Military Review

Problems on the way of Chinese aircraft carriers

28
On September 25, 2012, the first Liaoning aircraft carrier was officially enlisted in the naval forces of the People’s Liberation Army of China (PLA Navy). Long before this event, officials from the command of the Chinese Navy announced the main objectives of the ship. During the first few years it will be used as a training. Deck pilots will train at Liaoning aviation, and also it is planned to work out a number of new technologies on it. Around the same time, information began to appear about Beijing's plans for the construction of new ships of this class. In the future, the leadership of the country and the armed forces repeatedly made various statements that can be interpreted as confirmation of these plans. However, in the coming years, there will be only one aircraft carrier in the PLA Navy.




Before building new ships with an aviation group, China needs to decide on the concept of their use, which will directly affect the appearance of these aircraft carriers. In this context, first of all, it is worth remembering the American and Soviet approaches to the creation of aircraft carriers. Since the times of the Second World War, the United States has been building its aircraft carriers as ships, which are the basis of carrier strike groups. In this case, carrier-based aviation is an additional means of detecting targets and a “long arm” capable of performing a wide range of tasks for the destruction of enemy targets. In this case, the aircraft carrier itself is engaged only in ensuring the work of the aircraft. All other tasks, such as the detection and destruction of enemy submarines, etc., are assigned to escort ships. Carrier strike groups are currently the basis of the striking power of the US Navy. They are able to arrive in a short time in the desired area and strike at the enemy or, as it is called, to project force.

Soviet aircraft carrying cruisers were created according to a different concept. The main task of their aircraft was the air defense of the formation in which such a ship operates. In addition, the characteristic distinction of all Soviet ships of the 1143 family projects was the presence of their own anti-ship weapons. Thus, an aircraft carrying cruiser, with some reservations, could take on some of the functions of cruisers or escort destroyers. The main task of the Soviet ship groups with aircraft-carrying cruisers, as was seen in past years, was the support and protection of submarines with strategic missiles. Now, for obvious reasons, it is difficult to talk about the correctness of such a decision. American carrier strike groups regularly participate in various conflicts, and the capabilities of the Russian Navy have long prevented working according to old ideas.

China can choose any of these concepts, but the implementation of its counterpart to the American strategy looks the most plausible. In recent years, Chinese shipbuilders are actively updating the navy and build, including large warships. The current state of affairs in this area may serve as a hint that over the next few years, China will be determined to begin patrolling the Pacific region. With such a development of events, carrier strike groups will prove to be the most profitable method of ensuring a presence in different parts of the Pacific Ocean and demonstrating their military capabilities.

Regardless of the carrier development strategy fleet the question remains of the required number of aircraft carriers. Currently, the PLA Navy has only one such ship, which, moreover, is not yet ready for full service. There are different opinions about the required number of aircraft carriers. One of the most popular is one that talks about five or six ships of this class. This opinion has justification in the form of simple arithmetic: the Chinese Navy consists of three fleets and each of them must have at least one carrier group, or even two such formations. At the same time, the current number of Chinese fleets suggests that the smallest operational-strategic association (North Sea Fleet) can receive only one aircraft carrier. However, despite its strength, it is the North Sea Fleet that is equipped with nuclear submarines carrying strategic missiles. Thus, in the development of the Soviet concept of the use of aircraft carriers, the North Sea Fleet takes on a special priority.

Even having decided on the main directions of development of its carrier fleet, China will have to solve a lot of technical issues. First of all, it is a question of the power plant. "Liaoning" is equipped with a steam turbine power plant, typical of the majority of large ships of the Soviet development. Perhaps future Chinese aircraft carriers will receive nuclear power plants, which may contribute to the presence of certain developments in the field of reactors for submarines. Nevertheless, the development of a full-fledged nuclear power plant, designed for use on aircraft carriers, in any case will take a lot of time. For this reason, the new Chinese aircraft carriers of the first projects will be equipped with the same steam-turbine units.

It is noteworthy that almost all countries that currently own aircraft carriers have gone from steam turbine to nuclear power plants. For example, in the US Navy until the beginning of the XXI century, aircraft carriers with power plants of both types served at the same time. The last of the steam turbine aircraft carriers (USS Kitty Hawk CV-63) was withdrawn from the fleet only in 2009 year. France in the mid-nineties, in addition to two old aircraft carriers such as Clemenceau, built the atomic Charles de Gaulle. At about the same time in the Soviet Union it was planned to build the first domestic aircraft carrier carrying the Ulyanovsk. However, economic, political and other problems at first slowed down the construction of this ship, and the subsequent collapse of the country led to a complete halt. The unfinished hull of the Ulyanovsk was disposed of and the Russian Navy still has only one ship with an aviation group on board.

As you know, when converting the "Varyag" in "Liaoning", the Chinese abandoned anti-ship missiles. So the only shock weapons "Liaoning" and, probably, the following Chinese aircraft carriers are planes. The "Liaonin" will be based multifunctional fighter Shenyang J-15, which is not without reason to be considered a copy of the Soviet / Russian Su-33. At the end of last year, official representatives of the Chinese Ministry of Defense stated that J-15, firstly, is a completely independent development based on the previous J-11 (an unlicensed copy of Su-27), and secondly, in no way inferior, and even surpasses the Russian Su-33 in some characteristics. One could be happy for the Chinese aircraft manufacturers, if not for a couple of interesting nuances. J-15 first took to the air in 2009 year. Su-33, in turn, first flew a quarter of a century ago. Thus, in the field of carrier-based fighters of the Chinese aviation industry, it was possible to catch up with the Soviet branch of the model of the mid-eighties. It is not difficult to imagine the ratio of the combat potentials of the J-15 and, for example, the latest American F / A-18. It is unlikely that the comparison will be in favor of the first. It is worth noting, J-15 will be adopted no earlier than the next 2014 of the year. Thus, over the next few years, China simply will not have a carrier-based fighter capable of fighting with the aircraft of developed countries on an equal footing.

Imagine that China still managed to solve all the problems and build several new aircraft carriers with modern fighters. In this case, the question of their application comes to the fore. Ideally, it should be solved at the design stage of new ships, but the concept of their combat use will be subject to various adjustments all the time. In the context of increasing China’s military power, a hypothetical war with Taiwan is constantly mentioned. It is easy to see that the participation of aircraft carriers in such a conflict is not mandatory. In such a war, frigates, corvettes and landing ships will be much more relevant. The island of Taiwan is located in the zone of operations of the Chinese coastal aviation, and therefore the use of aircraft carriers with J-15 fighter-bombers seems inappropriate.

The use of aircraft carriers also looks unnecessary or optional in the case of some other disputed territories that are within the reach of ground-based aviation. The result is that aircraft carriers and support ships must operate at a great distance from the bases. Thus, the entire Pacific and the entire Indian Ocean will become the responsibility zone of future Chinese aircraft carriers. Thanks to this, China will receive a convenient tool of political pressure on rivals in the region, primarily the United States and India. Given the recent trends in the development of the armed forces of these three countries, it can be assumed that by the year of 2020 in the southern Pacific, the Chinese Navy will be inferior only to the US Navy.

As for the northern part of the Pacific region, here the Chinese aircraft carriers can become the most real headache for the Japanese naval self-defense forces. Ship groups with aviation, if necessary, are capable of attempting to attack any part of Japan, which will contribute to the island position of this country. Undoubtedly, aircraft carriers will become an indispensable element of Sino-Japanese international relations, after all, Beijing will not fail to once again put pressure on the intractable neighbor with the help of ships with an air group.

In general, the construction of several aircraft carriers will significantly raise the combat potential of the Chinese naval forces. Thanks to such ships, the People's Republic of China is capable of permanently securing the title of regional leader, who is able to dictate his will to neighboring states. But there is one huge problem: the only PLA Navy aircraft carrier is still not suitable for full-fledged combat work and does not have a sufficient number of deck-based aircraft. If Chinese shipbuilders expect to gain experience in the operation of Liaonin and, based on the information gathered, design and build new aircraft carriers, then the process of implementing the entire aircraft carrier program may drag on for many years. Under favorable circumstances, Liaoning will be fully equipped with aircraft no earlier than 2016 of the year. By this date, you need to add a couple of years, during which the ship will spend on hikes, ensuring the work of the aircraft and - most importantly - showing their positive and negative features. Some more time should be spent on analyzing the collected data and designing a new aircraft carrier.

Of course, the construction of a second Chinese aircraft carrier, this time completely independent, can begin at any time, even before the completion of work on the J-15 project, etc. But in this case, the new ship runs the risk of “inheriting” some problems, both technical and ideological. Only the command of the Chinese army knows exactly how the new aircraft carriers will serve, and because of this, now, in the absence of experience in operating such ships, China may choose the wrong path for their development. Therefore, the construction of a new aircraft carrier, developed taking into account the positive and negative experience, should be expected no earlier than the end of the current decade. At the same time, one can expect the appearance of new deck-based aircraft, as well as the creation of a special nuclear power plant.

Obvious is the fact that the creation of a powerful and modern aircraft carrier fleet is expensive and time consuming. But China, apparently, intends to further develop its armed forces. Over the past few years, a lot has been done to update them and in the foreseeable future, the PLA will receive new weapons and equipment. However, in the case of aircraft carriers, as with any other complex defense program, many different issues that need to be addressed immediately come to the fore. If commanders from Beijing fail to respond to them in time, the effectiveness of new aircraft carriers may not be sufficient for the tasks assigned to them.


On the materials of the sites:
http://sinodefence.com/
http://globalsecurity.org/
http://defense-update.com/
http://bbc.co.uk/
http://vpk-news.ru/
Author:
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 15 May 2013 08: 23
    +5
    The road will be mastered by the walking one. A wise old adage. China has taken this path, and slowly gaining momentum is going in the right direction. Soon - and this is in the next 10-15 years, we will see full-blooded aircraft carriers under the Chinese flag with 5th generation aircraft and their AWACS, similar to the American Hockey. And the catapults will be electromagnetic. And all why? Because the Chinese don't speak, they really do. You can compare with our aircraft carrier building program. Apart from beautiful pictures, toy models and contradictory speeches of our high-ranking officials, I have not heard anything.
    1. morehod73
      morehod73 15 May 2013 09: 45
      +3
      They also say in the Navy that alcohol does not flow under the reclining starpom — China in this case does not look like either standing or lying. At one time, both us and Amers had similar dilemmas and problems. No one is mistaken who does nothing .... if only there was no war .... fellow
    2. vostok1982
      vostok1982 15 May 2013 16: 21
      +6
      Let's divide China into 15 states, leave the main shipyards and half of the military-industrial complex outside of it, and see what happens to it? Only Russia could endure what the traitors and enemies did in 1991 and within literally 15-20 years to start anew the path to the top of Olympus. So you need to rejoice at every little success, and not cry: "But the United States, and here is China ..." Yes, if at least a quarter of what the country suffered in the 90s fell to their lot, there would be no memory of them left.
    3. Reasonable, 2,3
      Reasonable, 2,3 15 May 2013 22: 33
      0
      Yes clone "Kuzi", 1 in 1.
  2. Apollo
    Apollo 15 May 2013 08: 33
    +3
    The Chinese J-15 fighter successfully landed on the aircraft carrier Liaoning for the first time as part of the ship's test. The event was broadcast by the country's television. The landing technology was developed by China independently, ahead of the forecasts of some military experts.
    Let me remind you that the former Soviet aircraft-carrying cruiser Varyag was acquired by China from Ukraine in 1998.

    1. old man54
      old man54 15 May 2013 12: 11
      +4
      Quote: Apollon
      Landing technology was developed by China on its own in anticipation of the forecasts of some military experts.

      Yes, of course, they developed on their own, yeah! :)) As well as all their jet aircraft in service and a family of destroyers based on our project 56 and many other NRK weapons. Don't tell me, to develop this technology requires many years of painstaking work, a bunch of complex experiments and very qualified research institutes on the topic! And in this case, after the purposeful collapse of the USSR, specialists and ready-made technologies and their developments flowed to different countries, to those who were ready to pay for them! China "bought" it all illegally, through bribes, betrayal of the military and research institutes.
    2. old man54
      old man54 15 May 2013 12: 23
      +2
      Quote: Apollon
      Landing technology was developed by China on its own in anticipation of the forecasts of some military experts.


      Don't be ridiculous! :) Yeah, just as independently, everything was developed like all models of jet combat aircraft in China, like its destroyers based on Anshego pr. 56 and many other things stolen from us and not only from us. To develop such a technology requires painstaking long-term experiments, the necessary scientific and experimental base, qualified research institutes on the topic and much more. It's just that after the collapse of the USSR, China began to "buy", or rather to steal technologies, samples of weapons and their developments from us at the same time mainly through bribery of employees of scientific research institutes and high-ranking officers of the army and navy! This is where all his independence ended!
  3. cyclist
    cyclist 15 May 2013 09: 09
    0
    In order not to be isolated in the sea, China needs to develop its Navy
  4. cyclist
    cyclist 15 May 2013 10: 06
    -1
    apparently the abandonment of anti-ship missiles indirectly confirms that the aircraft carrier is used as a training ship
    1. 77bor1973
      77bor1973 15 May 2013 12: 40
      +2
      They just have nothing to put there.
      1. cyclist
        cyclist 15 May 2013 13: 51
        0
        Quote: 77bor1973
        They just have nothing to put there.

        put to them is that, that's just why they didn’t put it, probably again an oriental trick ?? or stupidity ?? someone like ...
        1. old man54
          old man54 15 May 2013 15: 15
          0
          Quote: cyclist
          Quote: 77bor1973
          They just have nothing to put there.

          put to them is that, that's just why they didn’t put it, probably again an oriental trick ?? or stupidity ?? someone like ...

          what exactly do they have? a Chinese analogue of the P-15U?) But seriously, today no country in the world has a Basalt-class anti-ship missile in its arsenal, what can we say about China. :)) apparently they did not manage to steal the techology from us "Granite", that's not delivered.))
        2. patsantre
          patsantre 15 May 2013 23: 04
          0
          Maybe because they aren’t needed there? On the same Kuze they are no longer there.
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 15 May 2013 15: 50
      +1
      Quote: cyclist
      apparently the abandonment of anti-ship missiles indirectly confirms that the aircraft carrier is used as a training ship

      Rocket carriers are not used at all on aircraft carriers. Exception Soviet Kuznetsov where it was a necessary measure.
  5. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 15 May 2013 10: 50
    -1
    Quote: cyclist
    apparently the abandonment of anti-ship missiles indirectly confirms that the aircraft carrier is used as a training ship

    Americans on aircraft carriers also do not have anti-ship missiles. Are they also educational?
    And the Chinese "Varyag" will be better than our "Kuznetsov" in terms of the composition of weapons (including electronic ones), and it is not worth comparing with the "Vikramaditya" at all.
    1. old man54
      old man54 15 May 2013 12: 25
      +2
      Quote: VohaAhov

      And the Chinese "Varyag" will be better than our "Kuznetsov" in terms of the composition of weapons (including electronic ones), and it is not worth comparing with the "Vikramaditya" at all.

      where is such awareness from? :) share
    2. 77bor1973
      77bor1973 15 May 2013 12: 33
      +1
      Please share what kind of weapon it is better than the Kuznetsov and even more so the Vikramaditya, I doubt something.
    3. Odysseus
      Odysseus 15 May 2013 15: 43
      0
      Quote: VohaAhov
      And the Chinese "Varyag" will be better than our "Kuznetsov" in terms of the composition of weapons (including electronic ones), and it is not worth comparing with the "Vikramaditya"

      Clear business is better. But China is going to compete with America, so it’s more relevant for them to compare with the Nimitets with their Super Hornets, AWACS planes, and then F-35, X-47.
  6. Akim
    Akim 15 May 2013 12: 55
    +1
    The Chinese say that two aircraft carriers were laid at the shipyards in Jiangnan (Jiāngnán somewhere in the Shanghai area). One on 60 another on 80000 tone. True, they did not share photos.
    1. Akim
      Akim 15 May 2013 14: 57
      0
      Quote: AkiFirst t
      One on 60

      I made a mistake. The same as "Liaoning". Somewhere 45000 tons. Both are going to be equipped with Ukrainian boilers.
      1. old man54
        old man54 15 May 2013 15: 19
        -2
        Quote: Akim
        I made a mistake. The same as "Liaoning". Somewhere 45000 tons. Both are going to be equipped with Ukrainian boilers.

        then we’ll laugh at their work, if they still manage to get them into the water. :) I’m directly looking forward to it already! :)))
        1. Akim
          Akim 15 May 2013 15: 36
          +1
          Quote: old man54
          I’m directly looking forward to it already! :)))


          The journalist with whom I correspond is saying that he already has a lot built on 001. (He even walked around the deck). And in the second there is only one section. Both ships are being built with the consultation of Nikolaev shipbuilders (they have very decent salaries of 15-20000 yuan there. But there are not more than ten of them there).
          1. cyclist
            cyclist 15 May 2013 15: 56
            +1
            Quote: Odyssey
            Rocket carriers are not used at all on aircraft carriers. Exception Soviet Kuznetsov where it was a necessary measure.

            but in vain! in my opinion this would be a good addition to the main armament of the AUG.
            P.S. so I realized that the Chinese abandoned the RCC for the sake of excess free space for fighter spare parts
            1. Odysseus
              Odysseus 15 May 2013 19: 29
              +1
              Quote: cyclist
              but in vain! in my opinion this would be a good addition to the main armament of the AUG.

              Well, not only an aircraft carrier is part of the AUG. There is someone to let in anti-ship missiles.
              1. cyclist
                cyclist 15 May 2013 19: 41
                0
                Quote: Odyssey
                Well, not only an aircraft carrier is part of the AUG. There is someone to let in anti-ship missiles.

                and so for self-defense if what suddenly happens to the rest of the ships ??
                1. Odysseus
                  Odysseus 15 May 2013 21: 34
                  +1
                  Quote: cyclist
                  and so for self-defense if what suddenly happens to the rest of the ships ??

                  And why then the aircraft carrier aircraft? )) Indeed, the effective range of anti-ship missiles fired from aircraft is always greater than the range of anti-ship missiles fired from a ship.
                  In general, equipping aircraft carriers with "non-core" weapons is a rather dubious idea.
                  For Kuznetsov, this was done because there was no way to quickly "level" the number of full-fledged AUGs and because of the long range of Granites (with satellite guidance and high-altitude flight) with the possibility of using nuclear warheads.
          2. old man54
            old man54 15 May 2013 18: 57
            0
            Quote: Akim
            Quote: old man54
            I’m directly looking forward to it already! :)))


            Both ships are being built with the consultation of Nikolaev shipbuilders (they have very decent salaries of 15-20000 yuan there. But there are not more than ten of them there).

            Well, here's the answer to you! :))) It is not the Chinese who build them, and I really don’t believe that they designed them themselves, but the Ukrainians are in charge of the work, thereby transferring the developments, technologies and constructive solutions of that USSR. And what, it will also be a 100% Chinese aircraft carrier, or what? If YES, then cars of foreign brands assembled at factories in Russia, "Camry" for example, should also be attributed to Russian developments. :)
            1. Akim
              Akim 15 May 2013 19: 06
              -1
              Quote: old man54
              Not the Chinese are building them,

              And no one argued that the Chinese were building copies. Why should they design and spend big money when they have everything ready: both "Varyag" and drawings of "Ulyanovsk". As for the quality ... Let Russian or Ukrainian cars start assembling like the Chinese (not the "Amulet" of the old generation, but Jelly), I will go and light a candle to God, for the health of our car industry.
            2. cyclist
              cyclist 15 May 2013 19: 24
              0
              Quote: old man54
              Well, here’s your own answer! :))) It’s not the Chinese who are building them, and I won’t believe that they designed them themselves, but the Ukrainians manage the work, thereby transferring the achievements, technologies and constructive decisions of that USSR.

              Of course, work on the aircraft carrier is consulted by Ukrainian specialists, "Liaolin" aka "Varyag" was assembled in Ukraine. I think that the method of copying and buying foreign equipment abroad for further study, as it were, hints at a non-aggressive policy of China!
  7. queen
    queen 15 May 2013 13: 17
    0
    The photo is like a toad. Like the deck is overloaded. And the planes are the same)))))
    1. igor36
      igor36 15 May 2013 14: 13
      0
      definitely the toad of 18-20 aircraft on the deck of the training ship is stupid. The landing strip is fully occupied, how are they getting together? In addition, they have a little J-15 and the coloring is different.
  8. Arct
    Arct 15 May 2013 13: 56
    +4
    Chinese military electronics is another headache. Therefore, the assertion about superiority is unfounded. In terms of the aviation component, it is possible, but do not forget about the factor of using a new direction in the armed forces. "Kuznetsov" is at the very least, but it has been in operation for the second ten years, I generally keep quiet about India. Well, the Chinese will have to step on the rake of developing a new direction more than once.
  9. lilit.193
    lilit.193 15 May 2013 18: 20
    +1
    Let them have as many of these problems as possible! am
    1. Argon
      Argon 15 May 2013 20: 37
      -1
      In my opinion, you’re so in vain, let them go on a trodden path, the wider the step, the more cones in the priest the amers have.
  10. xomaNN
    xomaNN 15 May 2013 20: 25
    0
    Yes, it was not in vain that the "Varyag" was dragging the Chinese people from Nikolaev for a couple of years. Allegedly almost for scrap :))
  11. heavytank
    heavytank 15 May 2013 21: 09
    -1
    This aircraft carrier is the pioneer of the Chinese fleet. This is just the beginning. They have a goal, money, cheap labor and need. here the main experience in the construction of an aircraft carrier and the development of technology. And here Ukraine and Russia help him. And the Chinese aircraft carrier fully shows the technical solution of Soviet engineers, who worked this many years ago. although late, but the idea spawned the first Aircraft Carrier of the Pro-Soviet Aircraft Carrier and Aircraft also above it.
  12. Seraph
    Seraph 15 May 2013 22: 08
    0
    The main weapon of the PRC is not aircraft carriers, as it seems to me, but millions of Chinese around the world. California will be occupied without aviation
  13. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 15 May 2013 22: 08
    +2
    In the article, I was struck by the phrase that the Chinese have not decided on the concept of using their AVU! But ships are built under the tasks assigned to them. No wonder it was written on the board of “Kiev” that anti-submarine cruiser with aviation weapons. He then became TAKR. Those. his main task was to control the underwater area over a large area with the help of Ka-25PL and 2's own GAS helicopters. Accordingly, the air group was under this task.
    BUT! YAK-38 has appeared! This is now causing him a grin, and in 1976, it was an attempt to get an aviation umbrella over the OBK. Radius 150-180 km, bomb load less than 1000 kg. At high air temperatures, continuous surges of PMD. To take off, part of the fuel had to be drained. An attempt to catch up with Harrier failed: the engines are gluttonous and not into the Red Army by traction.
    What to do? Place P-500 "Basalt" with D = 500 km. But the pilots knew for sure: they had a one-way ticket, and it turned out about 600 km. Air defense "Kiev" - this is 2 "Storms" with a reach of the VTS up to 34 km, plus 2 "Wasps-MA" and artillery for self-defense. At the turn of 20 km, the ship could meet the enemy URPK-1 "Whirlwind", albeit in a nuclear version.
    With the advent of aircraft with a thrust-weight ratio of more than 1,0, it became possible to use them from a springboard (ramps, as the British did) with a short take-off in the afterburner with an aircraft landing on the aircraft deck (with a hook on the hook of the aircraft airborne cable). The modern I-B deck-based raises 6-7 tons of combat load. It has a combat radius of the order of 1000 km. Able to carry aviation anti-ship missiles. But most importantly, he is able to intercept the airborne missile systems to the turn of their weapons. Therefore, the need for anti-ship missiles on the AVU disappeared. Remained self-defense air defense systems and multi-barrel quick-fire art. MZA systems to repel the attacks of IOS that broke through to the ship. The vacated place went to increase the hangar.
    According to the statement of the Navy we will build an AVU with a nuclear power plant, a normal circuit, a displacement of the order of 60 000т, with 60-80 aircraft on board and an electromagnetic catapult. China, apparently, will also follow the beaten track and will build a “normal aircraft carrier”. The tasks for him are partially indicated in the article. There is no point in repeating.
  14. Argon
    Argon 15 May 2013 22: 26
    -1
    Again you have to go against the team, do you really think that 10 employees of the shipyard will design an aircraft carrier? At most, consultations on assembly technology. I am sure that the projects of those two rooms that are being built were almost ready (well, 90%), even before the Varyag began to be completed. Indirect proof of this can be considered the rejection of the onboard SCRC, and the point here is this, the most difficult thing in the design and construction of such a complex ship is to observe the percentage of displacement allotted for each separate set of equipment, while the equipment itself is actually not there yet, it is only being created and it, as evil turns out to be 10 tons heavier than it was As planned, we have to take these 10 tons from another complex. So the Chinese have the opportunity (well, historically it happened, and they do not be fools, hurry up) during the development to test their theories on an already existing model. Moreover, it is clear that they do not harbor illusions knowing that the air defense complex, for example, will turn out to be more difficult. So they left the reserve of free displacement from the SCRC as a reserve. From here we can draw a conclusion: the nearest aircraft carriers of the Middle Kingdom (pok at least those two that are being built), although they will look similar to Kuznetsov, in fact, there will be independent projects. The absence of the SCRC on the Liaoning suggests that the ship will have to get up for re-equipment more than once. It seems to me that the Chinese have chosen the most optimal way to obtain an aircraft carrier fleet (creating your own ship based on someone else's project) in terms of technical and financial risks.
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus 15 May 2013 22: 42
      +1
      Quote: Argon
      Again you have to go against the team, do you really think that 10 employees of the shipyard will design an aircraft carrier?

      Why versus the collective? Of course, this is a Chinese aircraft carrier. You are writing everything correctly, but why so much effort to prove the obvious?
      1. Argon
        Argon 16 May 2013 00: 15
        -1
        Well, the general rhetoric at the beginning of the comments: robbed, copied, h.h.l.y. they are building, they are selling a common homeland. Another thing is that I wrote for a long time, I had to wash the monitor, as I look at the "Varyag" under a false flag I want to spit. belay
    2. old man54
      old man54 17 May 2013 21: 17
      +1
      Quote: Argon
      Again you have to go against the team, do you really think that the 10 shipyard employees will design an aircraft carrier? Maximum consultation on assembly technology.

      Well, firstly, about 10 people are more than indirect, unfounded infa! And then it is said about them that they are seen directly on the slipway, i.e. manage and advise the actual ship assembly process.
      2. I think that no one doubts that today China has an abundance of highly qualified welders, metal cutters, crane operators and these work managers (such as foremen). About the availability of modern equipment for assembling the case and the fact that we will not speak Chinese metal. :)) This is of course all there is.
      3. But was it, for example, that the T-34 was created by workers and heads of the assembly shops of the Kharkov steam locomotive plant, or is it Koshkin with his design bureau? And how many people "advise" Chinese shipbuilders on the design of such a complex ship as an aircraft carrier, one can only guess, and they do not have to hang around in the slipway area, they are sitting in the design bureau, or rather, they were sitting. And we can only guess about their nationality, tk. and in our country and in the square, people are not paid wages, but they have to live, and the borders have been opened and the special agencies do not stop the disclosure of state secrets and technologies! What do you think, if what happened to the USSR in 1991 had not happened and relations with China remained at the same level as before, then China would have had Liaolin today, aka Varyag, and its whole series , and? Would I have created "on my own", but in fact stolen, as it is politically correct to say non-lens copies of the Su-27, Su-30 and other advanced weapons? :)) The question is for realists, not for dreamers!
      4. for example: even competently designing a modern aircraft carrier on paper is a very big job requiring great knowledge, experience in designing it, the school for designing such ships and, of course, specialist designers themselves. And it is advisable that these experts do not start designing after the port tug project! :) For example, Japan had experience and specialists in this field in the 2-th VM, but under the terms of the peace treaty with amers from 1945, they were forbidden from now on have aircraft carriers! But the leadership of the country after the war believed that it was the aircraft carrier that was the main striking force at sea, and so as not to lose the skill in design, be ready for design (they are still waiting and hoping when will the hour of the revival of the former military power of Japan) according to changing trends, changes armament systems and technical missions of the aircraft themselves, they regularly spend VERY MUCH MONEY on the creation of projects of modern aircraft carriers, while realizing that they will not build them. They do this in order not to lose school and skill in designing aircraft carriers.
      And you naively believed that China took it like that and designed the modern 65 aircraft carrier with a tonnage of tonnage, itself, that's just once and all! :)))
  15. doktor_alex
    doktor_alex 29 May 2013 17: 45
    0
    Quote: Akim
    Both ships build with the consultation of the Nikolaev shipbuilders


    Ohhhhh, this will be a masterpiece, the Nikolaev shipbuilders who can make 1 different tanks according to 2 drawing (I cried and cursed at the defect of the pot looking at the drawing and what lies in front of my eyes) are led by Chinese workers, this is five of course, our border is locked comrades =)