China says it is building its second aircraft carrier.....

This was rumored and now is official.....as the article states they have been building other ships and subs as well. So to has the Japanese. Their other Aircraft Carrier is out at trials. The US is going to need to start building ships and improving on our Subs. The Chinese are ahead of schedule.




China is building its second aircraft carrier, this time entirely with domestic technology, its Defense Ministry said Thursday, in a leap in its naval development that is increasingly tipping the regional balance of power.

The 50,000-ton vessel is being built in the northern port of Dalian and will be conventionally, rather than nuclear, powered, ministry spokesman Col. Yang Yujun told reporters at a news conference.

Yang said the second carrier is being built entirely with domestic technology but has drawn on China's experience refitting its first carrier "with new improvements in various aspects." Plans for a second aircraft carrier had long been rumored, with many designating Shanghai's Jiangnan Shipyard as the most likely build site. Thursday's announcement was the first official confirmation.

China is also steadily adding cutting-edge frigates, destroyers and nuclear submarines to its fleet and by some estimates has been launching more vessels than any other nation. Its rapid naval modernization is seen as aimed at asserting its maritime claims and extending its power far from its shores. Those ambitions have raised tensions with Japan, the U.S. and Southeast Asian nations with rival territorial claims.

China claims sovereignty over almost all of the South China Sea, which is home to key shipping lanes, rich fishing grounds and a potential wealth of mineral resources. Five other governments claim the maritime space either in part or in whole, and the Philippines and Vietnam in particular have sought assistance from the U.S. and others in beefing up their ability to resist what they view as Chinese aggression, including its construction of seven new islands by piling sand atop coral reefs.....snip~

http://news.yahoo.com/china-says-building-second-aircraft-carrier-081843776.html

 

The scuttlebutt is, that the chi-coms plan to have four aircraft carriers in the PLA-N, the current chi-com carrier built by the Russkies and the other three they plan to build themselves.

What nobody has figured out is how the chi-coms plan to use their carriers, as an air attack platform, ASW, sea lane control, air defense, amphibious operations ???
The chi-coms probably don't even know.

 

They know. Its a game changer for them with Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines.


The yet-to-be-named vessel will carry J-15 fighter-bombers and other aircraft and use a ski jump mode for launching fixed-wing aircraft, Yang said. The J-15 is a copy of Russia's Sukhoi Su-33.....snip~ same link.

 

Just like the United States they want to be a blue water navy

 

Video: Chinese Aircraft Carrier Operations at Sea

December 29, 2015 7:30 AM
The following is a video published on Dec. 25, 2015 of a visit of People’s Liberation Army Navy head Adm. Wu Shengli visiting Chinese Aircraft carrier Liaoning.

http://news.usni.org/2015/12/29/vid...230369141&mc_cid=85dc1366cd&mc_eid=2aedd16e3c

 

Lets hold our responses until Alucard has had a chance to make his paid troll post.

 

Their domestic technology will need to be better than what I see at the dollar store. Just sayin.




In this Oct. 14, 2012 photo, the Liaoning, China's first aircraft carrier, sails in the sea near Qingdao in eastern China's Shandong province. China's Defense Ministry spokesman Col. Yang Yujun told reporters at a news conference Thursday, Dec. 31, 2015 that China is building a second aircraft carrier, this time entirely with domestic technology......snip~ same link.

 

Not really. They want to dominate the South and East China sea, making it so the Americans can't operate their. The same way the Americans kicked the British out of the Caribbean in the early 1900's. The Chinese want to kick the Americans out of that area. China doesn't want a blue water navy, those things cost a mother load of money and time to create. So planning such a thing wouldn't work. It just emerges over time as successive governments move to meet the challenges in front of them. The same way it did for the Romans, British and Americans.

 

Fine, we go to war even if it doesn't go nuclear which we will both try to avoid we could do two things refuse to repay our debts clearing them since we can't fund our enemy. The second use our blue water navy to cut off the trade by sea they have left including attacking their ocean oil platforms forcing them to get food, war supplies and trade goods overland. Good luck with that. They need us more than we need them.

And if it goes nuclear its game over neither nation and most humans won't survive that.

I might suggest Japan go nuclear and build up its military with South Korea since they can't count on us protecting them.

 

To be honest the idea that the Americans are going to just cut off trade to China is wrong. First off that trade is going to China from other nations and those nations need paid for the goods they can't trade with China. If the US just flat out stop trade getting to China then it would be just as big a problem for the Americans. If you force China to start trading over land you increase the leverage of the Russia's, or force the Chinese to take desperate measures internally causing a civil war and mass starvation or famine. The Americans don't want a humanitarian disaster to deal with. Or a severely weakened China into which the Korean's, Russians and Japanese can fill the void. So what the Americans want is a strong China, with a healthy economy, and secure political elite which they can deal with. So for the Americans such a war against China would be a purely military engagement. They would be sinking Chinese ships, subs and shooting down aircraft. But in the end you are right the Americans could shut down naval based trade to China, and that is what the Chinese worry about. But in my view it is an option of limited value to the Americans strategic interests in the Pacific and East Asia.

 

A lot can be told from a photo. Notice all of the water being discharged, especially on the starboard side amidship and also froward of the superstructure. It's discharging water that is cooling down electronics and computers.

The Chi-com's Liaoning is a former Soviet/Russian aircraft carrier that was designed for one mission, to deny NATO anti submarine forces access to Soviet ballistic missile submarine bastions. The Kiev class carriers are actually surface warfare cruisers.

When China accepted the former Soviet/Russian ship they completely gutted the ship and rebuilt it including a new propulsion system, new electronics but seem to have retained many of it's Russian weapons platforms like it's 12 X SS-N-19 Shipwreck vertical launch anti ship missiles and it's 192 SA-N-9 "Gauntlet" A/A missiles and 24 ASW rockets.

A couple years ago when the chi-com's Liaoning first entered the PLA-N fleet, over on another political forum some of us on the PF ( Mushroom, US Conservative, MMC, and a few others who go by a different user names) participated on that thread asking if the Liaoning was an aircraft carrier or a surface warfare cruiser with a flight deck with some aircraft aboard. Most of us concured that it was a cruiser.

But the question is, how will the chi-coms use these aircraft carrier cruisers ? What are their real missions ?

 

After reading a few things on China and their Navy. I just don't think our people get it. They didn't think they would build islands off of coral reefs. Certainly they will use them as projection of power. Both regional and globally. Just as we do. I just don't think their platform is set up for Humanitarian Assistance nor just for defensive and security purposes.



What is China’s doctrine on the role of aircraft carriers? In one of the most authoritative sources, the latest biannual defense White Paper (2103), we get the following indications. (1) “China’s development of an aircraft carrier has a profound impact on building a strong PLAN and safeguarding maritime security.” (2) “It is an essential national development strategy to … build China into a maritime power.” (3) “Overseas interests have become an integral component of China’s national interests. Security issues are increasingly prominent, involving overseas energy and resources, strategic sea lines of communication (SLOCs), and Chinese nationals and legal persons overseas.”

Careful analysis of China’s doctrinal position on protecting SLOCs is that this is a multinational responsibility, not something that China can deliver by itself. A carrier would be useful in some cases to rescue Chinese nationals overseas, but these cases would be very rare. So if we are reading the White Paper to look for justification of carriers, we are left largely with the national prestige argument: “building a strong PLA Navy.” The word “sovereignty”, the proxy for a Taiwan-related mission, is not visible in the brief statement on carriers.....snip~

http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/the-truth-about-chinas-aircraft-carriers/

 

Liaoning is a sistership of Kuznetsov. Not exactly a Kiev class.

They've removed P-700 launch silos as well.

 

Well, the actual name of this class really says it all to me.

The actual nomenclature of this class of ship was tyazholiy avianesushchiy krey, or in English "Heavy Aircraft Carrying Cruiser". The complement of aircraft was not intended to be used for strike missions as a US carrier would use them, but simply as air defense against other aircraft.

And I am not all that worried about the PLAN. They have a long ways to go until they are any kind of serious threat to Japan and the US.

 

It looks like to me that the Chinese are working the problem from both ends. Trying to get a sub base or any others in the South Atlantic wouldn't be for defensive purposes.

Now protecting it with a carrier fleet will add to that problem.



Writing for Real Clear Defense, Robert C. O’Brien explores reports that China is looking to build an overseas naval base in Namibia. O’Brien notes the historical strategic importance of Walvis Bay, Namibia’s sole deep water port, adding that the South Atlantic is generally “below the radar of most policy makers today.” If the PLA Navy does construct a base at Walvis Bay, he writes, “It would have the ability to patrol the critical Cape of Good Hope around Africa and Cape Horn around South America. The approaches to the key North Atlantic sea lanes linking the Americas, Africa and Europe would be nearby.”

The question of PLA overseas bases in general was explored more fully last year in a report from National Defense University. Report co-author Christopher Yung summarized the findings in a piece for The Diplomat. Yung argues that a “dual-use” model, where ports serve both for commercial and military interests, would be China’s most likely blueprint for setting up bases overseas. I also previously explored China’s investments in Africa and how they relate to the Maritime Silk Road project.....snip~

http://thediplomat.com/2015/03/is-china-secretly-building-a-navy-base-in-africa/



China's Next Move: A Naval Base in the South Atlantic?

In Jan. 2015, The Namibian reported the existence of a "confidential letter from Namibia's ambassador to China, Ringo Abed, to Namibia's foreign minister stat[ing] that 'a [Chinese] delegation will visit Namibia ... for discussions ... on the way forward regarding plans for the proposed naval base in Walvis Bay'.” According to the letter, a Chinese delegation, including technical staff and naval architects, will meet with Namibian officials sometime after March 21, 2015 to discuss a field feasibility study for the base. Beijing has told Namibian diplomats that a "Chinese naval presence will deter any would-be illegal trawlers and smugglers.” China's Indian Ocean-based "string of pearls" naval base strategy to protect the country's 21st Century vision of a "maritime silk road" looks like it may now extend all the way to the South Atlantic. If such a development came to fruition, it would have major strategic implications for the West.

During my visit to Walvis Bay, China's plan to build a naval base was the talk of the town. Several Namibians pointed out that China already has a major satellite tracking installation in-country. China is developing key uranium mines. Chinese immigrants are opening shops in every corner of the land. A Namibian told me he would not be surprised if Namibia soon elects its first Chinese member of parliament. One local, who works at the harbor, said he has heard the PLA Navy will deploy four to six warships to the prospective base. Once that happens, he said, Namibia becomes, in essence, a Chinese colony. That estimate is consistent with a reported PLA Navy call on Walvis Bay last year, "PLAN's 16th escort task force consisting of the Taihu, a Type 903 replenishment ship, Yancheng, a Type 054A guided-missile frigate and Luoyang, a Type 053H3 frigate, anchored in Walvis Bay during a mission to the Gulf of Aden."....snip~

http://www.realcleardefense.com/art..._naval_base_in_the_south_atlantic_107803.html

 

From page 2 on the link.


A Present-Day Predicament:
Since the mid-1980s when the South Atlantic's regional powers - Argentina and South Africa - basically stopped policing the ocean's blue waters, the job has fallen primarily to Britain. The U.K. has the most significant Western interests in the region. According to the Royal Navy, Atlantic Patrol Tasking South "provide ongoing protection and reassurance to British interests [and "allied nations"] in the South Atlantic, maintaining the continuous Royal Naval presence in the Atlantic." For decades, the U.K. has protected the vital South Atlantic sea lanes as well as its territories of Ascension, St. Helena and the oil rich Falklands and related islands on a very efficient basis with just one Type 45 destroyer (albeit likely the most sophisticated destroyer in the world) or a Type 23 frigate. The lone warship is usually accompanied by a replenishment ship when on extended deployment in the South Atlantic. Given the significant cuts to the Royal Navy since Prime Minister Cameron took office amid the Global Financial Crisis, one warship is probably the most the Royal Navy can deploy to the South Atlantic, given the U.K.'s other commitments. The U.S. Navy, its own fleet size declining for years and preoccupied with the Middle East and Pacific, has been pleased to see its closest naval ally provide presence in the region.

In this context, China's desire to extend its growing surface warfare fleet to a Walvis Bay base is smart geopolitical and naval strategy—amplified by the fact that Beijing has already showed at least some interest in the Atlantic going back to late 2012. Namibia is a friendly government that will be increasingly susceptible to Chinese influence as the PLA's bases there grow as does the Chinese immigrant population and China's commercial mining investments......snip~

 

Well, with the number of subs in the Chinese inventory, that is not a real worry that I can see.

They have 5 SSBNs (most of them are described as being noisier then 1970's era Sovet subs), 6 SSNs (also known as being highly noisy and leaking radioactivity). These are not going to be much of a threat at all. They also have 57 conventional submarines, mostly 30-50 year old Soviet Romeo and Kilo class boats. Before they can operate at that far from their national waters, they are going to have to develop a huge infrastructure of support ships to even hope to keep subs operating that far away.

 

Mornin Shroom. They also have plenty of mini subs and lets not forget recently their sub got within range of Pacific exercises before being detected.

 

It was not a mini sub, it was simply a conventional sub. The Song class is 80 meters long, and China has done things like this before. But they also caught the carriers at a peacetime setting, without an agressive ASW net in operation. The difference between the two is significant.

And while their conventional subs are recognized as the quietest conventional subs in operation, their nuclear subs have been described as a hazard to whales, dolphins, and any SONAR operators that have to listen for them. Experts have regularly described them as being much louder then the Soviet subs of the 1970's, and those were loud even in comparison to the US subs of the era (the Sturgeon class, since replaced by the Los Angeles then Seawolf classes).

 

China has other ships we need to worry about. Not so much their carriers. Their subs and drones are increasing in Number. Moreover we need to get it together with the Ohio Class. The Ohio-Class submarines have been extended in their service life. They will start to be retired in the 2020’s. We have to have a replacement for that submarine to make sure we have that enduring presence at sea, have at least 12 ballistic missile submarines to put those nuclear missiles in places where our adversaries don’t know where they are, but know that if they were to launch an attack against us, there’d be return missiles coming back to them from undisclosed locations around the world.

Its China's numbers and getting them placed in our backyard that I would be worried about.



China negotiating Horn of Africa military base: Djibouti president......

China is negotiating a military base in the strategic port of Djibouti, the president told AFP, raising the prospect of US and Chinese bases side-by-side in the tiny Horn of Africa nation. "Discussions are ongoing," President Ismail Omar Guelleh told AFP in an interview in Djibouti, saying Beijing's presence would be "welcome".

China is already financing several major infrastructure projects estimated to total more than $9 billion (8 billion euros), including improved ports, airports and railway lines to landlocked Ethiopia, for whom Djibouti is a lifeline port.

Djibouti and Beijing signed a military agreement allowing the Chinese navy to use Djibouti port in February 2014, a move that angered Washington. China aims to install a permanent military base in Obock, Djibouti's northern port city......snip~

http://news.yahoo.com/china-negotiating-horn-africa-military-djibouti-president-071459015.html

 

Well, I would hardly call the Horn of Africa "in our backyard". And unless they are going to try a sneak attack, their SSBNs are not much of a threat.

They only have 5 of them, all are known to leak radiation at hazardous levels, and are the noisiest SSBNs ever constructed. Plus they spend far more time tied up at their warfs then they ever do at sea (like most of the PLAN).

And our SSBN fleet is still in good shape. The first retired are expected to start in 2029, giving us 14 years to design and build a replacement. And the Navy is considering 2 options at this time. The first is a modified Virginia class SSN, the other is a modernization of the current Ohio class. But since the Ohio is generally considered to be a "Black Hole" when at sea, I am not worried about their surviveability.

 

Nigeria and Djibouti. They also were looking at some Islands off of South Africa.

We have 14 and we are going down to 12. They were trying to get funds switched around from Shipbuilding and the Sea deterrence fund. If we try to build out shipfunding we wont have money for any other ships. Theres is only 16 billion in shipbuilding and each Ohio is 7 billion a pop. We need to start now with any upgrades.

Currently the assessment is we are lacking amphibious lift capabilities too.

 

Wasn't it a Kiev class carrier that the chi-coms bought, tore it apart to see how it works and then turned it into a casino ?

Here's what Wiki has for the Liaoning armament. It's not "Janes" but I'm not rich.

 

Here is some stats, and whats taking place with our Navy.



US Pacific Fleet shrinks even as China grows more aggressive.....


The Navy and its regional component, the U.S. Pacific Fleet, both have fewer ships now than in the mid-1990s. Navy officials say vastly improved technology on those vessels outweighs any disadvantage from a drop in numbers. Questions about whether the Pacific Fleet has enough resources are more of a reflection of regional anxieties than the Navy's actual capability, said its commander, Adm. Scott Swift.

An expert at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute think tank said the issue in peacetime is whether there are enough American vessels to reassure friends and allies and demonstrate U.S. capacity to use power when it needs to. In wartime, it comes down to whether enough platforms survive missile strikes to carry on their work, Peter Jennings said.

The Pacific Fleet currently has 182 vessels, including combat ships like aircraft carriers as well as auxiliary and logistics vessels, said spokesman Cmdr. Clay Doss. That compares to 192 nearly two decades ago. Around the world, the Navy has 272 ships usable in combat or to support ships in combat, nearly 20 percent less than 1998. The current total includes 10 aircraft carriers.

China's People's Liberation Army Navy has more than 300 surface ships, submarines, amphibious ships and patrol craft, according to the Pentagon's Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy report released in August. China's coast guard and other maritime law enforcement fleet, meanwhile, has upward of 200 ships — more than the combined fleets of neighbors with competing claims to tiny islands in the East and South China Seas.

The U.S. Coast Guard has about 280 cutters, or vessels at least 65 feet in length, though they primarily operate stateside. Further, he said U.S. forces are spread around the world while China is focused on its own neighborhood. "So even if the United States spends much more than China, it doesn't mean the local balance stays the same. The local balance in Asia is rapidly changing," Michi(*)(*)(*)(*)a said.....snip~

http://news.yahoo.com/us-pacific-fleet-shrinks-even-china-grows-more-081100070--politics.html

 

The U.S. Navy's Pacific Fleet is better known as the 7th Fleet.

Actually there's only one carrier and it's escorts that make up a CSG assigned to the 7th Fleet, which is forward deployed and based in Japan.

This is the 7th Fleet. -> http://www.c7f.navy.mil/forces.htm