Why not for a super super carrier? The Chinese certainly has the capability to build such monster. They have so many shipyards that can build large ocean going vessels, plus almost unlimited financial resources for naval expansion thanks to US consumers. We keep underestimate chicom military at our own peril. We seem to be surprised at every time PLA publically shows off their new toys then our so called experts start to scramble and come up with lame excuses. I won’t be surprised if their stealth fighters declared operational before F-35 FOC or their super carrier task force goes underway within the next two years.
not necessarily. nuclear power can motor along our super carriers at very impressive speeds...additionally our super carriers are thought to be armored to a standard that would defeat torpedo attacks. why would we think differently of Chinese carriers. last armor is lighter but more effective. i said armored to the same standard, not in the same way as a wwII battleship.
A salvo of heavy torpedoes firings probably would sink super carrier. But that threat doesn't seem to deter US Navy from cutting back her own fleet of super carrier.
what are you calling a heavy torpedo? i'm not sure but i think the brits use the heaviest torpedos in the west and they're not what i would call designed to sink a carrier.
For the cost on one of those SupperCat Carriers, you could build 3-4 normal carriers. This decreases the number of targets to track and engage thereby making it easier to mission-kill a larger number of assets with the least amount of effort.
btw, If you envision yourself as a Blue water navy, then you cannot base your survival on cover from land based planes.
why not? what is Air Sea battle if not the US Navy relying on land based air to keep another Navy in check? additionally if you're talking about an expeditionary carrier then the ones being listed will be capable of carrying C-130's sized airplanes without problem making onboard delivery simple.
a super super super carrier makes alot of sense. carrier landings would become easier, more aircraft could be carried, a higher sortie rate achieved, landings and take offs performed simultaneously ... the list goes on.
The Chinese won't build anything like this for the foreseeable future for several reasons. The PLAAN has five tankers to support 75 major ships. The annual report to Congress by the DoD concluded China cannot sustain prolonged Naval operations far from China with its existing fleet. Carriers without strike groups don't fare well. More importantly, the consensus among analysts is China is more concerned with regional power projection and consolidation rather than global power projection (as this mega carrier concept would suggest).
why are you assuming that the carrier is designed to operate out of area? for US forces a carrier this size would be ideal for out of area operations but for the Chinese to have a floating behemoth that can tie up at Hong Kong and then blast out towards Taiwan would be perfect. an attack on the philippines or the spratly isles would be easier with a huge carrier----operating under a land air umbrella.
its easy to poo poo this but it would be in keeping with the Chinese vision of themselves as the next super power.
AirSea battle is about using overseas basing of USAF assets in conjunction with USN assets to project power. The USAF assets are not there to guard the Navy.
The US has been studying SuperSuper carriers for decades and did not go with them for several reasons, and they had the rest of the navy to back them up too.
China is not even to the point where they can build a regular carrier, let alone build and support a SuperSuper one. It's fan art, nothing more.
you are so wrong about air sea battle that its not even funny. no one said anything about it being to protect the US Navy, its to fight in conjunction with the US Navy.
this carrier concept that is so popular in China is a possibility. for you to try and limit it to fan art is again to ignore recent history. the stealth fighters that China has been producing lately were once called fan art.
Well. Their "real" stealth fighters did show up after someone posted Photoshopped fan art, as their first carrier and their first C-17ish strategic airlifter. The list goes on and on. I remember all the experts were laughing back then and ridiculed the ideal of a Chinese made 5th gen fighter. Haven’t you all notice it yet, the pace Chinese military advancement always caught western observers off guard. The gap is shrinking faster…
Might not be as hard to make as we think. Could be 2 tankers joined by the top deck. Kind of a giant catamaran with some armor platted below the water line, could work. 4 nukes for power plants,maybe. Would resolve any problems of lack of power...
why not? Might not be as expensive as we think, lot of it could be off the shelf.
and that's the point. we've already seen Maersk essential build a super carrier out of a super container ship...this wouldn't be much more difficult. all you're doing is building bigger...and that's not hard to do. take existing structures and simply upsize them, make allowances for stress, and on a ship big enough all you'd really need are sufficient compartmentalization and you'd have something approaching a ship that is darn near unsinkable.
as far as torpedoes against our super carriers, i think the Chinese answered that question when they're designing a ballistic missile to take one out.
Something I thought after postings, not sure how true, just talking from memory but doesn't China, Japan and South Korea pretty much make all tankers, big cargo boats,etc for the world? If we are talking regular carriers a la Nimitz or Charles de Gaulle, yeah, it is an area of expertise those countries don't really possess but they know a LOT about big civilian boats. What might seem impossible or difficult for USA, France or UK might actually be easier for those countries since there are using civilian technology that they are familiar with.
Let's not fall into the trap of since we couldn't do it, they can't. Western manufacturing has been declining for decades, they have manufacturing capabilities in the region we just don't have anymore.
As for it being useful or practical, that's a different matter but I think it could be done by China.
An interesting concept. I think the idea is, instead of making a "normal" carrier and developing the specialized aircraft and procedures to use it, just take a normal airfield and make it float. The true gain is not in size or capability, but in being able to use existing airplanes of all types and needing little retraining/procedural changes. Many critics said that the recently bought/built Chinese carriers would not be a major threat as they would need years to develop planes and learn proper carrier operations. But with this approach they don't need to.
Lilly pad concept. Not so much a Carrier as a huge Naval aviation floating base. The one danger that stalks all Carrier's is FIRE, The crew will have to be very good at Fire fighting and damage control. Do the Chinese have the skill and experience with massive ship fires? Just maneuvering with an heavy compliment of Jets on deck will be a chore. Un-Rep and Vert-Rep strike me as being a nightmare evolution for any ship this size during a war or rough seas state. ----- Rule # 1 If it's a Capitol ship of this size and capabilities a nuke will be used against it, it's the only way to be sure.
Not a snowball's chance.
ReplyDeleteWhy not for a super super carrier? The Chinese certainly has the capability to build such monster. They have so many shipyards that can build large ocean going vessels, plus almost unlimited financial resources for naval expansion thanks to US consumers.
ReplyDeleteWe keep underestimate chicom military at our own peril. We seem to be surprised at every time PLA publically shows off their new toys then our so called experts start to scramble and come up with lame excuses. I won’t be surprised if their stealth fighters declared operational before F-35 FOC or their super carrier task force goes underway within the next two years.
LRASM/mk48 magnet :)
ReplyDeleteMk48 would have little effect against a wwII battleship and why wouldn't the Chinese armor their ships to the same standard.
DeleteShips of those size require propellers. Large and noisy ones. I'd send a few torps and hope to detonate under the propellers and damage the bearings.
DeleteThen you have one big mother-f*cking sitting duck ... with alot of "ducklings" (escorts) sitting around it.
That much armor in a ship this large means it would be SLOW.
ReplyDeleteiirc, The mk48 detonates under the hull, not in it, and lets gravity do the work.
not necessarily. nuclear power can motor along our super carriers at very impressive speeds...additionally our super carriers are thought to be armored to a standard that would defeat torpedo attacks. why would we think differently of Chinese carriers. last armor is lighter but more effective. i said armored to the same standard, not in the same way as a wwII battleship.
DeleteA salvo of heavy torpedoes firings probably would sink super carrier. But that threat doesn't seem to deter US Navy from cutting back her own fleet of super carrier.
Deletewhat are you calling a heavy torpedo? i'm not sure but i think the brits use the heaviest torpedos in the west and they're not what i would call designed to sink a carrier.
Deleteok... They will still be a magnet come hostility-time :)
DeletePutting all your eggs in one basket is not smart.
so will US carriers...except they can have the advantage of operating under naval and land based fighter protection and a huge number of escorts....
DeleteFor the cost on one of those SupperCat Carriers, you could build 3-4 normal carriers. This decreases the number of targets to track and engage thereby making it easier to mission-kill a larger number of assets with the least amount of effort.
ReplyDeletebtw, If you envision yourself as a Blue water navy, then you cannot base your survival on cover from land based planes.
why not? what is Air Sea battle if not the US Navy relying on land based air to keep another Navy in check? additionally if you're talking about an expeditionary carrier then the ones being listed will be capable of carrying C-130's sized airplanes without problem making onboard delivery simple.
Deletea super super super carrier makes alot of sense. carrier landings would become easier, more aircraft could be carried, a higher sortie rate achieved, landings and take offs performed simultaneously ... the list goes on.
The Chinese won't build anything like this for the foreseeable future for several reasons. The PLAAN has five tankers to support 75 major ships. The annual report to Congress by the DoD concluded China cannot sustain prolonged Naval operations far from China with its existing fleet. Carriers without strike groups don't fare well. More importantly, the consensus among analysts is China is more concerned with regional power projection and consolidation rather than global power projection (as this mega carrier concept would suggest).
Deletewhy are you assuming that the carrier is designed to operate out of area? for US forces a carrier this size would be ideal for out of area operations but for the Chinese to have a floating behemoth that can tie up at Hong Kong and then blast out towards Taiwan would be perfect. an attack on the philippines or the spratly isles would be easier with a huge carrier----operating under a land air umbrella.
Deleteits easy to poo poo this but it would be in keeping with the Chinese vision of themselves as the next super power.
AirSea battle is about using overseas basing of USAF assets in conjunction with USN assets to project power. The USAF assets are not there to guard the Navy.
ReplyDeleteThe US has been studying SuperSuper carriers for decades and did not go with them for several reasons, and they had the rest of the navy to back them up too.
China is not even to the point where they can build a regular carrier, let alone build and support a SuperSuper one. It's fan art, nothing more.
you are so wrong about air sea battle that its not even funny. no one said anything about it being to protect the US Navy, its to fight in conjunction with the US Navy.
Deletethis carrier concept that is so popular in China is a possibility. for you to try and limit it to fan art is again to ignore recent history. the stealth fighters that China has been producing lately were once called fan art.
Well. Their "real" stealth fighters did show up after someone posted Photoshopped fan art, as their first carrier and their first C-17ish strategic airlifter. The list goes on and on. I remember all the experts were laughing back then and ridiculed the ideal of a Chinese made 5th gen fighter. Haven’t you all notice it yet, the pace Chinese military advancement always caught western observers off guard. The gap is shrinking faster…
ReplyDeleteMight not be as hard to make as we think. Could be 2 tankers joined by the top deck. Kind of a giant catamaran with some armor platted below the water line, could work. 4 nukes for power plants,maybe. Would resolve any problems of lack of power...
ReplyDeletewhy not? Might not be as expensive as we think, lot of it could be off the shelf.
and that's the point. we've already seen Maersk essential build a super carrier out of a super container ship...this wouldn't be much more difficult. all you're doing is building bigger...and that's not hard to do. take existing structures and simply upsize them, make allowances for stress, and on a ship big enough all you'd really need are sufficient compartmentalization and you'd have something approaching a ship that is darn near unsinkable.
Deleteas far as torpedoes against our super carriers, i think the Chinese answered that question when they're designing a ballistic missile to take one out.
Something I thought after postings, not sure how true, just talking from memory but doesn't China, Japan and South Korea pretty much make all tankers, big cargo boats,etc for the world? If we are talking regular carriers a la Nimitz or Charles de Gaulle, yeah, it is an area of expertise those countries don't really possess but they know a LOT about big civilian boats. What might seem impossible or difficult for USA, France or UK might actually be easier for those countries since there are using civilian technology that they are familiar with.
ReplyDeleteLet's not fall into the trap of since we couldn't do it, they can't. Western manufacturing has been declining for decades, they have manufacturing capabilities in the region we just don't have anymore.
As for it being useful or practical, that's a different matter but I think it could be done by China.
An interesting concept. I think the idea is, instead of making a "normal" carrier and developing the specialized aircraft and procedures to use it, just take a normal airfield and make it float.
ReplyDeleteThe true gain is not in size or capability, but in being able to use existing airplanes of all types and needing little retraining/procedural changes. Many critics said that the recently bought/built Chinese carriers would not be a major threat as they would need years to develop planes and learn proper carrier operations. But with this approach they don't need to.
Lilly pad concept.
ReplyDeleteNot so much a Carrier as a huge Naval aviation floating base.
The one danger that stalks all Carrier's is FIRE, The crew will have to be very good at Fire fighting and damage control. Do the Chinese have the skill and experience with massive ship fires?
Just maneuvering with an heavy compliment of Jets on deck will be a chore.
Un-Rep and Vert-Rep strike me as being a nightmare evolution for any ship this size during a war or rough seas state.
-----
Rule # 1
If it's a Capitol ship of this size and capabilities a nuke will be used against it, it's the only way to be sure.