THE RISING SEA DRAGON IN N ASIA 2004-2011
THE RED CHINESE NAVY'S 1ST AIRCRAFT CARRIER
Posted on 07/27/2011 10:16:41 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
BEIJING (Reuters) - China is building two aircraft carriers as part of a military modernization program that is causing concern among other Asian countries, sources said on Wednesday.
President Hu Jintao has made the navy a keystone of China's defense upgrade, and the carriers will be among the most visible signs of its rising military prowess.
...
"Two aircraft carriers are being built at the Jiangnan shipyard in Shanghai," a source with ties to China's Communist Party leadership told Reuters, requesting anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about the program.
China's Defense Ministry has confirmed the existence of one carrier, a former Soviet vessel that was bought from Ukraine in 1998 and was once destined to become a floating casino.
That vessel, the Shi Lang, will be used for training and research purposes, ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng said, seeking to reassure other countries that China would stick to its defensive military policy.
But he said it had a right to protect its extensive maritime territory and coast.
"This is the sacred responsibility of China's armed forces," Geng said in a statement.
"Building a carrier is extremely complex. We are currently refitting an old aircraft carrier, to be used for research and testing."
"An aircraft carrier is a weapons platform; it can be used for offensive or defensive purposes. It can also be used to maintain global peace and for rescue and relief work," he added.
Geng gave no timetable for starting sea trials but said pilots were being trained to operate from the carrier.
Sources with ties to the Communist Party and the military said that the ship would likely be based in the southern island province of Hainan, which sits atop the trade lanes of the sensitive South China Sea.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
fyi - Reuters
When China is not using the carriers for training and etc.. US “big box” retailers can rent them out as huge container ships to bring in even more china sh!t.
They can use the helicopters to make hot-shot deliveries directly to the stores.
“Lieutenant Chang!.. you mission today is to get these blue-ray players to store 501.. good luck.
10 bucks says they strangely look IDENTICAL to one of our Nimitz class carriers!
I’m sure it will be just coincidence just like their new jet looks somewhat like an F-22 Raptor.
Sarc on!
Okay. But accumulated experience counts too.
***China boosts naval power with carrier program: sources***
Making a mountain out of a molehill ...
***10 bucks says they strangely look IDENTICAL to one of our Nimitz class carriers!***
Hasn’t the Nimitz been mothballed or is it some other boat?
In any case, this http://www.chinapost.com.tw/china/national-news/2011/07/28/311430/China-says.htm, to me, also is how much the Varyag is worth: a bragging right and showoff piece that doubles as a moral boosting tool of course...
But, to get Congress to pump more hard cash into the establishment, why not draw the grimiest of picture out of it?
I suspect the first two post Shi Lang carriers will only be slightly larger and both conventional. And the ones to come after that will approach the size of the Nimitz carriers and be outfitted with nuclear reactors.
China does need these ships though. As resources from all parts of the world are shipped to China, e.g., from Africa, Latin America, Australia and even North America, China needs to protect these vital lifelines of supplies to feed its people.
THE RISING SEA DRAGON IN N ASIA 2004-2011
xxxBe interesting to find out more about the carriers. Whether its displacement is the same as the Shi Lang (60,000 tons), or closer to the Nimitz (100,000 tons). And whether the two new carriers will be nuclear.xxx
Ever heard of the saying “Never Put All Your Eggs In One Basket”?
My bet is this: Despite all of the commotions (artist’s conceptuals over Chinese Internets) of big and aggressive Chinese ideas of 100,000 tonners or better and nuclear is fundamentally, affordability-wise, just not an option for many country’s — the ChiComs inclusive.
I’m betting they will stick to the “CHEAP”, “DIME-A-DOZEN”, and “HIGHLY EXPENDABLE”, Varyag class philosophy and concept and — they will stick to the philosophy of numerosity over unit size superiority.
The US itself had studied the idea of going lighter in the late 90’s early 2000 but whatever become of that idea is anyone’s guess.
The issue would be, whether 100,000 ton is practicial or not, which, it is possible that a 60,000 ton ship would be better. But I don't know for sure since I don't study military strategy enough to say one way or another. But I do believe China will eventually develop a nuclear powered carrier. The advantages are, of course, that the ship can operate for a very long time without refueling.
***Affordability wise not an option? China will soon be have the largest GDP in the world (estimation time, about 2020)***
Are you a ChiCom diehard to suggest that the PRC can sustain the cost of an armada the size of the USN when even the US, which was the larges economy in the world for the last century and she still is, gets itself into the economic mess it’s in today?
Carriers are no fancy catamaran joyride in the warm and hazy sun of the Florida Keys. Carriers are self contained systems as the Battlestar Galacticas, it’s about USS Starship Enterprises, it’s about MC80a Star Cruisers and about Corellian Corvettes. Simply put: carriers costs an arm, a leg, and a fat bank account to maintain and operate and — somebody needs to pay for it. I doubt the ChiComs can handle it.
Bottom line: I don’t think the ChiComs are going to follow America’s lead because carriers are simply way too costly. I think they will go for the cheap, dime a dozen, fast pace to bang together carriers of the Varyag class where the words “expendable” and “numerical advantage” have to play into the picture.
I doubt the ChiComs can handle it.
Well, it depends. The China of today, no. But if China continues to develop, yes, it is possible. As China continues to reform her economy, she will eventually have greater resources than the US at her disposal. And no, I am not a "ChiCom" diehard.
Bottom line: I don’t think the ChiComs are going to follow America’s lead because carriers are simply way too costly. I think they will go for the cheap, dime a dozen, fast pace to bang together carriers of the Varyag class where the words “expendable” and “numerical advantage” have to play into the picture.
They'll start with something along the lines of Varyag, but eventually, they'll move up the ladder if it proves militarily more effective.
While there is talk about the potential China becoming the largest economy and question when or even whether she will achieve it, I personally believe there is an even higher marker people should look for. And that is the combined economic output of North America, European Union and Japan and Australia. Basically, all the developed nations combined. While I'm not sure China could ever surpass these combined countries in GDP, I believe, by 2040, she will come close.
Keep in mind, China's GDP was less than half the size of Canada's in about 1990 and 1/10th the size of Japan. And as recently as 2000 had a smaller GDP than all the major European countries (Ger, Fra, Ita, UK, Spn).
Consider electricity production. China's planned net gain in installed capacity the next 5 years will be larger than any country in the world, except the US. Keep in mind, I am just talking about the net gain. I could give you many examples where China's current GDP doesn't do it justice.
However, despite these resources, China isn't going to put a large chunk of her GDP into defense, contrary to what many wish to believe on the FR. Likely, China will continue to spend less as percentage of GDP than the US. But by her sheer economic size, it may someday be larger than the US.
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.