Jump to content


Photo

Second Chinese Carrier


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#1 Inhapi

Inhapi

    Wielder of the Unicorn Hat

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 608 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 0603 AM

Any news about the second Chinese aircraft carrier ? last i heard is that it moved almost complted from its building berth in april.

 

Further: any news on what the Chinese plan to do after that carrier wise ? 


  • 0

#2 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 0652 AM

The second carrier is currently doing sea trials. AFAIK, only a helicopter has landed on it so far. So it still has a lot of trials to do until it becomes fully operational with a full load of fighter aircraft.

 

The 3rd carrier is believed to be under an early stage of construction, the stage in which hull modules are being created. At some point, the modules will appear, likely at Jiangnan shipyard, and the assemble of the ship hull would then begin. There have been reports that the 3rd carrier started construction in 2015, so hull assembly at the dry dock might begin within a year. The third carrier is supposed to not feature a ski jump but instead use catapults, either steam or EMALs. It won't be nuclear powered. A 4th carrier has been stated to be planned, likely to be similar to the third. In the 2025-2030 year period, assuming the current trajectory, they will probably have 4 carriers. As for long term, I recall statements saying they will go up to 5 or 6 carriers in the end, with the last ones being nuclear powered.

 

As far as aircraft for the carriers go, there's been talk about a competition for either a carrier version of the J-20 or of the J-31 (or FC-31), but there has been no indications of actual development about that. There have been some pictures of a J-15D in yellow which is the normal color for aircraft in development. The J-15D is supposed to be an electronic warfare version of the J-15, something like the EA-18G. As for AEW aircraft, they built a test-bed aircraft about a decade ago. And they often have mock versions of an AEW aircraft on top of the mock carrier land building. So I would have to imagine that they have such an aircraft planned or under development that would probably start to come to the surface by the time the third carrier approaches sea trials.


Edited by JasonJ, 05 September 2018 - 0656 AM.

  • 0

#3 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,602 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 0815 AM

The J-20 is completely unsuitable for carrier use. The J-30 would work if it's low speed handling characteristics are sufficient. It might need wider wings a la F-35C.

In any case the lack of AEW is their major short coming, but first they have to have a CV with cats for that to be a surmountable problem.
  • 0

#4 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,762 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 1144 AM

The cover story on Jane's Defense Weekly (23 May 2018) is probably old news, but relates the following:

 

  • Initial sea trials [sailed on 13 May] were likely for propulsion, ship handling and ship safety systems; crew training and familiarization.
  • Chinese have not named the ship but refered to it as the Type 001A during construction.
  • The ship was floated out of dry dock only 54 weeks earlier, so the sea trials are impressive by that alone [The British QE dates ere July 2014-June 2017 by comparison].
  • Slated to operate J-15 in a STO mode using the ramp, with arrested recovery.
  • Most differences from previous CV Liaoning are phased arrar radar Type 346 same as latest PLAN destroyers. Island is one story higher and slightly shorter than the first CV.

  • 0

#5 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 06 September 2018 - 0640 AM

These images came up recently for what their worth.

oneortwo1.jpg

 

oneortwo2.jpg

 

oneortwo3.jpg

https://www.weibo.co...nd1536233975376


  • 0

#6 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,602 posts

Posted 06 September 2018 - 0940 AM

I feel like the J-20 would absolutely require catapults for launch, at least with a full fuel and internal war load, and I would have thought that wing configuration would not have great low speed handling characteristics. Where do those images come from? Someplace reputable or just fanboi stuff?


  • 0

#7 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 06 September 2018 - 1002 AM

Probably fanboi stuff.

But competition between J-20 and J-31 for carrier version seems real. Might try to find something more direct about that.
  • 0

#8 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,442 posts

Posted 06 September 2018 - 1052 AM

The carrier SINKEX's may come in handy... nice to know those stately ladies might not have died in vain.
Nice to know that we have 'way more experience sinking carriers than they do.

Edited by shep854, 06 September 2018 - 1055 AM.

  • 0

#9 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 07 September 2018 - 0928 AM

A lengthy post that argues that the J-20 is more suitable then the FC-31. Some main points; still smaller than J-15, range of J-20 needed to intercept against long range platforms thus more suitable than J-31, some techie physics stuff than claim the design is still suitable enough for carrier ops, and so on. It argues that FC-31 would be inferior to F-35 so better to go with J-20 for the carrier aircraft design. Subject to google translate of course. Just putting it up.

Spoiler
https://www.zhihu.co...estion/30543311

x1.jpg

 

x2.jpg

 

x3.jpg


  • 0

#10 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,602 posts

Posted 07 September 2018 - 1152 AM

I can see the long range aspect, and I certainly agree J-20 is superior. As for size, it doesn't seem like it is any shorter, just more narrow, and that is with the wings of the J-15 extended. Whether it truly stored in a smaller footprint depends on where the fold would be.

I still dono't see that canard narrow wing design having good slow speed handling characteristics. I think they'd have to make the wing as large as J-15 to make it manageable. And I'm willing to be the T:W ratio of the J-15 is better, and it already is limited to doing a full run out from the furthest back launch point in order to have a full fuel load. J20 will make sense only if the third carrier is indeed using cats.
  • 0

#11 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 03 January 2019 - 0942 AM

FWIW, its globaltimes so may need a pinch of salt, although may still serve to ready perception of something to actual come out eventually otherwise loss of face.

China's future aircraft carriers will see stealth warplanes on their decks, likely the medium-sized fighter jet FC-31, said Chinese military experts as the People's Liberation Army (PLA) is procuring stealth parts for China's aircraft carrier-based fighter jet manufacturer.

Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute is in need of an integral unit for photoelectric target acquisition that is stealth capable, according to a notice the PLA weapon and equipment procurement website weain.mil.cn released on Thursday.

The notice also said that the unit must be able to operate against naval targets and capable of monitoring humidity.

Judging from the stated requirements and previous rumors, Chinese military observers said that the parts mentioned in the procurement are very likely to be used on China's new aircraft carrier-based stealth fighter jets although the notice did not specify how the parts will be used.

Having already designed China's current aircraft carrier-borne fighter jet J-15, Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute is developing a new carrier-based warplane based on the FC-31, a Chinese military insider, who asked not to be named, told the Global Times.

The FC-31 is a fourth generation medium-sized stealth fighter jet originally intended for export. Chinese military experts said that the PLA procurement notice suggests the FC-31 is no longer export-oriented, and is destined for domestic military service.

The FC-31 made its public debut flight at Airshow China 2014 in Zhuhai, South China's Guangdong Province, but went relatively quiet after that.

Multiple changes and upgrades are being made to the FC-31 allowing it to be used on an aircraft carrier, the insider said.

China's third aircraft carrier, which was confirmed to be under construction by the Xinhua News Agency in November and is widely expected to be equipped with an electromagnetic catapult, will use the stealth fighter jet, predicted Wang Yunfei, a naval expert and retired PLA Navy officer.

The single-seat, twin-engine fighter jet will greatly expand Chinese aircraft carrier battle groups' capabilities just as China's most advanced stealth fighter jet the J-20 did for the PLA Air Force, the anonymous insider said.

"Only a fourth generation fighter jet can stand up against another fourth generation fighter in an engagement without being at a significant disadvantage," he said.

The US-made fourth generation fighter jet F-35B and F-35C are capable of operating on aircraft carriers, and Japan is planning to upgrade its Izumo-class helicopter destroyers into aircraft carriers, equipping them with imported F-35Bs.

http://www.globaltim...t/1134186.shtml


  • 0

#12 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,602 posts

Posted 03 January 2019 - 1601 PM

It is a natural solution, if it can be made to work. I don't think it has a high performance with its existing engines and making it CTOL is going to cost a lot of additional weight.


  • 0

#13 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,700 posts

Posted 03 January 2019 - 1615 PM

Any news about the second Chinese aircraft carrier ? last i heard is that it moved almost complted from its building berth in april.

 

Further: any news on what the Chinese plan to do after that carrier wise ? 

Liberate Taiwan.


  • 0

#14 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 03 January 2019 - 2211 PM

Liberate is a generous word :)

 

There was a video at not long ago China airshow with the concept of an AEW aircraft.

cvbgvscvbg3.jpg

 

cvbgvscvbg2.jpg

 

cvbgvscvbg1.jpg

 


  • 0

#15 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,030 posts

Posted 04 January 2019 - 0204 AM

China and Chinese will likely use the second carrier to increase the quality and quantity of their training in fixed-wing carrier operations, unfortunately.

 

Allowing them to have caught up, and to have potentially exceeded, Japanese carrier operations expertise is almost unforgivable in various ways.


  • 0

#16 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,602 posts

Posted 04 January 2019 - 0926 AM

They clearly have exceeded the Japanese in that they operate a carrier and Japan doesn't. If the 3rd carrier is in fact a CATOBAR type, which every open source indicates it will be, the Japanese will be far behind in terms of experience, numbers, and engineering. I don't doubt that they have the tech and skill to make it happen but there seems to be little will to move quickly. That said, I'm not sure it would be a particularly good use of resources anyway. I think greatly expanding Japan's tanker fleet and using conformal fuel tanks on any fighter that can take them would be a quicker, more cost effective way to extend Japan's land based air over most of the relevant region. Chinese carriers are largely going to be expensive targets with not a lot of capability until they perfect catapult operations and embark a fixed wing AEW aircraft.


  • 0

#17 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 04 January 2019 - 2255 PM

I think the two Izumo-class to-be light carriers is enough of a counter to the two ski jump carriers. A number of Chinese sources of sorts say an ultimate goal of 5 or 6 carriers. If China stops at 3, then Japan won't need a larger carrier of their own. If China stops at 4, then its sort of a toss up as to whether or not Japan should get its own larger carrier. A single carrier of course would see some time of not being available as it goes into maintenance or upgrade phases. But having one does mean Japan possessing the technicality and the crew skills for carrier operations so should it be necessary to expand to two or more carriers, Japan would be able to do so. If China makes a 5th, then I think Japan will want to have 2 full-sized carriers.

 

Or in other words, if China are just a little above the Japanese in carrier ops, then reliance on the US as an ally to make up and then push for absolute combined total superiority is no problem. But if China is pushing to be quite superior to Japan, then reliance on the US would be too much, and to some extent, the US itself would be hard pressed to maintain deterrence of China at the same time as other regions. So Japan should scale up in that case.

 

One thing though is that some military thinkers here seem a little more interested in an Amphibious Assault Ship rather than a full size fleet carrier, which may make more sense. Something of the size of the America-class. Idea would is for the high multi functionality. Strategic speaking it would also enable greater response capability in contingents like Taiwan or DPRK. In some what, the US has less political will for sending boots on the ground than showing force and utilizing 3 fleet carrier strike groups. So should a situation arise that ground boots be needed for Taiwan or DPRK, necessary US boot numbers could be reduced in exchange for Japanese boots. Although on mention of DPRK, the funny thing is that just the mere utterance of Japanese boots going into DPRK should motivate the ROK to fill necessary numbers with their own ground forces instead.

 

In any case, as of the new 5 year midterm procurement plan (2019-2023), just the two Izumo DDHs are to be converted into the light carriers. The following 5 year mid-term plan might have the big ticket item or either amphibious assault ship or larger fleet carrier. Sort of makes sense to take the time in doing the two Izumo DDHs first as the handling of F-35Bs on them is naturally a transitional point to catch up in carrier ops.

 

About aerial refueling, Japan has the current 4 KC-767Js and 2 C-130Hs received funding to be converted into KC-130Hs in recent years in accordance to the 2014-2018 mid-term defense plan. In that mid-term defense plan, 3 KC-46s were planned for procurement but it seems like only 2 out of 3 got the funding within the annual defense budgets.

 

So as of now, its 6 larger tankers and 2 small tankers.

 

In the new midterm defense plan (2019-2023), 4 KC-46s are planned for procurement, although there isn't one in the 2019 annual budget. Although the 2019 defense budget has expensive items such as the two Aegis Ashore sites (about 1.61 billion USD). So 1 KC-46 for each of the remaining 4 years of the mid-term plan doesn't seem unlikely.

 

So after 2023 procurement items enter service by 2025ish, Japan should have 10 large aerial tankers.


  • 0

#18 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,030 posts

Posted 06 January 2019 - 2237 PM

They clearly have exceeded the Japanese in that they operate a carrier and Japan doesn't. If the 3rd carrier is in fact a CATOBAR type, which every open source indicates it will be, the Japanese will be far behind in terms of experience, numbers, and engineering. I don't doubt that they have the tech and skill to make it happen but there seems to be little will to move quickly.

 

The word for this is complacency, and does not bode well for the future of Japanese dependency on the United States for its security.


  • 0

#19 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 06 January 2019 - 2309 PM

They clearly have exceeded the Japanese in that they operate a carrier and Japan doesn't. If the 3rd carrier is in fact a CATOBAR type, which every open source indicates it will be, the Japanese will be far behind in terms of experience, numbers, and engineering. I don't doubt that they have the tech and skill to make it happen but there seems to be little will to move quickly.
 
The word for this is complacency, and does not bode well for the future of Japanese dependency on the United States for its security.


Is that really the case or is this a case of fishing for positive rebuttals? I've had my fill for the current session of having to make arguments about geopolitics/history relating to Japan. So one more bite then I'm taking a break until some time later.

It certainly hasn't been a case of complacency. Japan making a fully fledged fixed wing carrier in say the 1980s, 1990s, or even as late as 2005 would be geopolitical suicide as it would trigger a tsunami of criticism about so-called far right wing ultra-nationalists white washing historical revisionism going on a path of the term remilitarization. Comfort Women issue has not yet dragged to the point of being an obvious politicizing tool. Iris Chiang's book was taken as all true. The PM couldn't and still can't even visit Yasukuni Shrine without drawing such heavy international criticism. The mass media of international and domestic (leftists anti-Japan Japanese) never reported the valid arguments and points made by Japanese regarding these issues but only mention them briefly in a way that implies they are incorrect or the media only quote the obviously stupid far right statments even though those are the minority/dumb among the rebuttals. Such was the enrionment that making a fixed wing carrier would put Japanese exports at great risk. It has now only become possible because now other countries including the US need Japan to balance China.

Edited by JasonJ, 06 January 2019 - 2313 PM.

  • 0

#20 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,347 posts

Posted 07 January 2019 - 0044 AM

China and Chinese will likely use the second carrier to increase the quality and quantity of their training in fixed-wing carrier operations, unfortunately.

 

Allowing them to have caught up, and to have potentially exceeded, Japanese carrier operations expertise is almost unforgivable in various ways.

 

How good is Chinese ASW?

 

How good are the Japanese in offensive submarine operations?

 

Why the seeming need to match China carrier with carrier when one can sink the carrier by other means?


Edited by Corinthian, 07 January 2019 - 0045 AM.

  • 0