What's new

Aircraft carrier is a glorified training ship per NY times article

JayAtl

BANNED
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Messages
8,812
Reaction score
-14
BEIJING — In a ceremony attended by the country’s top leaders, China put its first aircraft carrier into service on Tuesday, a move intended to signal its growing military might as tensions escalate between Beijing and its neighbors over islands in nearby seas.
Enlarge This Image

Officials said that the carrier, a discarded vessel bought from Ukraine in 1998 and refurbished by China, would protect national sovereignty, an issue that has become a touchstone of the government’s dispute with Japan over ownership of islands in the East China Sea.

But despite the triumphant tone of the launch, which was watched by President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, and despite rousing assessments by Chinese military experts about the importance of the carrier, the vessel will only be used for training and testing for the foreseeable future.

The mark “16” emblazoned on the carrier’s side indicates it is limited to training, Chinese and other military experts said. China does not have planes capable of landing on the carrier and so far training for such landings have been carried out on land, they said.

Even so, the public appearance of the carrier at the northeastern port of Dalian was used as an occasion to stir patriotic feelings, which have run at fever pitch in the last 10 days over the dispute between China and Japan over the East China Sea islands, called Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China.

The carrier would “raise the overall operational strength of the Chinese Navy” and help China “to effectively protect national sovereignty, security and development interests,” the Ministry of Defense said.

The Communist Party congress that will begin the country’s once-in-a-decade leadership transition is expected to be held next month, and the public unveiling of the carrier appeared to be part of an effort to forge national unity ahead of the event.

For international purposes, the public unveiling of the carrier seemed intended to signal to smaller nations in the South China Sea, including the Philippines, a U.S. ally, that China has an increasing number of impressive assets to deploy.

American military planners have downplayed the significance of the commissioning of the carrier. Some Navy officials have even said they would encourage China to move ahead with building its own aircraft carrier and the ships to accompany it, because it would be a waste of money.

Other military experts outside China have agreed with that assessment.


“The fact is the aircraft carrier is useless for the Chinese Navy,” You Ji, a visiting senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore, said in an interview. “If it is used against America, it has no survivability. If it is used against China’s neighbors, it’s a sign of bullying.”

Vietnam, a neighbor with whom China has fought wars, operates land-based Russian SU 230 aircraft that could pose a threat to the aircraft carrier, Mr. You said. “In the South China Sea, if the carrier is damaged by the Vietnamese, it’s a huge loss of face,” he said. “It’s not worth it.”

Up to now, Chinese pilots have been limited to practicing simulated carrier landings on concrete strips on land in Chinese J-8 aircraft based on Soviet-made MIG-23s produced about 25 years ago, Mr. You said. The pilots could not undertake the difficult maneuver of landing on a moving carrier because China does not yet have suitable aircraft, Mr. You said.

The question of whether China will move ahead and build its own carrier depends in large part, he said, on whether China can develop aircraft to land on one. “It’s a long, long process for constructing such aircraft,” he said.

In contrast to some of the skepticism expressed by military experts outside China, Li Jie, a researcher at the Chinese Naval Research Institute, said in an interview in the state-run People’s Daily that the carrier would change the Chinese Navy’s traditional mind-set and bring qualitative changes to its operational style and structure, he said.

Although the Chinese military does not publish a breakdown of its military spending, foreign military experts say the navy is less well funded than the army and air force.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/w...rcraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical.html
 
The real value of this ship is the training it will provide. Looking at the longer term, it will lay the foundations for future carrier operations, no doubt. Hence, this is a valuable effort to further national goals.
 
The real value of this ship is the training it will provide. Looking at the longer term, it will lay the foundations for future carrier operations, no doubt. Hence, this is a valuable effort to further national goals.

absolutely , if it was being sold as a training ship and not as a ready to go out to sea traditional carrier. Also some interesting thought re: american and other expert responses. Many NATO powers have decided against having a carrier fleet for the same reason.
 
NY times?? Wow!! It say as it knows more than PLAN admiral?

Indian are so quick to jump at any tom, dick , harry report down playing rising China. I bet if NY times says about super power China pwned Indian in carrier project. You sure will not post it and try to find other bogus report to serve your agenda.
 
NY times?? Wow!! It say as it knows more than PLAN admiral?

Indian are so quick to jump at any tom, dick , harry report down playing rising China. I bet if NY times says about super power China pwned Indian in carrier project. You sure will not post it and try to find other bogus report to serve your agenda.

Not only is NY times regarded by the world as a prestigious news organization and is cited by many Chinese, and other than your obvious petty defensive mindset... the fact that it is a training ship was also cited by Chinese military experts as reported. But none of that would stop you from cheerleading ignorance I suspect.
 
Not only is NY times regarded by the world as a prestigious news organization and is cited by many Chinese, and other than your obvious petty defensive mindset... the fact that it is a training ship was also cited by Chinese military experts as reported. But none of that would stop you from cheerleading ignorance I suspect.
Is it? I think only u think that way. Just by the saying of china used J-8 as the primary plane for training carrier ops clearly show the reporter knows nothing of china carrier ops. Basically sprouting nonsense. He don't know what is J-15 and JL-9??? Please go google more of this before he comes back and talk abt it...
 
LOL at USA deluding themselves with insecurity

a, 20x superpower naval power is insecure of an 70's aircraft carrier refurbished without landing capabilities and designated as a training ship? You rock - and we hope you influence more Chinese with your intellect.

:chilli: you got a head start with Beast.
 
a, 20x superpower naval power is insecure of an 70's aircraft carrier refurbished without landing capabilities and designated as a training ship? You rock - and we hope you influence more Chinese with your intellect.

:chilli: you got a head start with Beast.
:rofl: LOL at indians feeling so inferior because they paid hard-earned money to reburbish a museum piece Kiev-class that suffered an internal explosion during testing.
 
:rofl: LOL at indians feeling so inferior because they paid hard-earned money to reburbish a museum piece Kiev-class that suffered an internal explosion during testing.

:rofl: :rofl:

That kiev class have tested aircraft landing and was tested unlike your floating casino for gambling :lol: ..

Show me a video of flight testing of copied flankers :P
 
absolutely , if it was being sold as a training ship and not as a ready to go out to sea traditional carrier. Also some interesting thought re: american and other expert responses. Many NATO powers have decided against having a carrier fleet for the same reason.

NY oh please...

I doubt that the amount of time and investment that took on this AC means in conflicts and War Times it can be an Operational AC to reach Conflict Zone, don't take China as fools.

This Aircraft Carrier is an effective Asset from both operational point of view and from Training point of view.
 
NY oh please...

I doubt that the amount of time and investment that took on this AC means in conflicts and War Times it can be an Operational AC to reach Conflict Zone, don't take China as fools.

This Aircraft Carrier is an effective Asset from both operational point of view and from Training point of view.

I don't take china as fools- they themselves have designated this as a training ship and no, you can't take a training ship without any aircraft's on it and call it a functional AC. You can proclaim it to be- but it won't be based on facts.
 
a, 20x superpower naval power is insecure of an 70's aircraft carrier refurbished without landing capabilities and designated as a training ship? You rock - and we hope you influence more Chinese with your intellect.

:chilli: you got a head start with Beast.
SinusChallenged make up with quantity for what he lacks in quality. Sad part for him is that he realized what he is.
 
Dumbass Indians back at it again. The ship was just handed to the navy after completing sea trials and refit, and air wing hasn't even moved in yet. It's been a day since the handover and they're calling it "training ship" based on observation made in less than 24 hours. It's better if you go bark up your own carrier rigged with explosive boilers.

I guess all these J-15s are just for show eh?
25_178587_097ec029542828c.jpg
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom