China Builds Second Aircraft Carrier

originally posted by: rockpaperhammock
a reply to: hellobruce

EDIT: sorry mate I misunderstood your post...I see what you are saying now...disregard my statement, but I'll leave the wiki link for anyone interested.

Im pretty sure China had one already...I remember cause it has that curved part at the end which I always thought looked weird.

wiki link here

en.wikipedia.org...

"The curved part" is a ski jump flight deck. It's for countries that either can't or don't use catapults for whatever reason. The Brits use them on their smaller carriers, I believe.

As to the OP: China made noise that they plan to end up with four carriers. How long that will take, who knows. Defense tech had an article about it a while ago. I'm sure it's only news to those of us not wearing a uniform (or wearing a suit) and prowling the inner hallways of various alphabet agencies.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: neo96
Second carrier ?

They still haven't built the first one yet.

They just bought one from Russia, and slapped the 'made in china' label on it.

My bad, I'm not an expert in military hardware. I was under the impression they had finished building their first carrier. Either way, this news should be no surprise and given the fact that carriers are losing their importance these days it seems like China is going to be a bit late to the party.

With the proliferation of missile tech, carriers may be somewhat diminished but I don't think they'll be obsolete anytime soon. They're still a pretty big psychological "stick" to wag, and are hard to match when it comes to power projection.

Eta: that may change more rapidly the first time an American destroyer or cruiser is used as a band-aid and ends up spanking somebody hard.

I am surprised that it has not built air craft carriers before this. But here is the one thing that they are going to have to learn about such.

An air craft carrier, while it is am impressive ship, is a floating air port. It launches aircraft and lands them. But that is only part of it. There also has to be more ships, support vehicles that have to travel along with it. If not, then once those aircraft are launched, the ship is vulnerable and has very little defense. Hence why you often when one hears about an aircraft from say the USA or England, or even Russia, it is part of a group, the main ship and the rest are support vehicles to prevent it from sinking.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
"The curved part" is a ski jump flight deck. It's for countries that either can't or don't use catapults for whatever reason. The Brits use them on their smaller carriers, I believe.

Yeah, we used them on both the Invincible class (those smaller carriers - not really carriers at all, just a flat-top cruiser) and on the previous HMS Hermes. It wasn't because we "can't" (we invented the catapult, after all) or "won't" but simply because we used the Harrier and the ski-jump allowed for a short take off at full load as a Harrier cannot do a VTO with a full weapons loadout.

EDIT: As for the Chinese "building" a carrier, they have a long way to go as their "first" was a refit of an old Soviet design the Russians binned years ago. Besides, building a carrier and actually being able to use it is a world apart. You need the training, doctrines, fleet support etc to make it worthwhile having one.

China is going to usher in the NWO. The key word is going to be order. The thing is, the whole 1st world is in on it. We are getting rid of the countries who don't want it now. They will do the same to you when the time comes if you don't play ball.

I'm a regular ray of sunshine. Maybe it won't be bad. It'll be different. We'll consume less. You can't have billions of people frivolously consuming. So your way of life is going to go down. You see it every single day. I've finally come to grips with it.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Only time will tell.

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: sg1642
...Carriers are game changers in warfare and offer extensive capabilities and applications...

Most top military planners see aircraft carriers as past ruling the seas now. Anti-ship missiles have improved so much that in truth defending the floating city isn't easy and certainly isn't guaranteed. Imagine 100 over the horizon missiles skimming the waters surface all headed for the one big ship. If one gets through the ship is toast...along with billions of equipment it was carrying.

They are great to project force against 2nd tier opponents or lower, but in the next really big war you won't see Aircraft carriers out there until things have been softened up significantly.

I Agree.

Which is why China developed the mach 10 missile.

To neutralize our carriers if need be.

We have no countermeasure for these.

Maybe our new laser system once it if fully shaken down?

Now though....our missile interceptors would be useless, and poor c-wis would even see it coming.

FEL on every nuclear powered vessel coming to a theatre near you. They have also figured out how to make it effective in poor conditions. Speed of Light > Mach 10.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: sg1642
...Carriers are game changers in warfare and offer extensive capabilities and applications...

Most top military planners see aircraft carriers as past ruling the seas now. Anti-ship missiles have improved so much that in truth defending the floating city isn't easy and certainly isn't guaranteed. Imagine 100 over the horizon missiles skimming the waters surface all headed for the one big ship. If one gets through the ship is toast...along with billions of equipment it was carrying.

They are great to project force against 2nd tier opponents or lower, but in the next really big war you won't see Aircraft carriers out there until things have been softened up significantly.

I Agree.

Which is why China developed the mach 10 missile.

To neutralize our carriers if need be.

We have no countermeasure for these.

Maybe our new laser system once it if fully shaken down?

Now though....our missile interceptors would be useless, and poor c-wis would even see it coming.

FEL on every nuclear powered vessel coming to a theatre near you. They have also figured out how to make it effective in poor conditions. Speed of Light > Mach 10.

I agree. The speed of light is > mach 10.

The speed of detection acquisition and attack though.....

Not so much.

At mach 10 a missile will go from 100 miles to target in seconds, not minutes.

Aegis would be the first to detect it, if one of our radar birds didn't get lucky.

If they haven't used stealth coatings( which they obviously would) to make detection harder.

I am not convinced the system can acquire and kill in less than a couple seconds.

Which is what it would have.

Once they had a visual on it....it is too late already.

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: sg1642
...Carriers are game changers in warfare and offer extensive capabilities and applications...

Most top military planners see aircraft carriers as past ruling the seas now. Anti-ship missiles have improved so much that in truth defending the floating city isn't easy and certainly isn't guaranteed. Imagine 100 over the horizon missiles skimming the waters surface all headed for the one big ship. If one gets through the ship is toast...along with billions of equipment it was carrying.

They are great to project force against 2nd tier opponents or lower, but in the next really big war you won't see Aircraft carriers out there until things have been softened up significantly.

I Agree.

Which is why China developed the mach 10 missile.

To neutralize our carriers if need be.

We have no countermeasure for these.

Maybe our new laser system once it if fully shaken down?

Now though....our missile interceptors would be useless, and poor c-wis would even see it coming.

FEL on every nuclear powered vessel coming to a theatre near you. They have also figured out how to make it effective in poor conditions. Speed of Light > Mach 10.

I agree. The speed of light is > mach 10.

The speed of detection acquisition and attack though.....

Not so much.

At mach 10 a missile will go from 100 miles to target in seconds, not minutes.

Aegis would be the first to detect it, if one of our radar birds didn't get lucky.

If they haven't used stealth coatings( which they obviously would) to make detection harder.

I am not convinced the system can acquire and kill in less than a couple seconds.

Which is what it would have.

Once they had a visual on it....it is too late already.

Im not going to say that the chinese missile isnt something to be concerned about, because it is. But so far they cant hit a moving target with it yet. and in order for it to use its electro-optical seeker, it has to rise up from skirting the ocean surface, gain some altitude, and then come down from the top to the carrier surface. When it does this, im sure our destroyers and cruisers will see it and go after it. But honestly, i dont think its that accurate of a weapon yet. Maybe in 5 to 10 years...

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: sg1642
...Carriers are game changers in warfare and offer extensive capabilities and applications...

Most top military planners see aircraft carriers as past ruling the seas now. Anti-ship missiles have improved so much that in truth defending the floating city isn't easy and certainly isn't guaranteed. Imagine 100 over the horizon missiles skimming the waters surface all headed for the one big ship. If one gets through the ship is toast...along with billions of equipment it was carrying.

They are great to project force against 2nd tier opponents or lower, but in the next really big war you won't see Aircraft carriers out there until things have been softened up significantly.

I Agree.

Which is why China developed the mach 10 missile.

To neutralize our carriers if need be.

We have no countermeasure for these.

Maybe our new laser system once it if fully shaken down?

Now though....our missile interceptors would be useless, and poor c-wis would even see it coming.

FEL on every nuclear powered vessel coming to a theatre near you. They have also figured out how to make it effective in poor conditions. Speed of Light > Mach 10.

I agree. The speed of light is > mach 10.

The speed of detection acquisition and attack though.....

Not so much.

At mach 10 a missile will go from 100 miles to target in seconds, not minutes.

Aegis would be the first to detect it, if one of our radar birds didn't get lucky.

If they haven't used stealth coatings( which they obviously would) to make detection harder.

I am not convinced the system can acquire and kill in less than a couple seconds.

Which is what it would have.

Once they had a visual on it....it is too late already.

I am not sure if there even are any stealth coatings that survive at Mach 10. It would acquire and kill in much less than a second.

I also highly doubt China has a missile that goes Mach 10. I think Russia's fastest missile is Mach 3-5. Russia should be years ahead of China, Missiles are their forte.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: sg1642
...Carriers are game changers in warfare and offer extensive capabilities and applications...

Most top military planners see aircraft carriers as past ruling the seas now. Anti-ship missiles have improved so much that in truth defending the floating city isn't easy and certainly isn't guaranteed. Imagine 100 over the horizon missiles skimming the waters surface all headed for the one big ship. If one gets through the ship is toast...along with billions of equipment it was carrying.

They are great to project force against 2nd tier opponents or lower, but in the next really big war you won't see Aircraft carriers out there until things have been softened up significantly.

I Agree.

Which is why China developed the mach 10 missile.

To neutralize our carriers if need be.

We have no countermeasure for these.

Maybe our new laser system once it if fully shaken down?

Now though....our missile interceptors would be useless, and poor c-wis would even see it coming.

FEL on every nuclear powered vessel coming to a theatre near you. They have also figured out how to make it effective in poor conditions. Speed of Light > Mach 10.

I agree. The speed of light is > mach 10.

The speed of detection acquisition and attack though.....

Not so much.

At mach 10 a missile will go from 100 miles to target in seconds, not minutes.

Aegis would be the first to detect it, if one of our radar birds didn't get lucky.

If they haven't used stealth coatings( which they obviously would) to make detection harder.

I am not convinced the system can acquire and kill in less than a couple seconds.

Which is what it would have.

Once they had a visual on it....it is too late already.

I am not sure if there even are any stealth coatings that survive at Mach 10. It would acquire and kill in much less than a second.

I also highly doubt China has a missile that goes Mach 10. I think Russia's fastest missile is Mach 3-5. Russia should be years ahead of China, Missiles are their forte.

oh its very real actually...

DF-21

a reply to: boomer135

Surely that is only a mach 10 missile in the terminal phase of the ballistic trajectory? Prior to that, it's like any old school ICBM missile. It can be shot down, especially if you know where it is being launched from. In fact, isn't Aegis specifically designed to be part of an ABM system?

a reply to: boomer135

This "mach 10" missile doesn't skim. It's just a guided IRBM missile that fires warheads way up high and slams them back down again. I highly doubt it is as effective as claimed and Aegis has been built to be an ABM system

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: boomer135

Surely that is only a mach 10 missile in the terminal phase of the ballistic trajectory? Prior to that, it's like any old school ICBM missile. It can be shot down, especially if you know where it is being launched from. In fact, isn't Aegis specifically designed to be part of an ABM system?

I believe you are correct. Not really my area of expertise, but from what ive read you would be right. But they are talking about putting this missile on the J-20 when it becomes operational. So I'm assuming that it will act like a standard cruise missile more than anything. Also, alot of the stuff about how we dont have a way to defend against the missile came out in 2009 ish. Back then they said the only way of stopping the missile was to use electronic measures to do it. So who knows what kind of defense we have against it now.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: boomer135

This "mach 10" missile doesn't skim. It's just a guided IRBM missile that fires warheads way up high and slams them back down again. I highly doubt it is as effective as claimed and Aegis has been built to be an ABM system

Yeah i was more refering to the version that they were putting on an aircraft. If i remember correctly, it will be skirting the ocean surface before finding its target. But i could be totally wrong on that. Ill have to look up where i saw that...

a reply to: boomer135

I think you're confusing it with another missile. You simply cannot put the one you quoted onto an aircraft. It needs a large, stable launch platform on the ground. It us essentially a converted nuclear missile.

a reply to: stumason

The Aegis BMD is designed to be effective against theater ballistic missiles, not an ICBM class missile.

a reply to: boomer135

They went three for three last year against targets under tow, including one at 15 knots.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The DF 21 is a theatre missile. Range of 900 miles, it's a converted IRBM.

a reply to: stumason

In fact, it is in response to this missile the US has beefed up its ABM defence in the Pacific and changed its naval stance.

As for the tests, it's all very well hitting targets when you know where they are, how fast they are going and not shooting back or trying to avoid.

a reply to: stumason

And you have to walk before you run. Or should they have started with full up high speed tests, against targets that started hidden?

The BMD is going to be hard pressed to defend against it. China isn't going to launch one missile at a time against the carrier. They're going to have multiple launches at once coming in trying to overwhelm the defenses.