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

Skip to comments.

Should We Be Afraid of China's New Aircraft Carrier?
Foreign Policy ^ | JUNE 27, 2011 | ABRAHAM M. DENMARK, ANDREW S. ERICKSON, AND GABRIEL COLLINS

Posted on 06/28/2011 8:18:16 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki

Should We Be Afraid of China's New Aircraft Carrier?

Not yet.

BY ABRAHAM M. DENMARK, ANDREW S. ERICKSON, AND GABRIEL COLLINS | JUNE 27, 2011

Six months ago, Gen. Liu Huaqing -- the father of China's modern navy and its commander from 1982 to 1988 (and, according to the state-run People's Daily, "a distinguished member of the CPC, a seasoned loyal Communist fighter, an outstanding proletarian revolutionist, politician and strategist, and an excellent leader of the Party, the state and the military") -- passed away. Liu sought to build China's navy first into a "green water" fleet and, eventually, into a full-fledged "blue water" navy capable of projecting power over vast distances. Key to realizing Liu's vision was an aircraft carrier, and Liu reportedly vowed: "I will not die with my eyes closed if I do not see a Chinese aircraft carrier in front of me."

While Liu may have died with his eyes open, they can close now. From the harbor at Dalian naval shipyard in northeast China, the first aircraft carrier of the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) will soon set sail for the first time. And much of the Asia-Pacific region, as well as the Asia-watching strategic community in the United States, is hotly debating the implications of this move.

Adm. Robert Willard, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, said in an April interview with Bloomberg that he is "not concerned" about China's first carrier going to sea, but allowed: "Based on the feedback that we received from our partners and allies in the Pacific, I think the change in perception by the region will be significant." Japan's Asahi Shimbun

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


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aircraftcarrier; china; chinesenavy; japan; navair; russia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

1 posted on 06/28/2011 8:18:20 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

RE: the article’s title...Betcha there are a bunch of sailors who serve aboard Los Angeles-class attack subs who would answer “Uh...no.”


2 posted on 06/28/2011 8:21:19 AM PDT by hoagy62 (Help stamp out crack-pull up your pants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

If it’s anything like two thirds of the Chinese crap I am forced to buy because there is no alternative — then, no, I doubt it’ll stay afloat for more than a couple months.

We’ll probably see that new carrier lying next to someone’s driveway awaiting the garbage truck before it gets around to threatening us.


3 posted on 06/28/2011 8:22:53 AM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I think China should be afraid of it falling apart.


4 posted on 06/28/2011 8:23:29 AM PDT by mothball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

Yup. The Chicoms steal but don’t improve. We create cool killer stuff like Reaper drones and we’ve got our Navy around the world, while they don’t. My cuz who serves close to the DMZ once said that the first thing the Chicoms will try is Taiwan and we have more than enough to knock em out.


5 posted on 06/28/2011 8:26:51 AM PDT by max americana (FUBO NATION 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Should We Be Afraid?

Depends on who you are. If you're on a US warship, no worries at all. But if you're in the Filipino Navy, or the Vietnamese Navy, or the Japanese Navy, maybe.

Because if America pulls back, you'll be on your own.

6 posted on 06/28/2011 8:27:37 AM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hoagy62

All that it takes is one MK48 torpedo.


7 posted on 06/28/2011 8:29:43 AM PDT by DarthVader (That which supports Barack Hussein Obama must be sterilized and there are NO exceptions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

“...Should We Be Afraid of China’s New Aircraft Carrier?...”

No more than we were of the Akagi and her sister ships. They have be residing at the bottom of the Pacific ever since the US Navy sent them to Davy Jone’s locker for all time. If China wants to re-enact that event, come get some. We’re game.


8 posted on 06/28/2011 8:33:05 AM PDT by NCC-1701 (In Memphis on January 20, 2009, pump price were $1.49. We all know what happened after that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: max americana

>> we have more than enough to knock em out

I have no doubt of that fact. The real question: do we have the will to use it?


9 posted on 06/28/2011 8:36:21 AM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: hoagy62
If you can see it from satellite or hear it from a sonobuoy or a sub, it is dead meat.

This also applies to our carriers.

10 posted on 06/28/2011 8:43:19 AM PDT by cpdiii (Deckhand, Roughneck, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist, Iconoclast: THE CONSTITUTION IS WORTH DYING FOR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NCC-1701
No more than we were of the Akagi and her sister ships.

We were lucky that day.

11 posted on 06/28/2011 8:45:27 AM PDT by clamper1797 (Hoping to have some change left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I think the article sets the tone right. This is not really a big deal to us now. But in 20 or 30 years, it could be. As Admiral Mullen referred to last year. This debt problem is getting to the point of affecting our national security. We have to get our debt and spending under control for national security reasons. So we can continue to stay ahead of the competition militarily so to speak.

Hopefully this has a side benefit of Japan changing it’s constitution to allow for the building of offensive minded ships. Between us, India, South Korea, Japan and even the Phillipines I think that we can contain this Chinese tiger for a long time if we get out from our debt problems!!

Let’s remember, it was only about 35 years ago that the Vietnamese navy kicked China’s naval tail. This is the Vietnamese navy for crying out loud.


12 posted on 06/28/2011 8:47:58 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clamper1797
"We were lucky that day."

Lucky that day and lucky leading up to that day. Like being able to break the Japanese code in time to figure out Midway was going to be attacked. The Japanese Navy at that point was more powerful than ours. I still believe that we would have eventually been able to outproduce them and build a bigger and more powerful Navy but that war could have dragged on for many more years if we didn't have success at Midway.
13 posted on 06/28/2011 8:51:09 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

The threat is not the carrier itself its the fact that the Red Chinese now have the industrial, technological, and financial capacity to build and field such a thing. What will they be building in ten or twenty years. What will the US have the capacity to build and field in ten or twenty years? The way things are going in a few years the Red Chinese could very well buy our entire navy, cheap.


14 posted on 06/28/2011 8:54:25 AM PDT by Roninf5-1 (If ignorance is bliss why are so many Americans on anti-depressants?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clamper1797
We were lucky that day.

More than most people realize. And it came at a terrible cost. Fortunately for us, it cost the Japanese more.

15 posted on 06/28/2011 9:02:46 AM PDT by Noumenon ("One man with courage is a majority." - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

I remember when it was a Soviet Aircraft carrier. A military pundit said; “it’s not a carrier. it’s a target.”


16 posted on 06/28/2011 9:07:02 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: clamper1797

“...We were lucky that day....”

Yes we were. No doubt about that. While they sank the Yorktown, we got the Akagi, Kaga, Hiryu, and Soryu. With the loss of those four carriers, the Japanese naval effort was severely crippled. They still put up a he!! of a fight after those went to the bottom.

The same fate remains for China’s carrier if they want to press any issue with us. Let ‘em try.


17 posted on 06/28/2011 9:12:27 AM PDT by NCC-1701 (In Memphis on January 20, 2009, pump price were $1.49. We all know what happened after that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

The Chinese have a long way to go to match 90 yrs of U.S. carrier tactics.


18 posted on 06/28/2011 9:17:10 AM PDT by Despot of the Delta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCC-1701

But do we have the leadership of a Nimitz, a Spruance, a Halsey and others of the greatest generation?

Remember who is in charge right now and what his track record is.


19 posted on 06/28/2011 9:18:11 AM PDT by 353FMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Why would we be? We've dealt with enemy carriers before...like at Midway


20 posted on 06/28/2011 9:20:27 AM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Can you afford to board the Chattanooga Choo-Choo?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Silly yankee...That not aircraft carrier, haha...it floating china factory where quality product for yankee come from.. haha...It where tainted doggy yum yums are made...We build more floating factories to help make yankee strong and proud! Bye bye now!

21 posted on 06/28/2011 9:26:11 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

One aircraft carrier does not a world naval power make. Ask the UK, France, or even Thailand. Though it is not my intention to diminish the threat, especially to Taiwan, the sortie rate of one carrier, oil fired as it is will be quite low. A future nuclear powered carrier, would not help the sortie rate. Which is why the US currently has eleven commissioned with one under construction.


22 posted on 06/28/2011 9:26:11 AM PDT by MCCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

The Japanese were also supremely arrogant and infected with what Mitsuo Fuchida referred to after the war as “victory disease”.

Plus the methodical and cautious Nagumo was so distracted by a report that there might be a US carrier in the vicinity. This caused him to order the planes waiting for the second strike on Midway’s airfield to be rearmed with torpedoes. In their haste the Japanese armorers stacked the bombs removed from the planes on the decks of the carriers.

Just waiting for a few bombs from the Navy’s Dauntlesses to detonate among them creating huge chain-reaction explosions on board the enemy carriers.


23 posted on 06/28/2011 9:28:19 AM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Can you afford to board the Chattanooga Choo-Choo?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Emperor Palpatine

Don’t forget our superior DC capability. When all four of the Japanese carriers were hit, they all became infernos. Their DC people could not control the fire. Our guys got the Yorktown going so well, when the second bomb run that eventually sunk the Yorktown came overhead, the Japanese thought it was a different carrier because the DC guys has put out all the fires and got her underway.


24 posted on 06/28/2011 9:36:54 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/page?id=13917383

This is a list of places that still make stuff here in the USA.

https://www.saveourcountryfirst.com/Default.aspx

Here’s a store that only stocks 100% made in America stuff. Including clothes hangers, etc.


25 posted on 06/28/2011 9:45:19 AM PDT by Ro_Thunder (I sure hope there is a New Morning in America soon. All this hope and change is leaving me depressed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MCCC
"One aircraft carrier does not a world naval power make."

Your statement reminds me of the famous quote of Admiral Cunningham of the British Navy, "It takes three years to build a ship, it takes three centuries to build a tradition"
26 posted on 06/28/2011 9:46:17 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

The real practical strategic value of China’s carrier may be to improve the survivability of the PRC’s ballistic missile subs. That was the intended use of the Russian-version Varyag. Even though relatively small, it could provide anti-air and anti-sub patrols to give more credibility to China’s nuclear deterrent threat.


27 posted on 06/28/2011 9:58:13 AM PDT by Tenega
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cpdiii
"If you can see it from satellite or hear it from a sonobuoy or a sub, it is dead meat. This also applies to our carriers."

With the exception (supposedly) that the sinking of a US carrier would entail a nuclear retaliatory strike.

28 posted on 06/28/2011 9:59:33 AM PDT by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Roninf5-1
The Chinese didn't actually build it. It's an old Soviet carrier, the Varyag, that was incomplete when the Soviet Union fell. It transferred to Ukraine, which stripped it. China bought the hulk at auction and is completing and fitting it out.

It was never intended to be a general purpose carrier like ours, but rather to support the Sov's ballistic missile and ASW operations. It has a curved front deck reminiscent of the Brit jump carriers.

So, the Chicoms are hardly building Nimitz class ships, at least not yet. Still, this thing could be intimidating to some folks in their near neighborhood.

29 posted on 06/28/2011 10:06:45 AM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Yep - it was called the Varyag if I recall correctly. The Chicoms didn't build it themselves. They just loaded it up with stolen US tech.
30 posted on 06/28/2011 10:11:40 AM PDT by Noumenon ("One man with courage is a majority." - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
"or the Japanese Navy"

The Japanese Navy is far superior to the PLAN. Not even close.

They have some reasonable numbers too.

31 posted on 06/28/2011 10:25:48 AM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

ping


32 posted on 06/28/2011 10:59:24 AM PDT by Vroomfondel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; investigateworld; lowbuck; ...
SONOBUOY PING!

Click on pic for past Navair pings.

Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.

33 posted on 06/28/2011 12:43:07 PM PDT by magslinger (Zombies make up much of the Democrat's base.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner; Leaning Right
Technically,the Japanese don't have a Navy. What they do have, the JMSDF, is pretty good. The toys they play with weren't quite what we had but weren't anything to sneer at when I was over there, either.

The PLAN has a lot more bodies than the JMSDF. A Chinese invasion of Japan would use up a lot of them on both sides.

34 posted on 06/28/2011 1:29:15 PM PDT by magslinger (Zombies make up much of the Democrat's base.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Lets see, First space heater made in Mexico lasted me 9 years keeping me warm under my desk.

Second space heater made in CHINA lasted 1 1/2 months until the knobs stopped working, the decals falling off and the fan sounding like an F-14 taking off the dying all together.

Third space heater, Made in CHINA lasted 3 months (woohoo!) till Feb when it started sparking and melting.

Those are just the heaters, Don’t get me started on the blender, shop vac, cordless drill, power washer, weed wacker, etc etc....

No, i’m not too worried about a chinese carrier.
The engines will seize, prop shafts will un-balance, The “steel” hull will prematurely rot, the Cafeteria will poison the sailors........and so on.


35 posted on 06/28/2011 1:50:37 PM PDT by mowowie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mowowie

LOL, the Chinese can’t even make functioning toenail clippers.


36 posted on 06/28/2011 1:58:56 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (I'm sick of damn idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NCC-1701
No more than we were of the Akagi and her sister ships.

Akagi had only one sister. Both were caught on the builder's ways by the 1922 earthquake, and the sister fell off her slipway and was irretrievably damaged and had to be broken up. Both were to have been battlecruisers in the successor class to the Kongos, but Akagi, like USS Lexington and Saratoga, was converted to a large aircraft carrier.

37 posted on 06/28/2011 3:52:24 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus (Concealed carry is a pro-life position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: magslinger
The PLAN has a lot more bodies than the JMSDF. A Chinese invasion of Japan would use up a lot of them on both sides.

A straight fight between the two navies would probably be a walkover for the Japanese. They probably wouldn't even bother to ask us for help, except to make sure the phone lines still worked, lol.

38 posted on 06/28/2011 3:56:53 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus (Concealed carry is a pro-life position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
"It takes three years to build a ship, it takes three centuries to build a tradition"

In the case of the Royal Navy, the tradition was "Rum, Buggery and the Lash".

39 posted on 06/28/2011 7:31:32 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

Damn! Can’t you guys stomach “just a little itty bitty” of a competition? I mean hell, if only we make as much commotion about the HMS Vikrant, the HMS São Paulo, and the HMS Giuseppe Garibaldi, which had all been plying the world’s oceans for decades. I mean the [Shi Lang] as they call it (Ace in the hole would’ve been a much more appropriate name?) is only a floating casino. It probably have your favorite slots and table games in it just as they do in the Caesar’s Palace and in the Venetian. I mean you guys can’t be that serious about one and one only lonely little Moby-Dick dingy, are you guys?


40 posted on 06/28/2011 8:59:33 PM PDT by EdisonOne (http://www.channel4.com/dia/images/Channel4/c4-news/MAY/04/04_helicopter_r_k.jpg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Re: “It takes three years to build a ship, it takes three centuries to build a tradition”

Zhanghe, they said, built not only the greatest of tradition ever, more to that, he was said to have established for himself a maritime legacy that dwarfs even the greatest navy in modern record and it all started with but a dream. He was said to have commanded an armada of [three thousand boats]. So how hard is it for an old hand to scrap the rust off and brush away the dusts and start anew all over again? An old saying “necessity is the mother of all creations” and creation, or creativity works magics!


41 posted on 06/28/2011 9:27:15 PM PDT by EdisonOne (http://www.channel4.com/dia/images/Channel4/c4-news/MAY/04/04_helicopter_r_k.jpg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

Re: A straight fight between the two navies would probably be a walkover for the Japanese.

Hmmmm... that might hold true a decade or two ago. The reality of the matter however is this: If the central ojective of the PLA-N is focused on the US Pacific Fleet, which it is, and which the PLA-N is not shy about letting Keating’s in on it; then, if your Pentium IV computes as should, it should give you a pretty good picture of what the PLA-N is all about. Meaning if the Japanese Self Defense Force’s strategy is to out number the ChiCom’s frigate for frigate and destroyer for destroyers by 50 boats, then the strategy of the ChiCom’s is to out number Japan’s submarine force by twice the number with cutting edge and deadly antiship missiles and super “Shkvatl-ype-Torpedoes”.


42 posted on 06/28/2011 9:53:22 PM PDT by EdisonOne (http://www.channel4.com/dia/images/Channel4/c4-news/MAY/04/04_helicopter_r_k.jpg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

Re: LOL, the Chinese can’t even make functioning toenail clippers.

Heck! What do we want from them? We scour the world for low cost production in order to make a profit at home. We bring our designs and technical drawings to them to have the products we wanted produced to specified we wanted and at dirt cheap. They ship it back to us as per our specification and as per agreement. And now we b*tch about it?


43 posted on 06/28/2011 10:03:37 PM PDT by EdisonOne (http://www.channel4.com/dia/images/Channel4/c4-news/MAY/04/04_helicopter_r_k.jpg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: EdisonOne; Jeff Head
Actually, on a qualitative basis, I think the edge has to go to the excellent Japanese diesel-electric flotilla.

The Chinese have a few good Kilo-class diesels, the rest of their diesel fleet are clunkers and "generic" diesels mostly good for exercise work and training, and their nukey-boats are noisy as hell and easy meat for Japanese boats equipped with new-generation fire-control equipment.

American naval officers don't call the Japanese Maritime SDF the "Eighth Fleet" for nothing.

44 posted on 06/29/2011 12:03:05 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus (Concealed carry is a pro-life position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

A Chinese made bridge built in China and then shipped to the SF Bay area has more potential damage.


45 posted on 06/29/2011 12:23:09 AM PDT by Eye of Unk (2012, NO MORE LIES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
That is a facetious quote from Churchill - he didn't really mean it, and it's not true anyway.

Admittedly, in days of yore the supply of spirits was far too high, but it was always "cut". Even then it was mildly preferable and healthier to drinking the onboard water.

"The detestable practice of buggery" was specifically included as a capital offence under the "Articles of war", under which the Royal Navy was regulated, first written about 1650 and regularly reaffirmed for at least the next two centuries. You packed fudge, you swung for it. No exceptions.

Discipline in Nelson's Royal navy was savage by modern day standards, but it was scarcely worse than the contemporary civilian penal code, and it was heavily regulated. All punishments had to be entered in the log and justified later to higher authorities. Captains who were too fond of floggings would find themselves in trouble. A study of the logs makes it quite clear that most sailors were never flogged. It was actually uncommon. Usually the same old names crop up in the books time after time - the hard cases and the troublemakers.

46 posted on 06/29/2011 4:21:02 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden; clamper1797
At the end of the film "The Battle of Midway" Henry Fonda asks "were we better than the Japanese, or just luckier?"

Personally I think you were better AND luckier. Sure if Midway had not come off the whole thing would have dragged on longer, but I think even by then the US Navy had a qualitative advantage. In less than a year you would have had a quantitative advantage as well.

47 posted on 06/29/2011 4:27:30 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tenega
The real practical strategic value of China’s carrier may be to improve the survivability of the PRC’s ballistic missile subs. That was the intended use of the Russian-version Varyag. Even though relatively small, it could provide anti-air and anti-sub patrols to give more credibility to China’s nuclear deterrent threat.

Yes, that's pretty much it. Remember that the purpose of the Soviet carrier fleet was to protect the surface and submarine fleet that would deny US/NATO control of the seas. The carrier's aircraft (Forgers on the Kievs, Su-33s on the Kuznetsovs) wasn't meant as an offensive, power-projection capability, but a defensive one. Given a land war in Europe, US/NATO had to control the sea lanes ... all the Soviets had to do was deny them that control.

This is underscored by the fact that the Kuznetsov class, of which the ChiComs have Varyag - the second ship, had a surface to surface missile farm in the MIDDLE of the forward flight deck/launching area.

Apparently the ChiComs wanted the missile silos gone (since they weren't able to acquire the missiles to put into them) to free up space. And found out that the silos were structural in nature and couldn't just be cut out without compromising hull integrity. So they're still going to be there, just empty, when Varyag puts to sea.
48 posted on 06/29/2011 4:51:09 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

Well, yes, but it does have a certain lyrical tone to it... ;-)


49 posted on 06/29/2011 5:06:13 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

Course it does - its a Churchillian phrase! The man was a master of the quip!


50 posted on 06/29/2011 8:43:28 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 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