Um, I suspect they were policing the deck looking for FOD...

Good Idea of Rick Keller.

Look, paper dragon, perhaps stay "papdragon", in more abbreviated form.

We have a beautiful first name.

 

João Alfredo

I think people take this thing way too seriously,

 

In the short term, the main impact this "thing" will have will be certainly to help the US Navy budget as well as that of all neighbouring nations (Japan, the Philippines, etc).

 

In the long term....carriers, just like navies, are very expensive weapons, as the former Soviet Union found out. Building a navy takes decades, but if the Chinese are serious and don't run out of money or will power (and I don't think they will, at least in the coming years), then you will find that people didn't take this thing too seriously at all.

 

And that deck crew, what were they looking for, Easter Eggs? I kept expecting them to break into some sort of gangnam flash, like at "Minsk World":

 

Fr. Bill is right. The US Navy calls it "FOD walkdown"

 

The Liaoning is a paper dragon, meant to impress the masses, not intimidate the opposition.

 

(edited) At this time, you're certainly right. But maybe only in the short term...

 

Bruno

This carrier wasn't actually made in China. It is one of 2 built by the former Soviet Union in Riga Shipyard in 1985. It has a long history to it now. Ownership went from Russia to Ukraine and eventually sold to China in 1998 under the pretext it was going to be used as a floating casino.

 

It has taken China since 1998 to refit the ship.

 

 

Is this carrier nuclear powered?

 

Nope, Specs from Wiki:

 

Propulsion:

Steam turbines, 8 boilers, 4 shafts, 200,000 hp (150 MW)

2 × 50,000 hp (37 MW) turbines

9 × 2,011 hp (1,500 kW) turbogenerators

6 × 2,011 hp (1,500 kW) diesel generators

4 × fixed pitch propellers

This carrier wasn't actually made in China. It is one of 2 built by the former Soviet Union in Riga Shipyard in 1985. It has a long history to it now. Ownership went from Russia to Ukraine and eventually sold to China in 1998 under the pretext it was going to be used as a floating casino.

 

It has taken China since 1998 to refit the ship.

 

 

 

 

Nope, Specs from Wiki:

 

Propulsion:

Steam turbines, 8 boilers, 4 shafts, 200,000 hp (150 MW)

2 × 50,000 hp (37 MW) turbines

9 × 2,011 hp (1,500 kW) turbogenerators

6 × 2,011 hp (1,500 kW) diesel generators

4 × fixed pitch propellers

 

Cheers Matt.

 

So that is why it is so similar to the Russian carriers.

 

I wonder what design the Chinese will use when making their own carrier.

Little off topic, but goes to what Daniel was saying about the American Nuclear Powered Carriers....I always liked this picture:

 

(USS Enterprise)

 

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming....

 

Cheers

Cool pic. USS Enterprise, USS Long Island and USS Bainbridge - all nuclear powered.

 

I also like the air wing on Enterprise... far more interesting than what can be found on USN carriers nowadays!

I wonder what design the Chinese will use when making their own carrier.

It will likely have a Pagoda somewhere on it... :p0305:

Um, I suspect they were policing the deck looking for FOD...

Riight. They are on a ship that carries and launches airplanes, you know (scratch head), it stands to reason they might search for "F"oreign "O"bjects that could potentially cause "D"amage; thank you for elucidating something that is so blindingly obvious that most navies never bother to even mention, let alone document it. It also stands to reason the ship has working plumbing, I suppose we can be thankful the Chinese did not choose to include proof of that in their report.

My point is: why is this suddenly newsworthy? It isn't. They are all waving their hands and looking serious for the camera for nothing. Show. Hence the "Easter Eggs" allusion, apologies for being less than blunt in my observations. They are saying, "look, we can go out and fly carrier planes, just like the USA and if there were ever a conflict that was fought on 20th century terms, you know, with piloted airplanes and stuff, we could conceivably shoot at the other carrier planes."

I have also seen where they do an FOD sweep of runways and taxiways prior to Air Force 1 arriving or departing.

 

Remember the damage caused to the Concorde in Paris on take-off from a metallic strip. Good to be safe then sorry with these type of high performance aircraft.

This was a nice conversation.

Riight. They are on a ship that carries and launches airplanes, you know (scratch head), it stands to reason they might search for "F"oreign "O"bjects that could potentially cause "D"amage; thank you for elucidating something that is so blindingly obvious that most navies never bother to even mention, let alone document it.

 

On the contrary. ALL navies flying aircraft at sea mention FOD walkdowns and document them abundantly. The fact that you missed it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

My point is: why is this suddenly newsworthy? It isn't.

 

Of course it is. Ask Japan and all neighbouring nations. Ask why the first question any US president would ask at the beginning of a crisis during the cold war was : "Where are the (ie our) carriers?".

 

Very few navies own aicraft carriers. And most of those who do only own carriers with limited capabilities (like Italy and Spain now or the UK during the Falklands war in 1982 and until a few years ago) : Ie only VSTOL aircraft, no or very little Airborne Early Warning capability (similar to what the E-2C/D provides), So the fact that the Chinese navy gets into the carrier business is noteworthy.

 

And even if the Liaoping has a very limited capability at the present time compared to a Nimitz class carrier, its very existence, AND the fact that it is developped by a nation possessing :

 

- the financial and industrial ressources and the staying power to further develop its capabilities (and maybe to develop a full CATOBAR carrier as the next step)

 

- and (more importantly) the political will to use it, even only for political bluff.

 

it is a game changer.

 

Bruno

 

Note : CATOBAR stands for Catapult and arrested landing. The ship is much more expensive but the planes have better performances, better range, better weapon-carrying capabilities etc.

Thanks for the pic of the USS Enterprise Matt. They had F-4 Phantoms on the deck and the Skyhawks. The F-4s are one of my favourites......

And the Tomcats are great too. My favourite is the F-15, a True Air Superiority Fighter.

OMG. Y'all have Googled where the dayam thing came from, right? It was garbage. Now I know China is really smart about taking $2 million worth of scrap iron and turning it into $20 billion in Black and Decker screw guns and tailgate barbeques - and that is about the level of game this paper dragon painted lady could change; it just might interrupt some play-off somewhere. Any serious military presence in the region is going to seek a worthy target and pass right over the FODless deck of the Liaoning.

 

On the contrary. ALL navies flying aircraft at sea mention FOD walkdowns and document them abundantly. The fact that you missed it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

The fact that you did not produce a single link doesn't mean it doesn't exist either, it demonstrates the veracity of rhetorical hearsay.

Of course it is. Ask Japan and all neighbouring nations. Ask why the first question any US president would ask at the beginning of a crisis during the cold war was : "Where are the (ie our) carriers?".

"Japan, China just re-commissioned one of three Cold War era diesel powered carriers that Russia (sorry, Ukraine) sold as scrap. Considering that you are a nation that is one tenth the size as China, yet you maintain 99.8% of the GDP of China; are you worried or in any wishing you had also refurbished one of those carriers?"

___

 

"Mr President, U-2 spyplanes have just discovered ballistic missiles in Cuba."

"Jumping jehosafat, where are our diesel powered, modern era carriers?"

"Sir, the Enterprise was commissioned a year ago."

"Crimeny, that'll clean their whistles. And make sure they do a halfway decent FOD before they head over there, don't want the world's eyes to see little crummies dripping off the deck of the worlds first nucular carrier."

"(that's 'nuclear' Sir.)

Very few navies own aicraft carriers. And most of those who do only own carriers with limited capabilities (like Italy and Spain now or the UK during the Falklands war in 1982 and until a few years ago)

This statement addresses facts in a deceiving manner. The UK, known for empire building, naval prowess and world leadership, retired all their carriers. Russia? Even with it's impossibly long coast lines and hostile national borders, see's no priority for carriers. Their only example, the Kuznetsov, half sister to Liaoning, must carry a complement of anti-ship missiles, defining it's role as fleet protection. With technical and financial issues, it is hardly expected to be a "game changer" between now and it's retirement in 2025. But the country that has no fleet to protect, that bought one as scrap, is going to turn all that around.

the fact that the Chinese navy gets into the carrier business is noteworthy.

At a time when aircraft are losing pilots and can therefore be launched from - well almost anything. I am sure there must be some circumstance where AEW is superior to satellite data, probably a good enough reason to have a carrier, probably at least worth taking a few notes over.

The fact that you did not produce a single link doesn't mean it doesn't exist either, it demonstrates the veracity of rhetorical hearsay.

 

"Japan, China just re-commissioned one of three Cold War era diesel powered carriers that Russia (sorry, Ukraine) sold as scrap. Considering that you are a nation that is one tenth the size as China, yet you maintain 99.8% of the GDP of China; are you worried or in any wishing you had also refurbished one of those carriers?"

___

 

 

 

This statement addresses facts in a deceiving manner. The UK, known for empire building, naval prowess and world leadership, retired all their carriers.

 

Russia? Even with it's impossibly long coast lines and hostile national borders, see's no priority for carriers.

 

 

 

At a time when aircraft are losing pilots

 

Just a quick answer (I have a plane to catch and will be away for a while so I won't be able to follow this discussion, which, in view of your sense of humour, will be a great loss :smile: )

 

- FOD Walkdown : see Google, National Geographic channel, any magazine article or book or TV report. ANYTHING mentionning carriers really...

 

- Japan : have you heard or the territorial disputes between Japan and China. Or between China, the Philipines, Taiwan, Vietnam (Paracells etc...)?

 

- UK

 

1 retired all their carriers...and are building two new ones, twice as large as those they retired.

 

2 Had they not had the Invincible in 1982, they most probably would have lost the Falklands forever

 

- Russia : the USSR tried hard (and in many ways succeded in) developping a surface Navy during the cold war. But it takes more than ships to develop a Navy (see your reference to Britain...). And it takes, time, money, committment. Furthermore, they never were, at hart, a maritime nation and when the communist system collapsed, all this went down the drain.

 

Right now, they have given up on carrier aviation but are building a series of large amphibious ships based on a design they bought from France.

 

Drones : see the current US Navy developments for carrier-based drones (try Googling X47....)

 

Anyway, nice talking to you... :lol:

 

Bruno