Posted on 06/29/2005 5:33:55 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
/begin my translation
China Secretly Constructing an Aircraft Carrier
China recently completed the final design for an Chinese aircraft carrier, and start in early August to construct it in secret at Jiang-nan Shipyard, Zhang-xing Island near Shanghai, reported the June 29th issue of Hong Kong Economic Daily(Jing-ji-ri-bao,) quoting (Chinese) high-level military sources.
Costing 3 billion yuan(390 million dollars), which takes up 3% of Chinese military budget, this carrier, due to be completed next year if everything goes well, has top speed 30 knots per hour and its maximal displacement is 78,000 ton. It is equipped with Russian engines and radars.
It will carry 54 fighter planes and 13 anti-submarine helicopters, and the introduction of latest Russian fighters(Su-33) is also in the works. When it would be in service in 2008, it is expected to boost Chinese naval strength.
The paper reports, "Zhang Guang-qin, vice minister of the Commission of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense, denied the rumor that a carrier is under construction. However, he emphasized it is the sacred duty of the Chinese navy to safeguard the country's sovereignty of territorial waters. It is in this context which they go for the construction of the carrier."
(Song Ui-dal, reporting from Hong Kong)
/end my translation
I actually served on the Midway (as an AO2) and we were rated at 80 aircraft, but never operated that many as far as I recall.
If I remember correctly, that rating referred to the number of aircraft that could actually be carried (overhead and deck storage, crated, etc), but not necessarily in service.
I think the roster ran something like this:
F-14 (14)
A-6 (24)
A-7 (12)
S-3 (5)
EA-6 (4)
E-2 (3)
SH-53 (5)
Total of 65 aircraft. That would often change depending on mission or rotation of squadrons. For example, I can recall one cruise without A-7's at all, and another where we ferried a Marine squadron (AV-8B's) to Diego Garcia from Cavite.
No problem, I fully understand the wording.
Enjoy the tests. To be honest I have no dog in the fight.
The only advantage to killing off this bird would be to keep stealth a US only property. But we would really have some very angry partners and allies if we did that. Australia is betting the farm on the JSF.
Thanks but i kinda knew that. I served on Midway, Big E and Ike in my day.
The BILL CLIN TON
.
China has leapfrogged one generation of technology to get where they are today. They are in the space race. They are improving ICBMs. They are vastly increasing their wealth.
With their population, they will undoubted surpass us as the biggest economic power in the world within 40 years or so.
That does not mean that they will be more powerful than us in a military or diplomatic sense, but it's foolish to think that they'll not be a serious rival. They could surpass us in every sense if we're not careful.
Thanks for the info. I assume they want the wind in their face when doing a launch but when they do a recovery, and since they land in the same direction on the carrier as a takeoff, do they want the same wind conditions for both?
Yes, with more men like him, there will be fewer men like him....
Depends. say 85 to 90, depending on which one and the type of aircraft.
Also keep in mind that US carriers are often, but not always nuclear, for added space for fuel.
95% of the Chinese population have standards of living that is much lower than "our poor" standards of living (12% of Americans are poor). No matter how many big projects Communist China accomplish and no matter how much money they accumulate, it will crumble at the end. First because 95% of its people live in extreme poverty and second because no totalitarian communist regime can ever succeed.
I forget who posted the question, but in regards to Japan and nuclear armed ships, the issue was not originally nuclear weapons per se. the issue revolved around the grounding of the Enterprise on a sand bar on the approaches to Tokyo Bay c. 1985. The debate and concern then was what would happen if the bottom were torn out of nuclear-powered warship. It naturally then degenrated into a "worst-case" scenario about a loose nuc.
As of 1987, no American surface ships (officially) carry nuclear weapons.
For recovery, it is preferable to have the WOD down the angle, bow to stern. Easy to do if there is a lot of natural wind; more difficult if the ship has to "make wind."
For launch, WOD straight down the deck is preferred.
Sorry, that was supposed to be "as of 1991 no American surface ships officially carry nuc weapons". Can;t for the life of me figure out why I remembered 1987. Probably a brain fart. My apologies.
"I'm sure they'll have plenty of replacements for "retired" deck crewmen. I wouldn't be surprised if they have a medical team standing by to harvest organs."
I dunno...the organs are liable to be pretty crispy.
Actually that "claim" goes back at least to my day in the early 70s. We never officially carried any nuclear weapons. Even the one the marines came out and guarded at the pier while it was loaded ;)
Thanks for the education, man. I knew we gave the japanese Aegis and right before I got out in late 95 we sold two older frigates to Taiwan. in fact, I was in "C" school with a Taiwanese LT.
the posting about the Nimitz class was for all. you just happened to be the random "reply" I hit. I hope you took no offense?
And our Navy pilots are exceedingly better trained and more skilled. Not sure how long we'll be able to say that if a real oil crisis occurs. But I hope it's always true.
They are not communist and we'd better wake up to that fact. They are fascist and it's a small political difference but a huge economic difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.