via South China Morning Post.
"[You should] build up [the carrier's] combat readiness, logistics and support expeditiously," Xi told Captain Zhang Zheng before wrapping up his inspection of the Liaoning, according to an account in this month's issue of Dangjian(Party Construction) magazine.Many have speculated that this first carrier would serve as a training ship.
The Liaoning, originally the Soviet Admiral Kuznetsov class carrier Varyag, was sold to China in 1998 after it was stripped of all weapons and engines. It underwent years of refitting and was handed over to the Chinese navy in September 2012 as an "aircraft carrier training platform".
In November it sailed for the first time in battle formation with warships in the South China Sea.
It appears they were wrong.
The Chinese are not evolving in the same way that Western navies have. They have stolen secrets, copied training methods and are in essence reading our playbook...and they're doing it on the run.
One does not exclude the second Sol, the main role of this ship will be the training of future carrier crews of PLAN. But of course even China can't afford to build or rather rebuild ship of that size to be ONLY a school barge. It will be a mix, school/combat ship that main role will be training but there will be no problem to join any combat action and support it with it's air wing.
ReplyDeleteThe perks of being a new comer with an unlimited budget and an ambition to match. A Chinese company offered to buy Ark Royal when the ship was decommissioned, if I remember correctly, they wanted to turn it into a floating casino or something like this. They buy, they study, they use. No time to invest in weapons R&D, they have a huge gap to recover and no time to spend on it. No one ever said about the Chinese that they are stupid or lacking pragmatism.
ReplyDeleteWell they turn Minsk and Kiev in to theme park. Originally Varyag was also sold with idea to turn it in to theme park, casino and hotel in once like the two other carriers... but from the start everybody know that this one will not end that way.
Deletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFifAs-mHkM
ReplyDeletegreat video of the ship. Notice the weapons still onboard.
Varyag/Liaoning is not combat ready regardless of what Xi says. It really is a training ship full of candidates and women(Who are not put in harm's way).
ReplyDeleteThe Kriegmarine of the former NAZI run Germany had some very powerful naval warships.
ReplyDeleteHaving powerful warships of a great number does not a world class sea power make.
As it did with the German Navy being a landlocked mentality will hinder China.
I recall Four large CV's with attached battle fleets sailing into the Midway battle considered an unstoppable force until Mcluskey"s SBD's arrived.
Those few large warships that the Kriegsmarine possessed tied down a lot of RN resources to prevent breakout and to protect Lend-Lease convoys to Russia.
DeleteHaving powerful warships doesn't make you a would class seapower, gratned. But it does scare the crap out of civilians and tie down a lot of military assets to deal with them.
Mcluskey was anomaly. He had some great luck, but that cannot be counted upon to win battles. It took the unintentional sacrifice of Torpedo 8 and others to draw of the Japanese fighters, and an indecisive Nagumo to order the rearming the Japanese strike forces. Counting on the the enemy making a mistake is never a good idea.
Having the tools and knowing how to effectively use them are two different things, any moron can go out and buy a ranger handbook and memorize it, that doesn't mean he can employ those techniques as good as a Ranger can in combat (which is all that matters) the Chinese haven't fought as a blue water navy in the 20th or 21st Century, the last time we did was in WWII (Navy v. Navy) but we still prepare for it to a certain extent. The Chinese are rookies, they are learning but they don't have the resident knowledge that we do.
DeleteThis is not saying that they PLAN should not be taken seriously but giving a guy a M40A5 and him knowing how to shoot it effectively are two different things. Its not the gear, its the man.
As crazy as it sounds, the Chinese claim that they must re-arm to defend themselves from the Japanese Imperialists is actually gaining credibility in Asia, so it's becoming harder to criticize Chinese military build-up.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26029614
Governor of Japan broadcaster NHK denies Nanjing massacre
A governor of Japan's public broadcaster, NHK, has denied that the Nanjing massacre took place, days after a row over Tokyo's use of war-time sex slaves engulfed the new NHK chief.
He was picked by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for the role late last year.
"In 1938, Chiang Kai-shek tried to publicise Japan's responsibility for the Nanking Massacre, but the nations of the world ignored him. Why? Because it never happened," the Asahi newspaper quoted Mr Hyakuta as saying.
=======================================
Most of Abe appointees are like him who are strongly committed turning back the clock prior to 1945 and erase the Tokyo Trial, including the Vice Premier Aso Taro(a former prime minister himself who took Abe's no. 2 role), who infamously claimed that Japan should learn from Nazi tactic in revising its constitution quickly before the opposition and the world knew that happened.
Oh, Mr. Hyakuta also claimed in a speech on same day that the only party that committed a massacre of the innocent in Asia during the WW2 was the Americans with their Tokyo firebombing and nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan always had nutjobs like his before, but not in the position of parliamentary and cabinet members, vice prime ministers, NHK governors and chairmen, and some argue even the prime minister of Japan as observed today.
Deletehttp://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/politics/AJ201402040048
NHK governor campaigns for revisionist in Tokyo election
February 04, 2014
THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
A Japan Broadcasting Corp. (NHK) governor handpicked by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said the Nanking Massacre was a fabrication designed to cancel out U.S. atrocities during speeches supporting a like-minded candidate in the Tokyo gubernatorial election.
In his first speech on Feb. 3, in front of JR Shinjuku Station, Hyakuta said the U.S. military committed “cruel massacres” by fire-bombing Tokyo and dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
Referring to the Tokyo war crimes trial, Hyakuta said, “It was conducted to cover up those atrocities.”
Tamogami was dismissed as ASDF chief of staff in November 2008 after he wrote an essay trying to legitimize Japanese military action before and during World War II. His view was in direct opposition to established government policy.
In the essay, Tamogami described Japan as a victim that was dragged into war against China by Chiang Kai-shek.
Hyakuta said in his Feb. 3 campaign speech that the Nanking Massacre was resuscitated in the Tokyo tribunal because the U.S. military wanted to cancel out its own crimes.
He also touched upon Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, that brought the United States into war against Japan.
“Japan has been criticized for going into war without a formal declaration, but in 20th-century wars, there were very few in which such declarations were made before fighting broke out,” Hyakuta said.
Slowman.
ReplyDeletetime for me to pull out my ugly American cape and hit you with some disturbing facts about western culture.
1. we don't give a rats ass about WW2. if we did then we'd still be firebombing Japan.
2. we don't give a rats ass about Vietnam War. if we did then we'd still be bombing Hanoi.
3. we don't give a rats ass about the Korean War. if we did then we'd be kicking the shit out of S. Korea for not being able to defend their own country, we'd be bombing N. Korea as we speak and China would be getting nuked while we complete the first two parts.
long story short.
we're not into the big "aggrieved" thing. we live life and we move on. if the Asian culture can't get with that then fine.
we'll help where we can but quite honestly we ARE NOT interested in getting caught up in all the gnashing of teeth over past wars.
we're not built that way.
but it does explain why every joint defense effort has failed. we tried to bring a western concept to a region of the world that is totally different from our own in that respect.
i can accept that. i can even respect that. but DON'T TRY TO GET ME TO BE CONCERNED BY THE TIRED OLD STUFF THAT HAS MANY WRAPPED AROUND THE AXLES!
Solomon
ReplyDelete> it does explain why every joint defense effort has failed.
And it will continue to fail into the future without the US taking drastic and decisive actions to change the status quo. In other word, the whole US "China containment" strategy fails.
> i can accept that.
"Accepting that" means accepting that the Western Pacific Ocean becomes a Chinese lake where the US military presence is not welcome, so the US must retreat to Guam-Haiwaii line and cede control of the Western Pacific to the PLA where half a dozen Chinese carrier battle groups patrol in routes that the US CBG used to do.
This is why the US has to make a hard decision now; either pressure Abe administration to drop "Neo-Imperialist" stuff and stop inflaming its neighbors, or form an Asian NATO without Japan, because an Asian NATO that includes the current nationalist Japan would almost certainly create a never-ending infighting between member states over territorial disputes, and be tainted as an imperialist organization by the presence of nationalist Japan.
What kind of future do you want to hand over to your next-generation? A future where China is contained within the First Island Chain, or an alternate future where the PLAN has broken through the first island chain and now challenge the US Navy near Hawaii?
NO IT DOESN'T!
Deletewhy does everyone look to the US to solve their problems!
WE MAKE ALLIANCES WITH THE INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES! that will be enough to keep China in its cage.
i never thought i would seriously tire of you but i have. your tips are great but your world view is tilted in a way that is seriously juvenile.
the US has its own issues to deal with. to be blunt. China might fuck with S. Korea or Japan...they might push around the Philippines but they fuck with us and they're dog food.
as far as Abe is concerned. I COULD CARE LESS! he isn't stepping on our toes and we're not sensitive about all the shit that has you tied up in knots.
if you're scared of Japan then say so, but you're becoming pathetic in your pronouncements. your passiveness when it comes to confronting rogue states that happen to have a bit of power is frustrating and quite honestly annoying. you would rather blame allies than confront enemies.
once we get rid of this commander in chief from Indonesia then we can finally start doing some good work in the region.
like making S. Korea pay for its own defense and leave them to it.
A quick reminder for Solomon on what's at stake here.
Deletehttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/aug/17/inside-the-ring-11086842/
Division rejected
The senior Air Force commander in the Pacific this week threw cold water on a Chinese military proposal to divide up the Pacific Ocean into U.S. and Chinese spheres of influence.
Gen. Paul V. Hester was asked about China’s recent plan to give the United States control of the eastern Pacific region, while China would control the western Pacific.
“Our policy is not to cede space to anyone,” Gen. Hester said in a telephone press conference from Hawaii.
He said the United States “needs to be” in the western Pacific, “as opposed to running through a proxy, if you will, by ceding a certain part of territory and asking them to take care of it for us.”
The proposal was made toAdm. Tim Keating, the overall commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, during a recent visit to China.
http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/china-proposed-division-of-pacific-indian-ocean-regions-we-declined-us-admiral/459851/
China proposed division of Pacific, Indian Ocean regions, we declined: US Admiral
Manu Pubby : New Delhi, Fri May 15 2009, 02:42 hrs
In a startling disclosure, a top US Admiral has revealed that China offered to divide the Pacific and Indian Ocean regions between China and the US after Beijing launched its own fleet of aircraft carriers.
The offer was made by an unnamed top Chinese Navy officer while discussing the country's ongoing aircraft carrier programme, one of the senior-most officers of the US military, Pacific Command (PACOM) chief Admiral Timothy J Keating said. He added that the incident was disclosed to Indian Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta during their meeting on Thursday.
"We (Keating and Mehta) talked a little about the potential development of a Chinese aircraft carrier. I related (to Mehta) a conversation I had with a senior Chinese Naval officer during which he proposed, in his words, that as China builds aircraft carriers — he said plural — we can make a deal," the PACOM chief said after meeting the top Indian military leadership besides the National Security Advisor and Foreign Secretary.
The proposed "deal" envisaged that after China has its own aircraft carriers — it remains the only major naval power currently without such a capability — the Pacific region could be divided into two areas of responsibility.
"(The Chinese officer said) You, the US, take Hawaii East and we, China, will take Hawai West and the Indian Ocean. Then you will not need to come to the western Pacific and the Indian Ocean and we will not need to go to the Eastern Pacific. If anything happens there, you can let us know and if something happens here, we will let you know," Keating recalled.
=========================================
Chinese are serious about kicking Americans out of the Western Pacific(This is their stated eventual goal, no matter how long it takes), and nationalist Japan is only helping to accelerate toward that future.
Solomon,
Delete> if you're scared of Japan then say so, but you're becoming pathetic in your pronouncements. your passiveness when it comes to confronting rogue states that happen to have a bit of power is frustrating and quite honestly annoying. you would rather blame allies than confront enemies.
The US is directly involved in two of three territorial disputes that Japan's currently involved in, so the US has a moral obligation to get involved and clear things up.
The Diaoyu Islands were under the US administration until the return of Okinawa to Japan, so the US was a direct participant in the transaction that caused the present day dispute between Japan, Taiwan, and China. Thus the US has a moral obligation to clear up the transaction that has gone bad.
Same with the Liancourt Rocks. The US included the Liancourt Rocks under the Korea-ADIZ line(The original KADIZ line was drawn up by the US in 1951), and listed it as belonging to Korea until the 4th revision draft of the San Francisco Treaty, but deleted it in the final version of it. The US has yet to explain why it did what it did, and the US cannot remain "neutral" to the problem when its unexplained action created the problem in the first place.
The US position is that it remains neutral on territorial disputes in which it took a part in creating, and this indecisiveness is creating a regional tension and is harming the US national interests by unnecessarily drawing the US into territorial wars covered by the mutual defense treaties that the US signed.