Full Version: Chinese aircraft carrier
.
QUOTE (21JumpStreet @ Sep 2 2009, 09:04 PM) 
So what country did the chinese send spies to steal this technology from?
technology is made by people and should be shared by all people.
If one country wants to keep their inventions a secret so they can exploit and enslave other people then people have the right to stop them at any costs.
is catapult technology that hard to master? that even a fanboy ps'er doesn't allow himself/herself to imagine it?
or is it that the catapult shortens the airframe's lifetime so much that it's uneconomical for China
or is it that the catapult shortens the airframe's lifetime so much that it's uneconomical for China
QUOTE (orange peel @ Sep 2 2009, 10:34 PM)
is catapult technology that hard to master? that even a fanboy ps'er doesn't allow himself/herself to imagine it?
or is it that the catapult shortens the airframe's lifetime so much that it's uneconomical for China
or is it that the catapult shortens the airframe's lifetime so much that it's uneconomical for China
the Varyag was never designed to have catapults. China purchased the unfinished hull from Ukraine.
Looks very nice.
looks like fanboy art but recently they have been doing work on the ex-varyag such as dismantling the old island
Russian carriers aren't fine even as platform for nightclubs http://www.hudong.com/wiki/天津...#20844;园 hoho, I would mention why it was commissioned, ya it was commissioned because of braindead engine placement. And I wouldn't even mention it for famous Minsk one =D
QUOTE (baybal @ Sep 4 2009, 12:05 AM)
Russian carriers aren't fine even as platform for nightclubs http://www.hudong.com/wiki/天津...#20844;园 hoho, I would mention why it was commissioned, ya it was commissioned because of braindead engine placement. And I wouldn't even mention it for famous Minsk one =D
PLAN purchased the Varyag for learning purposes anyways.
Im pretty sure that the "company" that purchased it for entertainment would be bankrupt long ago considering it has been idle for the last 7 years and the billions of dollars used to transport it to China
If you remember the 60s Japan was known for their lack of innovation and at times low quality products and people questioned their innovative capabilities as their products were thought to be copies. Today they are a innovative superpower. The idea is that you have to get competitive before the can innovate and to get competitive, you have to produce low cost products and that includes low cost research. The ability to innovate does not come magically, it takes generations to become an innovative powerhouse
Why bother even responding to the troll's bs claims about China? He's just a troll and that's what he's gonna do no matter what you say. We should just ignore him and take it as a compliment that he finds China so threatening that he has to come troll us.
there's no reason to not steal technology. patent laws were created to enrich a small subset of people
Unlike consumer goods, for all intense and purposes there is no stealing of designs in military equipment. every one does it including the U.S.
Besides, copying can only make something at best equal to the original. You have to add somethings of your own to make it better.
Besides, copying can only make something at best equal to the original. You have to add somethings of your own to make it better.
QUOTE (21JumpStreet @ Sep 3 2009, 06:59 PM)
"technology is made by people and should be shared by all people.
If one country wants to keep their inventions a secret so they can exploit and enslave other people then people have the right to stop them at any costs."
Is that the only argument that Chinese people have for stealing other peoples technology? People across the world spend their lives, their blood sweat and tears, their entire mental capacity to invent, research and design to create inventions to make this world a better and safer place, and then the Chinese send their little cockroach spies in to steal the technology, and lie through their fu-ken teeth when confronted. Its unethical and its immoral.
Id rather be known to be innovative and inventive, smart and creative like the Japanese than to be known as a bunch of low IQ lying little cockroach stealing theives like the Chinese. Its funny, out of the 1 billion 400 million Chinese youd think there be a good number of creative people..i guess not. All ethnic groups in China including the caucasian ones have some kind of Han Chinese blood, so I count everyone in China no matter ethnic group as chinese.
If one country wants to keep their inventions a secret so they can exploit and enslave other people then people have the right to stop them at any costs."
Is that the only argument that Chinese people have for stealing other peoples technology? People across the world spend their lives, their blood sweat and tears, their entire mental capacity to invent, research and design to create inventions to make this world a better and safer place, and then the Chinese send their little cockroach spies in to steal the technology, and lie through their fu-ken teeth when confronted. Its unethical and its immoral.
Id rather be known to be innovative and inventive, smart and creative like the Japanese than to be known as a bunch of low IQ lying little cockroach stealing theives like the Chinese. Its funny, out of the 1 billion 400 million Chinese youd think there be a good number of creative people..i guess not. All ethnic groups in China including the caucasian ones have some kind of Han Chinese blood, so I count everyone in China no matter ethnic group as chinese.
lol low level troll huh. you can go check the stats for patents and triadic patents alike. in both China is growing quite fast. you can ask aerein what triadic patents are if you dont know, which i seriously doubt you do.
i thought the common name these days for aircraft carriers is "floating coffins"
QUOTE (MangoMania @ Sep 8 2009, 06:23 AM)
i thought the common name these days for aircraft carriers is "floating coffins"
nah, they are actually the sword behind the shield of destroyers, frigates and subs
QUOTE (MangoMania @ Sep 8 2009, 01:23 PM)
i thought the common name these days for aircraft carriers is "floating coffins"
Well, if you look at the shape of the typical flight deck........
QUOTE (sinraptor @ Sep 8 2009, 06:31 PM)
nah, they are actually the sword behind the shield of destroyers, frigates and subs
what sword?
they are usually called one hit blunders
as in one hit and the thing is gone, the runway is destroyed and the aircraft cant take off
just a nice big coffin sinking into the ocean
QUOTE (MangoMania @ Sep 10 2009, 09:37 AM)
what sword?
they are usually called one hit blunders
as in one hit and the thing is gone, the runway is destroyed and the aircraft cant take off
just a nice big coffin sinking into the ocean
they are usually called one hit blunders
as in one hit and the thing is gone, the runway is destroyed and the aircraft cant take off
just a nice big coffin sinking into the ocean
thats why there are so much frigates, destroyers and subs to protect it while the carrier attacks with firepower that the escorts cannot provide
QUOTE (sinraptor @ Sep 11 2009, 12:43 PM)
thats why there are so much frigates, destroyers and subs to protect it while the carrier attacks with firepower that the escorts cannot provide
China atm does not have enough to defend its coastlines, trade routes and forming a carrier battle group at the same time.
PLAN should keep pumping out frigates and subs and leave the carrier at the R&D stage until its ready.
QUOTE (BigBenChow @ Sep 11 2009, 10:49 AM)
PLAN should keep pumping out frigates and subs and leave the carrier at the R&D stage until its ready.
i'snt that what the PLAN have been doing in the past few years surging frigates and subs?
QUOTE (sinraptor @ Sep 12 2009, 07:18 AM)
i'snt that what the PLAN have been doing in the past few years surging frigates and subs?
yes...and they should continue doing it.
PLAN needs to enhance current models as well. China pumps out 1 or 2 of each variant, then designs something completely new. Waste of money and time.
Just don't forget "1 decent missile cruiser = 1 sunken fleet of somebody who was not aware of it". Fleets are now bit useless today =D
QUOTE (baybal @ Sep 14 2009, 12:45 PM)
Just don't forget "1 decent missile cruiser = 1 sunken fleet of somebody who was not aware of it". Fleets are now bit useless today =D
At least fleets are better than horses nowadays.
QUOTE (baybal @ Sep 14 2009, 10:45 AM)
Just don't forget "1 decent missile cruiser = 1 sunken fleet of somebody who was not aware of it". Fleets are now bit useless today =D
fleets are useless? i doubt that considering how often the US and all major countries rely on CBGs in conventional warfare....
Ye, big fleets ages has ended, ground operation support yes, big fleet against fleet action no
QUOTE (21JumpStreet @ Sep 3 2009, 05:59 PM)
Id rather be known to be innovative and inventive, smart and creative like the Japanese than to be known as a bunch of low IQ lying little cockroach stealing theives like the Chinese. Its funny, out of the 1 billion 400 million Chinese youd think there be a good number of creative people..i guess not. All ethnic groups in China including the caucasian ones have some kind of Han Chinese blood, so I count everyone in China no matter ethnic group as chinese.
Low IQ??? The only low IQ person around here is you. Your argument that China should have more inventors because it has more human population is quite reflective of your ignorant mentality.
Do you know how much time, energy, money, and resources it takes to come up with something new??? Inventing and innovating takes lots of money, resources, trials and errors. China with over a billion mouths to feed does not have the resources and money to spend on research when people need to eat and have water and decent lliving standards you know.
Matter of fact. Most scientists in the West will tell you that having a smaller group of people with access to a greater amount of resources, time, and money is a far greater environment for innovation and creativity than having a large population of people who are exposed to a limited amounts of resource. Having barely enough to feed yourself and your family is not a particularly helpful environment if innovation is your goal.
QUOTE (retaxis @ Sep 2 2009, 09:18 AM)
technology is made by people and should be shared by all people.
If one country wants to keep their inventions a secret so they can exploit and enslave other people then people have the right to stop them at any costs.
If one country wants to keep their inventions a secret so they can exploit and enslave other people then people have the right to stop them at any costs.
WELL SAID!!
QUOTE (21JumpStreet @ Sep 3 2009, 05:59 PM)
Id rather be known to be innovative and inventive, smart and creative like the Japanese than to be known as a bunch of low IQ lying little cockroach stealing theives like the Chinese. Its funny, out of the 1 billion 400 million Chinese youd think there be a good number of creative people..i guess not. All ethnic groups in China including the caucasian ones have some kind of Han Chinese blood, so I count everyone in China no matter ethnic group as chinese.
Bold statement. Have you ever take any AP history Courses? If you make these kinds of statements on the test, you will get Fs. Well I guess your IQ is not high enough to take AP courses.
BTW, HKSKYLINE, how come all your Chinese Carrier pics looks like they are taken in Taiwan? I didnt know they have direct flight between Taiwan - China already??
I'm actually quite against China having carriers. China is traditionally a continental power. It's power comes from it's army. Like Germany of WW2 and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, China should stick to submarines instead, which I believe makes more strategic sense.
You can't be a true global power without aircraft carriers. You need the ability to protect your interests overseas, including doing air strikes on countries that threaten your interests.
For example, China has economic interests in Angola. Imagine one of Angola's neighbours, hypothetically, were threatening the Angolan government as well as Chinese interests there. What is China to do? Wait around and twittle its thumbs?
No, China has to defend its interests. All true powers have that capability. The Americans have it, the British have it, the French have it, and even the Soviets had it at one point. If China were to stick purely to Asian interests, it is severely limiting itself.
For example, China has economic interests in Angola. Imagine one of Angola's neighbours, hypothetically, were threatening the Angolan government as well as Chinese interests there. What is China to do? Wait around and twittle its thumbs?
No, China has to defend its interests. All true powers have that capability. The Americans have it, the British have it, the French have it, and even the Soviets had it at one point. If China were to stick purely to Asian interests, it is severely limiting itself.
QUOTE (ccL1 @ Nov 9 2009, 08:38 AM)
You can't be a true global power without aircraft carriers. You need the ability to protect your interests overseas, including doing air strikes on countries that threaten your interests.
For example, China has economic interests in Angola. Imagine one of Angola's neighbours, hypothetically, were threatening the Angolan government as well as Chinese interests there. What is China to do? Wait around and twittle its thumbs?
No, China has to defend its interests. All true powers have that capability. The Americans have it, the British have it, the French have it, and even the Soviets had it at one point. If China were to stick purely to Asian interests, it is severely limiting itself.
For example, China has economic interests in Angola. Imagine one of Angola's neighbours, hypothetically, were threatening the Angolan government as well as Chinese interests there. What is China to do? Wait around and twittle its thumbs?
No, China has to defend its interests. All true powers have that capability. The Americans have it, the British have it, the French have it, and even the Soviets had it at one point. If China were to stick purely to Asian interests, it is severely limiting itself.
agreed, an aircraft carrier to fight Taiwan is useless as there are plenty of airbases near Taiwan already that can operate more efficiently than an aircraft carrier. Air carrier carriers are used to project power beyond the reach of Chinese airbases such as the Indian Ocean
An aircraft carrier represents several thousand square meters of sovereign Chinese PRC territory afloat at sea, deployable anywhere in the world. You can't beat that. This is absolutely essential for PRC interests in Africa. There are many peacetime purposes for carriers.
Besides, if China needs carriers at some point in 2030 or 2040, then why not start practicing now?
Besides, if China needs carriers at some point in 2030 or 2040, then why not start practicing now?
QUOTE (ccL1 @ Nov 10 2009, 02:38 AM)
You can't be a true global power without aircraft carriers. You need the ability to protect your interests overseas, including doing air strikes on countries that threaten your interests.
For example, China has economic interests in Angola. Imagine one of Angola's neighbours, hypothetically, were threatening the Angolan government as well as Chinese interests there. What is China to do? Wait around and twittle its thumbs?
No, China has to defend its interests. All true powers have that capability. The Americans have it, the British have it, the French have it, and even the Soviets had it at one point. If China were to stick purely to Asian interests, it is severely limiting itself.
For example, China has economic interests in Angola. Imagine one of Angola's neighbours, hypothetically, were threatening the Angolan government as well as Chinese interests there. What is China to do? Wait around and twittle its thumbs?
No, China has to defend its interests. All true powers have that capability. The Americans have it, the British have it, the French have it, and even the Soviets had it at one point. If China were to stick purely to Asian interests, it is severely limiting itself.
In that case, I think diplomacy works better than gunboat diplomacy. It's still not worth having carriers just to protect a few Chinese businesses in some parts of Africa. You can punish someone just as hard by using diplomacy alone, when you're at that stage. China is a continental power, and continental powers have all traditionally relied on submarines to project naval power and to defend sealanes and to threaten the enemy's. Carriers would be a waste of time and money because you'll never match the Americans in naval power not because we're less capable or they're more so, but simply because they are a maritime power and they will always invest proportionately far more resourse in their navy than other arms of service. For the same reason, the American will never have an army bigger than China's, or as many tanks.
A good analogy would be Germany of WWII. It makes no sense for the Germans to have a massive navy like Japan or America.
QUOTE (Manjushaka @ Nov 12 2009, 05:01 PM)
In that case, I think diplomacy works better than gunboat diplomacy. It's still not worth having carriers just to protect a few Chinese businesses in some parts of Africa. You can punish someone just as hard by using diplomacy alone, when you're at that stage. China is a continental power, and continental powers have all traditionally relied on submarines to project naval power and to defend sealanes and to threaten the enemy's. Carriers would be a waste of time and money because you'll never match the Americans in naval power not because we're less capable or they're more so, but simply because they are a maritime power and they will always invest proportionately far more resourse in their navy than other arms of service. For the same reason, the American will never have an army bigger than China's, or as many tanks.
A good analogy would be Germany of WWII. It makes no sense for the Germans to have a massive navy like Japan or America.
A good analogy would be Germany of WWII. It makes no sense for the Germans to have a massive navy like Japan or America.
submarines are good for destroying ships but when it comes to projecting power, it is very limited as they lack the fire power of an aircraft carrier and can easily be sunk by maritime patrol aircraft. The carrier is supposed to compliment a large group of escorts and subs adding extended airpower and firepower while the escorts compliment the carrier by providing state of the art defence
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.