New satellite imagery has shown that China may have started construction on a new aircraft carrier. This would be their second one, in addition to refurbished Soviet-era flattop they finished sea trials with last year. When the construction is finished, it’ll be China’s first carrier made in their country. But images leaked from The National Interest shows that it doesn’t look very much like a carrier at all, which is to be expected, considering that China doesn’t have the experience or skill to make anything like modern U.S. carriers. Perhaps this is why they’re so interested in hacking American intelligence.
Go to the next page to read more about the carrier.
It is a old Russian rebuild
The Love Boar
Considering the tech we have on board, the development of Gen V Naval Aircraft and all that. Good luck. Also it is said DC is so good on these big aircraft carriers, it would take a nuke to sink it. And even then good luck. Bikini atoll showed those don’t work well on water. And really those “close in islands” are very far apart reason why we needed the B29 back in the last war. Carriers thrive there and the capability of killing one is nill. Exspetially with all the escorts it has. Even subs don’t stand a chance.
Air blast no but when they went off under it was very different there is a reason carriers run away
A jump set ramp. Perfect for Harrier style aircraft.
They all sink the same! This one a little faster due to Chinese made parts.
There’s an old saying, the more you put into the plumbing the easier it is to stop up the drain. Just because something may be cheaply built doesn’t mean it can’t get the job done. It wasn’t that long ago that a gentleman landed an ultra lite on the lawn of the Whitehouse , never underestimate your opponent or enemy.
Another example of Truth and Actions ignorance- a carrier that size would be similar in size to a ski-jump V/STOL carrier like the Indian Navy or British Navy have operated, or a WWII Essex-class fleet carrier, some of which were used through the end of the Vietnam war. Nothing in the cited article implies- as TnA tries to, that the hull is anything but a carrier. Diesel engines? Most of the carriers in use world wide are powered by steam plants fueled by Diesel or Bunker fuel. Only the U.S. extensively uses nuclear carriers, and our amphibious assault carriers (like the Iwo Jima) are non-nuclear. China may not be building a U.S.-style super carrier, but a smaller carrier is entirely consistent with what is described.
Parker Fields- in WWII, we were needing the range of the B-29 since our targets were in Japan and bases in Southern China or the central Pacific. Remember, however, that some of the 1941 raids on US bases in the Phillipines were launched from China, and modern strike aircraft with anti-ship missiles have a longer range than Bettys. Our closest bases are still in Japan or the CentPac (Guam/Saipan) which is much farther away. Light carriers can be quite effective in picketing the South China Sea, which is the PLAN’s announced goal, particularly with the U.S. Navy cut to 10 CVBGs coupled with significant cuts in the deep water frigate force to fund the shallow water LCS hulls. A CVBG no longer packs a Cold War punch- smaller air groups, fewer escorts (1 cruiser and one destroyer, as opposed to 5-7, which is a big loss in screening against missile or sub Attacks, etc).
Stealth is going to be obsolete by 2030. Detection capabilities are catching up- like switching to different radar wavelengths than those the scattering technologies were built to fool.
There are options for defending against ballistic ASMs and high velocity cruise missiles. A Tico or Spruance with the SM-1ER can handle an incoming ICBM warhead much less a theater missile. We already have a SAM system being deployed on the Spruance and Ticonderoga class ships that can defend against a DF-21 or the new Russian ASM. Other options are still available for development- like directional EMP to fry guidance systems, dun systems (think a WWII heavy cruiser with 8″guns firing flechette rounds for kinetic kills in a cloud of high velocity projectiles, laser weapons -admittedly subject to weather degradation, etc). Don’t write off the surface fleet and carriers yet.
BTW, the Iowa class battleships were retired due to operating costs, not performance. As far as survivability, one hit a mine in the first Gulf War and continued the battle, with the only real impact being slower sailing speed.