Images show construction on China’s third and largest aircraft carrier

[pipedreams]

May 7, 2019

By Greg Torode and Ben Blanchard

HONG KONG/BEIJING(Reuters) – Construction of China’s first full-sized aircraft carrier is well under way, according to satellite images obtained and analyzed by a U.S. think tank.

 

https://www.oann.com/exclusive-analysts-images-show-construction-on-chinas-third-and-largest-aircraft-carrier/

[BamaBud]

"Lift off. Nuke it from orbit. That's the only way to be sure."

[janice6]

2 hours ago, pipedreams said:

May 7, 2019

By Greg Torode and Ben Blanchard

HONG KONG/BEIJING(Reuters) – Construction of China’s first full-sized aircraft carrier is well under way, according to satellite images obtained and analyzed by a U.S. think tank.

 

https://www.oann.com/exclusive-analysts-images-show-construction-on-chinas-third-and-largest-aircraft-carrier/

According to China, the United States Aircraft Carriers are vulnerable to their weapons and therefore useless.  If this is so, then why is China building Aircraft Carriers?  They symbolize power across the world. They show what good training and a coordinated military can do to concentrate power and strategic mobile forces around the world.

China will learn that to just build an Aircraft Carrier is nothing compared to the logistics, training, and experience to utilize them properly and the need for massive supplementary naval platforms to protect them.  Years of experience are necessary before they and their crews are skilled enough to be considered a force to be reckoned with.

China knows just how ineffectual their Naval Aircraft forces are along with the lack of operational experience and suitable aircraft and pilots that must be skilled in working together in an adverse environment.  When they perform continuous night time take offs and landings during stormy weather, you see what value many decades of experience has.

China is copying.  China is playing catch-up.  China is trying to appear strong through a paper naval military force.  China is far more vulnerable at sea than the USA, and will be for many years to come.  Thus the blustering for the ignorant. 

Edited May 7, 2019 by janice6

[Bish1309]

Oh goodie. Can we go water skiing this summer? Please, oh pretty please?

[Cougar_ml]

1 hour ago, janice6 said:

According to China, the United States Aircraft Carriers are vulnerable to their weapons and therefore useless.  If this is so, then why is China building Aircraft Carriers?  They symbolize power across the world. They show what good training and a coordinated military can do to concentrate power and strategic mobile forces around the world.

China will learn that to just build an Aircraft Carrier is nothing compared to the logistics, training, and experience to utilize them properly and the need for massive supplementary naval platforms to protect them.  Years of experience are necessary before they and their crews are skilled enough to be considered a force to be reckoned with.

China knows just how ineffectual their Naval Aircraft forces are along with the lack of operational experience and suitable aircraft and pilots that must be skilled in working together in an adverse environment.  When they perform continuous night time take offs and landings during stormy weather, you see what value many decades of experience has.

China is copying.  China is playing catch-up.  China is trying to appear strong through a paper naval military force.  China is far more vulnerable at sea than the USA, and will be for many years to come.  Thus the blustering for the ignorant. 

To get those decades of training and experience, you have to start somewhere.  They might be blustering now, but given the fact that they took over a large portion of our manufacturing capabilities, if they stopped exporting everything and converted it all to domestic and wartime production, they'd very well be a force to recon with in short order.  

[janice6]

2 hours ago, Cougar_ml said:

To get those decades of training and experience, you have to start somewhere.  They might be blustering now, but given the fact that they took over a large portion of our manufacturing capabilities, if they stopped exporting everything and converted it all to domestic and wartime production, they'd very well be a force to recon with in short order.  

Experience is still key and there is no way to hasten the process.  It will take them as long as it took us to master the process of everyone knowing what to do  when an emergency occurs that leaves the critical personnel without superiors for guidance.

The expertise isn't just in launching and retrieving aircraft, it's in doing the right thing when everything else goes wrong.  American Aircraft Carriers are the result of many years of learning and problem solving.  That cannot be copied!  It will take them years to be proficient just as it did us.

[KWalrad]

No worries. Somewhere in the dark, creepy recesses will be a little sticker that reads, "MADE IN CHINA".

 

Drop a half dozen five year olds on it and they'll have it broken beyond repair within fifteen minutes.

[Cougar_ml]

On 5/7/2019 at 2:38 PM, janice6 said:

Experience is still key and there is no way to hasten the process.  It will take them as long as it took us to master the process of everyone knowing what to do  when an emergency occurs that leaves the critical personnel without superiors for guidance.

The expertise isn't just in launching and retrieving aircraft, it's in doing the right thing when everything else goes wrong.  American Aircraft Carriers are the result of many years of learning and problem solving.  That cannot be copied!  It will take them years to be proficient just as it did us.

The other issue is they don't value human life the same as we do.  They have literally over half a billion people they can throw into a war, and still have a lot more than we do left over.  While they don't have the experience that we do, they can just keep throwing people at the problem until something works.  Aircraft aren't cheap, but I'd be willing to bet theirs cost a lot less than ours to produce, so they can lose a whole lot more of them without it hurting as bad as it would us.

[janice6]

1 minute ago, Cougar_ml said:

The other issue is they don't value human life the same as we do.  They have literally over half a billion people they can throw into a war, and still have a lot more than we do left over.  While they don't have the experience that we do, they can just keep throwing people at the problem until something works.  Aircraft aren't cheap, but I'd be willing to bet theirs cost a lot less than ours to produce, so they can lose a whole lot more of them without it hurting as bad as it would us.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe attrition on China's side is a good plan to win a war.

[Cougar_ml]

18 minutes ago, janice6 said:

I'm sorry, but I don't believe attrition on China's side is a good plan to win a war.

From our point of view it's not, but like I said, we place more value on human life (well, the non liberals among us do at least).

 

Against us it wouldn't work that well, because it takes too long.  We'd need a couple years to rebuild/restart industries that have been shipped overseas, then we'd have a very good chance of winning, provided no WMDs are deployed.  

If it came down to a mass surprise attack, then there's a chance that our infrastructure could become too crippled to recover enough to fend off the attrition.  With the fighter jet readiness levels being ridiculously low, a whole lot of damage could be done by a couple carrier groups off our coastline.

Just saying theoretically it could happen in a bad scenario, not that it's likely.

[Cougar_ml]

24 minutes ago, janice6 said:

I'm sorry, but I don't believe attrition on China's side is a good plan to win a war.

Going to war is never a good plan to begin with

[AK_Stick]

5 hours ago, Cougar_ml said:

The other issue is they don't value human life the same as we do.  They have literally over half a billion people they can throw into a war, and still have a lot more than we do left over.  While they don't have the experience that we do, they can just keep throwing people at the problem until something works.  Aircraft aren't cheap, but I'd be willing to bet theirs cost a lot less than ours to produce, so they can lose a whole lot more of them without it hurting as bad as it would us.

They don’t have the logistics to move, support or fight 1/2 their number. 

 

 

People get all fixated on the number they claim to field, yet overlook that they can’t move to battle or feed more than a fraction of their forces. 

 

Logistics is king. 

[Moshe]

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 7:54 PM, KWalrad said:

No worries. Somewhere in the dark, creepy recesses will be a little sticker that reads, "MADE IN CHINA".

 

Drop a half dozen five year olds on it and they'll have it broken beyond repair within fifteen minutes.

Give it to the USBP, if we couldn't inevitably break it, it was a solid product.

[Cougar_ml]

7 hours ago, AK_Stick said:

They don’t have the logistics to move, support or fight 1/2 their number. 

 

 

People get all fixated on the number they claim to field, yet overlook that they can’t move to battle or feed more than a fraction of their forces. 

 

Logistics is king. 

In a short fight, no, they can't.

If it becomes a long fight, it would take a long time and a lot of resources, but if they don't care about losses, then packing them onto huge container ships they could easily move millions, or even tens of millions, a year across the ocean.  Wouldn't even put a dent in their population growth.

[AK_Stick]

4 hours ago, Cougar_ml said:

In a short fight, no, they can't.

If it becomes a long fight, it would take a long time and a lot of resources, but if they don't care about losses, then packing them onto huge container ships they could easily move millions, or even tens of millions, a year across the ocean.  Wouldn't even put a dent in their population growth.

 

A long fight doesn’t help the situation. 

 

If you can’t move and fight them in a short period conflict, drawing it out will not make it better. 

 

The problem is they lack the logistical capability to move troops and supply them for even a short period fight. Which is why they can’t take even take back islands just off their coast.