If a Chinese Aircraft Carrier Moves 2 Miles, Is it News?

The problem being that in a war versus the US china would instantly lose any Oil, food and resource inports that arent coming by way of land. Resources would be embargoed by Australia, oil would be interdicted from Diego Garcia.

India can similarly interdict Oil movement into China.

Hence China cultivating the central Asian states & Russia, extending internal pipeline networks, & planning cross-border pipelines.

“Casino” my ass.

Didn’t the Russians demand she be scrapped?

When’s the last time the Chinese actually listened to the Russians? :rolleyes:

China imports a heck of a lot of stuff especially oil, and those sea lanes would only become more important with time. More than mere reputation, I think chinese plans for future aircraft carrier would take into consideration of the protection of sea lane/power projection.

The problem being that in a war versus the US china would instantly lose any Oil, food and resource inports that arent coming by way of land. Resources would be embargoed by Australia, oil would be interdicted from Diego Garcia.

India can similarly interdict Oil movement into China.

Uhh, that area around Shanghai to Japan is approx 1000KM I think.

That’s plenty of room for air cover from home. Not to mention lack of air cover can easily be compensated for by excellent air defenses.

China simply doesn’t need to go so far that it would need a carrier.

China imports a heck of a lot of stuff especially oil, and those sea lanes would only become more important with time. More than mere reputation, I think chinese plans for future aircraft carrier would take into consideration of the protection of sea lane/power projection.

Uhuh, and what do you think would happen to that fleet without aircover? If the other side had it, the PLAN would be under a lot of pressure. With a carrier you can help rebalance that.

Uhh, that area around Shanghai to Japan is approx 1000KM I think.

That’s plenty of room for air cover from home. Not to mention lack of air cover can easily be compensated for by excellent air defenses.

China simply doesn’t need to go so far that it would need a carrier.

Is that wise on the part of Brazil??? As it gets much of its Carrier Equipment and Training from France and the United States. I doubt either would be happy with Brazil assisting China with its Carrier Development…………..

Brazil is not helping china develop (a) carrier(s). As the article states, there will be an exchange of navy personnel. Which is quite common among friendly navies. The Brazilians have not excluded their carrier from the vessels on board of which chinese mariners would be staying.

AGÊNCIA OF THE NEWS XINHUA – CHINA

Chinese sailors will realise practices in Brazil

BRASILIA, 19 may (Xinhua) — The Navy of Brazil will offer training to officials of Navy of the Popular Army of Liberación (EPL) of China, especially in the operation of aircraft carrier, today informed the minister into Defense of Brazil, Nelson Jobim.
The minister said east Tuesday to the press that the cooperation was decided during the visit commander of Brazilian Navy, Carlos Soares de Net Moura, to the Asian country in April, by the celebration of the 60 anniversary of the foundation of the Navy of the EPL. ” Admiral Net Moura was in China, and we committed ourselves to receive officials Chinese to train them in the Brazilian ships, and including in the Sao Paulo aircraft carrier ” , Jobim said. ” China wants to retake its Navy, but precise instruction, therefore it remembered that they would come Chinese to train, to learn. They mainly are interested in portaaviones” , he added. In last March, the minister of Defense of China, general Liang Guanglie, put of manifesto the necessity that China owns an aircraft carrier, because it is the unique country between the main powers of the world that does not own it. The Brazilian minister stood out that the naval-army cooperation can be the departure point for others initiatives in the defense area. ” With China which we have in the field of Defense it is that possibility. And you know that he begins with that, later the things go away sucediendo” , he indicated. Jobim anticipated in addition that opportunely he himself will go to China to define the details of that general agreement. China maintains a Strategic Alliance with Brazil from 1993, that includes a flood cooperation in the technological area, and this year happened to be its main commercial partner, surpassing to the United States. During the visit to Peking that president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva initiated east Monday was decided in addition a loan to 10,000 million dollars granted by the Development bank of China for oil state Petrobra’s. With the referred credit, oil Brazilian prentende to extend the petroleum exploration in I milk submarine continental Brazilian.

If China wanted control of Japan’s EEZ or whatever, they could easily simply use a fleet of ships that lacked a carrier.

Uhuh, and what do you think would happen to that fleet without aircover? If the other side had it, the PLAN would be under a lot of pressure. With a carrier you can help rebalance that.

China probably wants a carrier for force projection away from its coastlines – towards its shipping routes and possibly even further to areas that supply it with resources. It’s about securing supplies, not making attacks on random states.

Carriers would also allow China to better contest waters in the South China Sea and in Japan’s claimed EEZ if it wanted to access the resources there, limit the potential effectiveness of other countries’ military operations, etc. It wasn’t a high priority to begin with, but once the submarine fleet was large enough and was starting to modernise it became something that was more useful.

The only good thing a carrier allows really is use of aircraft to attack land targets deep in enemy territory.

If China wanted control of Japan’s EEZ or whatever, they could easily simply use a fleet of ships that lacked a carrier.

A single carrier might be handy for extra air defenses and more anti-ship capability, but more are hardly worth the money involved.

No, it’s like saying that a police force centred on a large & under-employed specialised anti-drug squad is quite relieved to see a new drug-smuggling gang start up. It justifies their size & organisation.

The USN is having great difficulty justifying the number of carriers it currently has. The possible threats you mention, & any others you can dredge up, don’t justify the current fleet even if they all explode at once.

There are few scenarios that call for more than LHAs/LHDs.

Sorry, the USN has been very happy with 10-12 Carriers for decades…..As a matter of fact the USN would prefer a 10 Carrier Fleet right now. Yet, the US Congress always fights them over cutting back even one ship……

Regardless, the USN is not having a hard time justifying in large fleet of blue water surface ships. As Aegis Destroyers are back in production and the Carrier Fleet is stable at 10-11 Ships………….the same goes for LHA’s and LHD’s……..

Really, the only issue at the momment is the lower end of the scale. As the OHP are retiring and its replacement (sort of) LCS is coming along slowly…..

Either way the USN is hardly in crisis or having a hard time justify its numbers or roles………:rolleyes:

US government think of China as a military adversary?

And its not a question of what the US wants, i am saying that at this stage they simply do not care about PRC developing aircraft carriers, atleast not enough to diplomatically persue Russia/Ukraine/Brazil or Frace to stop providing any help.

Your incorrect………

A carrier is good to move some air defense around your border – which makes sense for China – and bomb some undefended nations – which isn’t something China is going to be doing. As simplistic as that sounds it’s true.

China probably wants a carrier for force projection away from its coastlines – towards its shipping routes and possibly even further to areas that supply it with resources. It’s about securing supplies, not making attacks on random states.

Carriers would also allow China to better contest waters in the South China Sea and in Japan’s claimed EEZ if it wanted to access the resources there, limit the potential effectiveness of other countries’ military operations, etc. It wasn’t a high priority to begin with, but once the submarine fleet was large enough and was starting to modernise it became something that was more useful.

Loving the carrier masturbation here.

If China really wanted to match the USN, it would be wiser to do it with USSR / Russian style. Lots of fast and big missiles. Numbers are winner.

A carrier is good to move some air defense around your border – which makes sense for China – and bomb some undefended nations – which isn’t something China is going to be doing. As simplistic as that sounds it’s true.

Clearly, no country wants an adversary to develop more capable Weapons.

Which, is common sense with all do respect………

US government think of China as a military adversary?

And its not a question of what the US wants, i am saying that at this stage they simply do not care about PRC developing aircraft carriers, atleast not enough to diplomatically persue Russia/Ukraine/Brazil or Frace to stop providing any help.

Sorry, the USN doesn’t need Chinese Carriers to justify its own CBG’s. Especially, in todays very dangerous world………..(i.e. Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, etc. etc.)

That’s like saying the police don’t mind if criminal get’s off on a technicality. So, the police can justify next years budget……….:rolleyes:

Wrong analogy. There is a difference in the mindsets of a police force and that of USA’s.

Sorry, the USN doesn’t need Chinese Carriers to justify its own CBG’s. Especially, in todays very dangerous world………..(i.e. Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, etc. etc.)

That’s like saying the police don’t mind if criminal get’s off on a technicality. So, the police can justify next years budget……….:rolleyes:

No, it’s like saying that a police force centred on a large & under-employed specialised anti-drug squad is quite relieved to see a new drug-smuggling gang start up. It justifies their size & organisation.

The USN is having great difficulty justifying the number of carriers it currently has. The possible threats you mention, & any others you can dredge up, don’t justify the current fleet even if they all explode at once.

There are few scenarios that call for more than LHAs/LHDs.

I think the USN in the current climate will be quite happy to see China develop a carrier force. In reality there is no way the PLAN could come close to matching the USN for at least fifty years, but in the meantime an emerging carrier force will provide the USN with justification for the retention of it’s own carrier force in the face of budget cuts caused by the current recession. Whilst the US may make noises disagreeing with the China – Brazil deal, quietly they are probably quite pleased about it if it kick starts the PLAN CV program. The USN has suffered for some time now with overwhelming superiority, making it vulnerable to cuts from it’s own government, which as thing stand is the only serious adversary the USN has to face. A potential threat such as the PLAN on paper at least is just what they need right now. Also the Russian Navy carrier program as reported is likely to add to this argument, and once they start cutting steel the the USN will likely have a warm feeling inside for the first time since the fall of the USSR.

Sorry, the USN doesn’t need Chinese Carriers to justify its own CBG’s. Especially, in todays very dangerous world………..(i.e. Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, etc. etc.)

That’s like saying the police don’t mind if criminal get’s off on a technicality. So, the police can justify next years budget……….:rolleyes:

I think the USN in the current climate will be quite happy to see China develop a carrier force. In reality there is no way the PLAN could come close to matching the USN for at least fifty years, but in the meantime an emerging carrier force will provide the USN with justification for the retention of it’s own carrier force in the face of budget cuts caused by the current recession. Whilst the US may make noises disagreeing with the China – Brazil deal, quietly they are probably quite pleased about it if it kick starts the PLAN CV program. The USN has suffered for some time now with overwhelming superiority, making it vulnerable to cuts from it’s own government, which as thing stand is the only serious adversary the USN has to face. A potential threat such as the PLAN on paper at least is just what they need right now. Also the Russian Navy carrier program as reported is likely to add to this argument, and once they start cutting steel the the USN will likely have a warm feeling inside for the first time since the fall of the USSR.

How is it naive?

i am not stating they would want PLA-N to train with Brazil, i am saying they do not care.

If we look at all the things that are said in the public they give the impression of the thought process of the government.

Clearly, no country wants an adversary to develop more capable Weapons.

Which, is common sense with all do respect………

Sorry, it is extremely naive to believe the US or France would want China to train Naval Pilots with Brazil…………Regardless, what is said in the public.

How is it naive?

i am not stating they would want PLA-N to train with Brazil, i am saying they do not care.

If we look at all the things that are said in the public they give the impression of the thought process of the government.

Here’s the article that should go well with those new dry dock pics 🙂

Of course you can see the reason why China wants to hook up with Brazil and soon………