China to build more aircraft carriers

[Fsjal]

You're not even answering his question, you troll.

He said "And which country is so far that it's out of range of the H-6K and J-16 combat radius and the CJ-10K missiles? Or the Type 052D?"

 

[Foo_Fighter]

What's this got to to be with the topic??? Get a life troll... I am ashamed you are an Indian. Post reported.

Meanwhile in Beijing:

China Opens Its Biggest Corruption Case - ABC News

 

[Akasa]

You sending bombers by themselves without fighter cover? Oh yeah thats what the carrier is for.

Why would the bombers need cover when their missiles outrange air defense systems? Why can't the J-16 escort them from land?

 

[Penguin]

- This article failed to mention some important points:

- Aircraft carriers are never alone when it comes to missions. They are always supported by land based aircraft and they are only assigned to specific roles while the main force consists of land based planes.

- 30 4.5 generation fighters are already at an advantage when compared to most of South Asia's air forces. And no, Pakistan and India are exceptions to this since they have large air forces.

- China's Type 054A frigates can carry 32 anti submarine rockets in its VLS cells. That is more than enough to provide a credible anti submarine shield for the Liaoning. This is augmented by the fact that they are inducting the Y-8FQ anti sub plane.

- Taipei Times is also notorious for its very low quality of information

- China does not need aircraft carriers in a conflict with South Asian nations

I very much doubt that e.g. the British Invincible and Hermes were supported by land-based aviation during the Falklands conflict, or that the main force consisted of land based planes. During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, U.S. aircraft carriers served as the primary base of American air power. Even without the ability to place significant numbers of aircraft in Middle Eastern airbases, the United States was capable of carrying out significant air attacks from carrier-based squadrons. Recently, U.S. aircraft carriers such as the Ronald Reagan provided air support for counter-insurgency operations in Iraq.

30 4.5 generation fighters provide a useful fleet air defence asset to a fleet that untill very recently was seriously lacking in AAW capability (and whose new AAW capabilities have yet to prove themselves). Then again, it should be considered that a) sistership Kuznetsov carries only 14 × Su-33 fighters (current) or 28 × MiG-29K fighters (planned after refit) and it is unlikely that one could substitute 16 SU-33 (J-15) for the 16-18 helicopters it also carries, and b) it is very unlikely that all jets of the airwing would be available or in the air at any given time of attack (meaning that the opposing air force would likely not face all 30 jets at the same time)

While technically China's Type 054A frigates can carry 32 anti submarine rockets in its VLS cells, doing so would leave such a ship without air defence (guns aside). At best you might use half the VLS capability for such ASW missiles. Moreover, since ASW missile give you perhaps 20km rather than 10km self defence range, the key thing with ASW is not any missiles, but rather the quaility of sonar equipment and helicopters (which can deliver ASW torpedoes hundreds of kilometers away). One could augmented using the Y-8FQ anti sub plane, but this would tie down the carrier force to within a certain range of naval airbases on land.

Re Taipei Times: you can shoot the messenger if you don't like the message, but it doesn't solve the problem.

Re. China's need for carriers .... fact: party leadership has apparently decided differently.

 

[Speeder 2]

and your point is?

the same as your point

 

[Penguin]

the same as your point

Well, no. State your point or refrain from posting bs, pls. I don't seen anything installed in Liaoning that isn't on a Type 52C. And that is as far as your TV comparison goes. And it is not as if the Russians today could not fit anything newer in to a Kuz hull than they did in the late 1980s/early 1990s. It remains a fact that the ship design is Soviet-Russian and it was built by Ukrainian shipbuilders decades ago.

 

[Oldman1]

Why would the bombers need cover when their missiles outrange air defense systems? Why can't the J-16 escort them from land?

You are assuming that the countries out in Asia have no fighter jets to counter your bombers? Are you also assuming that your fighter jets have unlimited ranged even after combat with other fighter planes?

 

[Akasa]

You are assuming that the countries out in Asia have no fighter jets to counter your bombers? Are you also assuming that your fighter jets have unlimited ranged even after combat with other fighter planes?

Unless their fighters have 2000 km attack radius, then no, they don't really matter.

 

[jhungary]

Unless their fighters have 2000 km attack radius, then no, they don't really matter.

Not to interject, but there are numerous fighters comes with 2000+ km range with or without external fuel tank....

F-18 E/F - 2346 km combat range with aim-9 without tank
Euro fighter - 2900 km range
Su-35 - 3000 km range

Just to name a few

 

[Oldman1]

Unless their fighters have 2000 km attack radius, then no, they don't really matter.

Well when in combat their range is shorter, 2000km you are referring too sounds too much like ferry range. It burns a lot of fuel when dog fighting other fighter planes.

 

[jhungary]

Well when in combat their range is shorter, 2000km you are referring too sounds too much like ferry range. It burns a lot of fuel when dog fighting other fighter planes.

i don't think people like those know what mile to a gallon does with fighter planes.

If we are to talk about ferry range, then most fighter would have more than 4000kms ferry range with external fuel tanks.

They seems to also forgot fighter today can do a thing called "Mid-Air/Inflight Refuelling" which extent the range of the fighter into unlimited........

But then you do expect you are talking to some Chinese dude here, which usually open their mouth before digging into information first

 

[Akasa]

Well when in combat their range is shorter, 2000km you are referring too sounds too much like ferry range. It burns a lot of fuel when dog fighting other fighter planes.

This argument strengthens the point. The defending fighters would not be able to intercept the missiles before they are launched.

Not to interject, but there are numerous fighters comes with 2000+ km range with or without external fuel tank....

F-18 E/F - 2346 km combat range with aim-9 without tank
Euro fighter - 2900 km range
Su-35 - 3000 km range

Just to name a few

And how many of them are operated by South Asian air forces?

 

[jhungary]

This argument strengthens the point. The defending fighters would not be able to intercept the missiles before they are launched.



And how many of them are operated by South Asian air forces?

F-15E (2100KM Combat, 3900KM Ferry) - South Korean AF, Japan AF
Su-30 (2000KM Combat 3000KM Ferry) Vietnam, India, Malaysia, Indonesia

 

[eastwatch]

MR XI LOOKS GREAT, THATS TYPE OF MAN WHO SHOULD LEAD CHINA.

Deng Shiao Ping did not look great physically, but he had a robust state of mind. His ideas were followed to build an economically vibrant new China.

 

[eastwatch]

Great news.When China and Russia produce more aircraft carriers and overtake Pacific region from American it would reduce American power projection alot.

But what is the best for Chinese,that they never make hype about their military discoveries,they are just working and keep silent.

Pacific region is very large and China is almost surrounded by hostile countries like Japan, south Korea, Taiwan, Philippines and Vietnam and the USA in Guam. No reason to believe China can project itself that far and go offensive.