This is next doors to a University. Quite a lot of unwelcome eyes and mobile phone cameras. Interesting that photos are showing up only when the thing is almost finished…

Wuhan Technical College of Communication, a transportation technical school
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1473101&postcount=111

Here’s a picture of Aster launching from the cell. Looks like it’s blasted off from hell it self!

Mmmm, doesn’t quite look like Aster to me…:rolleyes:

Note the other ship mock-ups in the foreground… the bare dirt around the “carrier-building, and the incomplete part of the building on the far side of the tower cranes?

That is a dedicated training building, designed around the carrier deck roof and the island mock-up, just like the ones in the foreground are for destroyer/frigate training.

There is no way of knowing yet whether those items on the foreground are ship mock-ups or real ships. Besides, if the where mock ups, explain why the chinese would build full size mock ups of civilian ships?

The next funny situation will be with regards to what fighter the Chinese will operate from the Varyag. The Russians have dumped plans to make upgraded Su-33s and are going with the MiG 29-K/KUBs.

Can anyone see the PLAN going for the MIG 29-K ? Or will they build their own carrier capable J 11 B ? Which will be a bit hard because they have never operated a carrier and have no experience building a carrier capable fighter.

The fact that Mig29K/KUB will be used need not preclude the development of an upgrade or follow-on to the Su-33. It is merely convenient to use Mig 29k(support Mig + get a greater number of newer and more versatile aircraft onto Kuz soon.

If PLAN is planning it own design follow-on to mod-Varyag, then this likely to be bigger. It would be better feasible to stick with Flanker-size aircraft like J11B or follow-on in that case.

sure mig-29k better than su-33..(not the performance but naval flanker too big for the kuts).but is it wise to buy NOW ?
there will be PAK-FA – naval in the next 10 years so those expensive fulcrum will be obsolete just in 10 years (if not already)…

They can
– follow up the Indian order now and (finally) support MIG
– get more planes on Kuz, which will last longer than Su-33
– while giving greater operational versatility, and.
– at 42 million, these are not that expensive to procure

I think there is an element of doctrine and economy involved here. RIM 7/ 162 are more of an area defence weapon than a point defence weapon like GWS25/26. The RN, (certainly in the past) had enough hulls to afford to put out an area weapon (GWS30) and a point defence weapon (GWS20, 25 etc) while smaller fleets could afford one type only so went with RIM-7 which had slightly longer legs- certainly the case with ESSM which has a range more akin to GWS 30.

The Netherlands navy initially used Sea Cat (Van Speijk class frigates), then came the Tromp class AAW frigates with both Sea Sparrow and Standard SM1. Then came the Kortenaer class GP with Sea Sparrow. Then the van Heemskerck derivative with Sea Sparrow and Standard SM1. Then the Doorman class with VL Sea Sparrow (to be issued ESSM) and finally the Zeven Provincien ‘LCF’ (DDG) with VL ESSM and SM2. For the Dutch, Sea Sparrow never was an area defense weapon. Nor was it in NATO:

NATO SEASPARROW Surface Missile System (NSSMS) has its roots in the 1960s Point Defense Missile System (Mauler). When that and therefore Sea Mauler failed, the “Basic Point Defense Missile System” was organized, the then-current AIM-7E from the F-4 Phantom adapted to shipboard use. The main developments were the new Mark 25 trainable launcher developed from the ASROC launcher, and the Mark 115 manually aimed radar illuminator that looked like two large searchlights. In 1968, Denmark, Italy, and Norway signed an agreement with the US Navy to use the Sea Sparrow on their ships, and collaborate on improved versions. Over the next few years a number of other countries joined the NATO SEASPARROW Project Office (NSPO), and today it includes 12 member nations. Under this umbrella group, the “Improved Basic Point Defense Missile System” (IBPDMS) program started even while the original version was being deployed. Production of the folding fin RIM-7H began in 1973 as NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System (NSSMS) Block I, incorporating the Mk29 launcher.
Based on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-7_Sea_Sparrow#PDMS

If i was given the choice i would have went with the NATO Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile as it is a proven system in-use worldwide and with a better range than proposed CAMM and cheaper to boot. The problem is it’s semi active but there is/was an Active version mooted so that could work.

Well, that’s what smaller European NATO navies did (e.g. Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, eventually also Portugal, Greece, Turkey)….