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

Skip to comments.

China developing 11,0000 ton 'super aircraft carrier' to rival US naval power
Asian News International (ANI) ^ | December 22, 2013

Posted on 12/22/2013 1:21:17 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki

China has declared it is building a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.

The size of the carrier will be huge enough to rival the biggest in United States naval service in the first move of a major new arms race.

According to China Daily, Chinese website qianzhan.com said 'top People's Liberation Army' sources as saying the 110,000-ton aircraft carrier should be launched by 2020.

The news follows rising tensions in the South and East China Seas.

The design of the carrier is reportedly based on drawings from the former Soviet Union of a nuclear-powered, 80,000 ton vessel capable of carrying 60 aircraft, the report added.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Japan; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: aerospace; china; plan; usn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 12/22/2013 1:21:17 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Bigger Battleships, that’s the answer.../s


2 posted on 12/22/2013 1:25:13 PM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

We can pull China’s income stream any time we decide to pull our heads out and check what’s going on.

I know a good way for us to never have to pay China about $2 trillion in debt we owe it.

China just has to keep doing what it has been doing...


3 posted on 12/22/2013 1:25:51 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Huh? That’s smaller than a lot of commercial vessels. 110,000 tons? Good luck Chicoms. A nation doesn’t develop this sort of technology overnight.


4 posted on 12/22/2013 1:25:53 PM PST by x1stcav ("The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

So China is building an eleven-ten thousand ton aircraft carrier?


5 posted on 12/22/2013 1:26:53 PM PST by 1raider1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Nothing to worry about here. It will be made in China then it will break down the first time they take it out and no one will ever be able to get it running again. Just like all of the Chinese mopeds and four wheelers that have been sent to the US.


6 posted on 12/22/2013 1:28:35 PM PST by cquiggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
China, at best, can use a carrier to intimidate its weaker neighbors. If China tries to project power on the open seas they may soon discover that their carrier is nothing more than a torpedo target.


7 posted on 12/22/2013 1:29:30 PM PST by darkwing104 (Forgive but don't forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

When the Russians tried this, with a considerably smaller carrier, the first one was barely out of the dock before it capsized. The second one didn’t make it out of the harbor.

This biggest problem is not in the engineering, but paradoxically, in having an experienced crew that can use the engineering. The US now has about 100 years of experience that was earned from the bottom up.

The next biggest problem is having a crew experienced in damage control. The lack of this cost the Japanese carriers, that could have been saved, in World War II.

The Russians never did figure out how to build a large carrier.


8 posted on 12/22/2013 1:31:04 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Last Obamacare Promise: "If You Like Your Eternal Soul, You Can Keep It.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cquiggy

Ha...maybe they stole the plans of the French carrier....and just scaled it up......snicker


9 posted on 12/22/2013 1:31:33 PM PST by spokeshave (OMG.......Schadenfreude overload is not covered under Obamacare :-()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I thought aircraft carriers were too vulnerable?


10 posted on 12/22/2013 1:31:54 PM PST by Da Bilge Troll (Defeatism is not a winning strategy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Seems to be quite a waste of resources. 110,000 tons? How big is the air group. If it’s only 60 aircraft, then that’s too much ship for too few planes. And it’s going to need an escort of nuclear powered guided-missile cruisers to screen it. And what far-flung overseas commitments does China have to warrant such a behemoth?


11 posted on 12/22/2013 1:32:02 PM PST by steelhead_trout (MYOB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tet68

“Bigger Battleships, that’s the answer.../s”

Bigger today does not mean more powerful. It means you’ve put too many eggs in one basket. We need many smaller carriers. Eventually, we need carriers that launch nothing but robotic planes.

When individual planes cost hundreds of millions or a billion dollars you can’t afford to lose even one. Ships that carry them will soon be too expensive for our crippled socialist economy. (That’s why the British have practically disposed of their military.)


12 posted on 12/22/2013 1:35:28 PM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

To all of those people who believe that the Air Craft Carrier is obsolete,I guess the Chinese don’t believe that.


13 posted on 12/22/2013 1:36:05 PM PST by puppypusher ( The World is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Weren’t our WWII carriers around 25-30,000 tons? That is the big ones.


14 posted on 12/22/2013 1:36:57 PM PST by yarddog (Romans 8: verses 38 and 39. "For I am persuaded".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Our military is not what it used to be and the future looks bleak.

Fort Bragg chapel holds first same-sex ceremony

15 posted on 12/22/2013 1:37:27 PM PST by B4Ranch (Name your illness, do a Google & YouTube search with "hydrogen peroxide". Do it and be surprised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104

The aircraft carrier probably will just orbit around Taiwan and an occasional trip around Japan.


16 posted on 12/22/2013 1:39:09 PM PST by RadiationRomeo (Step into my mind and glimpse the madness that is me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
No named sources. no official CCP announcement.

I do not buy it at all.

They did announce last month that they would be building two conventionally powered STOBAR carriers similar to their existing carrier simultaneously at Dalian and Shanghai.

I put much more credence in that.

Duowei News:

China will construct two conventionally powered aircraft carriers in Dalian and Shanghai between 2014 and 2015, according to China's Central Military Commission as reported by Duowei News, an outlet run by overseas Chinese.

Under the Commission's Project 048, China aims to establish three carrier battle groups by 2020 so that all three major fleets of the PLA Navy will be able to carry out missions with the full support of an aircraft carrier. The two new Type 001A indigenous carriers will be updated versions of China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, which was originally a Soviet-era Admiral Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier purchased from Ukraine in 1998. They will also likely be designed with a ski-jump ramp, according to Duowei.

Sources said that the General Equipment Department of the PLA has already signed a contract with the Beijing-based China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation to build the two carriers. The price of the two vessels is estimated to be worth US$9 billion.

China has yet to decide whether its J-31 stealth fighter will replace the J-15 to become the country's next generation carrier-based fighter, according to sources. The J-31 fighter entered service before the J-15, and is able to land or take off from the flight deck of the Liaoning. Sources said that a decision will only be made after the construction of the nation's second and third aircraft carriers is completed. This will give the PLA more time to think about the type of carrier-based fighter it will need in the future, the sources added.

17 posted on 12/22/2013 1:39:10 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

There’s a whole lot more to carrier operations, carrier defense and effective carrier deployment than just having a big old ship.

Methinks the Russkies figured this out long ago. They could put billions of rubles into something that wouldn’t last a maximum of two-three hours after a couple of 688’s got to her.

With no flight operations during that period, either.


18 posted on 12/22/2013 1:41:35 PM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

With all due respect, China is doing more than one thing at a time.

There is a (lot) of American manufacturing being done there.

They are getting stronger very quickly.


19 posted on 12/22/2013 1:42:03 PM PST by Cringing Negativism Network (Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty, bring him back...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
ping...
20 posted on 12/22/2013 1:44:38 PM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steelhead_trout

This is to keep tight rein on the South China Sea, and intimidate the Philippines and Japan, as well as threaten the Malaysian Strait. If China ever develops air and naval superiority in this region sufficient to suppress or drive out US presence there, the worldwide reach of the US will diminish in direct response to the growth of the Chinese capability.

The Chinese have a long ways to go, to be sure, but given the nature of the timidity and the reticence of the Current Regime now in control of that territory once known as “the United States of America”, this could happen with amazing rapidity. Heck, the Current Regime might even be persuaded to sell the Chinese a couple of our older carriers.

But I should not be putting ideas in their heads.


21 posted on 12/22/2013 1:45:21 PM PST by alloysteel (Those who deny natural climate change are forever doomed to stupidity. AGW is a LIE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

“If China ever develops air and naval superiority in this region sufficient to suppress or drive out US presence there, the worldwide reach of the US will diminish in direct response to the growth of the Chinese capability.”


Empires always fall, and those nations who strive for the seduction of “worldwide reach” invariably burn themselves out. In this case, ironically, the Chinese might do us a favor!


22 posted on 12/22/2013 1:48:42 PM PST by steelhead_trout (MYOB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tet68

The carrier pretty much put an end to battleships
in the second world war, just as something else
will put an end to carriers.

Power projection keeps developing just like everything
else, when you can destroy it from orbit.


23 posted on 12/22/2013 1:50:42 PM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I'll see China's "super aircraft carrier" and raise them an American helicarrier.

24 posted on 12/22/2013 1:57:19 PM PST by Momaw Nadon ("...with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x1stcav

If China was developing its own technology, you’d be right. However, pretty much all of the military technology China has has been stolen, mostly from the US, so not necessarily.


25 posted on 12/22/2013 1:59:13 PM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: x1stcav

The japanese did, and plenty of people Wew dismissing them too.


26 posted on 12/22/2013 2:02:39 PM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

i thought they were in the 40,000 ton range.


27 posted on 12/22/2013 2:03:20 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

28 posted on 12/22/2013 2:04:16 PM PST by Robe (Rome did not create a great empire by talking, they did it by killing all those who opposed them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon

Kinda reminds me of the Nuclear powered flying
aircraft carriers you would see in Popular Mechanics
in the 50s.

Total nonsense.


29 posted on 12/22/2013 2:11:01 PM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

I know exactly what the Chinese military, and particularly their Navy, is doing. I have been monitoring it very closely for the last 12-14 years.

The PLAN is not building a nuclear carrier at this point. The article is rife with misstatements, reference to internet legends, and absolutely not one shred of authenticity.

It is very possible that the PLAN will start building two conventional carriers of 65,000 tons each (which are not small by any stretch) like the Liaoning, CV-16, they currently have, so that they can have similar training, operations and logistics for all three of their fleets. SCS, ECS, and NCS.

After that, perhaps sometime in the early to mid 2020s they may begin producing a CATOBAR carriers (probably conventional for the first one or two)...but they have not perfected either the nuclear propulsion adequate for a carrier, or the catapult technology for them yet, and they will accomplish those before they ever go there.

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia
http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/


30 posted on 12/22/2013 2:15:09 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

I recognize your depth of knowledge, and I am not questioning you in the least.

I however think China will tend to surprize us with the speed they adapt and develop technology.

Remember please, this technology is already being used in a number of American carriers.

I’m thinking the Chinese are further along with their efforts to develop such things, than we currently believe.

I do not have specific knowledge of this. I am not reporting it, or even suggesting is is so.

I just think we would be unwise to presume China is “lagging” in developing advanced technology.

I think they are further along in a number of areas, than they have let on so far.

I’m just saying America needs to start taking China very seriously.

Unlike every other nation we have ever opposed, China has a population five times America’s size, many of whom are college educated and very ambitious. And are all sorts of nationalistic.

I just think we are very unwise to believe we have some sort of inside track.

At the moment, China is rapidly gaining on us.

Thanks for your post. I really appreciate it.


31 posted on 12/22/2013 2:25:25 PM PST by Cringing Negativism Network (Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty, bring him back...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Probably built from technology stolen from the US or sold to them by the Clinton administration.


32 posted on 12/22/2013 2:28:09 PM PST by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
A country just can't decide to become a naval air power. It takes decades to perfect the methods & develop a tradition.

This is a very expensive sandbox for China to play in.

33 posted on 12/22/2013 2:29:27 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

I am very well aware, in significant detail, of the new A1B rectors we are putting on the new Ford class carriers, and how they compare to the A4W reactors we have on the Nimitz class, and how those compared to the A2W reactors we had on the USS Enterprise that was decommissioned last year.

You may be thinking that the Chinese PLAN is further along...but in this area, they are not.

Their naval nuclear reactors that they use on their submarines are continually having issues. The keep building one or two boats of a class and then having to build another class because of the issues they have been having with the reactors and with quieting

They are not ready in the least for a 110,000 ton nuclear powered aircraft carrier, or one of even 70-80,000 tons.

However, what they are doing with the Liaoning class carriers (which are improved variants of the Kuznetsov class on which they are based) are significant enough.

If they produce and deploy three of those sized carriers, they will represent a significant change in the balance of power to the Western Pacific.

The Chinese have already surpassed the Japanese Navy as the second largest and most powerful navy on the planet. The J-15 strike fighters they will deploy on these carriers, once they are trained in their usage and carrier operations, are going to be a serious competitor to our F/A-18E/F Super Hornets.

Building two carriers at once, as they plan, will be a very significant and serious message to all nations in the Western Pacific.

They have built four of their new Type 52D class destroyers which are nearing the capabilities of our AEGIS destroyers, and are in serial production...capable of up to three a year.

They have built 12 of their new Type 53 light frigates in the last two years, and are probably going to continue to build 6-8 of those a year for the foreseeable future. They have a similar role to our LCS, but are much more heavily armed.

They have built 20 of their larger Type 054A frigates in the last five to six years (averaging almost four of those a year). We have been steadily decommissioning our Perry class frigates and not replacing them at all.

So, yes, the Chinese can and are doing many things at once. But building a nuclear carrier in the near future, is not one of them. I expect ultimately they will...but it is another ten years off.

Our saving grace in this is the fact that we have been building very capable Burke class AEGIS destroyers at a rate of about two a year for the last 20 years.

Also, our Virginia class nuclear subs, which are in series production and outclass and nuclear sub the PLAN has now, or will have in the next 8-10 years.

But they do have very, very good AIP SSK conventional subs, so the littoral waters in the western Pacific will be very dangerous places. This while they build up a very strong surface Navy and beginning to develop their Naval Air Arm in a serious manner.


34 posted on 12/22/2013 2:42:06 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I’m not concerned. It’s made in China.


35 posted on 12/22/2013 2:51:48 PM PST by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x1stcav
A nation doesn’t develop this sort of technology overnight.

They do when Bill Xlinton sells it to them. Unfortunately.

36 posted on 12/22/2013 2:53:53 PM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Some people meet their heroes. I raised mine. Go Army.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

They are building up and we are down-sizing. We should not cut military spending right now.


37 posted on 12/22/2013 2:54:09 PM PST by 3Fingas (Sons and Daughters for Freedom and Rededicaton to the Principles of the U.S. Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Well the thing I keep thinking of is, China is now the largest exporter on the planet.

Not us. China.

China is growing in every regard. Including making a massive amount of what is sold, right here in America.

All I’m saying is a lot of people need to take China very seriously. Now. This is no longer some game. China is getting stronger every day.

Thanks for your posts. Wish you a very Merry Christmas.


38 posted on 12/22/2013 2:54:35 PM PST by Cringing Negativism Network (Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty, bring him back...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

I agree...and have been saying it and documenting in terms of their naval buildup for years.


39 posted on 12/22/2013 3:09:47 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: steelhead_trout

“And what far-flung overseas commitments does China have to warrant such a behemoth?”

Huge investments in Africa, growing influence in South America, and control of the sea lanes for Indonesian oil.

They aren’t building this to fight us, but to influence things in 2nd/3rd world nations.


40 posted on 12/22/2013 3:31:51 PM PST by tcrlaf (Well, it is what the Sheeple voted for....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Without a sizable blue water fleet, the huge Chinese merchant fleet is vunerable.

China’s weak spot is OIL.

They must control the lanes that provide the oil to their industries, which means Controlling the South China Sea, and the ability to contain any threats to the Malacca Straights, the Lombok Straight, the Sunda Straight, and the Celebes Sea.


41 posted on 12/22/2013 3:51:01 PM PST by tcrlaf (Well, it is what the Sheeple voted for....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle
There’s a whole lot more to carrier operations, carrier defense and effective carrier deployment than just having a big old ship.

So, if Bill Clinton sold China our ICBM secrets what stopped him from selling our aircraft carrier plans and procedures?

42 posted on 12/22/2013 3:56:44 PM PST by The Duke ("Forgiveness is between them and God, it's my job to arrange the meeting.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Am I the only one who realizes that aircraft carriers are not only obsolete, but they are also STUPID ??? You don’t have to sink them .... you only have to screw up the landing strip.


43 posted on 12/22/2013 4:07:47 PM PST by layman (Card Carrying Infidel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Jeff, what is Combined Fleet doing to counteract the Chinese build-up, given the relative inattention of the U.S. to its Navy since the early Nineties.


44 posted on 12/22/2013 4:18:22 PM PST by section9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: The Duke

You have to have thousands of trained personnel and support ships, surface and sub-surface to properly operate and protect a carrier in these times.

We’ve been doing it for over 70 years. Sure they can learn, but reality is a harsh mistress. But most naval wars are over, as they were in WWII.

China wants to project air power on a mobile platform. If they get into it with Japan, that asset could be crippled without that much trouble. A Kamikaze might do it.

Weapons advancement is putting most carriers at risk. The Russians went simple: The Oscar II was developed the launch huge nuclear-armed cruise missiles for melting a carrier.

This is what the Kursk was.


45 posted on 12/22/2013 4:27:09 PM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: section9
Well, 1st he US Navy has not been sitting still. v We have been building Arleigh Burke Class destroyers continually through the entire time and now have about 65 of them along with 22 Ticonderoga cruisers.

Those vessels are the best multi-role combatants on the planet...although some of our allies, with their own Burke builds have equally strong combatants.

In addition, the US has been building Virginia Class nuclear attack submarines, which outside Sea Wolf class, there are no other SSNs that can equal them either. Now, the Astutes the Royal Navy are building are very good too...but they only have two of them and will build no more than seven of them. We currently have ten of the Virginia's commissioned, and five more building, and another seventeen planned.

By comparison, the PLAN has seven nuclear attack subs, and four of those are very antiquated Han class boats,. The other four Type 093 boats are not even as good as the Los Angles class boats we still use...and we have about forty of them.

As t the Japanese Maritime Self defense Force, they are still very strong. They have fallen behind the PLAN in terms of new vessels and tonnage. They still hold an edge in experience which is very important...and they are not sitting on their laurels. They do not have the economic strength however to keep up with the Chinese. However, between ourselves and the Japanese, there is still overwhelming numbers, tonnage and experience. But the Chinese are pushing to try and match that.

The Japanese have six AEGIS destroyers, four Kongo class and two Atago Class. They are going to build two more Atago class. They also have 13 Murasami class DDGs, five Takanami Class DDGs, and are have now launched all four of their Akizaki Class DDGs which are very powerful. All of those have been built since the late 1990s.

Their Diesel/Electric subs are among the best in the world, particularly their AIP capably Soryu class. However, they cannot keep up with the build pace of the Chinese. The JSMDF has about 22 good diesel Electric subs. The Chinese have about 34...and their build rate is outpacing the Japanese.

The Japanese have commissioned two new, large Hyuga class DDH carriers. They are large, 20,000 ton flat deck carriers that are ASW oriented and principally carry ASW helicopters, though they could carry Ospreys, and probably a small contingent of Joint Strike Fighters if the Japanese ever buy any of the Bravo variant (the STOVL variant).

They have also just finished a larger, 30,000 ton vessel which is also a carrier, the Izumo and are building a second of those. These too are put forward as helicopter ASW carriers, but could clearly carry even more JSFs if they so desired. Here's a picture of the new Izumo.


IZUMO CLASS CVH

So, the Japanese are continuing to modernize and build up, just at a slower pace.

The South Koreans are doing the same and are themselves very strong, as are the Australians. Right now, China's [problem is that they have to catch up with and surpass and then maintain a lead over all of these nations combined. A very difficult task.

Or they will have to try and take them on piece meal, one at a time. We are there to make sure they do not do that.

Some good reference links:

World-wide Aircraft Carriers

AEGIS and AEGIS-like vessels of the World

The US Navy in the 21st Century

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia

46 posted on 12/22/2013 5:02:30 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
I like the fact that some of our allies in the East (not so much Euroland anymore) are taking up the slack. This ship is 11,000 tons...

Sejong the Great of the South Korean Navy carries 128 missiles instead of the 96 that the Arleigh Burke and Atago Class carry. Making it one of the most heavily armed surface ships on Earth (the Russian KIROV battlecruisers carry 352 though)

47 posted on 12/22/2013 5:10:08 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Yes, that is the Se Jong Class...the KDX-III DDG the South Koreans have built. They have built three of them and plan to build three more.

This is the larger Arleigh Burke Flight IIA variant I believe we should base our Burke Flight III vessels on that will start replacing the Ticonderoga vessels around 2020 or later.

48 posted on 12/22/2013 5:28:37 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

y9ou da man


49 posted on 12/22/2013 6:07:35 PM PST by q_an_a (the more laws the less justice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

What number is 11,0000?


50 posted on 12/22/2013 7:14:04 PM PST by pacific_waters
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 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