Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Reuters)   Chinese "Aircraft Carrier" that at present carries no aircraft, and isn't seaworthy, sucessfully upgraded to "floating runway"   (reuters.com) divider line 200
    More: Interesting, floating runway, Liaoning Province, Iranian Navy, military sciences, People's Liberation Army, aircraft, Hu Jintao  
•       •       •

14351 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Nov 2012 at 12:28 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-26 12:55:09 PM  
Just read up on the carrier itself. Pretty amazing actually and a hell of a deal for China.. That thing was built in Russia and never completed (like most things in Russia).. Then it just sat around with no engines or electronics for ever.. China basically got a empty shell for a bargain price.
 
2012-11-26 12:55:23 PM  

dittybopper: FTFA:

"We should make active planning for the use of military forces in peacetime, expand and intensify military preparedness, and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local war in an information age," Hu said.

Hu said that?


Hu's on first.
 
2012-11-26 12:56:54 PM  
Magorn: Honestly, an air-craft carrier is SO 20th century-at this point why not build something that can launch thousands of cruise missile and drones?

Sounds like you want a missile corvette.

But I'm all about the iron canon frigate.
 
2012-11-26 12:57:33 PM  

baronvonzipper: U.S. Pacific carrier supremacy was lost when the Chinese navy surfaced an undetected sub in the middle of the Kitty Hawk battle group, within torpedo range.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-11-26 12:58:55 PM  
Cute. Very cute.

/'Mericuh
 
2012-11-26 12:59:20 PM  
It's funny to see "so what?" comments from the same folks who were telling us - about three months back - that China wouldn't even start landing planes on this ship for another three to five years. Or (this time last year) that the thing wouldn't even be able to land or launch planes for a very long time. Or (two years ago) wouldn't be able to sail under its own power until at least 2015...

Of course, considering the amount of money China's been spending on anti-carrier ballistic missiles and hunter-killer subs, why would one carrier make a difference? Or three (currently under construction: two more locally-produced carriers)?

They're not building this stuff to go up against the US in a head-to-head fight. They're building up to take over local waters - like the South China Sea. They're obviously going under the assumption that the US won't stop them if they get ambitious in that area.
 
2012-11-26 01:00:16 PM  

BronyMedic: Pocket Ninja: Uh oh. Guess we'd better commission another dozen carrier battle groups before we lose our competitive edge.

[www.steelfalcon.com image 600x222]

A dozen, you say?


An M7 reference before any SHIELD helicarrier reference? That was unexpected.

Flying carriers have been done to death anyway. Now, this on the other hand...
images.community.wizards.com

/hot
 
2012-11-26 01:00:33 PM  

BigNumber12: Bomb Head Mohammed: Russia has refused to sell certain aircraft to China now simply because of the belief that China will again act like the thieves that they are, intellectual propertywise.


That's pretty rich, coming from Russia.


Russians may be jackholes, but they at least play by something resembling a set of rules. It's bad when they can look down upon your country and say, "Try being original for once."
 
2012-11-26 01:00:52 PM  

baronvonzipper: U.S. Pacific carrier supremacy was lost when the Chinese navy surfaced an undetected sub in the middle of the Kitty Hawk battle group, within torpedo range. This new carrier is nothing but smoke and mirrors.


No citation needed. Google results in pages of confirmation.
 
2012-11-26 01:01:08 PM  

dittybopper: Mithiwithi: dittybopper: FTFA:

"We should make active planning for the use of military forces in peacetime, expand and intensify military preparedness, and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local war in an information age," Hu said.

Hu said that?

Yes.

So Yes said it?


No, that's an English rock band. The outgoing president of China is Hu.
 
2012-11-26 01:03:02 PM  

GAT_00: Well done China. You've reached the 1930s level of naval power.


You're more right than you know. That carrier doesn't have catapults, so the aircraft have to get off the deck on the power of their engines alone, running down the whole length of the deck. Even with the ski jump at the end, that means the J-15 could only take off with no ordnance and a partial fuel load.

So, for military utility, not much.

However, for developing the institutional knowledge needed to actually operate a carrier, it was probably worth every ruble (or whatever) they paid the Russians for the thing. Catapults aren't that complicated to design.
 
2012-11-26 01:03:23 PM  

dittybopper: Heh. Aircraft carriers make nice, juicy sub targets:

All sunk by submarines.

/Probably an incomplete list.


If the sub can get close enough.

i.imgur.com 

i.imgur.com

A sub I worked on had a scope picture in the control room of an SH-60 dipping it's sonar right on top of the sub. A reminder, I guess.
 
2012-11-26 01:03:27 PM  

Marine1: Russians may be jackholes, but they at least play by something resembling a set of rules. It's bad when they can look down upon your country and say, "Try being original for once."



Without a doubt. I'm just pointing out that they have one of the richest technological espionage traditions on earth.
 
2012-11-26 01:03:44 PM  

styckx: Just read up on the carrier itself. Pretty amazing actually and a hell of a deal for China.. That thing was built in Russia and never completed (like most things in Russia).. Then it just sat around with no engines or electronics for ever.. China basically got a empty shell for a bargain price.


I still chuckle that until not long ago, the thing was going to be a floating casino.
 
2012-11-26 01:04:49 PM  
Gleeman:

*Replace nukes with air dropped torpedoes these days, of course.
 
2012-11-26 01:05:44 PM  

whither_apophis: baronvonzipper: U.S. Pacific carrier supremacy was lost when the Chinese navy surfaced an undetected sub in the middle of the Kitty Hawk battle group, within torpedo range. This new carrier is nothing but smoke and mirrors.

A) Armed forces generally don't announce "oh yeah we picked them up 40 miles away" even if they did
B) any sub sitting around on batteries can have a fleet blunder over them.


This.

Hell, back when the US and UK had completely mastered the U-boat menace, to the point where it wasn't a significant threat at all, the Germans still occasionally got lucky. For example, the USS Block Island, an escort carrier specifically tasked with hunting down and killing U-boats, was torpedoed and sank on May 29th, 1944. Her escorts sank the U-boat, which is what I suspect would have happened to the PLAN* sub that surfaced near the USS Kitty Hawk, if it got that far.

*People's Liberation Army Navy. Yes, they call it that.
 
2012-11-26 01:06:23 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: dittybopper: FTFA:

"We should make active planning for the use of military forces in peacetime, expand and intensify military preparedness, and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local war in an information age," Hu said.

Hu said that?

Hu's on first.


Wai?
 
2012-11-26 01:08:48 PM  

Mithiwithi: dittybopper: Mithiwithi: dittybopper: FTFA:

"We should make active planning for the use of military forces in peacetime, expand and intensify military preparedness, and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local war in an information age," Hu said.

Hu said that?

Yes.

So Yes said it?

No, that's an English rock band. The outgoing president of China is Hu.


Oh, ok. Hu's next?
 
2012-11-26 01:08:51 PM  
I'd personally be more afraid of those carrier-sinking missiles they've conjured up.

I mean, you could find some way to intercept it, I'm sure, but still.
 
2012-11-26 01:09:23 PM  

Mithiwithi: dittybopper: FTFA:

"We should make active planning for the use of military forces in peacetime, expand and intensify military preparedness, and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local war in an information age," Hu said.

Hu said that?

Yes.


Hu said what?
 
2012-11-26 01:09:56 PM  

mjohnson71: baronvonzipper: U.S. Pacific carrier supremacy was lost when the Chinese navy surfaced an undetected sub in the middle of the Kitty Hawk battle group, within torpedo range.

[imgs.xkcd.com image 500x271]


Link
 
2012-11-26 01:09:59 PM  

clutchcargo2002: styckx: The J-15 looks amazingly similar to an F-15 Eagle.

Not sure if serious...


Absolutely serious. They both have the " -15", plus F and a J are only, what, 4...maybe 5 places apart in the alphabet? Sure, one may be a chinese knockoff, but for all intents and purposes the J-15 and F-15 are the same thing.
 
2012-11-26 01:10:50 PM  

dittybopper: BronyMedic: Well, isn't that quaint.

[www.military-today.com image 600x399]


Heh. Aircraft carriers make nice, juicy sub targets:


www.history.navy.mil
warandgame.files.wordpress.com
www.fas.org
2.bp.blogspot.com

Naval aviators might disagree...

/How will the chinese ever get the ship to float if it's full of lead?
 
2012-11-26 01:10:53 PM  

Gleeman: dittybopper: Heh. Aircraft carriers make nice, juicy sub targets:

All sunk by submarines.

/Probably an incomplete list.

If the sub can get close enough.

[i.imgur.com image 850x352] 

[i.imgur.com image 640x480]

A sub I worked on had a scope picture in the control room of an SH-60 dipping it's sonar right on top of the sub. A reminder, I guess.


Subs can get close enough, but it requires some luck and skill.

Flood a choke point with conventional boats just making steerage on batteries, and it's not out of the question that one would get a lucky shot.
 
2012-11-26 01:12:08 PM  
I didn't know Chinese people rolled their r's. "Aircrraft Carrier" is hard to say. Stupid Mandarin.
 
2012-11-26 01:12:26 PM  

baronvonzipper: mjohnson71: baronvonzipper: U.S. Pacific carrier supremacy was lost when the Chinese navy surfaced an undetected sub in the middle of the Kitty Hawk battle group, within torpedo range.

[imgs.xkcd.com image 500x271]

Link


Daily Fail?
 
2012-11-26 01:12:49 PM  
Given the rather flippant responses to this thread I even hesitate to mention this. But I will as, apparently, none of the posters have ever designed, built, operated, or managed any of the following. An aircraft carrier. A jet fighter. A navy. An air force.

The Peoples Liberation Army as they like to be called is taking steps to learn how to operate aircraft from the deck of ship moving in the ocean. You see unlike the previous posters here they realize that all of the things it takes to operate an aircraft carrier are not easy. To this end they purchased an incomplete carrier from the Ukraine. They are using it to train a core of pilots and crew for their naval ambitions.

They are currently building from the dockyard up their first truly operational aircraft carrier. Likely to be in service around 2020.

It amazes me how intelligent people continue to look down their noses at the Chinese and their military. Some folks should wake up. China is not a paper tiger. In a decade or two China could cause much trouble in the pacific if they made the calculation that it was worth the cost to do so. By trouble I mean the projection of hundreds of thousands of men within their chosen sphere of influence for as long as they could maintain the supply lines.
 
2012-11-26 01:14:15 PM  

Misconduc: So the Ark royal will be a bran new carrier without any planes to fly off its deck? Sounds british to me..


Nah. It's got planes. But in 2035 when the class was first commissioned, they're still flying VF-11s.

www.macrossworld.com
 
2012-11-26 01:14:20 PM  

dittybopper: Gleeman: dittybopper: Heh. Aircraft carriers make nice, juicy sub targets:

All sunk by submarines.

/Probably an incomplete list.

If the sub can get close enough.

[i.imgur.com image 850x352] 

[i.imgur.com image 640x480]

A sub I worked on had a scope picture in the control room of an SH-60 dipping it's sonar right on top of the sub. A reminder, I guess.

Subs can get close enough, but it requires some luck and skill.

Flood a choke point with conventional boats just making steerage on batteries, and it's not out of the question that one would get a lucky shot.


True, just saying it's not an automatic sinking just because there's a sub about.
 
2012-11-26 01:15:05 PM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: dittybopper: BronyMedic: Well, isn't that quaint.

[www.military-today.com image 600x399]


Heh. Aircraft carriers make nice, juicy sub targets:

[www.history.navy.mil image 700x500]
[warandgame.files.wordpress.com image 800x545]
[www.fas.org image 700x480]
[2.bp.blogspot.com image 400x250]

Naval aviators might disagree...


The naval aviators on this boat no doubt disagreed also:

upload.wikimedia.org

Their job was to specifically go out to hunt and kill German U-boats, using things like air-dropped homing torpedoes. Nonetheless, their ship was sunk out from underneath them by a U-boat.
 
2012-11-26 01:16:45 PM  

Frogfoot: Given the rather flippant responses to this thread I even hesitate to mention this. But I will as, apparently, none of the posters have ever designed, built, operated, or managed any of the following. An aircraft carrier. A jet fighter. A navy. An air force.

The Peoples Liberation Army as they like to be called is taking steps to learn how to operate aircraft from the deck of ship moving in the ocean. You see unlike the previous posters here they realize that all of the things it takes to operate an aircraft carrier are not easy. To this end they purchased an incomplete carrier from the Ukraine. They are using it to train a core of pilots and crew for their naval ambitions.

They are currently building from the dockyard up their first truly operational aircraft carrier. Likely to be in service around 2020.

It amazes me how intelligent people continue to look down their noses at the Chinese and their military. Some folks should wake up. China is not a paper tiger. In a decade or two China could cause much trouble in the pacific if they made the calculation that it was worth the cost to do so. By trouble I mean the projection of hundreds of thousands of men within their chosen sphere of influence for as long as they could maintain the supply lines.


I think most folks realize that the Chinese could become a force to be reckoned with. However, at this point they really aren't. They've got a huge military, but can't get it to the USA. Sure, they could cause all sorts of problems for Japan, Russia, or folks in their immediate vicinity, but even that's a losing proposition.
 
2012-11-26 01:17:27 PM  
"The home-built J-15 fighter jet"

Dedicated hobbyists??
 
2012-11-26 01:18:03 PM  

baronvonzipper: U.S. Pacific carrier supremacy was lost when the Chinese navy surfaced an undetected sub in the middle of the Kitty Hawk battle group, within torpedo range. This new carrier is nothing but smoke and mirrors.


I'm calling shenanigans.

For one, a Chinese sub trailing a carrier battle group would never purposfully reveal their position. And they'd never surface in the middle of a carrier battle group.

For One: It'd be considered a hostile act, and those ships would open up on the unknown. You don't get close to a Carrier Battle Group unless you are cleared to.
For Two: It'd be a major international incident since carriers are considered de-facto US Soil, and any attack on them is considered grounds for the use of nuclear weapons in retaliation.
 
2012-11-26 01:19:00 PM  

Gleeman: True, just saying it's not an automatic sinking just because there's a sub about.


Well, yeah. But the reverse is also true: Just because you've got a modern carrier battle group doesn't mean you are impervious to attack by submarine.

And you could sacrifice a *LOT* of conventional boats before you came close to equaling the cost of a single supercarrier.
 
2012-11-26 01:19:15 PM  
Wouldja believe a half-dozen empty barrels, duct-taped together, and a boyscout in a pair of water-wings?
upload.wikimedia.org
 
Ehh
2012-11-26 01:19:37 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: I think India's navy is hungry for a fight; can take-out-chinese.


An hour after the peace treaty is signed, they'll be hungry for war again.
 
2012-11-26 01:21:10 PM  
dittybopper:

Can you provide any examples of submarines attacking a carrier in the past 50 years?
 
2012-11-26 01:21:44 PM  

mainstreet62: mainstreet62: styckx: The J-15 looks amazingly similar to an F-15 Eagle.

I was going to mention that. I thought it was a hybrid F-14/F-15.

I hit send too soon.

The winglets in front are new. The F-14 has wings that can be swept back, but these look fixed. Probably just added them so they can claim they didn't plagiarize US design for the 5 billionth time....


Actually it doesn't look anything like either a F-15 or F-14.

It does look exactly like the Russian Su-33.
 
2012-11-26 01:21:59 PM  

Linoleum_Blownapart: Here we have the dirty aircraft carrier. Any state it visits is going to have dead zones for miles around it's ports.


it'll be really dangerous once it turns into a flotilla and starts carrying inuits.
 
2012-11-26 01:23:48 PM  

ronaprhys: Frogfoot: Given the rather flippant responses to this thread I even hesitate to mention this. But I will as, apparently, none of the posters have ever designed, built, operated, or managed any of the following. An aircraft carrier. A jet fighter. A navy. An air force.

The Peoples Liberation Army as they like to be called is taking steps to learn how to operate aircraft from the deck of ship moving in the ocean. You see unlike the previous posters here they realize that all of the things it takes to operate an aircraft carrier are not easy. To this end they purchased an incomplete carrier from the Ukraine. They are using it to train a core of pilots and crew for their naval ambitions.

They are currently building from the dockyard up their first truly operational aircraft carrier. Likely to be in service around 2020.

It amazes me how intelligent people continue to look down their noses at the Chinese and their military. Some folks should wake up. China is not a paper tiger. In a decade or two China could cause much trouble in the pacific if they made the calculation that it was worth the cost to do so. By trouble I mean the projection of hundreds of thousands of men within their chosen sphere of influence for as long as they could maintain the supply lines.

I think most folks realize that the Chinese could become a force to be reckoned with. However, at this point they really aren't. They've got a huge military, but can't get it to the USA. Sure, they could cause all sorts of problems for Japan, Russia, or folks in their immediate vicinity, but even that's a losing proposition.


The economic zones affliliated with the MANY disputed islands in the China Sea are more than enough to prompt belligerance in the region. The Asians have hated e/o for a long time. Somehow I doubt that there will be some sort of pan-asian cooperative over these resources. 

But hey, selling off our old naval equipment to China's rivals, might be nice.
 
2012-11-26 01:23:48 PM  
China needs carriers to protect their growing demand for oil.

US gets 6% of its oil from Saudi Arabia. The US Navy is thinking of withdrawing a carrier group from the region, due to our decreasing dependence on their oil.

If China wants to keep buying Saudi oil, it will be their job to keep the tanker shipping lanes open.
 
2012-11-26 01:27:30 PM  

SirHolo: China needs carriers to protect their growing demand for oil.

US gets 6% of its oil from Saudi Arabia. The US Navy is thinking of withdrawing a carrier group from the region, due to our decreasing dependence on their oil.

If China wants to keep buying Saudi oil, it will be their job to keep the tanker shipping lanes open.


Question is, do we want the Chinese having that sort of influence in that part of the world?

Place is already a powder keg that goes off every few weeks.
 
2012-11-26 01:28:03 PM  

Decillion: Empty cities and empty carriers. China really is a paper tiger.

It wouldn't surprise me if they are currently mining an area that has nothing worth mining just to keep a town/city employed.


this. really really this.
 
2012-11-26 01:28:04 PM  

SirHolo: China needs carriers to protect their growing demand for oil.

US gets 6% of its oil from Saudi Arabia. The US Navy is thinking of withdrawing a carrier group from the region, due to our decreasing dependence on their oil.

If China wants to keep buying Saudi oil, it will be their job to keep the tanker shipping lanes open.


Iranian Revolutionary Guard masturbating furiously over thought of such.jpg
 
WGJ
2012-11-26 01:29:01 PM  
If the Chinese really wanted to cripple the US, all it would have to do is seize all of the factories that are owned by US companies. The job creators have completely destroyed this country's ability to maintain itself in this scenario and we would be crippled in less than a month.
 
2012-11-26 01:30:27 PM  
Landed this month. They expect to figure out how to take it off by 2014.
 
2012-11-26 01:30:51 PM  

ronaprhys: Frogfoot: Given the rather flippant responses to this thread I even hesitate to mention this. But I will as, apparently, none of the posters have ever designed, built, operated, or managed any of the following. An aircraft carrier. A jet fighter. A navy. An air force.

The Peoples Liberation Army as they like to be called is taking steps to learn how to operate aircraft from the deck of ship moving in the ocean. You see unlike the previous posters here they realize that all of the things it takes to operate an aircraft carrier are not easy. To this end they purchased an incomplete carrier from the Ukraine. They are using it to train a core of pilots and crew for their naval ambitions.

They are currently building from the dockyard up their first truly operational aircraft carrier. Likely to be in service around 2020.

It amazes me how intelligent people continue to look down their noses at the Chinese and their military. Some folks should wake up. China is not a paper tiger. In a decade or two China could cause much trouble in the pacific if they made the calculation that it was worth the cost to do so. By trouble I mean the projection of hundreds of thousands of men within their chosen sphere of influence for as long as they could maintain the supply lines.

I think most folks realize that the Chinese could become a force to be reckoned with. However, at this point they really aren't. They've got a huge military, but can't get it to the USA. Sure, they could cause all sorts of problems for Japan, Russia, or folks in their immediate vicinity, but even that's a losing proposition.


China's economy is going to asplode soon. They're currently propping it up with useless spending projects with little hope of return. It's going to be ugly.

/just read that article on empty faux European cities for an example.
 
2012-11-26 01:32:21 PM  

WGJ: If the Chinese really wanted to cripple the US, all it would have to do is seize all of the factories that are owned by US companies. The job creators have completely destroyed this country's ability to maintain itself in this scenario and we would be crippled in less than a month.


They don't want to cripple us. They're a lot of things, but they're not stupid. They know that their economic fortunes are directly tied to the well-being of the United States.

Raise their own influence at the expense of ours, definitely, but certainly not cripple the US.
 
2012-11-26 01:33:39 PM  
BronyMedic: For Two: It'd be a major international incident since carriers are considered de-facto US Soil, and any attack on them is considered grounds for the use of nuclear weapons in retaliation.

No.
 
2012-11-26 01:33:58 PM  

Frogfoot: Given the rather flippant responses to this thread I even hesitate to mention this. But I will as, apparently, none of the posters have ever designed, built, operated, or managed any of the following. An aircraft carrier. A jet fighter. A navy. An air force.

The Peoples Liberation Army as they like to be called is taking steps to learn how to operate aircraft from the deck of ship moving in the ocean. You see unlike the previous posters here they realize that all of the things it takes to operate an aircraft carrier are not easy. To this end they purchased an incomplete carrier from the Ukraine. They are using it to train a core of pilots and crew for their naval ambitions.

They are currently building from the dockyard up their first truly operational aircraft carrier. Likely to be in service around 2020.

It amazes me how intelligent people continue to look down their noses at the Chinese and their military. Some folks should wake up. China is not a paper tiger. In a decade or two China could cause much trouble in the pacific if they made the calculation that it was worth the cost to do so. By trouble I mean the projection of hundreds of thousands of men within their chosen sphere of influence for as long as they could maintain the supply lines.


Now we know Mitt Romney's Fark handle.
 
Displayed 50 of 200 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report