tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post8741935799827631755..comments2024-03-20T12:03:26.126+00:00Comments on Thin Pinstriped Line: The Long March to Carrier Capability and the new Chinese Aircraft Carrier. Sir Humphreyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-57001430721124927882012-12-14T07:53:08.312+00:002012-12-14T07:53:08.312+00:00A "proper" carrier capability, a "p...A "proper" carrier capability, a "proper" battle group? If you are only going to apply a standard that has been met by one nation in history ("in the entire world, arguably only the USN can field a proper carrier battle group"), then perhaps your conclusion will be a bit one-dimensional. All it gives you is a measure against the USA, and that hardly seems fair or analytically very useful - after all, there is no reason why a nation would try to follow the pattern of the USA, even if their objective was to become a serious rival in terms of some future contest at sea (which I don't think is necessarily the case here). Surely the most meaningful metric here would be based on China's strategic requirements and the ambitions particular to the time and place in that context. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-8595215233149831952012-12-05T11:07:51.766+00:002012-12-05T11:07:51.766+00:00Humphrey, in regard to reactions on the recent car...Humphrey, in regard to reactions on the recent carrier developments I do not have the impression at all, that hype would be a suitable description. Instead what could be read on western sites was a fairly extraordinary amount of patronizing, passive-aggressive "this means nothing, USN rules yadda yadda yadda". Selected quotes "China has arrived in 1945", "One pilot and one AC now carrier capable", "Whatever they do, all their stuff is stolen", "One US CSG will defeat entire PLAN". Very little acknowledgment of their progress.<br /><br />For context - 15 years ago the Chinese had an empty hulk, that only visually resembled a carrier, they had no carrier planes and no running program to build one. The J-15 went from reverse-engineering an old prototype in 2001 to at least eight flying prototypes and pre-production aircraft incl a two-seater in only 11 years. The Varyag was refurbished and filled with equipment within 14 years. We havent seen much of the inside of that ship, but the equipment they put on externally is not Russian, but domestic stuff, that suggests arguably a fair bit of indigenous development. All this while the Russians are still trying to get their act together in refurbishing one of their own ships for India, a project that by now is taking twice as long as expected and costs a hilarious amount of money (to be fair, Vikramadityas reconstruction is extensive, still...). <br /><br />And its not like they channel all their funds into that one prestige project. I am not a fanboy, who spends time gazing at PS images, nor am I warmongering and putting this in the context of a Red menace. What I can see though over the past ten years is, that most Western observers are time and again caught out cold, when it comes to projecting Chinese progress on major military programs. So far thats a simple fact of life.<br /><br />Re some of your points: is touch and go not something different to arrested landings? They definitely did several touch and go's before, based on images, while this latest thing was two J-15 performing both arrested landings and take-offs.<br /><br />As far as deployments go, the PLAN has been sending more than a dozen flotillas on piracy patrols over the past few years in Somalia. They always had two FFG or DDG plus AOR deployed in sustained patrols. They also sent a flotilla into the Med in support of evac ops of Chinese workers in Libya. Their hospital ships have also been busy in Latin America and elsewhere. I dont see any carriers in the Atlantic anytime soon, but the notion of the Chinese fleet as having had no long range deployments is arguably not true anymore for a few years now.<br /><br />Of course the longer one operates a capability, the better one gets, yet I am not sure, it took the USN "decades to get it right". Instead they have been operating CSG for decades, with their most productive use only less than two decades after they first started looking into the whole carrier business. Changing technology over time requires adaption and evolution of skills, but China is not replicating that process from scratch, instead benefitting from what others have done before. They certainly dont operate a "Langley" right now and its safe to say, they wont need to wait for decades before putting to sea a credible capability. Personally I give it about two years before they start embarking an air group for sustained training on Liaoning. Time will tell.<br />paranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-64034389450461755672012-12-03T15:20:12.973+00:002012-12-03T15:20:12.973+00:00I think the Chinese mindset is pretty well 'we...I think the Chinese mindset is pretty well 'we can do anything we put our mind to' these days, wether that be industrial, economic or defense (Very Victorian don't you think!). On that basis I think the timescales they will be looking at for full blown carrier capability will be far shorter than anyone expects. That said how truly effective this would be in the real world could be up for some doubt, at least lets hope so, but just like with the Soviets before them we should really be taking this very seriously. The sooner our carriers are out there plying the oceans of the world with full air wings the better. As has been stated previously the USN are reaching a bit of a crisis point of an aging fleet and real budget problems, this time we might need to be the cavalry!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-19944120468906623492012-11-30T19:38:43.222+00:002012-11-30T19:38:43.222+00:00Indeed, their 'aircraft carrying cruiser' ...Indeed, their 'aircraft carrying cruiser' (remember the Air Defense nature of the type of carrier...) has a very long way to go. I think its not something that's a concern to the US ans other 'western' navies. But for china's local neighbors - especially Vietnam (where in confrontations past, Chinese naval assets were bereft of air-cover) - this is of a far greater concern.<br /><br />Its seems to also reinvigorated India's plans as well. mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-54820975106165894782012-11-30T14:51:01.190+00:002012-11-30T14:51:01.190+00:00Sir H is correct in asserting that China is some w...Sir H is correct in asserting that China is some way away from fielding a fully worked up CVBG. It may also be the case as suggested in some articles, that the purpose of the worked up ship would be to provide air defence for their South China Sea fleet, rather than a full-up strike capability.<br /><br />However, what should not be underestimated about the Chinese is their technical prowess - their shipbuilders are not peasants paid in bowls of rice, but very capable and increasing in capability by the year. Unlike Western governments, they also appear to be capable of creating a plan and executing it without undue prevarication and very single mindedly. The best description is momentum.<br /><br />Irrespective of how many hoots they give regarding loss of life (and I happen to think they can't continue to behave as they have previously), these boys are serious. Most importantly, the US JCS thinks they are serious and will be doing their level best to bring Barry O'Bama with them. All of which should give anyone still labouring under the delusion that the US is not disengaging from Europe and that Western European nations will have to fight their own battles, pause for thought.<br /><br />Chinese developments while not immediately threatening are not as distant as people may assume.Not a Boffinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-62781641888481755412012-11-30T11:34:02.159+00:002012-11-30T11:34:02.159+00:00The West was in a similar state of complacency dur...The West was in a similar state of complacency during the Cold War when it was surprised by the speed with which the USSR achieved air parity, (on paper), with the Western Alliance<br />In the case of sea power, the USSR exhibited, (on paper), similar craft to our own, but not Carriers.<br />I think that China will foreshorten Sir Humph's time scales by a considerable margin, again on paper, by the same methods used by the USSR.<br />First of all, and the most important factor, will be the blackmail of pride and face. Two very important aspects of Chinese culture. Unlike the West, with it's exaggerated sense of individual care and responsibility, the Chinese have no such compunctions in the way of attaining their objectives. Their kit might not be as reliable or pretty, but it will photograph well and look tremendously important on the front pages of the Press. It will be an powerful card to play in diplomatic terms. They will not give two hoots about loss of life. Test flights will be carried out in service squadrons, washing machines will not register as essential weapons and pilots will wash their own underpants, if they should live that long.<br />Ruthlessness concentrates minds and smoke and mirrors bamboozle politicians.<br />Portsmouth should expect a visit circa 2018.Derek McBridenoreply@blogger.com