Military Review

The National Interest: Chinese aircraft carriers - a nightmare for the US Navy?

30
The development of the armed forces of the leading countries of the world is a traditional topic for polite discussions, bitter disputes and questionable speculations. Each new message about a particular project attracts the attention of specialists and the general public, which is why it becomes another reason for disputes. In recent years, one of the main topics of discussion was the forthcoming change in the situation in the Asia-Pacific region, associated with the development of Chinese naval forces and the construction of aircraft carriers. Already, the promising Chinese warships were able to become a cause for some concern.


Foreign analysts and journalists tend to have a different attitude to the current situation and the current development program of the Navy of the People's Liberation Army of China. A variety of forecasts are made, both neutral, and encouraging or frightening. In addition, attempts are being made to understand the situation. A good example of such an attempt is one of the last articles of the American publication The National Interest, known for its bold and interesting publications on relevant topics. On September 18, the publication published an article by Dave Majumdar Chinese Aircraft Carriers: A Nightmare for the US Navy? (“Chinese aircraft carriers: a nightmare for the US Navy?”), In which an attempt is made to determine the real prospects of the Chinese aircraft carrier fleet and associated risks for the United States.

D. Majumdar begins his material with a reminder of the key features of the current situation. Since the end of World War II, the US Navy carrier strike groups have dominated the World Ocean. Even the Soviet Union at the peak of its power could not build a similar carrier fleet and compare with its main rival in this. However, in recent years, the situation has begun to change. American experts are concerned that China is actively engaged in the development of its Navy. In the future, this may lead to a serious change in the situation on the seas.

The National Interest: Chinese aircraft carriers - a nightmare for the US Navy?


The journalist of The National Interest reminds that the Soviet command implemented the so-called. Sea denial strategy. Long-range bombers, submarines and surface ships armed with long-range anti-ship missiles were built to protect against the warships of the likely enemy. The PRC, until a certain time, also implemented such plans, concentrating on defense against potential attacks from the sea. Nevertheless, now the Chinese command, like the Soviet commanders at the closing stage of the Cold War, seems to be intending to build a powerful navy. Perhaps in the future, the new Chinese navy will even be able to challenge the fleet of the United States.

Chinese experts took into account Soviet experience and continued to use the ideas of the command of the USSR. The result was the purchase of an unfinished aircraft carrier cruiser "Varyag" with subsequent completion and commissioning. Thanks to this, the first aircraft carrier named “Liaoning" appeared in the PLA Navy. Nevertheless, says D. Majumdar, this ship is the beginning of a large and ambitious program. It seems that the Liaoning is used only as a training ship for training personnel and working out the main features of the deck aviation. It is noted that the development of all such "skills" in the US Navy took several decades.

The aviation component of the new aircraft carrier program is based on one of the earliest prototypes of the Soviet fighter Su-33, acquired by China. This aircraft was once developed on the basis of the Flanker fighter (Su-27 according to NATO classification). The study of Russian technology has allowed Chinese specialists to create their own project J-15. In addition, in parallel with the development of the first carrier-based fighter, the Chinese industry was engaged in the creation of other aviation technology. As a result of all these workings, the Liaoning spacecraft aviation group now looks like this: J-24 fighter jets, Z-15F anti-submarine helicopters Z-6F, 18 Z-4C helicopter for long-range radar detection.

Author of the article Chinese Aircraft Carriers: A Nightmare for the US Navy? notes that the Pentagon is not yet inclined to consider the Chinese carrier fleet a serious threat. In a recent report by 2015 China Military Power Report, analysts from the US military wrote that the aircraft carrier Liaoning and its air group in their current state cannot be used to project force at a great distance from the bases. The same opinion is expressed about the aircraft carrier in a fully operational state implied by the project.

Experts believe that the rebuilt "Varyag" is too small to solve a number of problems. Because of this, sufficient efficiency can be achieved only in ensuring the air defense of the fleet, including at a distance from the coast. "Liaoning", unlike the American ships such as the Nimitz, can not be used for long-distance projection of force.

D. Majumdar notes some of the main problems of the Chinese aircraft carrier program in its current state. First of all, these are the features of the available aircraft. From the American F / A-18E / F Super Hornet aircraft, the Chinese J-15, which is the development of the Soviet Su-33, is distinguished by more advanced aerodynamics, but this positive feature is leveled by some features of the aircraft carrier. "Liaoning" is equipped with a take-off springboard, which imposes strict restrictions on the weight of the payload and affects the real combat effectiveness of the aircraft.

In addition to problems with the maximum weight of weapons and fuel, Pentagon analysts draw attention to the negative consequences of the relatively small size of the aircraft carrier. The dimensions of the Liaoning affect the maximum number of aircraft on board. It is noteworthy that these problems are recognized by Chinese specialists. D. Majumdar believes that in the context of such problems one should recall the unfinished Soviet aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk. From his predecessors, he had to differ in the presence of steam catapults.

In the future, China is expected to build new aircraft carriers. In addition, there are suggestions that such construction has already begun. American analysts believe that the new ships will be built taking into account the existing minuses, and this will allow to fully unleash the potential of the existing J-15 fighter jets. Regardless of the plans of the PLA command, the construction of new ships will take some time. As a result, over the next few years there will not be a single naval group in the oceans capable of challenging the US carrier fleet.

The timing of the construction of new Chinese ships may also be affected by the lack of necessary experience. For example, the American shipbuilding plant Newport News, which several aircraft carriers have already descended from the stocks, has spent more than half a decade on building one ship like the Nimitz or Ford. Chinese industry has no experience in building such large ships. Moreover, even the medium-sized aircraft carrier Liaonin / Varyag was built in the Crimea, where all the main structures were assembled. It should be noted that D. Majumdar made a mistake here - “Varyag” built the Black Sea Shipbuilding Plant (Nikolaev).

If China can still build a new aircraft carrier that will allow it to use the full potential of the existing deck aircraft, the pilots and sailors will still face serious difficulties. It is noted that the American fighter F / A-18E / F, not being the fastest or maneuverable in the world, is equipped with modern radio-electronic equipment, increasing its combat potential. More importantly, American carrier-based aircraft do not fight alone. The modern US aircraft carrier is a complex of various means, in one way or another facilitating the combat work of the aircraft.

Using the existing combat control system NIFC-CA, the aircraft carrier is able to effectively interact with its own aviation group and other ships. Super Hornet fighters, EA-18G Growler electronic warfare aircraft, E-2D Advanced Hawkeye early warning radar aircraft, etc. can interact not only with their aircraft carrier, but also with other ships of the strike group.

Thanks to this, for example, it is possible to launch a missile from a cruiser or destroyer on a target located beyond the radio horizon of its own means of detecting a ship. Targeting in this case is carried out by long-range radar detection aircraft. In addition, it is possible to determine the coordinates of the target ship using the onboard equipment of the EA-18G aircraft. In this case, it is provided to identify the location of the ship using the EW system, with the subsequent attack of strike aircraft.

Chinese Aircraft Carriers article: A Nightmare for the US Navy? It concludes with quite logical conclusions about the prospects of the Chinese carrier fleet. D. Majumdar believes that China is really capable of building and improving aircraft carriers. In addition, the Chinese fleet will be able to form full-fledged carrier-based strike groups. However, the implementation of all such plans will take time. Building new ships and obtaining the necessary experience will be an extremely difficult and lengthy process. Indeed, China can catch up with the United States in terms of the development of naval forces. However, it will take several decades.

As you can see, the journalist of The National Interest is not inclined to downplay the success of Chinese shipbuilding. At the same time, he does not exaggerate them. Assessing the existing situation, D. Majumdar notes the achievements of the Chinese Navy, but touches on a number of issues that Chinese specialists will face in the future. To create a full-fledged carrier fleet capable of comparing with the US, China will have to create, build and master not only new ships. You will also need a wide range of different aircraft and special equipment. As a result, the program to build new aircraft carriers suitable for projection of force in remote areas of the oceans may be delayed for several decades.

This means that in the near future, the question in the title of the article can be answered negatively: no, the Chinese aircraft carriers are not a nightmare for the US Navy.


Chinese Aircraft Carriers article: A Nightmare for the US Navy ?:
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/chinese-aircraft-carriers-nightmare-the-us-navy-13877
Author:
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mera joota
    Mera joota 25 September 2015 06: 26 New
    +7
    Cyril walked rather gently along the opus of Majumdar with regards to the hypothetical "Chinese aircraft carriers", I would put it bluntly. Dave's illiteracy and his superficial "knowledge" in my opinion are obvious.
    The only thing that is clear is the fact that the Chinese aircraft carriers took up seriously. And in the foreseeable future, discussion of the first Chinese aircraft carrier is guaranteed. What will it be, that is another question ...
    P.S .:
    Chinese industry does not yet have experience in building such large ships.

    I would argue here. China is building the world's largest ships with a displacement much larger than the same J. Ford. Well, the most cranes are made in China, for example, when building the Lizka, the British used a Chinese crane ...
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 25 September 2015 09: 16 New
      0
      from here would argue. China is building the world's largest ships with a displacement much larger than the same J. Ford.

      I think the author had in mind warships. Still, a dry cargo tanker and an aircraft carrier are very different things: the first thing is not to sink, the second must also fight, well, and so on. In the end, there are many who can do dry cargo ships, but normal aircraft carriers can only afford amer.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 25 September 2015 11: 07 New
        +4
        Quote: Kalmar
        In the end, there are many who can do dry cargo ships, but normal aircraft carriers can only afford amer.

        5.08.2015/15/4, it was announced that China began the construction of an aircraft carrier, plans to build XNUMX aircraft carriers in XNUMX years. Have posted such a picture.

        China has a foreign exchange reserve of almost $ 4 trillion; they can afford any kind of aircraft carrier.
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 28 September 2015 20: 56 New
          0
          They will have a J-26 soon, why do they need it? Especially two-hull .....
        2. Peterhof 73
          Peterhof 73 9 October 2015 12: 17 New
          0
          The picture is beautiful. But how are helicopters going to take off? For the protrusion of the upper flight deck blades do not catch? No?
      2. Mera joota
        Mera joota 25 September 2015 17: 10 New
        +2
        Quote: Kalmar
        Still, a dry cargo tanker and an aircraft carrier are very different things: the first thing is not to sink, the second must also fight, well, and so on.

        All the complexity in building ships / ships of large displacement is reduced to the size of the shipyard and the availability of appropriate equipment. Now they are building blocks that are then joined together, which requires cranes with heavy lifting capacity. Those. in different workshops, separate compartments / blocks are welded, which are then assembled into a single unit. The difference in the construction of an aircraft carrier and a container ship or a supertanker is only in the scope of work and the greater number of equipment installed.
        It is being built by the aircraft carrier Gerald Ford




        And this is a container ship

        Or supertanker


      3. Mera joota
        Mera joota 25 September 2015 17: 33 New
        +1
        Quote: Kalmar
        In the end, there are many who can do bulk carriers

        It’s you in vain, large-capacity vessels are far from possible for everyone. China, Korea, Japan, the United States, not so much. Now it is mainly Korea and China, all of the largest ships built by them.
        Quote: Kalmar
        but normal aircraft carriers can only afford amer

        Aircraft carriers are useless to Koreans, and they build supertankers and supercontainer ships not for themselves, but on order. The Japanese cautiously, trying not to go beyond the framework of the constitution, began to build, the Chinese did not really hide too. The most difficult thing for the same Chinese is the catapult, and the GEM. Here is a stumbling block which so far they cannot get around. And if they close the issue of the catapult (the design of the steam catapult has not been a secret for a long time, but they want EM right away), then the choice of a power plant is very difficult. They do not have powerful gas turbines such as Rolls Royce MT30, and the creation of a reliable nuclear power plant will require a lot of time because the existing ones are weak ...
        1. Talgat
          Talgat 25 September 2015 19: 22 New
          +4
          In fact, China now resembles the USSR in the prewar years - the party said - and the task will be completed

          And the task, as everyone can clearly see, is the Air Force and Navy to withstand amers and yap

          And 100% in the near future, China will have both AUG and atomarines, and Amers and Yapes will have to confront the superpower and its fleet. China is definitely going to take its place in the USSR tightly and in the confrontation with amers

          Our fate is clear - in the next 30-40 years we will no longer be the main opponent of the amers - it will be great China

          All the Collective Security Treaty Organization taken together led by Russia can (sadly) be the allied rear of China - close it from Europe and supply oil and gas

          We need to spend these 30 years wisely — to strengthen ourselves under the “Chinese roof” —to bring down all Eurasia into a monolithic fist so that the “elder brother” also respects and doesn’t do stupid things with Kazakhstan and Middle Asia - this is ours - not Chinese and whatever allies the Chinese were not - this is our land. And Russia is simply obligated and generally historically SHOULD support Sa and Kz in this.
          1. Mera joota
            Mera joota 25 September 2015 19: 49 New
            -1
            Quote: Talgat
            In fact, China now resembles the USSR in the prewar years - the party said - and the task will be completed

            The main thing is that the party has a common opinion on the country's path, now this is not obvious. The future of China is far from clear, the decay of the party elite has begun, money is doing its filthy job ("taverns and women will be brought to zugunder")
            Quote: Talgat
            All the Collective Security Treaty Organization taken together led by Russia can (sadly) be the allied rear of China - close it from Europe and supply oil and gas

            It is naive. Central Asia and Kazakhstan, yes, they who do not have a strong army or nuclear weapons will dance to the tune of the Chinese (they are already dancing) as they like.
            Our figures are so unpredictable (just as corrupt and greedy) that the Chinese are wary of Russia.
  2. Magic archer
    Magic archer 25 September 2015 06: 29 New
    +3
    This Majumar is looking forging iron without leaving the box office! laughing
    It talks about the advantages of our fighters over the American, then about the flawed NATO tanks over Armata. Now I’ve got to the Chinese! Along the way, I sent a Cossack, causing panic to the near fellow citizens. If only they believed how terrible these Russians and Chinese were ...
    1. Azitral
      Azitral 25 September 2015 11: 41 New
      +4
      1) Unlike strike aircraft carriers, which are rather a means of maintaining (their own!) Order among all vassals and naughty natives than a means of armed struggle, even a small aircraft carrier carrying exclusively fighters with very good pilots is a universal value. He is able to significantly increase the stability of the squadron / fleet in a military campaign, covering from the air, scouting submarines, driving down winged anti-ship missiles.
      2) Work fast, faster and us, and amers. All these technological unattainability - in practice turn out to be very attainable.
      3) The Chinese are pragmatists. If attack aircraft carriers do, then for the same purpose as the United States. Not for war with a strong adversary, but for pressure on capricious kids. For this, 3-5 orders - quite, completely.
      1. Kalmar
        Kalmar 25 September 2015 15: 04 New
        +1
        a small aircraft carrier carrying exclusively fighters with very good pilots is a universal value. He is able to significantly increase the stability of the squadron / fleet in a military campaign

        The difficulty here is that the Chinese navy is currently very modestly represented. He can not compete with the American even in his wildest dreams (except in some momentary messes). And a couple of small aircraft carriers here will not do the weather.

        They work quickly, faster than us and amers. All these technological unattainability - in practice turn out to be very attainable.

        There can be anything. Let's say they have not yet learned how to make suitable engines for their fighters (as far as I know). On the other hand, their industrial potential is the envy of many, and there are a lot of good engineers, so who knows ...

        The Chinese are pragmatists. If attack aircraft carriers do, then for the same purpose as the United States. Not for war with a strong adversary, but for pressure on capricious kids.

        Most likely this is the case. All sorts of small inhabitants of Southeast Asia should not forget who is in charge of this main part of the globe.
  3. DimanC
    DimanC 25 September 2015 06: 35 New
    0
    For other countries, the other nightmare is represented by other trends - a course toward a complete reformatting of the United States, followed by a sharp reduction in consumption and the unpredictable collapse of the local military-industrial complex. By then, even China's only aircraft carrier will be an unbroken joker. And even today, Americans can rattle their weapons only closer to their shores, because near the Chinese they are already weedy ...
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 25 September 2015 09: 19 New
      0
      course for a complete reformatting of the United States, followed by a sharp reduction in consumption and the unpredictable collapse of the local military-industrial complex

      Are there any real prerequisites for this?

      near the Chinese are already linking ...

      If it’s not a secret, who is so scary there? And do they know in general that they are sick of it? Over in the Black Sea last year our Su-24th also scared them to death, because of fear they still go to the World Cup every month as they go to their homes.
      1. Azitral
        Azitral 25 September 2015 12: 34 New
        0
        Chinese BALLISTIC RCC. Here they have no analogues in the world. And antidotes too, including the notorious Aegis. So especially not frolic. And about the "reformatting" ... I agree, there are no obvious prerequisites. In addition, reformatting is also possible with a plus sign. Hidden accumulated a critical mass of technology and organizational solutions - and immediately rush into a new, unheard of formation. In a new paradise, and in the hell of former life, both other countries and their own "losers" will leave. Individuals are hinting at such an opportunity.
  4. rosarioagro
    rosarioagro 25 September 2015 07: 03 New
    +2
    Well, the Americans so far without too much noise and dust experience the prototype of an unmanned underwater vehicle that has traveled 400 km (with ascent), a very interesting thing, and also the topic of the work of drones in a flock, if you add two technologies, it will be even more interesting :-)
    1. Azitral
      Azitral 25 September 2015 12: 43 New
      0
      I’m not a "cheer patriot", but ours has already experienced a similar thing. I have not heard of “working in a pack”, have not read, I will not lie. We have been using such technologies in the air for a long time, but under water, what can we connect with? ADD is too small a channel, ultrasound is a low signal propagation speed. Blue laser? They say that this is a promising business, but no, of course, specifics.
  5. ICT
    ICT 25 September 2015 07: 46 New
    -1
    Quote: Magic Archer
    Along the way, the Cossack mishandled, causing panic in the near fellow citizens


    help than we can

    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 25 September 2015 09: 28 New
      +3
      The video is certainly cool, but too optimistic. Victory in the war is forged not only in the first hours, the experience of the Japanese and Germans as an example. With further developments, China is waiting for a fiasco, because economically, it will not pull the war with the United States. The whole economic miracle of China consists of 0% cheap labor and export of goods. 70% of these products are shipped to the US and the EU, and in a conflict, China will be left without a market. The population of the USA and the EU will be happy to accept the return of production to their territories (we are pleased to import substitution).
      Unlike China, the US economy is based on the suction of the entire world economy, because no one has canceled the hegemony of the dollar, and the main transactions for oil and gas occur in dollars. Accordingly, all US resources are received almost for free. In addition to this, the United States has the largest army in the world, and those. its equipment surpasses the Chinese (and unfortunately ours) at times.
      So the events in the video are similar to our propaganda films in the late 30s.
      The article is intended to strain American society with a new threat so that it does not mutter about the increase in the military budget. hi
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 25 September 2015 12: 04 New
        -3
        Quote: Ingvar 72
        Unlike China, the US economy is based on the suction of the entire global economy,

        They sucked 1,5 trillion from the Chinese, so between times.
        The Chinese dragon’s teeth have grown, back in 2009, the Chinese became the world leader in automobile production, I am afraid that returning the production back to the Americans will remain a dream.
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 25 September 2015 13: 25 New
          +2
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          I'm afraid that returning the production back to the Americans will remain a dream.

          Easy, and the US population will support this move. Regarding leadership in the auto industry - who buys? The EU has protected itself from most Chinese cars, the United States is the same. Consume mainly by themselves, the benefit of the people is enough. The main trump card of China - cheap electronics and clothes.
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 25 September 2015 17: 05 New
            -1
            Quote: Ingvar 72
            Easy, and the US population will support this move.

            Here the support of the population is not enough.
            Quote: Ingvar 72
            Regarding leadership in the auto industry - who buys?

            Yes, everyone buys: Indians, Russians, Belarusians, Malaysians, Indonesians, Brazilians, Iranians, Africans, etc.
            The EU and the USA are only the 7th of the world's population.
            Yes, I honestly did not hear about the ban on the import of Chinese cars into the EU and the USA, the Chinese would respond in the same way, a gross violation of WTO rules.
            Quote: Ingvar 72
            The main trump card of China - cheap electronics and clothes.

            It was about 10 years ago, everything happens quickly with the Chinese.
      2. Azitral
        Azitral 25 September 2015 13: 03 New
        +2
        Sorry, I’m not trying to somehow cheat, I really believe that true wealth is a lot of hardworking and skilled workers, and if you still have real facilities located on your territory, what else is needed to ensure a war? This is what, and not electronic trillions in banks. China is one of the most mono-ethnic countries, there the "Han" - more than 90%, with the introduction of martial law will work for the grub. I confess one heresy: Russia still survived only because we, its citizens, worked for free for months. everything was bad, but electricity, bread, heat. and "Ambulance" on the phone - were. There was no collapse, and then they got used to it. Nobody could imagine this in the West. Moreover, this applies to China.
        But the "leak" in the event of a major war, even non-nuclear, it is rather a weakness. For all my very serious attitude towards the USA.
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 25 September 2015 13: 39 New
          +1
          Quote: Azitral
          there are many working and skilled workers, and if still at real facilities located on its territory, then what else is needed to ensure war?

          As if to repeat - for the work of these enterprises resources are needed, but China does not possess them. He buys them, again for dollars. But the United States possesses them, again having a suction in the form of a dollar, which is used by the whole Western world and BV countries. And this is an opportunity to acquire any resources, and spending a maximum on paper. China is very dependent, with the introduction of sanctions like ours, China's economy will collapse.
          Quote: Azitral
          we, its citizens, have worked for months for free. everything was bad, but electricity, bread, heat. and Ambulance over the phone - were

          There were also social guarantees, excellent education, and decent free medicine. And most importantly, people were better. There were a lot of pluses, minuses were fewer, but with the collapse of the country, the manipulators virtuously turned our attention to the minuses, such as the lack of chewing gum and jeans. And we were led like sheep.
  6. kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 25 September 2015 08: 18 New
    +1
    Quote: Mera Joota
    Dave's illiteracy and his superficial "knowledge" in my opinion are obvious.

    And where in any area they smell like professionalism, sometimes I watch different talk shows with the participation of Westerners and I wonder at the level of not even degradation, but complete and comprehensive stupidity, and recently I watched one of their historical DOCUMENTARY films was shocked, it’s some kind of thinking on the level of comics, so there all sorts of different professors from their universities broadcast. Horror and gloom winked
  7. Engineer
    Engineer 25 September 2015 08: 38 New
    +2
    Thank you, have fun in the morning. One training aircraft carrier with a defective aircraft wing scared the world's most powerful fleet. All fleets of the world in total cannot compete with the US fleet, especially in the surface fleet. It is a fact.
    1. SeregaBoss
      SeregaBoss 25 September 2015 09: 24 New
      0
      Totally agree with you.
  8. Kingdino
    Kingdino 25 September 2015 08: 42 New
    +1
    Well, generally learn Chinese, "Older brother China "coming.
  9. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 25 September 2015 10: 14 New
    +3
    Well, maybe years through 10-20, then yes ... For comparison, the US has 10 nuclear aircraft carriers of the Chester W.Nimitz type, plus in the construction of the 2 of the Gerald R. Ford type (the first CVN-78 was laid out by 14.11.2009, 10.11.2013 was launched on the tentative date for the transfer of the 2016 fleet, the second "John F. Kennedy" was laid in 22 in August of this year, it is planned to be launched in 2018, the transfer to the fleet in 2020, the third "Enterprise" is planned to be laid in 2018 year).
    The air group of the American aircraft carrier 55 fighter-bomber F / A-18С and F / A-18E / F "Hornet", X-EUMX EW aircraft EA-4B, 6, E-4C Hockey plane, 2 of the PLO-I-I-I-4B, H-E, 60, Hocky, X-NUMX of the PLO-I-2, E-60C Hokai, 90; H, and as much as possible he can carry around XNUMX aircraft and helicopters.

    The planned aircraft group of the aircraft carrier type "Gerald R. Ford" around 90 F / A-18E / F Super Hornet and F-35C Lightning II fighter-bombers, EW EA-18G Growler EW aircraft, Grumman C-2 Greyhound transport aircraft, DRLO-X-NNXX Growler, and DRLO-X-NNXX Greyhound transport aircraft, X-ray e-2G Growler; Sikorsky SH-60 Seahawk helicopters and drone drone Northrop Grumman X-47B.
    Plus, you need to add UNX 8, the standard air group of which includes 6 — 8 of AV-8B aircraft (maximum 20 AV-8B) and 1 latest — passed to the fleet in 2014 year, America-type 6 F-35B 22 F-35B) another "Tripoli" laid 22.06.2014 of the year, and it is planned to build a total of 11 ships.
    For the time being, China can oppose ONE aircraft carrier Liaonin (nee Riga, then Varyag), carefully sold by our Brothers with the 24 air group of the Shenyang J-15 fighter (our Su-33 analog, built on based on its prototype T-10K-3, again carefully sold by the ukrami), the X-NUMX DRLO helicopter Z-4J (based on the French Super Frelon, but so far our Ka-18 helicopters are used), the 31 anti-submarine Z-6F helicopters. X-Numx Z-18C search and rescue helicopter (copy of Eurocopter "AS2 Dauphin" from France).

    It should be borne in mind that “Liaoning”, unlike “Americans,” has not a catapult, but a springboard, i.e. fighter spends the bulk of the fuel on take-off, or takes off with a lightweight combat load, which does not allow them to carry, unlike American anti-ship missiles. Those. Liaoning is a defensive weapon, and “Americans” are offensive.
    Construction of the first aircraft carrier on the national project may have started at the end of 2010. Before it is commissioned, deck fighters and pilots will use the Liaoning as a simulator ship for testing take-off and landing techniques on the flight deck and tactical use of aircraft from an aircraft carrier. At the same time, it is assumed that "Liaoning" will also be in a combat formation, since, according to various sources, China is preparing to have in the 2020-ies from four to six carrier-assault strike groups, which will be deployed in the South China and East China Seas.
  10. Car lover
    Car lover 25 September 2015 10: 14 New
    -1
    Analytics is worthy of the 7-8th grade of a comprehensive school. Graphomania is treated by physical labor.
    To Ryabov - why did the topic stall about Mistral? Did they sell them to Egypt? This is much more interesting than the retelling of delusions of pre-analysts.
  11. Anton Gavrilov
    Anton Gavrilov 25 September 2015 10: 52 New
    0
    I didn’t even particularly read, let them build the aircraft carrier themselves for a start, at least 1! And there we’ll already look and discuss what and how. Well, even with the Chinese pace, they’ll only be able to catch asashai with 1 for ten years, this is not to mention the quality and capabilities, so it’s too early to promise serious problems for them in this class of ships.
  12. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 25 September 2015 11: 02 New
    0
    I am tormented by vague doubts - why the hell to make up such a bandura as an aircraft carrier if it is drowned with just one cunning rocket or torpedo?
    For a third of its cost, you can stamp a thousand missiles, which is more than enough to sink an evil dozen of these banduras and all escort ships!
    1. strannik1985
      strannik1985 26 September 2015 13: 36 New
      -1
      Because it’s a missile with a missile launcher, conventional - already 7-9 missiles (and this is for disabling and not destroying an aircraft carrier), and in total, according to the standard, 70-100 anti-ship missiles (60 Tu-22M3 (2 regiments) will have to be spent ), 30 Mig-31 (regiment), 30 Su-27 (regiment), 10-15 RER, EW vehicles, plus a guidance system in the Union for this were the Tu-95RTS SMMS Success or satellites US-A / US-P MKRC Legend, plus airfields, the forces of their cover, maintenance). Losses up to 80%.
      At the same time, operational mobility and flexibility in the use of these forces are much less than those of carrier-based carrier-based aircraft. So it turns out that in terms of price / quality ratio, aircraft carriers are the most optimal solution.
  13. CRASH
    CRASH 25 September 2015 19: 07 New
    +1
    Soviet aircraft carriers sad