The First Chinese Aircraft Carrier

[UKBengali]

@gambit - you destroyed any crediblity you had by claiming that the Chinese Navy would not be able to take on the Indian Navy. Indians are renowned for their military incompetence - inability to decisively defeat Pakistan(a country nearly 1/10th their size) and their quick defeat in 1962 at the hands of China.

 

[gambit]

@gambit - you destroyed any crediblity you had by claiming that the Chinese Navy would not be able to take on the Indian Navy.

Wrong...I said something else. Read post 23 again.

Indians are renowned for their military incompetence - inability to decisively defeat Pakistan(a country nearly 1/10th their size)[b/] and their quick defeat in 1962 at the hands of China.

How do you explain the stalemated Iraq-Iran War when Iran was larger?

 

[Penguin]

You are going to need a lot more ships than that to defend against a possible U.S. Navy or Air Force attack against your ships. Stealth long range cruise missiles or Seawolf boats will sink those elephants.

Ships added in recent years (since 2005):
052C: 2 afloat, 2-4 more coming
052B: 2 afloat, 0 forthcoming
Sovremenny: 2+2 afloat
051C: 2 afloat
054: 2 afloat
054A: 6+ afloat, more in various stages of completion

That's about 18 actual ships, not counting 2 Type 93 SSN, 8 Kilo SSK, 4 Yuan SSK and with more ships on the way (another 6 054A, 2-4 052C)

So, you were saying?

 

[Penguin]

Okay, that is a big *** carrier.

Best of luck to PLAN, still some way to catch to the USN - currently operates 11 aircraft carriers in total.

THEME PARK!

 

[Penguin]

Hmmm who to believe, random guy on the internet or the U.S. Naval Institute. Tough choices.

To put the threat in perspective, China has 240 nuclear warheads, whereas the US has 8500. One can't distinguish a normal ballistic missile from this new antiship variant, therefor a pot shot at a carrier could very well trigger an all out nuclear responce. I think China will have to be very carefull in considering the use of this weapon (if it is what all that it is made out to be). USN has been working on ABM for a much linger time than this new ballistic missile has been around.

 

[UKBengali]

Wrong...I said something else. Read post 23 again.


How do you explain the stalemated Iraq-Iran War when Iran was larger?

1st point: If the Indian carriers can defeat Chinese carriers then the rest of the Chines Navy would pretty much get hammered. You technically said something else but it in effect meant what I said.

2nd Point; The difference in size between Iran and Iraq is not as great as that between India and Pakistan(just google population numbers for comparison). Also as everyone knows Iran was attacked at a very weak point - just after a revolution and there was a massive cull of military top brass in Iran by the revolutionary government. You also have to take into account the behaviour of oustside powers. I think it was a certain Henry Kissinger who said: "Too bad they both cannot lose" - i.e it was in the interest of the US to prolong the war to weaken both countries as much as possible.

 

[below_freezing]

To put the threat in perspective, China has 240 nuclear warheads, whereas the US has 8500. One can't distinguish a normal ballistic missile from this new antiship variant, therefor a pot shot at a carrier could very well trigger an all out nuclear responce. I think China will have to be very carefull in considering the use of this weapon (if it is what all that it is made out to be). USN has been working on ABM for a much linger time than this new ballistic missile has been around.

The tonnage of Chinese nukes is 294 MT vs. the US's 570 MT.

NTI: United States - Nuclear Disarmament

NTI: China - Nuclear Disarmament

We have fewer missiles, true. But we have missiles that have multiple megatons on them rather than the US's hundreds of kilotons.

If the US tries, it would be about 1 missile needed to take out 1 major US city vs. 4-5 needed for each Chinese city. 294 megatons, assuming 2 megatons per city needed to kill 90% of the population, can easily vaporize 200 million Americans directly, destroy 99% of US industry, kill the rest with slow radiation and permanently end the US as a nation state. The US isn't going to risk that.

 

[CardSharp]

To put the threat in perspective, China has 240 nuclear warheads, whereas the US has 8500.

Relevance?

One can't distinguish a normal ballistic missile from this new antiship variant

You can predict where a ballistic missile is going after launch using highschool level physics.

I think China will have to be very carefull in considering the use of this weapon (if it is what all that it is made out to be).

It will be a difficult weapon to use, I agree, but since the PLA has deployed it (at least according to US pacific command Admiral Willard? I think), they like found a place in their doctrine for the DF-21D.

USN has been working on ABM for a much linger time than this new ballistic missile has been around.

The Chinese strategy doesn't hinge on carrier groups and the PLAN doesn't plan on going near the US west coast anytime soon.

 

[gambit]

The tonnage of Chinese nukes is 294 MT vs. the US's 570 MT.

NTI: United States - Nuclear Disarmament

NTI: China - Nuclear Disarmament

We have fewer missiles, true. But we have missiles that have multiple megatons on them rather than the US's hundreds of kilotons.

If the US tries, it would be about 1 missile needed to take out 1 major US city vs. 4-5 needed for each Chinese city. 294 megatons, assuming 2 megatons per city needed to kill 90% of the population, can easily vaporize 200 million Americans directly, destroy 99% of US industry, kill the rest with slow radiation and permanently end the US as a nation state. The US isn't going to risk that.

That mean Chinese ICBMs are not as accurate and will require more per target. The US will not 'try'. Like Yoda said: 'Do or do not. There is no try'. If it comes down to it, China will lose this nuclear exchange.

 

[Zarvan]

Relevance?




You can predict where a ballistic missile is going after launch using highschool level physics.



It will be a difficult weapon to use, I agree, but since the PLA has deployed it (at least according to US pacific command Admiral Willard? I think), they like found a place in their doctrine for the DF-21D.




The Chinese strategy doesn't hinge on carrier groups and the PLAN doesn't plan on going near the US west coast anytime soon.

Sir I have a question for you that which Fighter Aircraft will be their on the Aircraft Carrier??????????????

 

[gambit]

To put the threat in perspective, China has 240 nuclear warheads, whereas the US has 8500. One can't distinguish a normal ballistic missile from this new antiship variant, therefor a pot shot at a carrier could very well trigger an all out nuclear responce. I think China will have to be very carefull in considering the use of this weapon (if it is what all that it is made out to be). USN has been working on ABM for a much linger time than this new ballistic missile has been around.

You can predict where a ballistic missile is going after launch using highschool level physics.

Yes...We know we can guesstimate the impact point of a ballistic missile. But the Penguin is saying that despite the fact that a 'ballistic' missile does not have to carry a nuclear warhead, neither are there any indicator that the just launched ballistic missile is the 'regular' or 'nuclear' kind. No one except the launcher know what is it that he just sent off. The fact that a ballistic trajectory is generally reserved for nuclear weapons over distances that involves three-zeros will make any military default to the assumption that the incoming projectile is a nuclear weapon.

 

[Black Widow]

@Vrayag: The day I heard some private Chinese company is buying it, I Thought what this son of Bi*** (Indian Defense minister)doing. There is nothing private in china. Every thing is state control. I was scared that China will have sophisticated Aircraft carrier technology. Now my fear came true. We could have stopped china from buying it (By buying it for us).

@china Vs US: This is the first AC in chinese inventory where as USA operate 11 ACs (Double of Vrayag capacity). Today no one can match USA (At least in this area).

@Carrier killer: DF21 (i think) is Ballistic missile with some guidance. I don't think its difficult to intercept for USA..

@India: With Vikadi and IAC1, India will be no less than China.. 2 ACs are enough to defend form Vrayag.. (India's doctrine is defensive). And in near 100s of year we are not going to fight USA/NATO, neither they are going to attack us..

 

[Malik Usman]

Chinese defence minister told, modernization of their forces are not to threat anyone..

India is also having an Aircraft carrier already...

All of the great nations in the world own aircraft carriers , they are symbols of a great nation-- I am not saying this, it's Lt Gen Qi Jianguo

Source: the same link posted by you.

But there is no comparison between China and India.......China built its own..........wherease India has on lease from Russia.

 

[Black Widow]

But there is no comparison between China and India.......China built its own..........wherease India has on lease from Russia.

You are late Dude, India is making Carrier from scratch.. (Designing) where as China got already designed skeleton..

Vikrant class aircraft carrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SR 71 Blackbird]

But the varyag is not nuclear powered meaning it cannot to global powerprojection.