Britain set to confront China with new aircraft carrier

[Zapper]

If you haven’t updated yourself, China has cancelled plans to construct that carrier for the foreseeable future

Chinese navy set to build fourth aircraft carrier, but plans for a more advanced ship are put on hold

On hold doesn't mean cancelled and UK's AC is 65k tons which is lesser than Type 003's >85k tons. So China is infact investing in bigger carriers which was originally what you contradicted

https://www.news.com.au/technology/...s/news-story/7460539e54fe026976276dd4cbfaa2e1

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3039653/chinese-navy-set-build-fourth-aircraft-carrier-plans-more

 

[Song Hong]

Deng threatened to send PLA to HK if UK don't leave in 1997.

Well it doesn’t depend upon what you and I have to say. Chinese missile stockpile has been built to effectively counter US navy deployed in pacific from mainland... were not even taking into account surface combatants that China can outbuild... this is the Chinese strategy and this is why US have been seeking to introduce direct energy weapons.


If you haven’t updated yourself, China has cancelled plans to construct that carrier for the foreseeable future


It’s not because Royal Navy isn’t capable or that Chinese navy is superior but because UK by end of WW2 has been nothing but a broke nation... its superpower status, long lost in WW1 building dreadnoughts till broke... it couldn’t afford a war in 1949 or budget to run its colonies.

 

[Zapper]

Well it doesn’t depend upon what you and I have to say. Chinese missile stockpile has been built to effectively counter US navy deployed in pacific from mainland... were not even taking into account surface combatants that China can outbuild... this is the Chinese strategy and this is why US have been seeking to introduce direct energy weapons.

Easier said than done

The U.S. Navy in 2005 Tried to Sink Its Own Aircraft Carrier (And Failed)

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-navy-2005-tried-sink-its-own-aircraft-carrier-and-failed-95011

 

[Song Hong]

If UK wanted to fight China, she would have made hk Stalingrad 2.0.

She had no guts then. She has no guts now

 

[antonius123]

Easier said than done

The U.S. Navy in 2005 Tried to Sink Its Own Aircraft Carrier (And Failed)

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-navy-2005-tried-sink-its-own-aircraft-carrier-and-failed-95011

Not clear how explosion made on that aircraft carrier in that trial. War situation will be much different, carrier will be barraged with many cruise missile slamming deeply into its body and explode inside. 1 cruise missile could sink a destroyer, for carrier maybe need 5 or 6.

Also even if it wont sink within 4 weeks, the functionality will deteriorate sharply.

Try with 30 mach warhead slammed into that carrier body from sky piercing from top making a big hole to the bottom and the warhead continue to bottom of the sea, and see what happen with the carrier

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

If UK wanted to fight China, she would have made hk Stalingrad 2.0.

She had no guts then. She has no guts now

Except most people in HK would side with the UK.

China basically will be the one attacking a major city full of hostiles while the UK can just pass through with full local support.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

As opposed to AESA radar is God & can do anything. You put AESA on everything somehow it's infinitely better. Yeah I agree those kind of people are douche. People forget that there's an environment in place & yeah AESA & others tech is important but most of the times tactics are more important.

EW are just 1 of many defenses in place to protect a ship. A regular CAP oftentimes can do a better job protecting the mother ship from any threat.

AESA radar is not just about radar. Phased array RF electronics is a massive enabling technology even in i.e. civilian 5G communication. It is about being able to be extremely jam resistant, robust and difficult to intercept. It is about being able to shape the RF signal at will. Basically, it is a massive enabling technology that goes far beyond just radar.

 

[Song Hong]

No one in UK wanted to fight for HK.

All no balls. And now you think they will fight in SCS?

Go dream.

Except most people in HK would side with the UK.

China basically will be the one attacking a major city full of hostiles while the UK can just pass through with full local support.

Basically it is electronic beamforming accompany by wideband frequency hopping technology.

I doubt if 1% of PDF guys knows more in detail about it. Many talk as if they are experts, and keep wasting their time.

AESA radar is not just about radar. Phased array RF electronics is a massive enabling technology even in i.e. civilian 5G communication. It is about being able to be extremely jam resistant, robust and difficult to intercept. It is about being able to shape the RF signal at will. Basically, it is a massive enabling technology that goes far beyond just radar.

 

[gambit]

Not clear how explosion made on that aircraft carrier in that trial. War situation will be much different, carrier will be barraged with many cruise missile slamming deeply into its body and explode inside. 1 cruise missile could sink a destroyer, for carrier maybe need 5 or 6.

The difference, which of course you failed to discerned, is that when we tried to sink the America, we placed the explosives at strategic locations INSIDE the ship. Whereas, in combat, a bomb or a missile can only hit on the outside and at random points, which will make it even more difficult to sink a US aircraft carrier. So when Lou said 'sink' an American carrier, he was speaking rhetorically, not technically, which he already knew would be next to impossible to do.

 

[antonius123]

The difference, which of course you failed to discerned, is that when we tried to sink the America, we placed the explosives at strategic locations INSIDE the ship. Whereas, in combat, a bomb or a missile can only hit on the outside and at random points, which will make it even more difficult to sink a US aircraft carrier. So when Lou said 'sink' an American carrier, he was speaking rhetorically, not technically, which he already knew would be next to impossible to do.

In reality, missile hit outside then pierce the ship and explode inside, much more damaging than exploding bomb from inside assuming with the same explosive power.

Anyway thanks for sharing military knowledge from a janitor point of view, unfortunately it is useless.

 

[gambit]

In reality, missile hit outside then pierce the ship and explode inside, much more damaging than exploding bomb from inside assuming with the same explosive power.

Anyway thanks for sharing military knowledge from a janitor point of view, unfortunately it is useless.

Let me guess, now you have 'navy' education, right?

 

[antonius123]

Let me guess, now you have 'navy' education, right?

It is a secret

 

[Song Hong]

Anyone in defence industries know that larger warships are structurally compartmentized. Not easy sink it with one hit.

But a naval structural engineer can place multiple explosive in critical locations, the ship will sink in one session of demolition.

US brag brag brag, to show how difficult to sink her ship.

The difference, which of course you failed to discerned, is that when we tried to sink the America, we placed the explosives at strategic locations INSIDE the ship. Whereas, in combat, a bomb or a missile can only hit on the outside and at random points, which will make it even more difficult to sink a US aircraft carrier. So when Lou said 'sink' an American carrier, he was speaking rhetorically, not technically, which he already knew would be next to impossible to do.

 

[Michael Corleone]

Chinese navy set to build fourth aircraft carrier, but plans for a more advanced ship are put on hold

On hold doesn't mean cancelled and UK's AC is 65k tons which is lesser than Type 003's >85k tons. So China is infact investing in bigger carriers which was originally what you contradicted

https://www.news.com.au/technology/...s/news-story/7460539e54fe026976276dd4cbfaa2e1

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3039653/chinese-navy-set-build-fourth-aircraft-carrier-plans-more

Yeah, irrelevant to talk about unconfirmed projects. Pfft

Easier said than done

The U.S. Navy in 2005 Tried to Sink Its Own Aircraft Carrier (And Failed)

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-navy-2005-tried-sink-its-own-aircraft-carrier-and-failed-95011

My god this dude.... there are articles from same source that reports how song class sub got through the defence layer or how Swedish subs scored hits in war games.... extremely irrelevant to the discussion