Posted on 03/03/2007 6:36:47 AM PST by Jeff Head
Edited on 03/03/2007 8:34:45 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
You of course are correct, the actual date was Christmas Day 1991 I believe. Thatt's already been fixed on the site...and I will try and get the mods to fix it here. Thanks.
...and two MK-48s would certainly do it
By Invitation.
Presently China has a coastal navy and not a very well-organized one. It is no secret that they want to expand to a Blue Water force of some size and capability. Such is a MASSIVE undertaking for a nation whose last experiences were big wooden junks sailing to Africa and back by eunuchs.
You do not sail a carrier battle group into the oceans without years of training, and I estimate 10 years, starting from scratch! Reason: A carrier battle group has to operate in all conditions where every able seaman, petty officer, officer up to and including the Admirals performs as a "Single Organism"! That does not happen easily and it can expire very soon without constant training and operations.
This carrier is small, real small like an escort carrier. It cannot put many jets up in a short time and recover them. The jets are not fuel sufficient for long range at sea interdiction. That means turning into the wind for traps often. Where do the aerial refuelers come from?
This carrier battle group against say, the USS Reagan carrier group would be outclassed in just about any specialty you could think of. AND it is only one against about 12 of our groups.
I could go on but won`t. Yes, it will be a strategic factor to consider and plan for but it is a long way off and the US Navy doesn`t ever stand still, rather we keep improving our lethality as rapidly as we can.
As my grandma used to say, "Oil ain`t oil til it`s in the barrel...."
Semper Fi,
Looks like the ChiComs are going for a blue water navy in competition to us. And there weren't anymore enemies after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
The French nuclear carrier, by comparison is only in the 40,000 ton category. That said, because the French operate a true catapault take-off and arrested landing system, they are able to launch more aircraft quicker, and with better war loads than these types of ski-jump take off arrangments allow.
The new UK carriers (which are several years off yet) will be 65,000 tons.
Nonetheless, the group the chinese are putting together is nothing to be scoffee at or underestimated. My guess is that by 2020 they are likely to have three full deck carriers operating at the rate they are going. We will probably be down to ten in that same time period.
But, in the confined spaces of the China Sea, or in the local waters of the Western Pacific, where such a conflict is likely to take place, they will still represent a significant threat.
That is why the Japanese are beefing up as are the South Koreans...and the INdians for that matter. Given our own clear strengths, it still should be a slam dunk...but everyone knew that ultimately in the Pacific in World War II it was going to be a slam dunk too and that did not stop a very costly war from being fought.
It may be unsinkable, but the exact locations of military airfields and installations are known to the Chinese. Which means that any attack will be initiated with missile attacks on those locations. The advantage of the floating aircraft carrier is that it's hard to know exactly where it is
The big question: if an attack on Taiwan is initiated by tactical nukes (either missile or cruise missile) against their military installations, what is the probability that a Dem administration will launch a nuke strike against China? IMHO, very low, especially if facing an enemy with the ability to hit the West Coast (at minimum) with their own missiles
The chinese economy (which we are helping along the way to self sufficency) and their methodical approach to this have every chance of turning into a major arms race and stand off between to vastly different ideological competitiors and foes. Best, if we still can, to cut off the funding from our side and live with the pain of weening ourselves from them until their governmental system changes. That will be far less costly and painful than a major war with them if it comes to that.
They might be useful to extend the reach of China a bit further into the ocean. Launch carrier-capable planes from land, have them hit targets outside their round-trip range, and land on the carrier for fueling and re-arming.
How many aircraft could that carrier keep in the air if they were not initially based on the carrier?
We're currently making modified Boeing 767's into refuelers. Airbus is looking for markets for its superjumbo. Think they would turn down a big order from China to produce a tanker version? How much fuel could that Airbus superjumbo carry?
According to Wikipedia, that "Shi Lang" guy had an interesting record of accomplishments. (Emphasis mine.)
"Shi Lang (Chinese: 施琅; 1621-1696) was a Ming-Qing admiral who had extensive experience in southeastern China. He was commander-in-chief of the Manchu fleets which destroyed the power of the Zheng family and conquered Taiwan in 1681."
I don't think so. The carrier battle group is a valuable asset. Mainly the carrier battle group is and will remain invincible to all but 10-15 countries. That is the US fleet (or chinese) should be able to attack and/or intimidate every country in the world except for 10-12 and that makes them very valuable.
I would have guessed it will be named the Clin Tong.
Actually it's Northrop-Grumman who bought the designs of the A330-200 MRTT
I just had a thought. What about a combination of a carrier and multiple Airbus-based aerial refuelers? Planes could take off from the carriers with max ordinance load and minimum fuel, fuel up in the air, and continue to their target, going back to the carrier only for more ordinance
How many infantry battalions could be transported in this rusting hulk?
Could an old aircraft carrier be converted easily into a troop carrier that is almost impossible to sink?
If you needed to get a large number of troops onto the shores of Taiwan, how would you do it?
I dont know, I'm just asking.
If they ain't careful, it's name will be Sunk Junk.
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.