China's Aircraft Carrier Ambitions: Seeking Truth from Rumors [Brian's Military Ping List]

Naval War College ^ | Ian Storey and You Ji

[Blue Scourge]

bump for a later read.....btw...can you add me to your ping list?

[spetznaz]

See my post 25.

[sukhoi-30mki]

Coz they have pretty large exclusive economic zones in a rather unfriendly part of the world-Malaysia,Indonesia ,Burma(Chinese prop )&ofcourse China .Moreover the deal to buy it was signed in 1992 when Thailand was in the midst of an economic boom&also for a bit of prestige that its giant (albeit friendly)neighbour,India has been operating carriers since 1961.

Technically speaking though,the Chakri Nareubet is classified as a "offshore patrol carrier"!!!-it weighs only about 11,500 tonnes (a weebit bigger than your average Aeigis equipped ship)&is said to carry 6 Sh-60s&6 ex-Spanish Av-8b harriers.She was purchased in 1997-&almost immediately confined to port due to the economic meltdown in south-east asian economies in the 1st quarter of that year.This combined with the fact that the Royal Thai navy does'nt have any decent escort vessels have rendered the Nareubet a true white elephant.

[Shryke]

It's a good post. Putting myself into a Chinese fleet designer's position would be interesting. What strategy do we take to build a fleet? Do we want to make it comparable to the USN? Probably not, it would bankrupt us and assuredly not work. Do we want to design a fleet that can defeat other nations' navies? For example, Japan's? If that is the case, and it is affordable and achievable, is it worth it considering the USN can always sink it?

Basically, it's my opinion that the PRC could not float a carrier fleet that could compete with the US. As such, there seems to be a strong argument for not building one at all.

[ASA Vet]

There was a time...long ago, when FReepers actually read the articles before they made comments

Hey Laz, time to bring back your old tag line!

[spetznaz]

China would never try to match the USN's capabilities (unless they started chewing on particularly potent ginseng roots). They saw what happened to the USSR, and consequently i do not think they would be dumb enough to go toe to toe with Uncle Sam. The only stratagem for them would be to go for a highly specialised plan that maximizes their inherent strengths and optimizes on the weaknesses of potential opponents (namely: the US, Russia and Japan. Taiwan doesn't count here since by 2015 it will be part of China one way or another). Those three are the nations that China has to be wary of. The US for obvious reasons, Russia because it is still potent (and the Chinese believe the oil/natural gas rich Siberian regions were stolen from it by Russia during the Opium wars), and Japan because Ol' Nippon has the ability to stand up to China militarily (and anyways China feels it has a score to settle for what happened in WW2).

As for the Japanese navy it would be disastrous for China to try and mess with it now. It is pound for pound one of the very best in the world, according to some second only to the US (although it doesn't have the quantity of ships, the quality of equipment, ships and training is stellar. Think of it as the naval equivalent of the Israeli Air Force). The Kongo class Japanese Aegis destroyers would be a force to reckon with alone, and the proposed Japanese 'helicopter carriers' (SCOFF SCOFF SCOFF) can 'remarkably' be easily turned into VSTOL carriers (just in time for the F-35 JSF)!!!! Also, some reports say Japan can field a nuclear missile (warhead plus missile) in a matter of months, if it had to. If China messed with Japan currently the head politicos in Beijing would be eating their Peking duck with very sour expressions on their faces.

The only viable stratagem for the Chinese (in my opinion) can be divided into two parts:

a) Making their crack-military highly trained, with a high technology core surrounded by low-trained ammased 'cannon-fodder' forces (that can be used as a means of attrition, enabling the high-tech core to then deliver the killing punch), and diversified warfare techniques (where war is not only fought with weapons but with brains and economies). It should also position itself in such a way that if need be it can employ a strategy that would really hurt its enemies, even if that strategy harmed China itself in the process (basically I cut off both my arms, but I kill you).

b) The second aspect is (in my humble opinion) the paramount key. There is a game played in China called Wu chi (the Japanese name for it is Go). Te best way to liken it is to call it 3-dimensional chess. Adepts of the game (if you can call it a game since there are whole philosophies devoted to it both in China and Japan, and its tactics are used in both life, business and war) can even spend ages playing it, and yet beginners normally finish it in minutes. The most important plays in Wu Chi (Go) are those that involve fighting from a position of weakness, and perpetually projecting that appearance until it is time to take the decisive step and 'surround the stone.'

It is all a game.

[XBob]

39 - "Why do the Thais have a carrier?"

Take a look at the location and shape of Thailand. It is over 1000 miles long, thousands of miles of seacoast, and a good porition of it, (the elephant's trunk) can be easily cut off by the Muslims to the south (Malaysia and Indonesia), and the Kmer Rouge (Cambodia) to the South, Laos and Vietnam to the East; Laos, China and Vietnam to the North, and Burma to the West. Plus, the Mekong river forms the eastern border of Thailand and it is far larger and wider than the Mississippi even 1800 miles up stream.

[XBob]

25 - "China is one of the world's largest merchant societies right now. They have extensive trade and tourism ties throughout the world."

True, but you missed my point - there are lots of interesting things you can put in containers, in large volumes on a giant container ship. Remember, 'passenger aircraft' as weapons?

[gilliam]

'connected' countries don't normally engage in terrorism because they will loose business and tourist trade.

Terrorism is the tool of the disconnected, frustrated, and isolated.

[Poohbah]

I was on the last Med cruise of the USS Coral Sea in 1989.

During that time, the Tbilisi (now named for some Commie Admiral) was on trials in the Black Sea.

A picture was posted one day on our bulletin board, and I was looking it over.

A pilot came by, took one look, and said, "Now there's a Navy Cross just waiting to get pinned on."

Same thing with whatever the ChiComs put in the water.

[struwwelpeter]

I wonder what to make of this article:

(4)"Today" Tuesday 25 May PEOPLE AND REGIME (political section: tel 457-24-10)

"KYIV" TO BECOME A DISNEYLAND - Aircraft carrier sold for scrap will bring profit to Chinese businessmen. (picture)

o ABROAD: The Nikolaevskiy-buit aircraft carrier "Kyiv" became the main attraction in the huge Chinese "military Disneyland", while Ukrainian and Chinese entrepreneurs agreed to build a "Ukrainian street" in the amusement park.

In 2000 the vessel was sold to China for scrap, according to various sources, for $8-16 million. Now the businessmen over there aren't just meeting expenses, but even making a profit.

The former aircraft carrier, already 32 years old, was docked in the Yellow Sea by the city of Tyan'tsin' (10 million inhabitants) and doesn't resemble in the slightest its registered description. The Chinese completely reconstructed the decks (the military equipment was removed before sale) and placed there four jet fighters from that period. In all, the investors spent about $300 million, but now they will use the monies they receive to build a kind of "military Disneyland", the center of which will be the Kyiv. Five hectares are planned with BTRs, anti-aircraft weapons, and other vehicles. There will also be a waterpark and other amusement complexes.

For now the only thing visible is the Yellow Sea (named for its color), the aircraft carrier, some big bill-boards, and a lot of junk. But there's no doubt that the Chinese will build everything as planned. During a tour of Peking our guide proudly showed us a nice nine-story building and said: "This is the oldest building in the city center, it's already 13 years old." Of course, he didn't mean historical places, but the speed with which the Chinese think, work, generate ideas upon which they can make money - for which they can be rightly proud.

The head of the investment company which owns the amusement park, Chzhen Zheyfu, didn't hide the fact the the project was practically paid off and was turning a profit. Now his company is getting ready to sell land (that same five hectares) for various park structures. There will be a "Ukrainian street" with souveniers and quite likely a Ukrainian restaurant. While the local authorities promised to to build a highway from Peking straight to the "Happy Port" (as the Chinese have named the future complex). A trip from the capital would take about two hours. Of course, Ukrainians would have to fly nine hours to get to Peking, for $580 round trip.

It could be a bit quicker if there weren't such problems in Ukrainian and Russian airline cooperation. "Today" has already written about how the Unified Economic Area (EEhP) between our countries would be more advantageous to the Ukraine, and so many Russian companies and their lobbyists are against it. In our case the airline Aerosvit must fly to China via Turkey, the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea, and Kazakhstan, instead of flying direct over Russia. According to unofficial sources, the Russian airline Aeroflot sees a serious competitor in the Ukrainian airline and demands huge sums for using their routes. Now our companies are trying to ward off the Russians through similar discriminatory practices, contrary to the agreement in the EEhP. Aeroflot is persisting. We'll see what will happen later.

Three pieces of advice from "Today"

If you're getting ready to go to China, remember: 1: From 11 PM to 7 AM almost nothing is open in Peking. The Chinese sleep, even the airport Duty Free is closed, so buy your souveniers early. 2: Changing your money to Yuans is usually possible in the airport or most hotels, but changing your money back is almost impossible, so exchange only as much as you will be spending. 3: Beer is often sold warm in China, don't bother asking for it to be chilled, because they'll just toss ice in the mug. Aleksey GAZUBEY "Today"

[XBob]

49 - "Terrorism is the tool of the disconnected, frustrated, and isolated."

Again, you missed my point. I was talking about innovative weapons systems, and sneak attacks. Surely you remember some of our disguised 'freighters' which were in fact gunships, used to 'lure' german submarines, so they could be sunk.

[gilliam]

Oh, OK. But I don't think that would make China a 'near peer' power. WWII techniques don't work with Aegis destroyers. At least not more than once.

I suppose you could make them into missile platforms, and position them around the world. That would work for a 1st strike, then they would be eliminated. A 1st strike weapon like that would only be of any real use, IMHO, if the weapons they had were nuclear. As the cold war proved, the only real use for hundreds or thousands of nuclear warheads is as a deterrent (you don't want to invade a country you decimated with nuclear fallout). The only way they could be a deterrent is if we know about them. The only way we probably would know about the use of the merchant fleet for military purposes is if China told us or leaked the information to the intelligence community. If they did, then we would not let those merchant ships into 'connected countries' ports. So we would quickly identify them and China would loose the trade it currently has (remember their major trading partners are 'connected countries').

Those ships that currently go into ports of 'connected countries') are now being inspected (often at both PoC).

So, if we think this through, I think you will agree, it is not in the best interest of China to fit a merchant fleet with military capabilities.

[ASA Vet]

They know that in open waters (blue water) they cannot last against the USN.
They would be decimated.

We'd destroy a lot more than 10%.

[VaBthang4]

Good post.

[LonghornFreeper]

>>Do the Russian (or any other country's)carriers possess a Phalanx system?

Whether or not it is as good as the Phalanx is unknown/debatable, but the newest Chinese destroyers have a CIWS (Close-In Weapons System) similar to the Phalanx. It is supposedly European designed.

[Non-Sequitur]

Why do the Thais have a carrier?

Why do the French?

[Shryke]

It is supposedly European designed.

Understood. I would venture that it is (similar Gatling weapon or not) inferior.

[sukhoi-30mki]

(similar Gatling weapon or not) inferior.

Well not so fast,It's actually a spoof off of the Dutch "Goalkeeper" CIWS,which lots of analysts have put on par with the Phalanx,though it must be said it is probably equivalent to the early variants & hence cannot compete with the Phalanx blk 1B or C.But if the EU does lift its arms embargo on China(which it most certainly will in around 2-3yrs time), u can be sure there will be several eager Brit,French & Italian companies salivating to upgrade this CIWS & the rest of China's massive arsenal.Besides the newer variants of the Sovremenny class ,the 956M which are being built in Russia(delivery in 2006)-are being equipped with the "Kashtan" gun-missile CIWS instead of older AK-630 .It consists of 2 30mm guns & 8 ready to fire SAMS( a sort of mini-RAM on Phalanx!!) & unlike earlier Russian CIWS,it is fully self deployable with its own sensors(no need to rely on the ship's systems).As of now only the Indian navy uses the Kashtan(which may have modified it to be compatible with French or Israeli-built IR sensors it uses).

the Chinese CIWS-http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/weapon/type730.asp


the Kashtan CIWS-http://www.shipunov.com/eng/kvnk/kashtan_m.htm