Chinese carrier build-up?

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Obi Wan Russell) — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:21:29 GMT

The Colossus class and Majestic class used externally identical hulls, and indeed the Majestics were ordered as members of the Colossus class. The modifications were mostly internal and directed towards operating heavier aircraft (stronger lifts, reinforced flightdeck etc) but once the various members were refitted postwar for their new owners the original distiction became somewhat meaningless. These refits incorporated practically all the differences between the two classes and so much...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (bager1968) — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:35:09 GMT

The Majestics have a slightly greater average displacement (about 1,000 t full load), but only due to a higher average level of modification from the original design.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (StevoJH) — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 18:53:58 GMT

Alexius55 wrote:

StevoJH wrote:

<
Hmm.....One catapult, would explain why there was only one bit sticking out the front......

Was Melbourne the smallest conventional carrier in the world operating supersonic aircraft?

No. Melbourne was a Majestic, and Colossuses were smaller. Vienticinco...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Alexius55) — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:05:09 GMT

StevoJH wrote:

<
Hmm.....One catapult, would explain why there was only one bit sticking out the front......

Was Melbourne the smallest conventional carrier in the world operating supersonic aircraft?

No. Melbourne was a Majestic, and Colossuses were smaller. Vienticinco de Mayo operated Super Etendards, which are apparently supersonic at altitude-...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (bager1968) — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:05:52 GMT

Ummm... you consider the A-4 Skyhawk supersonic? Clean, in a dive, just barely.

Melbourne operated Sea Venoms (Vampire on steroids) from 1955-~1969, then A-4G (modified A-4F) Skyhawks from 1968-1981, when she decommissioned.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (StevoJH) — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:40:21 GMT

bager1968 wrote:
Melbourne still had her one 1955-built BS-4 catapult (rebuilt 1971) installed when she was sold.

Allegedly, "her flight-deck equipment" was installed at a PLAN air base for test & evaluation.

So yes, China has had a steam catapult in their possession since since 1985

Hmm.....One catapult, would explain why there was only one bit...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Zen9) — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:11:00 GMT

Time enough to figure out how to use and maintain them, if the've been scientific about it.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (bager1968) — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 07:28:01 GMT

Melbourne still had her one 1955-built BS-4 catapult (rebuilt 1971) installed when she was sold.

Allegedly, "her flight-deck equipment" was installed at a PLAN air base for test & evaluation.

So yes, China has had a steam catapult in their possession since since 1985

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Zen9) — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:06:01 GMT

The rumour goes they've made lot of theoretical study of catapults and their operation already. It they have hardware prototypes I suspect its under cover to avoid satellite recce. But they can only do so much inside a warehouse (or under ground), ultimately if we see them modifying an airfield for trials of catapults we'll know for sure.

As for Varyag, the best people to ask is the Russians. But in theory yes, though it all depends in reality on on how much work is...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (StevoJH) — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:33:49 GMT

Zen9 wrote:
I don't see that, Varyag still allows them to understand the practicalities of arrested recovery, and landing at sea. As a stepping stone to CTOL you could do a lot worse. It only leaves them the effort of catapult operation to master, and we'd only know if that was going on if we saw a shore based set up for trials.

Varyag is designed for steam turbines correct. Theoretically, considering...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Zen9) — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:01:34 GMT

I don't see that, Varyag still allows them to understand the practicalities of arrested recovery, and landing at sea. As a stepping stone to CTOL you could do a lot worse. It only leaves them the effort of catapult operation to master, and we'd only know if that was going on if we saw a shore based set up for trials.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Obi Wan Russell) — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:52:16 GMT

Quite so. This is the path I think they are following. If and when Varyag puts to sea with suitable aircraft (probably SU-33s to begin with), any following carriers will by necessity have to be an evolution of the basic layout (STOBAR) or else Varyag becomes a developmental dead end. Even though she will be used to train ship and air crew in how to operate a carrier at sea, I believe the PLAN will at all times do their best to make her look like a fully operational frontline carrier until...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (StevoJH) — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 10:57:04 GMT

Obi Wan Russell wrote:
You could refit Kiev and Minsk for service with the PLAN, but why would you want to? A lot of money spent on thirty year old ships which if kept in their current configuration will give you a pair of 40,000 ton helicopter carriers, not aircraft carriers. For the same money you could convert quite a number of container ships and get a lot more helos to sea with the fleet. China has no STOVL aircraft to...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Obi Wan Russell) — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 10:40:14 GMT

You could refit Kiev and Minsk for service with the PLAN, but why would you want to? A lot of money spent on thirty year old ships which if kept in their current configuration will give you a pair of 40,000 ton helicopter carriers, not aircraft carriers. For the same money you could convert quite a number of container ships and get a lot more helos to sea with the fleet. China has no STOVL aircraft to operate from their decks, and if you want to go down the Gorshkov route and convert them for...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (StevoJH) — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 07:59:40 GMT

Technically speaking, China currently has 3 Aircraft Carriers, all over 40,000t.

Could the chinese ever go crazy and try modernize Kiev and Minsk along the lines of the Gorshkov? probably.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (DrAdam H) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:06:16 GMT

Yes China has cut back on how much they buy from Russia. I can only guess you guys got tired of reverse engineering garbage and have started reverse engineering modern stuff.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Bledlow) — Fri, 16 May 2008 11:52:56 GMT

Rajeev wrote:

...
TU22 is still in limited production but not for sale to chinese because it will be copied too.

Last Tu-22 Blinder was built in 1969, AFAIK - but I think you mean Tu-22M Backfire, a different aircraft despite the designation. Production of that ended in 1993. "Production" since then consists of upgrades.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (Rajeev) — Mon, 12 May 2008 16:21:11 GMT

Hi eeyylx

You sound more like a communist comrade!

The H-6 is a Chinese copy of the Russian Tu-16, which is a 1950s era design that has been upgraded considerably by the China.

Submarines are copies of Russian.

Big shipyard does not mean it can build everything but facilitaes building copy of Russian warships.

TU22 is still in limited production but not for sale to chinese because it will be copied too.

IL78/82 is still production...

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (pukalshik) — Thu, 08 May 2008 12:17:26 GMT

eeyylx wrote:
Again chinese air force build its own bomber H6H
the latest version of H6 is actully a new air plane. Its engine has been upgraded to D30 (the only russian component on borad)
the front nose has been resigned to accomondate better avionics . Its cockpit is similar to 737's (a two man glass cockpit).

You propably mean H-6k. China have to buy a lot of Il-76 engines then.

Re: Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (eeyylx) — Thu, 08 May 2008 00:32:45 GMT

The Chinese navy also known to received twelve Kilo Class 877/636 diesel submarines and four Type 956E/EM destroyers, (probably copies of it are being built secretly somewhere within this secretive communist nation) together with other naval subsystems for Chinese carriers.
=============

yes china received them. but those contrects are finished and chinas is now producing its own T039 and its upgrading versions.
They are now the backbone for chinese navy. we have seen at...

Chinese carrier build-up?

feeds@yuku.com (FreeloaderUK) — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:25:52 GMT

http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/27/chinese-building-93000-ton-supercarrier/

since China is looking to be a superpower they are building up their navy