SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
China Launches 'Fujian,' its Most Advanced Aircraft Carrier
China launches 'Fujian,' its most advanced aircraft carrier:
China launched its largest and most advanced aircraft carrier on Friday at a shipyard in Shanghai, in what state media called a "short but festive ceremony."
The 80,000-ton Fujian, named for the southern coastal province opposite Taiwan, is the first of China's three carriers to be fully designed and built domestically. Unlike China's Liaoning and Shandong carriers, which use ski-jump ramps, Fujian will launch planes using electromagnetic catapults, the technology used on current U.S. carriers.
"Although it will be years before the [carrier] enters military service and achieves initial operating capability, its launch will be a seminal moment in China's ongoing modernization efforts and a symbol of the country's growing military might," said analysts from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank in Washington, in an article earlier this month.
China Launches Third Aircraft Carrier: State Media - Times of India
China launches third aircraft carrier: State media - Times of India:
[...] However, it will take years before it reaches operational capacity, as the Ministry of Defence has not announced a date for entry into service. "Sailing and mooring tests will be carried out as planned after the ship is launched," CCTV reported. China has two other aircraft carriers in service. The Liaoning was commissioned in 2012, and the Shandong entering service in 2019.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Saturday June 18 2022, @04:21PM (10 children)
Carriers are relics of WWII, today only useful against enemies who do not have guided missiles or torpedoes, or all kinds of other things that could threaten a carrier. I would expect a modern carrier to have defenses that might work agains a few missiles, but can't handle a couple dozen or more all at once. Can't count on armor either, weapons can be equipped with ordinance far more powerful than the best of WWII. I mean, look, ragtag suicide bombers in something not much bigger than a freaking rowboat blew a huge hole in the USS Cole. Couple more factors are that planes today have a lot more range, and we're seeing a transition from planes to drones. Still another factor is satellites. A carrier cannot hide from that. The Japanese failed to find and track the American fleet in the critical days leading up to the Battle of Midway. They did not know the Yorktown was operational and present. Thought it would still be laid up for repairs. That particular fog of war is not going to happen today. Satellites will see all. In many scenarios, to avoid attack, a carrier would have to stay so far away that it might not reduce the range from the nearest base at all. There's no question about it, the idea of a carrier is very obsolete. Even if a carrier can stop dozens of guided missiles, and swarms of drones, it can't stop a nuclear bomb. A nuke detonated some 10 miles away could sink it. But why even bother, when the same nuke can take out the port city?
Any power contemplating the use of a carrier against the US or Britain, the powers most likely to have all kinds of anti-carrier and anti-ship weapons, is just being stupid. Yeah, we saw that kind of stupid in WWII with the Bismarck and Yamato class battleships, very embarrassingly sunk extremely quickly, in some cases mere days after launch, and in others, after months of fruitless cowering in safe waters because they knew it would be sunk if they tried anything. So, is China that stupid? What do they have in mind, using it to threaten Taiwan? I can't see that one, the mainland is quite close enough to make an aircraft carrier pointless. I wouldn't count on it being safe from a counterattack from Taiwan either. Is it intended to force US naval forces to keep more distance? Maybe it will be most useful against the others around the South China Sea? Doubt that too. Vietnam could probably sink it. Ditto Malaysia and the Philippines. I cite the sinking of the Moskva by the Ukrainians just weeks ago. Maybe it's for influence in East Africa, which I read China has begun to take an interest in?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 18 2022, @05:38PM (1 child)
10 miles? Hardly. The first bomb dropped during Operation Crossroads, an A-bomb test designed to test the effects of an atomic blast on ships at sea, was off target by less than half a mile, and that resulted in most of the ships that were supposed to sink surviving. And these were (obviously) uncrewed, inactive ships. The observation post for that test was about ten miles away, the observers said the test was unspectacular.
Although we have larger thermonuclear weapons today, they are not mounted on tactical missiles. It would take the Tsar Bomba to sink a warship from ten miles away, and nobody is putting anything like that on a missile (the Soviets could barely fit it into a bomber).
As for why China wants an aircraft carrier, not everything is about Taiwan. The purpose of the ship is to project power into the Pacific Ocean and, especially, the South China Sea, which China thinks belongs to them. (I guess it does have their name on it, but it definitely isn't theirs).
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday June 18 2022, @09:21PM
You should look into the "Ripple" bomb design [soylentnews.org]:
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/794729 [jhu.edu]
I'm not saying that this changes your analysis or that these are even being built today, just that it is theoretically possible that Tsar Bomba-like 50 megaton yields could be realized in a "small" package. If the U.S. decides to modernize its nuclear arsenal and start producing new bomb designs, something like this will probably make its way in there. Given the lineup of ever more powerful supercomputers that have been used for nuclear simulations for decades, I bet there has been additional development of the Ripple concept, just no testing or production.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Opportunist on Saturday June 18 2022, @08:19PM (5 children)
I feel like pointing out that the official Russian position on the sinking of the Moskva is that it was not sunk by Ukraine but that the Russian navy can't sail its own ships without sinking them.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Sunday June 19 2022, @04:07AM
Do we have Russian trolls registered so that they can mod-bomb anything they consider anti-Putin? That's the only explanation I can think of for modding that post "troll".
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 4, Funny) by driverless on Sunday June 19 2022, @06:24AM (1 child)
It wasn't sunk, it was promoted to submarine as part of a Special Diving Operation.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Sunday June 19 2022, @09:19PM
An operation special enough no bus is short enough for it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday June 19 2022, @12:30PM (1 child)
Yeah, I read that spin work on the sinking as well. There seem to be kernels of truth in the propaganda.
The Moskva didn't sink in two minutes, unlike the HMS Sheffield. Two minutes is something of a critical time limit in the sinking of a warship. Among the very first things we learned in boot camp was, if a destroyer doesn't sink it two minutes, it's not going to sink.
So, Moskva was struck with a warhead. Damage control started immediately, and was ongoing. The ship was apparently under tow, and headed to port. The Russian claim is that a storm came up, the Moskva took on too much water, and was lost.
So, the propaganda is in line with naval doctrine.
And, there is no way that any of us will ever learn any further details on the sinking.
Regardless of any doctrine, or any propaganda, Moskva was hit with a missile, and was subsequently lost. Points to Ukraine, no matter how the story is spun.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Sunday June 19 2022, @09:22PM
If that weather is considered a "storm" by Russia, my position stands: Their navy can't sail ships. I've been in worse weather with my 470.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Sunday June 19 2022, @06:21AM
It's also nowhere near finished, there's still a huge amount of fitting out to do. Most of the innards for example are either at "Outbound in sorting centre" or "Received by line haul" with no tracking updates for months. Refund claims have been lodged for some components, with the seller either promising to ship replacement parts or a Paypal refund if the dispute is closed first.
(Score: 1) by liar on Sunday June 19 2022, @06:55PM
"Maybe it's for influence in East Africa, which I read China has begun to take an interest in?"
from https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2022/6/19/leviathan-chinas-new-navy [aljazeera.com]
The Chinese naval base at Djibouti has been revamped, its piers extended to 340m (1,115ft) and now able to accommodate its growing fleet of aircraft carriers. Situated at the mouth of the Red Sea near the Horn of Africa, the base is rapidly becoming a logistical supply hub for Chinese naval vessels in one of the world’s most strategically significant waterways. As China’s economy becomes truly global in scale, its naval fleets are fast moving away from protecting China’s shoreline to long-range force projection. This has the US increasingly concerned as China negotiates base rights in Equatorial Guinea on Africa’s west coast with the aim of building a naval presence in the Atlantic Ocean.
Noli nothis permittere te terere.