If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Now that China has an aircraft carrier, all they need are some aircraft   (nytimes.com) divider line 103
    More: Amusing, Ministry of Defense, Wen Jiabao, military operation plan, National University of Singapore, aircraft, Hu Jintao  
•       •       •

10872 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Sep 2012 at 12:05 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



103 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-25 12:08:00 PM
DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.
 
2012-09-25 12:08:11 PM
Yawn.......

this is news why?

greenlight?

fark it just bomb them.
 
2012-09-25 12:09:49 PM
Don't forget the slot machines, blackjack and baccarat tables.
 
2012-09-25 12:10:02 PM
I don't know if I would trust even the most thorough overhaul of Varyag. I'd have put more trust in the Cabot (before it was scrapped) than a Kuznetzov hull.
 
2012-09-25 12:10:49 PM
They'll make copies of someone else's aircraft for the carrier, just like they make copies of every other thing ever made in the history of forever......or something like that.
 
2012-09-25 12:11:15 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


Sure, the ones that can actually fly are obsolete. The rest are probably cardboard cutouts.
 
2012-09-25 12:11:16 PM
... seen a few shoppe's in my days....
 
2012-09-25 12:12:10 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


Turns out a land based aircraft != a carrier based aircraft
 
2012-09-25 12:12:22 PM
Lead floats now?

/FU china
 
2012-09-25 12:12:23 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


Land based aircraft aren't suited for carrier type landings.
 
2012-09-25 12:12:33 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


However, none of those aircraft are capable, and none of the pilots fully trained, to land on a few hundred feet of metal bobbing in the sea.

The entire point of this particular ship is to train pilots, once they get some aircraft that can handle the rigors of a carrier landing.
 
2012-09-25 12:12:36 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


FTA:

China does not have planes capable of landing on the carrier and so far training for such landings has been carried out on land, they said. 

As much as neocons are going to get all worked up about this, it's not really a near-term thing to worry about. This one is just a trainer, since it takes decades and stupid amounts of military spending to build up the institutional skill sets you need to really operate a carrier at any level of effectiveness.
 
2012-09-25 12:13:26 PM

Albert911emt: They'll make copies of someone else's aircraft for the carrier, just like they make copies of every other thing ever made in the history of forever......or something like that.


And they would be full of lead, cutting down on range and payload.
 
2012-09-25 12:13:40 PM
Nathan Arizona Sr.:

Eight hundred leaf-tables and no chairs? You can't sell leaf-tables and no chairs. Chairs, you got a dinette set. No chairs, you got d*ck!
 
2012-09-25 12:14:30 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


The Chinese never bought any Su-33s, however. And I don't think they've modified any J-10s to be carrier-capable.
 
2012-09-25 12:14:45 PM
Now that I have read TFA, it sounds less like they need planes and more like they need pilots that can land on carriers.

Especially when the deck is pitching. My Dad flew sub patrol and he said that is some serious sphincter-tightening shiat.
 
2012-09-25 12:15:14 PM
They have one obsolete, decrepit Russian carrier that they don't know how to use.

Obviously we need to spend $1 trillion on another dozen state-of-the-art carrier task groups before the Red Tide washes over us.
 
2012-09-25 12:15:58 PM

cgraves67:
The entire point of this particular ship is to train pilots, once they get some aircraft that can handle the rigors of a carrier landing.


Also ship crews.

/like the article says, this ship is for training and research only so that they can build their own carrier
 
2012-09-25 12:16:10 PM
Maybe we can dig up a few of these to sell them for practice on their carrier.
 
2012-09-25 12:17:05 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


There's these guys in the Western Hemisphere that have a pretty large air force themselves.

I think it's Canada.
 
2012-09-25 12:18:27 PM

Slives: Maybe we can dig up a few of these to sell them for practice on their carrier.


Nah, let's give them some raw F4U-1A Corsairs, the ones where you had to manually compensate for engine torque by slamming the rudder in the opposite direction to keep from landing upside down.
 
2012-09-25 12:18:44 PM
I hope they do, I hope they build a whole fleet of them. They'll be so broke by the time they're done they won't have any fuel to sail them anywhere.
 
2012-09-25 12:18:49 PM

UNC_Samurai: The Chinese never bought any Su-33s, however. And I don't think they've modified any J-10s to be carrier-capable.


How much modification does that take tho'? Given the size of their air force and how much money China is currently rolling in, while I agree this is probably a tempest in a tea pot, but I don't think aircraft are really the problem here.
 
2012-09-25 12:19:03 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


but according to the article not ones capable of landing on the former soviet aircraft carrier.

that said do not mock our future chinese overlords.

That right there -- that kind of racism is exactly why I can't wait to see tiny little chinese boots on your ..
Which may sound hypocritical, i know, but would you just go already !

images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-09-25 12:19:50 PM

UNC_Samurai: I don't know if I would trust even the most thorough overhaul of Varyag. I'd have put more trust in the Cabot (before it was scrapped) than a Kuznetzov hull.


My Grandfather served on the Cabot in WWII. I have the medical dictionary he used then.
 
2012-09-25 12:20:23 PM
Does this mean there will be yet another "Iron Eagle" film?Louis Gossett Jr is still alive after all.
 
2012-09-25 12:20:23 PM

Marine1: KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.

There's these guys in the Western Hemisphere that have a pretty large air force themselves.

I think it's Canada.


And your point is relevant to this conversation how?
 
2012-09-25 12:20:56 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


but it still leaves you wanting more in 30 minutes or so..
 
2012-09-25 12:22:28 PM

KiplingKat872: Marine1: KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.

There's these guys in the Western Hemisphere that have a pretty large air force themselves.

I think it's Canada.

And your point is relevant to this conversation how?


Point being, the US has a larger air force with better trained crews and better aircraft. This goes for the USAF and US Navy/Marines.
 
2012-09-25 12:24:56 PM

KiplingKat872: UNC_Samurai: The Chinese never bought any Su-33s, however. And I don't think they've modified any J-10s to be carrier-capable.

How much modification does that take tho'? Given the size of their air force and how much money China is currently rolling in, while I agree this is probably a tempest in a tea pot, but I don't think aircraft are really the problem here.


I just looked up the J 10. That thing could land on a carrier...

Once.
 
2012-09-25 12:25:06 PM

RugNug: UNC_Samurai: I don't know if I would trust even the most thorough overhaul of Varyag. I'd have put more trust in the Cabot (before it was scrapped) than a Kuznetzov hull.

My Grandfather served on the Cabot in WWII. I have the medical dictionary he used then.


If you're ever in South Texas, go visit the Lexington in Corpus Christi. They were able to save some items off the Cabot before it was scrapped, including a cactus that had found a place to grow in between two planks of the flight deck.
 
2012-09-25 12:29:10 PM

Albert911emt: They'll make copies of someone else's aircraft for the carrier, just like they make copies of every other thing ever made in the history of forever......or something like that.


sure but try to sell copies of Ming vases and they lose their shiat.
 
2012-09-25 12:29:37 PM
I say we sell them $15 trillion dollars worth of airplanes and get even on the debt.
(and not get involved in any wars in Asia)

We can throw in all mining rights in Afghanistan.
 
2012-09-25 12:30:19 PM

UNC_Samurai: RugNug: UNC_Samurai: I don't know if I would trust even the most thorough overhaul of Varyag. I'd have put more trust in the Cabot (before it was scrapped) than a Kuznetzov hull.

My Grandfather served on the Cabot in WWII. I have the medical dictionary he used then.

If you're ever in South Texas, go visit the Lexington in Corpus Christi. They were able to save some items off the Cabot before it was scrapped, including a cactus that had found a place to grow in between two planks of the flight deck.


I was at Fort Hood for a while. Didn't make it down there before they scrapped the superstructure though. Too bad they couldn't save her.
 
2012-09-25 12:34:14 PM

Marine1: Point being, the US has a larger air force with better trained crews and better aircraft. This goes for the USAF and US Navy/Marines.


Still waiting to see how that is relevant to this discussion.
 
2012-09-25 12:34:33 PM
It's not an aircraft carrier, it's a big shiny training center.
 
2012-09-25 12:34:54 PM

KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.


Except that means bunk when you're talking about Naval Aviation. An F-16 would fall apart if it had to be recovered and launched from a carrier, and would probably fall nose first into the sea after it stalled leaving the carrier deck on launch.
 
2012-09-25 12:34:59 PM
Get Five O'clock Charlie.

// obscure?
Link
 
2012-09-25 12:38:25 PM
That's all well and nice but can I just get them to do a decent starch in my laundry?
 
2012-09-25 12:42:19 PM

BronyMedic: Except that means bunk when you're talking about Naval Aviation. An F-16 would fall apart if it had to be recovered and launched from a carrier, and would probably fall nose first into the sea after it stalled leaving the carrier deck on launch.


Yes, I have told that over a dozen times already.
 
2012-09-25 12:46:42 PM
Now that China has an aircraft carrier, all they need are some aircraft


SRSLY?

China gets anything and everyone is green with envy. US has dozens of carriers and has had for decades and China gets one that's just a training center and everyone has to come up with put downs.
 
2012-09-25 12:47:44 PM
Chinese J-15

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-25 12:51:04 PM

Langdon Alger: Nathan Arizona Sr.:

Eight hundred leaf-tables and no chairs? You can't sell leaf-tables and no chairs. Chairs, you got a dinette set. No chairs, you got d*ck!


Frankly I would have bought an unpainted Huffheinz.
 
2012-09-25 12:51:29 PM

Kibbler: They have one obsolete, decrepit Russian carrier that they don't know how to use.

Obviously we need to spend $1 trillion on another dozen state-of-the-art carrier task groups before the Red Tide washes over us.


i235.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-25 12:52:11 PM

Dupster: Yawn.......

this is news why?

greenlight?

fark it just bomb them.


You don't threaten your boss.
 
2012-09-25 12:53:36 PM

Voiceofreason01: land based aircraft


lamric: Land based aircraft


i.imgur.com
 
2012-09-25 12:55:05 PM
Uh, no it doesn't take decades. It does take a lot of money, and a large scale conflict. see US use of aircraft carriers in WW2. Unless your claiming that the US did not use carrier's effectively in WW2?

toraque: KiplingKat872: DRTFA, but China has one of the largest air forces in the world subby.

FTA:

China does not have planes capable of landing on the carrier and so far training for such landings has been carried out on land, they said. 

As much as neocons are going to get all worked up about this, it's not really a near-term thing to worry about. This one is just a trainer, since it takes decades and stupid amounts of military spending to build up the institutional skill sets you need to really operate a carrier at any level of effectiveness.

 
2012-09-25 12:55:50 PM

Albert911emt: They'll make copies of someone else's aircraft for the carrier, just like they make copies of every other thing ever made in the history of forever......or something like that.


www.endlick.com

They'll just illegally download some off of The Pirate Bay.
 
2012-09-25 12:56:27 PM
agitprop.typepad.com
 
2012-09-25 01:02:05 PM
Well the Japanese don't always worry about landing their planes.. they just let them take off, and then the rest is someone else's problem.
 
Displayed 50 of 103 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report