Varyag lives again!

[roym]

Interesting. Guess there's no money in casinos these days.

http://www.china.org.cn/china/2011-08/10/content_23176582.htm

Now, what do I need to do to convert my Italeri Kuznetsov kit into this?!!

[T0M4ever]

BBC have an article too with a little graphic comparing sizes of different carriers. Not sure why they bothered with Ark Royal, only carriers a few helicopters for now, then scrappage. Looks so small and insignificant!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14470882

[JasonW]

Interesting. Guess there's no money in casinos these days.

http://www.china.org.cn/china/2011-08/10/content_23176582.htm

Now, what do I need to do to convert my Italeri Kuznetsov kit into this?!!

It's not completed yet, just doing preliminary trials. From what I understand they will be fitting out more sensors, weaponry and radars over the next few months. My understanding is they really didn't change much about the basic construction of the vessel, she is mostly the same basic overall construction as the Kuznetsov. It is unclear how different the weapons fit will be as well as the sensor suite. Might have to wait a couple of more months for them to finish her up and get the rest of her fittings. We should see some decent pictures before long.

Aside from the weapons and sensors, the main external difference will be a PRC flag. They'll even be using Su-27's from what I've read.

Here are a few pictures of her recently. Basic structure of the Varyag is intact, island, sponsons, stern, bow ski ramp all look very close to original. I think it is mostly internal differences.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cgS12AC5hLw/Tby83LJ9jsI/AAAAAAAAALE/diRY007pA7Y/s1600/Carrier_Varyag_Now_Shi_Lang_PLAN13-2007-Dalian-Overhead.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QqlF6nBGeVc/TFPklN35jGI/AAAAAAAAF-0/2QadQiPqLRo/s1600/1.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QqlF6nBGeVc/TFPkdTL580I/AAAAAAAAF-s/EliKMZiqhVw/s1600/2.jpg

[eharrold44]

It's interesting how closely China is mirroring Japan, pre-WWII. Japan wanted a world-class navy, so they rabidly consumed every scrap of information about warship design they could get their hands on. First they used ships built in the UK, then they built their own ships from British designs, and finally they were able to build their own indigenous capital warships- all over the course of a few decades. China is starting to follow the same pattern. It'll be interesting to see where they go from here, once they gain some carrier expertise from operating the Varyag. The desire for a true blue water navy is certainly there.

[johnny_7713]

It's interesting how closely China is mirroring Japan, pre-WWII. Japan wanted a world-class navy, so they rabidly consumed every scrap of information about warship design they could get their hands on. First they used ships built in the UK, then they built their own ships from British designs, and finally they were able to build their own indigenous capital warships- all over the course of a few decades. China is starting to follow the same pattern. It'll be interesting to see where they go from here, once they gain some carrier expertise from operating the Varyag. The desire for a true blue water navy is certainly there.

Sounds like the most logical strategy if you want to close a technology gap to me. I'm sure the strategy is not specific to pre-WWII Japanese naval policy. But yes, China is certainly developing into a world power and is looking to acquire the trappings that go with that status, of which a blue water navy is one.

[Berkut]

They'll even be using Su-27's from what I've read.

J-15's.

[JasonW]

J-15's.

Sorry, an Su-33 (carrier based Su-27 variant) to be specific. Or, to clarify, a Chinese copy of the Su-33. Depends on the source but it boils down to some sort of Su-27 variant.

Same point though, they'll be using the same basic aircraft as the Russians use on their Kuznetsov carrier.

Edited August 10, 2011 by JasonW

[Kei Lau]

It's interesting how closely China is mirroring Japan, pre-WWII. Japan wanted a world-class navy, so they rabidly consumed every scrap of information about warship design they could get their hands on. First they used ships built in the UK, then they built their own ships from British designs, and finally they were able to build their own indigenous capital warships- all over the course of a few decades. China is starting to follow the same pattern. It'll be interesting to see where they go from here, once they gain some carrier expertise from operating the Varyag. The desire for a true blue water navy is certainly there.

The Indian Navy have been operating aircraft carrier since 1961. Currently, they have one in service and another scheduled to be commissioned in 2013. The carrier has not make India into a world class naval power yet in 50 years.

[fulcrum1]

Real question is how many corners did they skip and how much money are they really going to pump into it to keep it afloat. You couldn't pay me enough money to serve on that floating death trap. I understand why they want it and why they are building it, but any analogies to a pre-WWII Japan are nuts. Whole different mindset and purpose. Most of their military is still dirt poor and it has virtually no ability to be expeditionary, and certainly not in the numbers required to take Taiwan...which is the real goal. It won't risk a nuclear exchange - because it fears that our BMD would greatly reduce their strike, and we would certainly retaliate. China is a regional power at best.

[Guest Hoban Washburne]

Most of their military is still dirt poor and it has virtually no ability to be expeditionary

Errr...mate, China most certainly has expeditionary capabilities, and has carried on multiple expeditionary operations in the past several years. They've been constantly deployed with maritimes forces to the Gulf of Aden performing counter-piracy operations. Notably, they've conducted operations separately but coordinated apart from the remainder of the multi-national counter-piracy operation.

They've deployed to Anatolian Eagle for operations. They've been first on scene providing humanitarian relief in many of the major crises of the past several years, notably Haiti, Chile, and Japan. Colour China's military aspirations as you will. but they most certainly have an albeit limited expeditionary capability.

[LanceB]

The Indian Navy have been operating aircraft carrier since 1961. Currently, they have one in service and another scheduled to be commissioned in 2013. The carrier has not make India into a world class naval power yet in 50 years.

The same could arguably be said about every other country that operates carriers, save one. Or two, if you count the unpleasantness in the South Atlantic, but even then pressing a container ship into service as an "aircraft carrier" is not generally evidence of being a major naval power. Ingenuity, yes.

[LanceB]

Real question is how many corners did they skip and how much money are they really going to pump into it to keep it afloat.

Agreed, they seem to have trouble safely operating train technology pirated from inspired by Japanese and German designs. I shudder to think what they can do with bad copies of old Russian technology.

[11bee]

Agreed, they seem to have trouble safely operating train technology pirated from inspired by Japanese and German designs. I shudder to think what they can do with bad copies of old Russian technology.

I don't know... The Russians aren't the most technologically savvy group of people on the planet but so far they have managed to operate their carrier(s?) for decades without a major accident. Carrier Ops are inherently dangerous (as USN accident records will attest to), so at some point, the Chinese are going to lose a plane or worse. My guess is that given how crazy they are about any bad news, flight ops will be well out of the public eye and will start off very conservatively for quite some time (daylight / good weather only).

Once they are up to USN tempo (extended duration, multiple group launches every day, under combat conditions, regardless of weather, daylight, etc.), then we can get a bit worried. Until then, this is a PR tool and will also be used for intimidating their neighbors, with whom they have some pretty worrisome territorial disputes.

Expect to see lots of carefully edited videos and news reports released showcasing flight operations and faux combat exercises.

Edited August 11, 2011 by 11bee

[Antonov]

It seems to be an American habit to underestimate their real and potential enemies. How's that been working out for you since, say, 1950 or so?

That said, I agree that this is mostly a PR tool. Then again, I believe that modern anti-shipping missiles and quiet diesel submarines have made the carrier an ultra-expensive deathtrap when used against any more than a third-world, fourth-rate opponent. The Chinese want a carrier because that's what the big boys have. It's the same reason that the Japanese built the Yamato and Musashi, even after their own carrier air groups had proven that the era of the big battleship was over. Don't underestimate the power of prestige.

[JasonW]

Errr...mate, China most certainly has expeditionary capabilities, and has carried on multiple expeditionary operations in the past several years. They've been constantly deployed with maritimes forces to the Gulf of Aden performing counter-piracy operations. Notably, they've conducted operations separately but coordinated apart from the remainder of the multi-national counter-piracy operation.

They've deployed to Anatolian Eagle for operations. They've been first on scene providing humanitarian relief in many of the major crises of the past several years, notably Haiti, Chile, and Japan. Colour China's military aspirations as you will. but they most certainly have an albeit limited expeditionary capability.

To expand on this, China has been steadily building their amphibious assault capability over the last decade. They have commissioned two of the Type 071 amphibious warfare ships and are building another with a couple of more in the pipeline. The Type 071 can carry up to 4 Yuyi LCAC's. The Chinese have also developed the Jingsah II class LCAC which is comparable to the LCAC used by the US Navy/USMC. While they are not on par with the US in power projection capability, the Chinese have come a long way and have certainly demonstrated over the last 20 years they are dedicated to enhancing and growing their abilities in this regard.

[JasonW]

It's the same reason that the Japanese built the Yamato and Musashi, even after their own carrier air groups had proven that the era of the big battleship was over. Don't underestimate the power of prestige.

Disagree here. The IJN high command (including Yamamoto - who recognized the carriers capability and championed them early on) believed in the battleship as an important part of the fleet and really thought that the big gun ship in a closing engagement with an enemy fleet was still an important part of naval strategy. They thought that the battleship would be a critical part of the fleet in conjunction with the carriers. The IJN spent the better part of the early to mid-war trying to bring the US fleet into such an engagement.

[Antonov]

Disagree here. The IJN high command (including Yamamoto - who recognized the carriers capability and championed them early on) believed in the battleship as an important part of the fleet and really thought that the big gun ship in a closing engagement with an enemy fleet was still an important part of naval strategy. They thought that the battleship would be a critical part of the fleet in conjunction with the carriers. The IJN spent the better part of the early to mid-war trying to bring the US fleet into such an engagement.

We don't disagree that much. Either way, they believed in a weapons system that was clearly past its prime. Either way, they were wrong, and paid the price. Either way, they obviously came to understand their error before too long - thus why Shinano was converted into an aircraft carrier. Unfortunately, the fact that it was sunk by a cheap submarine was a bit of information about the future of naval warfare that we still haven't taken to heart.

[11bee]

That said, I agree that this is mostly a PR tool. Then again, I believe that modern anti-shipping missiles and quiet diesel submarines have made the carrier an ultra-expensive deathtrap when used against any more than a third-world, fourth-rate opponent. The Chinese want a carrier because that's what the big boys have. It's the same reason that the Japanese built the Yamato and Musashi, even after their own carrier air groups had proven that the era of the big battleship was over. Don't underestimate the power of prestige.

Not just a PR tool. Again, China has some very real disputes with pretty much all of it's neighbors over some potentially very valuable real estate. Even a bare-bones, partially functional carrier will go a long way in an armed dispute against the Philippines or Vietnam (your typical third world, fourth-rate opponent as mentioned above). If the dispute over the Spratly Islands ever gets hot, expect to see this ship directly involved.

China has shown that it moves incrementally. I highly doubt they will be confronting the US or invading Taiwan in the next decade but there is a very good chance you may see them exerting their new-found military might against lesser powers.

[eharrold44]

The same could arguably be said about every other country that operates carriers, save one. Or two, if you count the unpleasantness in the South Atlantic, but even then pressing a container ship into service as an "aircraft carrier" is not generally evidence of being a major naval power. Ingenuity, yes.

Yeah, having a minor flattop or two as a specialized compliment to your surface forces is a bit different than the Chinese approach. Given how much time and energy they've spent acquiring and studying carriers of varying designs (Minsk, Melbourne, etc.), I think it's fair to say their ambitions are probably much greater than a country like India's, or Spain's, or Argentina's, or any of the numerous other countries that have dabbled in light carrier operation. This is one more step in a learning process that's been going on for years.

I'm not saying China is going to have a fleet of supercarriers within 25 years, or anything alarmist like that, but I do feel the Japan analogy is a valid one. Japan's naval ambitions were motivated by a desire for prestige and a need to protect their expanding sphere of influence. China has both, and they do have a military industry that's had at least some success in adapting foreign designs and producing them domestically in significant numbers.

Not just a PR tool. Again, China has some very real disputes with pretty much all of it's neighbors over some potentially very valuable real estate. Even a bare-bones, partially functional carrier will go a long way in an armed dispute against the Philippines or Vietnam (your typical third world, fourth-rate opponent as mentioned above). If the dispute over the Spratly Islands ever gets hot, expect to see this ship directly involved.

China has shown that it moves incrementally. I highly doubt they will be confronting the US or invading Taiwan in the next decade but there is a very good chance you may see them exerting their new-found military might against lesser powers.

I'd say that's pretty reasonable. Varyag represents a small, deliberate step towards something bigger, IMO. It's an experiment, a learning platform. There are certainly some short-term benefits to having an operational fixed-wing carrier available for use in a regional dispute, though.

[fulcrum1]

Errr...mate, China most certainly has expeditionary capabilities, and has carried on multiple expeditionary operations in the past several years. They've been constantly deployed with maritimes forces to the Gulf of Aden performing counter-piracy operations. Notably, they've conducted operations separately but coordinated apart from the remainder of the multi-national counter-piracy operation.

They've deployed to Anatolian Eagle for operations. They've been first on scene providing humanitarian relief in many of the major crises of the past several years, notably Haiti, Chile, and Japan. Colour China's military aspirations as you will. but they most certainly have an albeit limited expeditionary capability.

Many nations along with private business have the capability of conducting humanitarian operations, that's really no big deal. Heck, I worked with Chevron Corp on this very issue back in '05. Now conducting Military Expeditionary operations by force? On a small, local scale, very few nations have that capability to do it on there own. On a global scale? Only the USA can do it. China is currently laying the ground work going through the diplomatic channels with various nations, but there is a hell of lot more than a few pieces of untested equipment and trained personnel that go into making a force expeditionary in the military aspect which is what we are talking about. What works for Humanitarian relief and pirates off the horn of Africa won't for a military operation, defensive or offensive.

[Antonov]

Not just a PR tool. Again, China has some very real disputes with pretty much all of it's neighbors over some potentially very valuable real estate. Even a bare-bones, partially functional carrier will go a long way in an armed dispute against the Philippines or Vietnam (your typical third world, fourth-rate opponent as mentioned above). If the dispute over the Spratly Islands ever gets hot, expect to see this ship directly involved.

I'm not convinced. The carrier would do... what, exactly? People with aircraft carriers have tried to push the Vietnamese around before. How'd that work out?

That's assuming that the Chinese's shiny new carrier didn't get sunk by an anti-ship missile, which is a distinct possibility. I'm not sure what the Viets have in terms of those, but I do know that they wouldn't hesitate to use whatever they've got. It wouldn't even be the first time they did something like that - remember that they sent out a bunch of MiG-17s to drop some iron bombs on the 7th Fleet in 1972. They didn't do much damage, but they've got a lot more sophisticated weapons now then they did then, and the most important point is that they wouldn't be the least bit afraid to use them. Sinking China's first carrier would be a ballsy thing to do, but if there's one thing the Vietnamese have never lacked in war, it's balls.

[Big Nick]

Take a look at Taiwan's response this week, particularly the artwork in the back....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/taiwan/8693255/As-China-launches-aircraft-carrier-Taiwan-presents-aircraft-carrier-killer.html

[Dndieje]

Some interesting observations here:

http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/61dc4903-260f-4158-947c-d40fd2f708c5/From-the-Sea--PLA-Doctrine-and-the-Employment-of-S

[LanceB]

Antonov, the flip side of your argument also applies. A Very Big Nation with aircraft carriers did try to push (a significant chunk) of the Vietnamese around before, and it didn't work out because there was no political will to invade, conquer or destroy North Vietnam as an entity and impose a new form of government there. All kinds of stupid "rules" were put into place, like "if we don't bomb their Russian-built SAM sites then the Russians will see to it that the Vietnamese won't use them against us". Obviously that bit of brilliant political insight didn't work out.

I strongly doubt the Chinese will have any similar reservations. When they used their ships' automatic cannons to blow apart that Vietnamese Navy landing party standing in chest-deep water on one of the contested shoals a few years ago they proved that point. If China sent an operational aircraft carrier into the area to push Vietnam around yes, I think Vietnam would push back hard. They may even sink the carrier.

If they did, then God help them, because China would open an entire container-ship load of canned whoop-*** on them.

[dmk0210]

That is a lot of big money for just a PR program. I'd bet they have some "Yankee Station" type plans for this thing.

Yes, the US parked carriers off the coast of Vietnam and ultimately had to withdraw, but they did a heck of a lot of damage in that time. And they would have done a lot worse if they would have been allowed to. The reasons for that not being as effective as it should have been (allow active shipping ports during a war? Safe zones for SAMs?, Political centers untouched?) were purely political. North Vietnam could have been laid waste if the Navy was given the OK.

if there's one thing the Vietnamese have never lacked in war, it's balls.

Boy that's the truth Edited August 12, 2011 by dmk0210