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,
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.
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?
Well stated. Unless they learn and practice Underway Replenishment (UNREP), they're Brown Water all the way. The US Navy does this all the time, the Brits most of the time, and the old USSR did it really badly. It doesn't matter how many spiffy new Curiser, Tin Can, and DE equivalents they build, unless they can load food, ammo, and fuel at sea, Force Projection is a non-starter for the PLAN.
But it would compare favorably to any of the regional rivals - Japan, Australia, India.