How do you work out that china cant win an arms race? Her econmy is predicted to have over taken that of the US by 2050 and her levels of technology are increasing massively. All china has to do is wait.

The desighn came about as a response to a need to defeat surge attacks, that is the reason why the vessel effectively had the equivilant AAW capability of 2 type 42s and and 2 type 22s. The problem was that it came about just as Britain was going through one of the most fundamental political, social and economic changes in its histrory (A change that without Britain would be in the dark ages by now). We simply could not afford them, only about 4 were ever planned.
Steve, your comment is the first I have heard about a sponson, I did once see a vertical schematic and it did not show a sponson, just the helo hanger offset, although it does sound plausible I am sceptical, if a ship is rolling a sponson on a vessel like this would be the last place I would want to be as its movements would be more violent than any other part of the ship.
When the ship was desighned the RN had yet to adopt the Harpoon, but I am sure that if they had been built they would have recieved them. I think the biggest reason for the placement of the helo facilitys was to allow the rear sea dart system. (If you look at HMS Bristol she only has a landing pad and no hanger). The type 43s primary role was AAW so the helo wasnt vital.
It is said that it was considered building these ships with the aegis system but I have no idea how far the idea got and have never seen a picture.
India, I dont understand your comment about the low superstructure, to me it appears tall.

Ok heres one, this is by far the best of the two, but it is the only one I can uplooad. It shows the latout and all the systems. If I remember correctly the helicopter hanger was to be offset to one side of the ship behind the bridge with the forward funnel next to it, not below the helicopter deck as some have suggested.

You may be in luck, if I remember rightly the type43 was the big one with 2 twin arm seadart launchers, seawolf and 4 directors for the sea dart, the helicopter platform was amidships.
I think that I have got some pictures squirreled away on a computer somewhere so I will have a hunt.

The chinese havnt named it Aegis, thats just a reference term used in text and on the internet becouse no official designation has been issued in public from official sources.

so which S-300 variant is it? :rolleyes:
do you actually have any idea what it is that you are talking about?

To the best of my knowledge how the F117 was shot down over Yugoslavia is still officially secret as far as US sources are concerned so how K.P.Foley knows I do not know.
It is now almost certain that Iraq and any of the former Yugoslavian states never received Kolchuga or any such technology.
Every aircraft has emisions, be they as slight as changes in the atmosphere. Theoretically (as the second article suggests) such emissions can be analysed and the location of aircraft established.
It is almost certain that the soviet union began an effort to track stealth aircraft in the 1980s, what is probable is that the systems I mentioned were part of the results.
I noticed that you only posted articles that are negative about the systems I mentioned, you do not strike me as the most open minded person in the world.

That is indeed an S-400 TEL, I and SOC have reffered to it frequently during these discussions but each time Noerper has ignored it becouse it does not fit with his ignorant view point. He has equally ignored reports of the trials of the S-400 system.

“According to unverified accounts” not exactly official is it.