Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S.-China trade ‘war’ is slowing construction of PLAN’s second aircraft carrier
Great Power War ^ | 11.27/18 | USA Features

Posted on 11/27/2018 7:29:53 AM PST by SleeperCatcher

The ongoing and escalating trade tariffs between the United States and China are beginning to affect Beijing in ways that many might not have considered.

For instance, according to a report from the South China Morning Post, the tariffs are dramatically affecting the budget for the construction of the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) second aircraft carrier, the Type 002.

As trade tensions rise, work on the new carrier has slowed, adding to the cost of the project. Also, delays in fighter jet development for the new carrier has substantially increased costs for the project, effectively blowing up the ship’s budget.

(Excerpt) Read more at greatpowerwar.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: aircraftcarrier; china; plan; tradewar

1 posted on 11/27/2018 7:29:53 AM PST by SleeperCatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher

It has just been announced that China is constructing a 3rd aircraft carrier


2 posted on 11/27/2018 7:39:48 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher
Pretty much documents how our politician’s past trade policies have enabled China's massive military modernization and buildup
3 posted on 11/27/2018 7:44:13 AM PST by rdcbn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Yes, and it’s bigger than either of those before it.

We funded that, by the way.

By buying everything which is “Made in China”.


4 posted on 11/27/2018 7:45:09 AM PST by cba123 ( Toi la nguoi My. Toi bay gio o Viet Nam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin; SleeperCatcher

It was always the basic program to build three carriers.

Generally, you need three, to always have one on duty. They generally take turns rotating through three cycles - mission, training and maintenance.

Strategically, it is much more advantageous to contest with China now on trade and constrain their budget, than it would be to contest with them later militarily, after allowing them rapid growth.

Not only their military construction budget will be constrained, but so will their budget to corrupt other Politicians/Governments.

The money from their trade surplus (and the tech transfer from open access and massive espionage) is the center of gravity for their strategy to replace us as the dominant power in the world, and institute their model of dictatorial police states.


5 posted on 11/27/2018 7:55:34 AM PST by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cba123

Yes, and it’s bigger than either of those before it.
We funded that, by the way.
By buying everything which is “Made in China”.

Not only that, last time I checked China is in possession of approximately 1.168 trillion Dollars worth of US bonds, financing our lifestyle. Just think what the interest payments are, they must be breathtaking to say the least. Where it all will end is going to be interesting, to say the least.


6 posted on 11/27/2018 7:58:21 AM PST by saintgermaine (saintgermaine the time traveller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher
Yes, we should get new trade deals in place with China. So we can continue to fund their military projects. Not just their carriers, but the Chinese need to fund their stealth fighter and stealth bomber programs.

And don't forget the Chinese need the money for building island bases in the South China Sea. So they can lay claim to large areas of the Sea. Their new carriers will help China defend these islands. And help to dominate the region and threaten US allies. Much like Japan did prior to WW 2.

7 posted on 11/27/2018 8:00:58 AM PST by Daaave ('the flesh eating jinn of Komari')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cba123

Yes, and it’s bigger than either of those before it.
We funded that, by the way.
By buying everything which is “Made in China”.

Not only that, last time I checked China is in possession of approximately 1.168 trillion Dollars worth of US bonds, financing our lifestyle. Just think what the interest payments are, they must be breathtaking to say the least. Where it all will end is going to be interesting, to say the least.


8 posted on 11/27/2018 8:02:22 AM PST by saintgermaine (saintgermaine the time traveller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BeauBo

Would you happen to know when China will be sending a carrier group into the Gulf of Mexico?


9 posted on 11/27/2018 8:11:15 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher

In Catch 22 Milo Minderbinder contracted with the Nazis to bomb the American lines because they were paying more.


10 posted on 11/27/2018 8:36:11 AM PST by fella ("As it was before Noah so shall it be again,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher

“The ongoing and escalating trade tariffs between the United States and China are beginning to affect Beijing in ways that many might not have considered.”


But you can bet your ass that POTUS Trump did. People forget that he was a high-stakes commercial real estate investor, builder, etc. for 45 years, and stupidly go by a few Tweets in assessing his intelligence. That is a YUUUUGE mistake, one that Trump constantly cultivates - having your enemies underestimate you is one of the greatest weapons that any person in power can have. Put simply, Trump the real estate investor didn’t go to the bathroom without a plan - and a plan that had considered every single variable possible. Why would he have changed because he (once again) succeeded and earned a new job title?


11 posted on 11/27/2018 8:43:01 AM PST by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Even fully funded, it would be a stretch for them to project that far for a decade. They are expected to focus on the South China Sea, Western Pacific, and Indian Ocean to the Red Sea.

They will probably send some warships ahead initially on a “show the flag” tour, before anything really combat ready would sally forth as far as the Gulf of Mexico.

Of course, we are talking about intent, rather than capability. If they were determined, they could send their one carrier today. It would be a political statement, rather than real military capability though - it would be an isolated sitting duck in a real conflict, but might have some mission at the Panama Canal.

They are building carriers, but not not big Carrier Groups like we used to field. We have even scaled ours down. The Chinese could probably send 6-10 warships with their carrier, but they could muster a lot of commercial ships, and have shown a capability to militarize them with modular missile systems, loaded like containers.

If they were going to attempt strategic surprise with long range naval projection, it would probably be based on leveraging their commercial fleet, like that.


12 posted on 11/27/2018 9:08:28 AM PST by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher

Protectionism solves ALL problems.


13 posted on 11/27/2018 9:10:02 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

From the article:

“Analysis: Whatever you may think of the Trump administration’s trade strategy with China, there are reports of late that appear to indicate it is succeeding in its primary objective which is to deprive the Chinese government of revenue at the cost of U.S. commerce. This is another indicator.

China knows it has a long way to go before its navy can match the power and capabilities of the U.S. Navy, and that is especially true when it comes to the operation of carrier battle groups. China had hoped to have four operational carrier battle groups by 2030, but this trade war is slowing down that timetable significantly.

In addition, China’s naval aviation is far behind that of the United States Navy. The J-15 is a failure for all intents and purposes; it has a tendency to crash and its engines are underpowered and have a short lifespan. A new engine, the WS-10, has a prolonged lifespan from 800 hours to about 1,500 hours, but that’s less than half of General Electric’s F414 engines (4,000 hours) which are used on the F/A-18 Super Hornet.

Technological shortfalls coupled with construction delays mean the PLAN won’t have comparable carrier battle groups anytime soon, and this is a naval capability that China really wants. This could be another factor in bringing Beijing to the trade negotiating table sooner rather than later.”


14 posted on 11/27/2018 9:19:23 AM PST by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

They had announced the 3rd carrier some months back - maybe last year - unlike the other two the 3rd will not be a ski jump but flat and use EMALS system like the Ford is supposed to (if they ever get it working correctly).


15 posted on 11/27/2018 1:22:17 PM PST by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now it is your turn ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson