China hints at aircraft carrier project

The world should not be surprised if China builds an aircraft carrier but Beijing would use such a vessel only for offshore defence, a senior official of the Chinese Ministry of National Defence has told the Financial Times.

The comments from Major General Qian Lihua, director of the ministry’s Foreign Affairs Office, come amid heated speculation within China and abroad that the increasingly potent naval arm of the People’s Liberation Army has decided to develop and deploy its first aircraft carrier. Traditionally, a carrier would accompany and protect a battle group of smaller ships.

www.ft.com...

Why would they build such a project for only 'offshore defence'? unless of course their definition of 'offshore defence' is different than mine...

Would the global 'balance of power' shift a little towards China?

Hey good find Groc
I heard they were planing on building a "Super carrier" sometime last year.
But I couldn't find out anything else.
And no I certainly do not think that an aircraft carrier is anything other than a means of power projection. Every military in the world is aware of this. It will be interesting to see how we respond to this.
After all America has sworn to protect Taiwan from a Chinese invasion. Right now America has power over the shipping lanes off of China's coast.

Also just remembered that Britan placed an order for two aircraft carriers sometime this year. And that's interesting because. Britan has never had an aircraft carrier before (well nothing bigger than the small jump jet harrier ones"
Not even at the height of the cold war did we have one. And consider our shared economic forecast. Is this something we need to be spending billion's on?

Me thinks the fan has started and the ex lax has been swallowed.

"Beijing claims sovereignty over Taiwan and threatens military action against the island if it tries to further formalise its current de facto independence. Taiwanese separatism was the “biggest threat” China currently faced, Maj Gen Qian said."

"he said. “Even if one day we have an aircraft carrier, unlike another country, we will not use it to pursue global deployment or global reach.”

That pledge is unlikely to reassure those in the region concerned about the PLA navy’s emergence as a blue-water force."

www.ft.com...


[edit on 18-11-2008 by foremanator]

reply to post by foremanator


You are very very wrong there my friend. The UK built the worlds first aircraft carrier and have had many aircraft carriers over the years.

The last Royal Navy 'true' aircraft carrier was HMS Ark Royal. The last of the old types before being converted to Commando Carriers were HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion. HMS Hermes was also of the Bulwark/Albion types but was converted to take Sea Harriers. I believe the last time 'true' British Carriers were involved in warfare was the Suez Crisis

The Royal Navys role during the Cold War was Anti-Submarine, hence HMS Invincible, Illustrious and Ark Royal were designated as anti-submarine warfare platforms.



[edit on 18/11/08 by Wotan]

How China can say that their Aircraft Carrier is going to be for ''offshore protection'' is beyond me - Carriers are offensive not defensive.

I think if one looks until very recently most, if not all, of the "old style" aircraft carriers that were historically in service post WWII with navies around the world that had aircraft carriers (except the us of course) were ex royal navy ones.

Historically speaking the UK has initiated many of the technical innovations for carrier operations such as angled flight decks, and mirror aided landing systems and so on.
Here is a list of old RN carriers (20,00 tons classes approx) This is what everyone else had except the US.

HMS Colossus 30th September 1943 Sold to France 1946.
HMS Venerable 30th December 1943 Sold to Holland 1948.
HMS Vengeance 23rd February 1944 Sold to Brazil 1956.
HMS Warrior 20th May 1944 Sold to Argentina 1958.
HMS Hercules 22nd September 1945 Sold to India 1957, becoming Vikrant.
HMS Majestic 28th February 1945 Sold to Australia 1955, becoming HMAS Melbourne
HMS Powerful 27th February 1945 Sold to Canada 1952, becoming HMCS Bonaventure
HMS Terrible 30th September 1944 Sold to Australia 1948, becoming HMAC Sydney
HMS Hermes 16th February 1953 Sold to India to become Viraat

The ex fleet carriers Ark Royal and Eagle were never resold and specs are below.

HMS Eagle (R05)

After 1959-1964 refit
Displacement: 43,000 tons standard ; 50,536 tons full load
Dimensions: 813.5 oa x 171 x 34.5 feet
Range: 7,000 nmiles at 14 knots ; 3,200 tons fuel oil
Aviation Facilities: 409 x 67 x 17.5 ft (upper) & 172 x 54 x 17.5 ft (lower) hangars ; 800 x 160 ft 8-degree angled flight deck ; 4 35,000 lb arrester wires ; 2 BS5 50,000 lb steam catapults, 1 port bow and 1 waist ; 2 40,000 lb lifts (35 second cycle), 54ft long x 44ft wide fwd., 54 x 33 feet aft. ; 487,480 gallons aviation fuel (AVCAT)
Aircraft: 44
Armament: 4 twin 4.5-inch / 45 Mk 6 DP turrets ; 6 GWS22 Sea Cat point-defence SAM quad launchers ; 4 single 3 pdr saluting guns
Radars: 3D Fighter Control - Type 984 ; Air Search - Type 965 ; Carrier Approach - Type 963

Paid off 26 January 1972. De-stored and de-equipped February 1972. Towed to Plymouth 6 August 1972 and used for spares to support Ark Royal over the next six years. Stricken October 1978 and broken up at Cairn Ryan, Wigtownshire

HMS Ark Royal (R09)
After 1967-1970 refit:
Displacement: 43,060 tons standard ; 49,950 tons full load
Dimensions: 845 oa x 171 x 34.5 feet
Range: 7,000 nmiles at 14 knots ; 3,200 tons fuel oil
Aviation Facilities: 409 x 67 x 17.5 ft (upper) & 172 x 53 x 17.5 ft (lower) hangars ; 808 x 160.5 ft 8-degree angled flight deck ; 4 35,000 lb arrester wires ; 2 BS5 50,000 lb steam catapults with bridle catchers, 1 port bow and 1 waist ; 2 40,000 lb lifts (35 second cycle), 54ft long x 44ft wide fwd., 54 x 33 feet aft. ; 537,700 gallons aviation fuel (AVCAT)
Aircraft: up to 40
Armament: fittings for 4 GWS22 Sea Cat (not carried) ; 4 single 3 pdr saluting guns
Radars: Air Search - Type 965 ; Fighter Control - Type 982 ; Height-finding - Type 983

Recommissioned at Devonport 24 February 1970.

Refit at Devonport 26 July 1973 to 10 April 1974.
Refit at Devonport 21 October 1976 to May 1977.

Returned to Devonport to pay off for last time 4 December 1978. Stricken 1980 and broken up at Cairn Ryan, Wigtownshire from 22 September 1980.

The royal navy has a very proud tradition in the use of Aircraft carriers and the Prince of Wales and the Queen Elizabeth will restore that tradition to life again.

Enjoy

Sorry that was a bit off topic, ok a lot off topic but I hope people liked it anyway.

Sorry
I knew that would come back and bite me in the ass.
I should have said we never had a "super carrier" is that right?

reply to post by Wotan


China's military strategy is based around a series of Pacific buffer zones defined by island chains. Their strategic cornerstone is what they describe as "offshore defense."

The idea is to prevent US carrier groups from approaching China close enough to launch strikes at the Chinese mainland.

They seem to plan a three-part layered defense to this end, composed of terminally-guided IRBM's, diesel attack subs, and surface action groups. The Chinese CV's will probably be optimized to provide air cover for these surface groups rather than to provide offensive striking power - something more like the mission of US Escort Carriers during WW2 than that of our current CVBG's.

If China was investing heavily in global striking power, they would be working to match the US's massive amphibious forces, not just building carriers. However that isn't where they seem to be putting their efforts at all, in fact their amphibious forces are mostly limited to short-range medium transports, even the newer classes.

More on China's "Offshore Defense" doctrine.

I bet this is converted into a drone carrier in a decade or so.

Think about it China can make massive amounts of consumer goods so why not small cheap drone craft?

Plus with there up and coming space program they could build em on the moon and no one would know till hundreds of em fall from the skies.

Of course I still don't think they would attack the US directly since we give them so much money through trade.

Originally posted by Dinoking
Think about it China can make massive amounts of consumer goods so why not small cheap drone craft?

There is a leap of capability from an economy that makes plastic consumer goods - which were once made in Europe and the States before it became too expensive - to an economy that can make advanced military equipment.

China is still a poor rudimentary economy with the majority of the population living in poverty (by Western standards). China is not (at the moment) an advanced industrialised nation. It may have a space programme, but that is hardly cutting edge considering rockets have been blasting off into for five decades from quite a few nations. China's space programme is for domestic consumption, not as an outward sigh of technological dominence.

Back on topic. China building carriers? Good for them. It woudl be interesting to see what they propose.

Regards

China is not (at the moment) an advanced industrialised nation.

This is not true.

Maybe ten or fifteen years ago it was.

While large parts of China are still backwards and agrarian, China's industrial sector is huge and growing rapidly, and technologically just as capable as their competitors.

They are, I believe, the third-largest builder of merchant ships, behind only Japan and South Korea. The US isn't even on the list anymore...

In fact China is now third in industrial output on the planet.
They are the world's largest producer of steel.

The computer you typed your post on?

Chances are that many of it's components came from China.

More: Wikipedia: Industry of China.

reply to post by xmotex


China is not an advanced industrial nations. Shipbuilding, iron and steel manufacture and assembling computers is not "advanced". Designing the processors for the computers is.

Of the c. 30 countries classified as having advanced ecomonies, China is missing.

Regards

to say that China is not advanced does not only do them a great diservice, it highlights how little you know about what all they have stolen from others in order to get themselves advanced...

www.google.com...

reply to post by Grock


With the greatest respect... Stealing from others does not an advanced economy make! Everyone can copy, disssemble and reassemble.

Regards

Yes I suppose you are right. However, with that advanced tech, and their current 'sleeping giant factor' its only a matter of time (and it may be a very short ammount of time im afraid). But yeah, i can agree with you there.

Regardless of Gunboat Diplomacy, maybe they simply want a [relatively] mobile aircraft platform, instead of fixed bases?

I for one have no problem with them acquiring/manufacturing aircraft carriers, im actually quite surprised it took them so long.

For the record, having observed the west in the last 60years, the Soviets figured out why and how carrier's were so important. You had forward projection of tremendous power, with out the the automatic need of using nukes. Any President would say, after he was told there were problems in several locations, where are the carriers? Hence if I ran a country, I would if I could at the least get us an aircraft carrier.

I would be very surprised if they do not already have an aircraft carrier.