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

Skip to comments.

China Secretly Constructing an Aircraft Carrier(54planes,13choppers,deployment in 2008)
Chosun Ilbo ^ | 06/30/05 | Song Ui-dal

Posted on 06/29/2005 5:33:55 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster

/begin my translation

China Secretly Constructing an Aircraft Carrier

Hong Kong Economic Daily(Jing-ji-ri-bao) reports
2005/06/30

China recently completed the final design for an Chinese aircraft carrier, and start in early August to construct it in secret at Jiang-nan Shipyard, Zhang-xing Island near Shanghai, reported the June 29th issue of Hong Kong Economic Daily(Jing-ji-ri-bao,) quoting (Chinese) high-level military sources.

Costing 3 billion yuan(390 million dollars), which takes up 3% of Chinese military budget, this carrier, due to be completed next year if everything goes well, has top speed 30 knots per hour and  its maximal displacement is 78,000 ton. It is equipped with Russian engines and radars.

It will carry 54 fighter planes and 13 anti-submarine helicopters, and the introduction of latest Russian fighters(Su-33) is also in the works. When it would be in service in 2008, it is expected to boost Chinese naval strength.

The paper reports, "Zhang Guang-qin, vice minister of the Commission of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense, denied the rumor that a carrier is under construction. However, he emphasized  it is the sacred duty of the Chinese navy to safeguard the country's sovereignty of territorial waters. It is in this context which they go for the construction of the carrier."

(Song Ui-dal, reporting from Hong Kong)

/end my translation



TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2008; aircraft; armsbuildup; carrier; chicoms; china; chinesemilitary
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-202 next last
To: Seaplaner

Other good names for this carrier:

Sal Walton

Wal-Mart


141 posted on 06/29/2005 8:07:42 PM PDT by superiorslots (Free Traitors are communist China's modern day "Useful Idiots")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77
You have my respect, sir. My father served on the Essex (when it was a carrier) in Korea.

I spent my time in the gulf enforcing the sanctions that Kofi Annan used to make his son rich.

142 posted on 06/29/2005 8:09:47 PM PDT by kerryusama04 (How do you make a Republican a conservative? Put him in the minority...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77

80 footers were merely part of the job. Try running from back-to-back typhoons before the skipper decideds that perhaps we should try to hide the ship inside one for a bit.


143 posted on 06/29/2005 8:10:21 PM PDT by Wombat101 (Sanitized for YOUR protection...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77
The difference is what separates communism from capitalism.

Fascism, at least as it deals with economics, is that it promotes capitalism with a very heavy hand from government. It's a partnership, but a very totalitarian one.

In America, the government doesn't own any part of any corporation. In China, the government owns a part or most of everything.

Yet individuals are allowed to compete for whatever jobs they can get.

It's a hybrid of communism and capitalism and if it's run right, it can be extremely efficient for the government and for the lucky people in the right place at the right time.

144 posted on 06/29/2005 8:12:19 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: All

Ok, FR Navy vets..riddle me this

Just how many Harpoons will it take to send this parade float to the bottom of the sea?

I expect that if we ever get into a shooting war over Taiwan, that ship will be the first one on the USN target list.


145 posted on 06/29/2005 8:14:12 PM PDT by Armedanddangerous (Watching indignant liberals is funnier than watching midgets run track.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04
You have my respect, sir.

I'm no sir, I was enlisted, I worked during my 4 years in the Navy ;)
146 posted on 06/29/2005 8:14:18 PM PDT by ProudVet77 (NASCAR - Because it's the way Americans drive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

More like a combination of socialism and capitalism. That's an important distinction to make between socialism and communism.

One of the problems with fascist economies, however, is that they do not adapt easily to changing market conditions, since the government directs all production and restricts access to markets for it's own purposes.


147 posted on 06/29/2005 8:16:03 PM PDT by Wombat101 (Sanitized for YOUR protection...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Armedanddangerous
Sorry, we're all getting a bit old here. The USN surface fleet or subs no longer have Harpoons. The TacTom is it's replacement.
I think it would be more fun to have SEALs swim in and put a few charges on it's hull right near the avgas. ;)
Plausible deniability is such a useful concept.
148 posted on 06/29/2005 8:16:51 PM PDT by ProudVet77 (NASCAR - Because it's the way Americans drive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Armedanddangerous

There can't be a lot of steel in a $360 million dollar carrier. One harpoon ought to do it, if there is enough metal in it to show up on radar. Maybe even a well placed 5" round.


149 posted on 06/29/2005 8:17:07 PM PDT by kerryusama04 (How do you make a Republican a conservative? Put him in the minority...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Armedanddangerous

My guess is a minimum of three, max of 5. Harpoon does not carry all that large a warhead (about 300 pounds or so, if memory serves). The question should be "How many Tomahawks or Mk. 48's will sink this baby?"


150 posted on 06/29/2005 8:18:08 PM PDT by Wombat101 (Sanitized for YOUR protection...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Wombat101

Thanks for the explanation.


151 posted on 06/29/2005 8:18:46 PM PDT by ProudVet77 (NASCAR - Because it's the way Americans drive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse; TigerLikesRooster

<< If [1] they fly like that idiot that midaired the EP-3 back in 2001, whoever's working deck crew will [2] be hating life. >>

[1] They all do and;

[2] But not for long!


152 posted on 06/29/2005 8:18:52 PM PDT by Brian Allen (All that is required to ensure the triumph [of evil] is that Good Men do nothing -- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

153 posted on 06/29/2005 8:20:04 PM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wombat101

Do you think it will be compartmentalized? It would take a couple of harpoons to sink our big boys because of watertight integrity. If this think is a great big banana boat it ought to go really easy. A MK48, there is a cool idea.


154 posted on 06/29/2005 8:20:34 PM PDT by kerryusama04 (How do you make a Republican a conservative? Put him in the minority...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

If it is in the 78000T class, I wonder if the design is based on the never completed Ulyanovsk.


155 posted on 06/29/2005 8:23:17 PM PDT by Fred Hayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fred Hayek

To be honest with you the whole project is a joke and meant to distract the citizens of China from their real problems, lack of clean water, air pollution, bad social policy. It's right out of 1984. They built this big battleship to keep people busy and make them proud and took it out and sunk it. (IIRC, it was a long time ago)


156 posted on 06/29/2005 8:25:58 PM PDT by ProudVet77 (NASCAR - Because it's the way Americans drive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Now, 54 planes and 13 choppers on a 78,000 ton hull (unless it's a nuc boat) sounds like a floating gas can.
The Midway class CV's were smaller than that, with a larger airwing.


If based on the Ulyanovsk, then some space is taken up by SSM's (The Ulyanovsk was to have at least 12 SS-N-19 Shipwrecks, which were BIG missiles - ~300nm range, ~Mach 2.5, and 1000kg warhead. However not sea skimmers like the SS-N-22 Sunburn)


157 posted on 06/29/2005 8:27:12 PM PDT by Fred Hayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04

Let's take it for granted that this baby has at least a double hull, and watertight integrity is minimum of western standards and reserve buoyancy equals at least 1/4 of the ship's displacement. Of course, this also assumes decent damage control training and equipment. It's oiriginally Russian, which means it's probably overengineered to the nth degree.

A Harpoon, being a surface attack weapon, would leave massive holes and start some nasty fires, but the blast from a single one or even a pair might not be enough to cause severe damage to cause sinking. A Tomahawk, with a minimum 1,000 lb warhead would cause much more devestating damage. Still, it's not likely, given all the above factors, that the ship is automatically doomed.

A Mk. 48, however, exploded under the hull, is a different story. A pair would be better. The expectation of critical damage which cannot easily be repaired or countered is much greater in this scenario. Do not forget that a ship is most vulnerable below the waterline, not above. Break a keel or destroy steering or propulsion gear, and it's merely a floating target.

It does not automatically follow that a missile hit, above the waterline, would cause much critical damage to a ship that large.


158 posted on 06/29/2005 8:28:10 PM PDT by Wombat101 (Sanitized for YOUR protection...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Wombat101

I didn't think the Midway class could handle the F-14. I know that they had the F-4 Phantoms, but then later used the F/A-18.


159 posted on 06/29/2005 8:30:56 PM PDT by Fred Hayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Wombat101
OK, you are smarter than me on this, I give. I wasn't in operations.

It's oiriginally Russian, which means it's probably overengineered to the nth degree.

Chernoble (spelling?) was engineered by russians.

160 posted on 06/29/2005 8:32:57 PM PDT by kerryusama04 (How do you make a Republican a conservative? Put him in the minority...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-202 next last

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