aircraft carrier

Re: aircraft carrier

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: garrett4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Chinese are getting ready to launch a carrier and if I understand correctly, have another in the early building stages. It is going to get crowded out there </div></div>

International News
China recruits 10,000 workers for building aircraft carrier

SHANGHAI (Kyodo) -- After China confirmed for the first time last week that it is pursuing an aircraft carrier program, residents in Changxing Island just north of Shanghai said authorities have secretly recruited 10,000 workers in an apparent move to build China's first domestic aircraft carrier.

Compared with December last year, the number of workers entering and leaving a gate leading to dry dock No. 3 of the Jiangnan Shipyard on the island is apparently increasing, with guards watching people's movements and many taxis waiting for customers.

"At dry dock No. 3, (the shipyard) recruited 10,000 workers in January," a local resident said. "Workers are obliged to strictly keep secret (about their employment). They would not be allowed to use mobile phones and to make contact with their families during a one-year contract period."

Another resident told Kyodo News that a state leader visited and inspected dry dock No. 3 on May 25.

The People's Daily, the newspaper for the Communist Party of China, showed the leader was He Guoqiang, a member of the Standing Committee of the party's Political Bureau.

A spokesman for the shipyard declined to confirm whether it had recruited 10,000 workers, only saying, "In general, we may attach conditions (to employment) for maintaining secrecy in construction of a military vessel."

Looking from outside dry dock No. 3, there are no signs that workers have begun building a hull. In contrast, a large hull is being constructed in a neighboring dock.

Experts said it would require three to five years to build an aircraft carrier. "I hear workers have already begun manufacturing parts inside the dock and at another shipyard," said one resident who previously worked at the Jiangnan Shipyard.

"If you need to hire 10,000 workers (for construction), it must be a considerably large vessel," said Tomohiko Tada, a Japanese military affairs expert.

A Chinese source said China needs Ukrainian engineers' cooperation in building a domestic carrier.

There are high-class apartments, apparently for foreigners, and a soccer field near dry dock No. 3. While no one appears to live in the apartments yet, a large number of Ukrainian engineers will arrive on the island in September, the source said, citing unconfirmed information.

In the northeastern city of Dalian, China appears to have completed refitting the Varyag, a Ukrainian-made aircraft carrier.

The Oriental Morning Post, a Shanghai daily, reported Monday that the Varyag, delivered in 2002, is expected to set sail on a maiden experimental voyage in mid- or late August.

(Mainichi Japan) August 2, 2011
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/international/archive/news/2011/08/02/20110802p2g00m0in057000c.html
 
Re: aircraft carrier

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I love the part where they say its for "platform for research and training"
the Ruskies are full of it


http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-08/10/c_131041570.htm </div></div>

They will research how to opperate a carrier. Then they will build more. I guess that is why we are starting the Gerald R Ford class of carriers.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/cvn-21/
 
Re: aircraft carrier

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rpk762</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Veer_G</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Force projection. I won't see it in my lifetime, more than likely, but we're going to wind up fighting them.

Watch:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-war-china-inevitable-author-glain-says-185732514.html </div></div>

Col. Andy Tanner: I don't know. Two toughest kids on the block, I guess. Sooner or later, they're gonna fight.
</div></div>

Unfortunately, in that scenario we were on the same side as China, if you remember.
 
Re: aircraft carrier

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rpk762</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I love the part where they say its for "platform for research and training"
the Ruskies are full of it


http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-08/10/c_131041570.htm </div></div>

They will research how to opperate a carrier. Then they will build more. I guess that is why we are starting the Gerald R Ford class of carriers.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/cvn-21/ </div></div>

"CVN 21 design

The Gerald R Ford class carriers will have the same displacement, about 100,000t, as its predecessor, the Nimitz class George HW Bush (CVN 77),...

The other main differences in operational performance compared with the Nimitz Class are ... a weight and stability allowance over the 50-year operational service life of the ship,,,,"

Does anybody know what a "a weight and stability allowance over the 50-year operational service life of the ship" means?
 
Re: aircraft carrier

Sounds to me like they got room to add more junk in the future without making the ship roll over or sink.

Navy guys are always painting, and paint adds weight. If they built the ship without allowing the addition of extra weight, the ship woud get heavy above the water, and eventually she'd capsize and sink. The paint example is simplistic, but they'll add electric and electronic systems as the technology matures, and the example holds true.
 
Re: aircraft carrier

They are decades behind us in carrier flight operations. Likely they will never be our equal in that arena, same as every other seafaring nation. NONE of them are our equal in carrier operatons.
 
Re: aircraft carrier

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 11B101ABN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They are decades behind us in carrier flight operations. Likely they will never be our equal in that arena, same as every other seafaring nation. NONE of them are our equal in carrier operatons.</div></div>

How 'bout we not find out, shall we not?

That fiasco we're getting out of now has us so in debt now we'll likely never get out.
 
Re: aircraft carrier

...There is a strong clue that the Chinese navy does not expect to take too long in learning the notoriously difficult and dangerous business of efficiently operating fixed-wing aircraft at sea. For many years while Varyag was in dockyard hands, it was unclear how much effort would be spent on the ship, and how far it would be transformed from the empty hull that Chinese businessmen bought from Ukraine in 1998. It was conceivable, for example, that Varyag might have been made only structurally fit for service as a moored hull that pilots and deck crews could practice on. Or it might have been cheaply fitted with a modest powerplant and not much else, confining it to training excursions.

But as the ship runs its trials, it is evident that the navy has gone for the whole box and dice. Varyag has been fitted for combat—with self-defense surface-to-air missile launchers, a profusion of domes that must cover antennas for communications systems and sensors and, most notably, a phased-array radar. To integrate those systems, a capable command system must be installed deep in the hull. It seems unlikely that a navy that expected to take, say, 10 years to prepare the ship for combat would spend so heavily now on such costly equipment, especially since better systems would be available later....

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/s...channel=defense

...The U.S. Navy’s next-generation aircraft carrier CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford could exceed the current contract’s price by about 11%, Naval Sea Systems Command (Navsea) officials confirm.

The Navy now has a $5.2 billion design-and-construction contract with the Newport News Shipbuilding unit of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) for the carrier, which features a reconfigured and redesigned Nimitz-class hull. But the company may exceed that amount by about $562 million, Navsea confirms.

The Navy says the cost overrun is due to material costs and contractor performance.

The overrun reflects “unfavorable contractor material and labor performance,” according to a Pentagon Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) released earlier this year and cited by an Aug. 9 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report.

The Navy says it is working to reduce the overrun, according to CRS.

The potential overrun could not come at a worse time for the Ford or the carrier program. Pentagon officials say the Defense Department has been considering delaying, cutting back or canceling planned future carriers (Aerospace DAILY, July 15, 27).

Potential cost growth has been a worry for the Ford-class carrier, CRS notes.

“The Navy’s proposed fiscal 2012 budget estimates the ship’s procurement cost at ... about $11.5 billion in then-year dollars,”...

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/asd/2011/08/11/04.xml&channel=defense
 
Re: aircraft carrier

Nobody knows what's coming. The one thing that's certain is that when we get there, nobody will be able to confidently say they saw it coming. We are in new territory, beyond known borders.

But while we haven't been precisely here until now, we've been in new territory for nearly all our history.

It's not where we've been that's important, it's how we got here. The most certain way to enter the death spiral is to hesitate when facing the unknown.

The Chinese know something we didn't. They know that where they're going is within the realm of possibility. They know it because we proved it so.

We made the mistakes, they can avoid them in as far as they know what we did and how we did it. They are good at letting others, mostly us, break the trail for them. We make this easier for them because we insist upon living within an open society.

I don't know whether the open society works for us or against us, but I do know China is not an open society, and whatever else, I'd rather be living here than there.

My only misgiving is that I know that an open society is its own worst enemy, and right now, we appear to be losing; to ourselves. We don't need to worry about China, we are already our own biggest match.

Greg
 
Re: aircraft carrier

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Veer_G</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rpk762</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Veer_G</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Force projection. I won't see it in my lifetime, more than likely, but we're going to wind up fighting them.

Watch:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-war-china-inevitable-author-glain-says-185732514.html </div></div>

Col. Andy Tanner: I don't know. Two toughest kids on the block, I guess. Sooner or later, they're gonna fight.
</div></div>

Unfortunately, in that scenario we were on the same side as China, if you remember.</div></div>

I do remember. Great movie. Now I am not so sure what they have planned. It can go either way. If they attack us or we attack them it would be crippling to either company. Yes company as that is kind of what we are. We get so much from them it is not funny. It would be crippling to both of our ecomonies.
 
Re: aircraft carrier

Never thought I'd see the day where WE, or at least some of we, would lament having an open society.

The sooner or later quote is a primary reason most of Europe plunged into the horrific bloodletting of WWI. Not one I'd like our leaders to use when shooting from the lip.

I seem to recall another sea superior nation that ruled the 7 seas. Seems they too faced enemy fleets, sometimes combined enemy fleets. The French and Spain had fleets for centuries but not the training or experience to match the British.

I'm not so sure the Chinese can match us anytime soon. The Roosians never could, for all the hype given their substandard subs, missles, and ships.

What strikes me as odd isn't a nation wanting a carrier, but as the budget crisis is discussed with possible cut backs on super expensive military projects, all of a sudden China building a carrier is a big deal.

We have how many?
 
Re: aircraft carrier

It looks like we have 11 in active duty and one in resurve and one being built.


USS Enterprise
CVN-65 094700 94,700 tons - Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1961-11-25 25 November 1961

USS Nimitz
CVN-68 100000 100,000 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1975-05-03 3 May 1975

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower
CVN-69 101600 101,600 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1977-10-18 18 October 1977

USS Carl Vinson
CVN-70 101300 101,300 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1982-03-13 13 March 1982

USS Theodore Roosevelt
CVN-71 104600 104,600 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1986-10-25 25 October 1986

USS Abraham Lincoln
CVN-72 100000 100,000 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1989-11-11 11 November 1989

USS George Washington
CVN-73 104200 104,200 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1992-07-04 4 July 1992

USS John C. Stennis
CVN-74 103300 103,300 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1995-12-09 9 December 1995

USS Harry S. Truman
CVN-75 103900 103,900 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 1998-07-25 25 July 1998

USS Ronald Reagan
CVN-76 101400 101,400 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 2003-07-12 12 July 2003

USS George H. W. Bush
CVN-77 102000 102,000 tons Nimitz Nuclear-powered supercarrier 2009-01-10 10 January 2009

and one in reserve.

United States USS Kitty Hawk
CV-63 081985 81,985 tons Kitty Hawk Conventionally-powered supercarrier 1961-04-21 21 April 1961 2009-01-31 31 resurve intillJanuary 2009 2015

USS Gerald R. Ford
CVN-78 100000 100,000 tons Ford Nuclear-powered supercarrier 2015 (expected) Under construction