Here is the entire article from Jane's:
Jane's Defence Weekly
August 17, 2005
Is China Building A Carrier?
By Yihong Chang, JDW Correspondent & Andrew Koch, JDW Bureau Chief, Hong Kong & Washington, DC
Chinese shipyard workers have been repairing a badly damaged ex-Russian aircraft carrier and have repainted it with the country's military markings, raising the question once again of whether China is pursuing longer-term plans to field its first carrier.
In the latest developments, images show that workers at the Chinese Dalian Shipyard have repainted the ex-Russian Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier Varyag with the markings and colour scheme of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy (PLAN). Additional new photographs show that other work, the specifics of which could not be determined, appears to be continuing and that the condition of the vessel is being improved.
JDW believes that PLAN technicians have also conducted thorough studies of the basic structure of the Varyag during the past few years to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the carrier's structural design. Former PLAN commander General Liu Huaqing stated in his memoirs that China had purchased blueprints for the carrier - a fact that Russian sources confirmed to JDW. Moreover, Gen Huaqing added: "The competent departments of the defence industry employed Russian aircraft carrier designers to come to China and give lectures."
Gen Huaqing noted that "meanwhile, a certain amount of aircraft carrier design documents were also introduced into China, which helped [China] to make some progress in the preliminary research of the key equipment of [an] aircraft carrier. [PLA] Headquarters of General Staff and the Commission of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defence organised constant analysis, evaluation and assessment of the related study trips, import projects and preliminary research programmes."
Still, China's ultimate intentions for the Varyag remain unclear. One possibility is that Beijing intends to eventually have it enter into some level of service. A military strategist from a Chinese military university has commented publicly that the Varyag "would be China's first aircraft carrier".
It is possible that the PLAN will modify the Varyag into a training aircraft carrier. A US intelligence official said the vessel could be made seaworthy again with enough time, effort and resources. However, US defence officials said that repairing the Varyag to become fully operational would be an extraordinarily large task. The carrier was about 70 per cent complete at the time of transfer and sensitive portions were destroyed, including damage to the core structure, before China was permitted to take possession. Given the difficulty and expense, it is questionable whether Beijing would pursue the effort only to use the Varyag as a training platform; such a move could, however, mark a transitional phase en route to a fully operational capability.
Another possibility is that China does, indeed, plan to repair the vessel to become its first seagoing aircraft carrier or use knowledge gained from it for an indigenously built carrier programme. The US intelligence official said such an outcome "is certainly a possibility" if China is seeking a blue- water navy capable of protecting long-range national interests far from its shores such as sea lanes in the Strait of Malacca. If this strategy were to be followed, China would have to reinstate the structural integrity degraded before delivery and study the structural design of the carrier's deck. These two activities, along with the blueprints and the ship itself, could be used to design an indigenous carrier. Such a plan would very likely be a long-term project preceded by the development of smaller vessels such as amphibious landing ships.
Despite the obvious controversy a Chinese aircraft carrier would entail, some US retired and active military officials say they are not troubled by the move as it would siphon off resources from other PLAN projects they view with greater concern. These include anti-access capabilities for use in a future conflict over Taiwan such as fielding more diesel-electric submarines, anti-ship cruise missile platforms and ballistic missiles with manoeuvring warheads that navy officials project could be capable of targeting US warships from sometime around 2015. Retired US Navy Rear Admiral Eric McVadon, an expert on the Chinese military and former US military attaché to that country, said it would be a little surprising if China were seriously pursuing a carrier as up to now Beijing has focused on improving its anti-access capabilities in a Taiwan crisis scenario - a situation in which a Chinese carrier would be of marginal value.
US defence and military officials were also sceptical, noting that fielding a Chinese carrier would be years in the making and entail significant time and resources far beyond just the vessel and its air wing. They noted, for example, that China would have to learn how to conduct integrated carrier operations with the rest of the fleet, including having to acquire the requisite escorts. It would also need to learn how to conduct maritime patrols away from shore and control those from the carrier. Past Russian and US experiences show these are not easily, cheaply or quickly accomplished.
Whatever the ultimate plan, the moves would appear to discredit China's original claim that Macao's Agencia Turisticae Diversoes Chong Lot Limitada purchased the Varyag with the intention of converting it into a 'floating casino'.
Using those carriers effectively is going to be a very long term issue for them.
I also agree that creating carriers siphons off resource...but according to their long term plans, if they do siphon off that resource, it just means that those long term plans include projection further and further from Chinese shores.
Finally, there is no doubt that they will continue with their aim of being in a position to force the issue over Taiwan. They are not illiterate. They can do pretty good math. If they are continuing carrier development and using the resources to do so, it is only because they have done the math themselves internally and figure that they can afford to do both IMHO.
I believe that economically we must find a way to throw a big wrench in their works.
Again, thanks.
Thanks for the ping!
"China would have to learn how to conduct integrated carrier operations with the rest of the fleet"
Nonsense. China will just wait for the next democrat American President to give them that information.