country that can actually make US equipment work.