China's new carrier

File: PLN CV-001A - 30.10.16 - 1.jpg (159KB, 1432x1080px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1432x1080px

>>31908999
photo of some days ago.

looks like they just completed the island

It will take longer to do the "fitting out" than it did to build the ship.

>>31908999
That and it's not a ground-up design. It's a modified Kuznetsov.

Also, the one place where China really lags behind the west is in metallurgy and composites. I expect the maintenance on that ship to be hellish.

>>31909094
Building a new ship from scratch, even if it is a Kutznesov-class hull, still is pretty good.

And regarding metallurgy, I dont think this applies any longer nowadays. In the early 2000s maybe.

As for Maintenance, it doesnt look like the Liaoning is a nightmare either. It spends little more than a month on maintenance after each deployment cycle. This is pretty fast.

>>31909030
It is a good sign of someone who has no idea what goes on in ship construction.

>>31908999
>>31909004
>TFW more interested in the shipbuilding that the ship itself

File: 1024495573[1].jpg (77KB, 705x375px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 705x375px

>>31909274

I thought that this was supposed to be based on the Project 23000E design that they purchased from Russia? 330 meters long displacing 90000 - 100000 tons, capable of supporting 80 aircraft, 90 max.

>>31908999
>poverty ramp
disregarded

File: PLN CV-002 mock-up at Wuhan - 5.9.16 - 1.jpg (242KB, 1440x1936px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1440x1936px

>>31909534
001A was always just planned to be a second Varyag with further improvements (and less cruiser-like features).

The 3rd carrier will be a 70-80k ton clean sheet design with catapults.

>>31908999
>>31909004
>all this in 14 month.

24/7 shifts fuck year.

Wonder how actual Chinese wartime mobilization would look like.Probably building destroyers and cruisers like Liberty ships.

>>31909534
It's a stupid design. Why have separate Cat and Ski-Jump launch systems. Why have both at all? Build cats or build ramps, both is silly.

>>31909595

Different roles? Anyway, taking babysteps and all that.

File: 120126l70umk05kx0u9zm6.jpg (209KB, 1500x1016px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1500x1016px

>>31909595
cat would require the Russians to make MiG29 versions with catapult hooks, which they have not. And carrier-capable PAK-FA is also only prospective.

Also a reason why China's 2nd carrier is another ramp one. The PLAN wants a 2nd carrier so bad and did not accept delays due to the ongoing testing of the J-15T catapult version.

>>31909595
>Why have both at all?

Yeah I mean what aircraft wants more lift eh

>>31909626
I'm not talking about China, it's good they're going for a new design. There's nothing good about the Shtorm.

>>31909637
The cats don't launch onto the ramp.

>>31909663
>I'm not talking about China, it's good they're going for a new design. There's nothing good about the Shtorm.

I mean, it could have been the same reason.

Catapults need dedicated catapult planes.

>>31909663
Yes they do.

File: 202454h581w42kxujvzj4b.jpg (2MB, 3000x2066px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x2066px

So, basically with two carriers, the PLAN could then constantly deploy one at the time?

>>31909692
Nope, you need at least three carriers to maintain a near 24/7 readiness status. One carrier is always undergoing maintenance, another one is going to be for training and finally the third carrier is for active duty.

>>31910009
Well, the Chinese are only doing training at the moment anyway.

So, it's basically two carriers taking turns at training.

File: b514ba1f4ba7bfc573ce536a0855f8c9.jpg (63KB, 1400x680px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1400x680px

>>31909534
When Chinese buy Varyag from Nikolaev shipyard, they most likely buy or steal all blueprints of soviet unfinished carriers.
Including blueprints of steam catapult.

File: PLAN by 2025 - Progess 2013 till 2016 bigger.jpg (723KB, 1920x843px) Image search: [Google]

723KB, 1920x843px

So...

Update on that chart?

>>31910063
China knows about Steam Catapult long before by buying the HMAS Sheffield.

>>31910020
Lets be realistic anon, its going to be another decade before the chinks are even remotely competent with carrier operations. As far as I'm concerned the first two carriers are strictly for developing their naval doctrine and training.

>>31910063
Didn't they steal steam catapult tech from us? I know they stole something from us related to carriers.

>>31908999
>They are damn fast.
Nah, that's not fast. The US built 20+ carriers in the four years that they were involved in WW2. Imagine a new carrier rolling out to sea every few months.

>>31910100
Doctrines and procedure.

They use the same color coding for the deck crew as the USN.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac18wj5GbNw

>>31910123
>WWII ship is equivalent to 2010's ship

Fuck off

>>31910075
Ulyanovsk steam catapult is different. It more like catapults from american supercarriers. It was created to launch heavy shipborne AWACS planes. And it was produced and tested. Chinese just need to copy it.

>>31910123
>Country with a massive mobilised industry built more of a much simpler ship

And?

>>31910152
>missing the point

>>31910127
Tbh a lot of that is in the public domain. There are tons of shows from when the history channel was good aboutcarrier ops

>>31910174
If you're making a point, it's a really irrelevant one

>>31910127
Interesting, they just copy USN procedures. Like color coding and gestures.
I saw fresh Kuznetsov air operations video, and Russian have entirely different procedures were deck crew almost not involved.

>>31910020
Not how it works. Look at Bongolia's nuclear deterrent; four subs with only one at sea at any given time. Admittedly, reactors complicate things, but the principle is the same. Two undergoing maintenance, one for training, one deployed.

>>31910187
Because Kuznetsov have missile hatches right in the flight deck. Missile exhaust will just blow crew overboard.

>>31910009
>Nope, you need at least three carriers to maintain a near 24/7 readiness status. One carrier is always undergoing maintenance, another one is going to be for training and finally the third carrier is for active duty.

Load of shit. You are taking the 1/3 rule of thumb too seriously, it's a rule of thumb for a reason. You can maintain 24/7 readiness with only two.

>>31910127
Damn, that mess hall looks nice. I am honestly impressed they are taking to this so well.

I guess it was to be expected given their experience making and running super tankers. They are well on their way to being a major regional superpower.

>>31910549
>You can maintain 24/7 readiness with only two.

You can, but something tells me you need a large body of competently trained and experienced personnel as well a well refined and well practiced naval doctrine to maintain 24/7 readiness with two carriers, two criteria the Chinks clearly lack.

>>31910628
Looks like the ward room on a Nimitz.

>>31910936

Right, but that wasn't my point and neither was it yours.

>>31910127
How do I tell the difference between J-11s and license produced SU-27s and their derivatives? Is there even a difference?

File: 234525123451.jpg (287KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 2048x1365px

>>31910989
J-11A usually fly with R-77, while Su-27SK do not.

Other than that, the first series J-11 and Su-27SK are indistinguishable.

>>31911005
I've wondered about that for a long time. Why is that?

I don't know much about actual proven missile hit probability, but surely a F&F missile is preferable on today's battlefield than a semi-active one, even if the R-27 series has slightly longer range. Obviously the IR R-27 is an exception because it's a unique missile but surely it's the RADAR one that Russia uses.

is it an issue of modernization that hasn't happened yet, or is it a conscious choice to prefer the R-27?

>>31911029
The Su-27SK was basically the original Su-27S, only with downgraded ECM systems. But radars were the same. Russians during 90s were cash strapped as shit and sold the Su-27 to China with half the price being bartered with consumer goods. The Su-27S and hence the SK had no capability of fring R-77.

>>31910936
How much training do you need? Can't you conduct drills and such while out to sea?

>>31911198

Well yeah, but when that carrier is conducting training missions, it's no longer considered to be "mission ready" until the training mission has concluded.

>>31911239
So if they change what they consider mission ready, they could conduct general quarters drills and propulsion plant causality drills while fucking around in the south china sea.

>>31911284

If you simply build a larger number of carriers to enable carriers to be cycled around between upgrades, training missions, and "mission ready" status, you don't need to make compromises like that.

>>31908999
dude what the fuck is up with their island. it looks like a fucking pagoda

>>31910136
yeah, an insult to the WWII ship isn't it

>>31908999
>A fucking ramp
Did they literally just clone the fucking Kuznetsov?

Fail.

>>31910549
Not if you're ChinkChink Chinamen you can't.

File: 091348vtzlznqrkim7bfzu.png (765KB, 844x413px) Image search: [Google]

765KB, 844x413px

>>31911526
Looks big and fat than before.

Pagoda look is because it is slimmer now and the APARs sitting higher.

>>31908999
>a fucking ramp

>>31910549
>You can maintain 24/7 readiness with only two.

Sure, as long as you're willing to sacrifice either training or maintenance. China isn't in a position where they can do either.

Once they get a pool of trained and competent personnel, they'll know where they can stretch training schedules.

Likewise with maintenance. Once they have a substantial body of documented maintenance evolutions, they'll know exactly which preventative and predictive maintenance cycles can be deferred to the next dockside availability.

They also need to develop some highly capable naval engineering support and augmentation teams.

Naval aviation is a lot more complex than putting hulls in the water and slapping airframes on top.

>>31911284
That can be, and usually is, done during periods of condition 4 steaming. It's an effective way of honing existing skills. It's a terrible way to impart those skills in the first place.

>>31908999
> literally posting the same set of threads every day

Fuck off.

>>31910064
I can already tell that the 054A part is wrong because there are new orders for it meaning that there will be 36 in total before the so called 054B.

>>31914344
The two carriers are smaller and more simple than the American supercarriers, the time they are stuck in port is reduced.

And the UK will do pretty much the same with their two new carriers.

Holy shit, didn't they launch their first carrier a few years ago? I know they bought it from Russia, but they already have another one?

Love how openly they show off the carrier building.

>>31915000
China doesn't have the 20-50+ years of naval tradition to operate a carrier even at britbong levels of competence, this is very new to them and understandably they're going to take itty bitty babby steps.

>>31915871
So does the UK.
Their last carriers were small vessels.

And even the French are capable of pulling long operation times out of their only nuclear powered carrier all the time.

>>31915871
Having three carriers commissioned in 10 years is anything but baby steps.

>>31909673
No they don't that would literally rip the plane apart. The planes that are launched do so not facing the ramp.

>>31915961
Both of those countries have been operating carriers longer than the PRC has existed.

>>31915980
They got the manufacturing capabilities and the money to finance their construction and its fucking China the first three carriers might all be sub-par faulty garbage. But that's okay in order to be good something you need to start from somewhere.

CURVED
U
R
V
E
D

>>31916015
I like how all your posts are just "lol, China" in different forms.

>>31916153
I bet two years ago he was all about that China will never be capable of building own carriers.

It's funny how such people moving their goalposts over the years.

>>31910177
It's how China conducts it's espionage... The majority of the stuff that they steal are all open source information...

>>31916251
And yet all most of the other countries can't even do a fraction of what China does. They must be utter shit then.

>>31916251
then it's not stealing or espionage, is it?

File: 1024px-Workers_with_hand_tools_building_Burma_Road2.jpg (209KB, 1024x839px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1024x839px

>>31909570
>Wonder how actual Chinese wartime mobilization would look like

See those factory-cities where dozens of millions of chinese are making small consumer-grade goods ?
Imagine that being shut down... because all that workforce is suddenly busy converting them into ammunition plants.

When the coastline cities and their shipyards are bombed into oblivion, the chinaman will build shipyards inland while his brothers will make canals, roads and anything necessary to carry the new ships from the Himalaya to the Yellow River.

These are the people who built a 1000 km mountain road in 3 months using hand tools while the best british engineers said it would take 3 years with modern equipment.

>>31915961
>Their last carriers were small vessels.

With biplanes.

>>31916513
The best british engineers also care about working conditions and labour rights. Oh, and product quality too.

>>31916747
good meme but the last carrier was HMS Invincible, decomissioned in 2014. She flew Harriers and Sea Kings

>>31916513
>Sorry Chang, but you're not working for Multi-National Inc™ making $2 / week anymore, you're working for the PLA and you'll do it for free 16 hours a day or we'll send you to the gulags in Qinghai

Yeah, surely the starving peasants would be happy to comply

File: ChinaDozer01.1.jpg (116KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 800x600px

>>31917763
China will grow larger

File: PLN Type 055 DDG no. 2 - 6.11.16.jpg (358KB, 1234x472px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1234x472px

Module for No 2 of the Type 055 cruiser spotted.

The first one isnt even launched.

>>31917763
You know the PLA got their own factories already and that jobs there are considered well-payed by your average chinaman worker, right ?

If China is on total war, they could do as you say.
They could do it like they did 60 years ago when Japan tried to conquer them.
They could do it that more easily since, contrary to 60 years ago, the country isn't in the middle of a civil war.
And the civilians are largely unarmed.
And the country has become the leader in industrial output.
And they don't lack impoverished peasants to step in place of whatever factory workers would rebel because muh wages.

But they wouldn't need to do it :
They have a foreign exchange reserve worth 3.000 billions $USD.

Their imports are slightly below 2000 billions $USD a year so they could run for 1,5 year just on that, without any exports.
If they do manage to export some stuff, that could last longer.

But beside the matter of their capacity to pay for imports, they could also just fit the bill for the whole country and this for 3 months.
That's right : they could keep paying wages for the whole population for a whole 3 months, without said population having to work for it.

Now, we know it would be a hellish economical scenario, what with the world's factory closing because of a war.

But I'm giving you perspective here : if a war starts, China can pay a 3000 billions bill in foreign currency and gold... and the population wouldn't even feel it.

To give you further perspective, back in WW2, the US government had to BORROW an amount equivalent to 2000 billions in today's dollar.
China could afford to fill 1,5 time this without even borrowing money.

>>31918004
Why do they censor that stuff if they build the ships so openly that everyone who is interested in that stuff has several times higher res images of that thing?

File: 222840zbbn8zb8ftt75i9w.jpg (50KB, 690x459px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 690x459px

>>31918148
Because no shipspotter likes to be invited to tea.

>>31908999
>>31909004
Damn these cranes are huge

File: 1331477822_89228.jpg (66KB, 640x854px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 640x854px

>>31916513
Wuhan, a central Chinese city, already builds most of China's submarines.

They are getting transported via river and canals like this.

>>31908999
>long does a fitting out period usually take?

All the parts are in Hanjin containers somewhere.

File: CwO2si-VIAAP-sL.jpg (201KB, 1316x960px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1316x960px

Once you have a good grasp at modular construction and a large enough yard, rapid construction of ships shouldnt be too hard, technology wise. Only politics will hold the rate back.

File: carrier.jpg (574KB, 2000x1247px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 2000x1247px

>>31909004
>a ramp
hah

>>31908999
They are knocking out a Type 056 corvette every 10 days.

>>31918374
Politics... and manpower.

It's good to build ships.
But it's less good if they are just left rusting in port because you lack proper crews to operate and maintain them.

Hence why nobody build hundreds of military ships in a few months.

Just like how 3rd world armies have this strange fascination with jumping through flaming hoops...they too have a fascination with ramps.

NOW if we can get a flaming hoop at the end of the ramp for the pilot to fly through...we'd have the most 3rd world military ever.

File: 30276556841_73f620aaa7_o.jpg (339KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 1500x1000px

>>31918395
Well, at the moment, the PLAN isnt actually "expanding" in a sense that they grow larger. For every new ship built and commissioned, an old Luda or Jianghu class ship is getting decommissioned, with the crew transfered and retrained.

New training ships like pic related are also being built and quickly commissioned to get the manpower they need.

I predict that China will only get some manpower bottlenecks once they have two carriers in operation - because for now, the Liaoning usually goes out with a "cruise line ship"-lookalike housing a second Liaoning-crew who are regularily switched out so that everyone gets their share of experience and training, while the other complete crew does R&R and classes on a hotel-ship.

File: 2013564nkm21mmzrs2wecm.jpg (147KB, 1600x833px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1600x833px

>>31918434
"Hotel 88" related

>>31916153
>>31916159
>throwing two thousand brand new sailors onto a nuclear powered hundred thousand ton war machine that launches planes where a single mistake by a single personnel at any given time will kill dozens of people is a simple task that takes two weeks to figure out 100%

launching a plane from a 300 ft runway in the ocean is just a mite more complex than the training you got at mcdonalds for their deep fryer

File: 201802gfy08508f05yw0lk.jpg (307KB, 2048x1552px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 2048x1552px

>>31918434
>>31918449

And China's getting their first sail-training ship soon as well.

>>31915871
These chinks put orbital stations around the earth, i'm sure they can operate a carrier.

>>31909030
"No"

>>31909094
>China lags behind in metallurgy
That's a 2005 meme

File: 231029cizbgp3c67guu5zg.jpg (118KB, 2000x889px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 2000x889px

>>31918004
>two, maybe three cruisers with 128 huge ultra long range SAM by 2018/20

>>31910123
>1940's escort carriers
>2016 supercarriers

>>31913039
There are some important changes to the design.

For one, they removed the missile compartments completely.

>>31915150
They bought a carrier hull from Ukraine in 2000.

Rebuilt it 2005-2011.

Started building this carrier in late 2014-early 2015.

>>31918606
This.

>>31915306
They don't.

Also not like it's anything not already known.

>>31918148
Because in China shitposting government secrets on image boards could end you up in jail. Even more so than in the USA.

>>31918606
>Implying China has built a supercarrier

>>31910009
While they have a planned newer domestic designed class of carriers, none have been laid down yet - however they have a new class of domestic designed Amphibious Assault Ships, with at least one of them already laid down and being built.
The question is will they try to make a jet for those amphibious assault ships

File: my_dream_wedding.jpg (37KB, 600x430px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 600x430px

>>31908999
Its not just fitting. It takes literally decades to learn how to use a carrier properly. Until then, it is a missile magnet.

Why didn't the Chinese buy the smoke stealth systems and the red firetrucks for Liaoning?

>>31918434
Does China have a naval reserve?

As for the old Luda's/Jianghu's/etc are they being transferred to the Chinese Coastguard, sitting in a mothball/.reserve or will some of them be sold to foreign nations?

>>31910123
WW2 carriers are analagous to Amphibious Assault Ships

File: buccaneers refueling buccaneers.jpg (71KB, 1023x575px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1023x575px

>>31915961

but unlike the PLAN the RN operated carriers continually from ww2 to 2014

they operated CATOBAR carriers for 40 years before operating "through-deck cruisers" for 30 years so they have a much better knowledge base than the chinks

when the CATOBAR HMS Ark Royal got killed by thatcher in 1979 it had 1 fighter squadron of Phantoms and 1 attack squadron of Buccaneers (which could also use their huge bomb bay to fit a gaint extra fuel tank for tanking and buddy fueling like an A-6) and Fixed Wing AEW

>not even the new QEs have tankers and fixed wing AEW
>Ark Royal could have retaken the falklands and sunk the argie carrier all without losing any frigates or destroyers if the early thatcher government hadn't scrapped her

th-thanks maggie

File: 1333896951_83869.jpg (434KB, 1778x1000px) Image search: [Google]

434KB, 1778x1000px

>>31918858
Ludas are getting decommissioned, aside of two odd ones that have been modernized with C803s and HQ-7 SAM, some of the Jianghus are getting transfered to CCG.

Foreign countries nowadays chose new productions over old shit. IIRC only Thailand bought couple of old Jianghus.

>>31918810
Lucky for them the US Navy has been training Chinky-Chan officers for decades.

>>31918704
>what is 65,000 tonnes

I'll grant you the argument though.

>>31918870
To modern Amphibious Assault carriers? "No"

>>31918562
Of course they can. That they are actually capable of doing it is demonstrated by the fact that they are taking the time to do it properly. Not everyone who comments on how long it will take China to have a proper carrier fleet is an anti-chink shitposter you know.

>>31918384
>overcompensating with 11 carriers

I am actually very jealous of China though I am American patriot myself. The Chinese have practically perfected large scale manufacturing while we're dragged down by waste.

>>31918606
Essex are small by modern standards, but were by no means an escort carrier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex-class_aircraft_carrier#Ships_in_class

File: 34780_366403_793695.jpg (166KB, 950x633px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 950x633px

>>31916513
>>31909570


China's basically Isengard in terms of production and industries:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwinMu7-ZrI

The massive night launches of Chinese warships really reminds me of this.

>>31910123
>Nah, that's not fast. The US built 20+ carriers in the four years that they were involved in WW2. Imagine a new carrier rolling out to sea every few months.

Imagine a thousand new standard missiles rolling out to sea every few months.

Because at that rate, they're going to be shit carriers, flying shit planes, with shit aircrews.

As long as the Burkes can stay supplied with SAMs, all those carrier rush jobs won't mean shit.

>>31918394
>Canada takes 20+ years to design and build 12 heavy Frigates / light Destroyers to replace the Halifax and Tribal class ships

>China builds an entire world class navy in under 20 years

Fuck..

>>31923327
Orcs werent unionized.

Chinese shipyard workers arent either.

Hmmm....

>>31918704
It roughly is..

It's class is between the Nimitz and Queen Elizabeth.. both being "Super carriers".
The Soviet designation is Heavy Aircraft Carrying Missile Cruiser however.. so meh.

File: arleighs-burke.jpg (1MB, 2887x1844px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2887x1844px

>>31923474
related

>>31918701
No.... the chinese are not shy about putting a bullet in your neck and harvesting your corpse of organs, blood, and tissue for the health of Party loyalists.

>>31908999
How much gutter oil per hour will it use?

>>31923832
actually good question.

gutter oil makes a great basis for recycling into fuel for gas turbines.

>>31923533
You mean they don't have racketeering that drives up the cost of a ship by 50%?

>>31910549
You've never met a naval crew have you?

File: pepe-btfo.png (314KB, 3316x1896px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 3316x1896px

Anything with a cuckramp is trash.

ramps are like the oldest tool known to mankind. Why wouldn't you take advantage of one is the question.

>>31918083
>60 years ago when Japan tried to conquer them
*did conquer them

>>31924380
Oh good containershipanon is back.

>>31915000
>The two carriers are smaller and more simple than the American supercarriers, the time they are stuck in port is reduced.

Yes and no. This is uncharted territory for the PLAN. Anticipate that either carrier will spend 50% of the first decade in port. The reason being, China has to learn what maintenance needs doing. Sure, they'll do the maintenance that they think needs done but there will always be a never-ending list of new machinery or system casualties that crop up during every underway period.

Those casualties need to be documented, analyzed, and integrated into the PM schedule that is under development for that type class. It's a massive undertaking, that is never really finished. Just when they think they have a handle on it, it's time for a FRAM or SLEP refit.

Smaller and simpler doesn't always equate to less prone to breakage.

>>31923547
>It roughly is..

Type 001's are significantly smaller than a QE, let alone a Nimitz or Ford, in both tonnage and aircraft carried.

>>31916411
It's a matter of need and willingness to invest the resources. Some countries that could benefit from having carriers aren't willing to commit the resources.

China sees it as a matter of being able to control the SCS and other nearby ocean expanses. They're investing the resources now, which means that they'll be a force to be reckoned with in about 25 years. Not because of numbers, but because of experience. And they'll still be at a disadvantage outside of their home waters.

>>31924732
No idea who your talking about, but I'm not the only one who thinks unions do much more harm than good for the country

Reminder the USN is putting out far more tonnage per year than the PLAN

Reminder that the 001, for its tonnage, has terrible aircraft capacity and thus is a complete mistake and a waste of time, material, manpower, and crew.

>>31910187
Well, perhaps its because the US have like 80 years of experience in carrier warfare?!

Lets face it: nobody comes even close to operating carriers on such a base as the US Navy. And the chinks have learned (probably sooner than the west did) that its not necessary to reinvent the wheel every time you start something new.

>>31918083
sure thing Zhang.

>意味了

>>31923533
Orcs got rekt by undead and scattered when the ring was destroyed.

>>31924664
?

>>31924793
>Anticipate that either carrier will spend 50% of the first decade in port.

Chinkaoning has spent most of its time at sea.

>>31924807
43,000-tonnes, light[1][2]
53,000 – 55,200-tonnes, standard[1][2][3]
58,600 – 67,500-tonnes, max[1][2]

Depends on how much they put on it.

65,000+ tonnes is considered super arrier size.

>>31908999

Not the same ship as the varyag.

>>31927173
>Reminder the USN is putting out far more tonnage per year than the PLAN
Questionable actually.
Also, the USN is retiring way more.

>Reminder that the 001, for its tonnage, has terrible aircraft capacity and thus is a complete mistake and a waste of time, material, manpower, and crew.
Actually it is quite standard in comparison to its peers in UK, Brazil, France, Spain, Italy, Russia, and India.
In plane weight/carrier tonnage the Liaoning is very average. Of course a carrier using tiny short range low armanment planes can carry more aircraft.

File: 233256xeb343nw92z2b3i2.jpg (300KB, 2048x1378px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 2048x1378px

http://eng.mod.gov.cn/TopNews/2016-11/04/content_4758472.htm

File: 233312k1p1wvq5siiqwall.jpg (316KB, 2048x1378px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 2048x1378px

>>31929225

>>31909274
>>31909094
here in germany the steel companys want that the gouverment taxes chinese steel
while i read 中国钢铁 on the railroad rails

>>31928292
>>31928292
By that metric half of chinas navy is irrelevent due to being gunboats and "sub chasers"

>>31929991
You still spread that meme. Where are those gunboats and subchasers in the PLAN?

point them out please.

>>31928225
Which will change significantly when the engineering casualties start piling up. This is a learning process that happens with any new type class, regardless of flag.

>>31910075
>by buying the HMAS Sheffield.
Can't even get the name right.

File: Phantom f4k.jpg (51KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 800x534px

>>31916747
>With biplanes.
Never heard the phantom called that before.

>>31909004
>Ramp

GAY! Use a steam/Mag catapult like a real navy.

>>31909534
R A M P
A
M
P

>>31920753
>what are you over compensating for America?
>weak allies.

>>31923491
>world class
Not quite.

>>31932955
what is wrong with having a ramp?