003 CHINESE CARRIER Fujian is as big as USS GERALD FORD!

The Type 003 Chinese Aircraft Carrier Fujian is nearly complete. A great addition to the Chinese Navy.
It is going to be the third Chinese carrier after 001 Liaoning and 002 Shandong and the first catobar.
Let's see what we know so far and let's make a a quick comparison with the USS Gerald Ford.
We also discuss PLAAN's strategic options.
#003
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Mille...
Join the Discord server / discord
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the KZbin Partner Program, Community guidelines & KZbin terms of service.

[@janpistelak1352]

I am really looking forward to Part 2! Excellent job so far.

[@teddy.d174]

As am I!

[@frankunderbush]

I remember years ago watching and reading Chinese analysis that the original plan was/seemed to be: 001 - Extensive refit, learn/reverse engineer, train naval and air crews 002 - Domestic copy with upgrades, lower range full combat ready vessel, likely just to help patrol the waters within 1st island chain 003 - Larger, more modern, indigenous design, catobar, diesel powered, maturing every part of the technology except engine 004 - using essentially the chassis of 003 and make it nuclear powered, with potentially better aircraft ready to be used such as the J-31

[@frankunderbush]

@@MrFlatage bruh I was 14 on summer break visiting family in China and just watched it on TV. What I said wasn't too far off from the contents of the video either, relax.

[@frankunderbush]

@@MrFlatage You seem to be projecting your own inner demons onto me. I don't know what part of that looks like a rant. You have a good day there. Just breathe.

[@james_l4337]

I believe from gossips channels variant of the J31 prototypes some called it J35... Will be used as carrier aircraft however when these will be revealed... Guess work: Likely 2023+, 1 to 2 years time from 2022

[@LordHusky01]

The plan still hasn't changed. We can still expect a nuclear carrier to be in construction by 2030.

[@BSPBuilder]

It should be J-35. You can find its maid flight photos on KZbin.

[@dbloskijr4665]

i think it is a very logical assumption, since china is the biggest maritime trading country, so to protect their trade route they're not only need to protect various choke point like strait malaka but also blue waters especially indian ocean

[@jonseilim4321]

Hopefully the Arctic trade route will lessen the impetus for patrolling the Indian ocean, India and China going to war would be disastrous for everyone around them

[@CloudC-kj6kt]

Don't worry, Indian culture is bully some weak but when confront powerful country they can be best servant you ever seen.looks those high class Indian they are proud to speak English and live in western country

[@rajeevd.296]

@@CloudC-kj6kt let me guess, another wumao troll

[@CloudC-kj6kt]

@@rajeevd.296 just telling the truth, whats wrong with my view? is that hurting your feeling coz you the one of them? abandon your own nation and people just for seeking better life quality. why those indian never thought back to country and build it. Hate modi or somehow?

[@kdrapertrucker]

China is not interested in protecting sealanes, they want to build an empire. Conquer Taiwan, Japan, pretty much all of Asia, and control the pacific.

[@practicalshooter6517]

One magnetic catapult advantage is, it can adapt to the weight of the airplane, by doing so, it removes a lot of stress on the airplane.

[@nothrabin]

Additionally, they can vary power over the length of the launch. Typical steam catapults apply the maximum force at the beginning and lose steam over the course of the launch. EMALs can keep a constant force on the airframe (minimizing stress) by increasing the power until it is at it's maximum when the aircraft is released.

[@Albertkallal]

That would nice! Unfortantly, they are finding increased damage and strain on the airframes with this launch system. So, right now, F18's are not permitted to launch from the Ford carrier with wing tanks - the EMALS system is causing damage and stress to the airframe. They do claim a software fix is available , but it not clear how well that fix will solve this issue.

[@Albertkallal]

@UCLcojN1WbYEqIVyGgGxb4Rw Wow, almost a real conversation!!! - good for you!!! There is hope!!! >And no you cannot use EMAIL software to fix launching a real world jet fighter, haha!! Yes, actually you can. You can send that software update and new fighter jet launch profile to the carrier by email, and that WILL in fact allow you to update the EMALS system. (so, we will all wait for a surgical team to remove how far you just shoved your own foot down your own throat). As for sources? I did not note make one claim, but shared MANY claims, from MANY articles. so, which particular claim are you referring to? (but, yes, I have an extensive library of links and notes - happy to provide such sources - as long as they are public or so called "open source". At this point in time, the sources I used are all open source - and are public (with the exception of one claim - that was and is not public shared information at this point in time). YT has a habit of deleting posts with links - in fact it will delete most of them. so, in regards to public information on the F18's, and airframe damage from EMALS? google this: new catapults needs to fix launching jets with fuel pods There is additional information on this subject. At Lakehurst, New Jersey air base (where they have a ground based version of EMALS for testing), they have completed a series of tests, and have created a new launch profile for F18's on the Ford carrier. That includes 71 F18 launches, and an additional 152 weighed launches. They claim that this software update should fix the over stressing of wings and wings tanks when launching with EMALS on the Ford carrier. This software update is to be deployed in fall of 2019, but was delayed. It not not clear how this fix will work, since they NEVER set the rails and EMALS system to OVER launch the F18's. In other words, they ONLY ever put in the power to the rails required to launch a given aircraft for a given weight and payload. They claim a change in the launch profile can fix this issue. As I pointed out, the issue was never the total force and power, but in fact vibrations occurring on the F18's. Or better said airframe flexing. quote: Jun 29 2017

[@Albertkallal]

@Kitty Cat Well, the higher launch rates? No, they have given up on that claim (they have quiet under the table removed that claim). So, the re-charge time (to re-set and re-charge) the electric catapult system is 50 seconds. That is not really much different then steam catapults - and it not clear if that 50 second time to re-charge this system is when running ONE catapult. If you run MORE then power draw is split between all 4 cats, and the re-change time INCREASES . So, the electric rail system does allow lighter and smaller aircrafts to be launched. But, they are already launching the MQ-25 refueling drone from steam catapults, so, it not clear what drone we will eventually see that can NOT be launched by a steam system - but it would have to be quite a light weight drone - and when they get that light weight, then they don't need a catapult to launch anyway. So, a steam catapult launch takes about 2 minutes. It doubtful that the time to launch one fighter will change by using EMALS. (as a FYI: ramps on ships using STOVL produce MUCH larger rates then a catapult). A whopping 4 times, and often close to 8 times that of a catapult system. So, here is 4 Harriers taking off in 40 seconds: (using ramp) kzbin.info/www/bejne/nJOai5-Qd6mje7M And, one F18 - takes just over 2 minutes to launch one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mYiyoXd_qdxkn6s So the time for steam to re-charge, or the time for EMALS to re-charge is about the same - but the hookup and setup of the aircraft takes LONGER, and the re-set time of the catapult (steam vs electric) tends not be really effect the launch rate

[@Albertkallal]

@Kitty Cat The re-charge of the steam or the EMALS takes about 50 seconds - this re-charge time exists for EACH launch. In the case of EMALS, those huge big mechanical beast of burden flywheels below deck are spun up each time and for each launch. They spin at about 5,000 rpm. For a launch, they spin up 4 of these big mechanical flywheels to about 6200 rpm. Each of these spinning flywheels weight 40 tons each. (so 80,000 lbs). Once these 4 big 80,000 lbs mechanical flywheels reach 6250 rpm, then the electric catapult is ready for a launch. During a launch, the electric rails draw power from those 4 80,000 lbs spinning flywheels. At the end of one launch, the 4 flywheels are now spinning at 5,000 rpm. To launch another fighter, they then draw ships power, and spin up the flywheels again. During a launch, the electric rails don't draw ships power directly, but draw power from these large spinning flywheels which then act as generators. So, during spin up time, or electric re-charge time, they spin up those flywheels. And during a catapult launch, then those big mechanical spinning flywheels are converted into generators. You can't draw ships power directly to the rails - someone might turn on a toaster, air conditioning, maybe a lift, or radar. So the power available to the electric rails would not be known ahead of time, and you also can't draw power that fast - else everything else on the ship from computers to radar etc. would not have any power left to run. So, they draw power - as needed from the ships power (in fact, they draw what is left over for the EMALS system) into those big mechanical spinning flywheels. ONLY then, do they risk a launch, and they draw power from the flywheels during a launch. There are 4 of those big flywheels tht store up power for each catapult. So, 4 catapults means 16 flywheels on board. The total weight of the 16 flywheels is a whopping 640 tons of extra weight the ship has to haul around for the next 50+ years. (they in fact has to do some re-design on the Ford carrier, and re-balance parts of the ship. The reason is that 640 tons is a LOT of extra weight - about the same weight as the 72 aircraft on board!!! So, re-change of steam, or re-charge of the electric catapult are about the same time wise. The major difference is that EMALS does not use up a lot of freshwater during a launch , where as steam system does. In fact steam uses up so much fresh water supply, that crews can't take showers or use much water when running steam catapults at a high rate of launches. (the ship will be short of fresh water).

[@stc2828]

What do you need to defeat the US navy in blue water? A fleet of 055 each armed with about 60 DF17 hypersonic missile would be terrifying.

[@ex0duzz]

Along with fleet of submarines launching them too, tagging along with the type 55s, along with the type 003 carriers with jets carrying PL15 and other long standoff range anti ship missiles. Basically on sea, land or air, Chinese missile shield it range everything USA has. Not just range, but the speed and. Trajectory are also in China's favour with hypersonic glide technologies. I think drones and AI also favour China.. By far.

[@MostWantedYouTuber]

A Frigate with 8 Brahmos is enough to decimate an American Super Carrier. And yes, that too while the Carrier protected by Carrier Battle Group.

[@anonymoususer3561]

@@MrFlatage 1) Blue water is water far away from the coast. In it you have less land support (radars, defenses). 2) Using that many question marks makes you sound insane. 3) A formidable foe is terrifying.

[@flynn1035]

​@@MrFlatage Bluewater basically means being far away from the Chinese coastline. This means there will not be any protection or assistance from planes, radars, or anything that are based on land. In contrast to Bluewater is the yellow water. The air force and Army can provide helps to the Navy as the yellow water means nearshore sea areas. It is called yellow water as the river water is usually yellower than the seawater at the deltas, thus the sea will become yellower in the nearshore areas.

[@blazinchalice]

@@flynn1035 Yellow water navy yeah that's PLAN alright, heheh

[@ooxx201]

Looks like the real Chiese attack weapon is not the aircraft carrier but the anti-ship ballistic missile. Chinese NAVY just launched an ASBM from Type-055(. H-6N boomer is able to launch ASBM as well. Now China is able to launch ASBM from land, from the surface, and from the air. The Type-076 is equated with an electromagnetic catapult and has the capability to launch larger drones. What are these drones used for? The answer is obvious, search the sea and find the US carriers, then let Type-055 destroy them. Or launch ASBMs themself. So Chinese aircraft carriers' role in the plan is fleet air defense, detection, and air-to-ground attack, they are still defense weapons.

[@thomaszhang3101]

China is trying every approach to see which one works. They can afford to do it because a. they are not under time pressure to focus on a single viable project and get it to work b. they just have the money to fund all these projects 有钱就是任性 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[@byhyew]

The anti ship missiles are defensive in nature, designed to keep American Navy away from the Chinese coast. I conquer with the video that to really protect Chinese trade routes and lifeline of the Chinese economy in global trade, China needs a blue water navy that can at least go toe to toe with the US Navy and the American bases positioned along the coast of the trade routes. Carriers are a necessity in such a strategy.

[@scofieldxue6176]

It depends on who you fight. If you have fought a US aircraft carrier, it is very likely as you said. If it is against India or other small countries, I think its effect should be similar to Nimitz. And 99% of the countries in the world are the latter, right?

[@chrissartain4430]

A very good point of view like non other, thank you. Your always giving us viewers insight that makes sense to us non service types

[@TurboHappyCar]

Great presentation! Thanks (Otis) for all the hardwork and research. 😂👍

[@justfly7730]

Another amazing video.

[@simonyip5978]

Now that China is the biggest trading nation and has rapidly growing overseas investments and assets to defend, plus a large number of citizens travelling, studying and working as expatriates abroad, it's not surprising that they are building up their navy so quickly. Another important factor is that they are well aware of the 'Anti China' narrative and they feel that they need the ability to deter potentially hostile neighbours forming alliances that are detrimental to China's national interests, so I am not surprised that they feel that they might have to fight multiple enemies at the same time. After all, the Chinese people and the Chinese government know full well what happened when they weren't able to defend themselves from outside forces (between the mid 19th century until the middle of the 20th century). They are determined to make sure that they are never in the same position again. It would be strange if they weren't developing their defensive forces in my opinion, but it's a shame that the western world doesn't often see the Chinese point of view and to accept that China is now more powerful than every country except for the US, and that China has every right to develop their military capabilities as they see fit, instead of trying to portray China's military build-up as a threat to the whole world.

[@laojnglao6320]

同意

[@eto1842]

massacre against local Chinese in southeast Asia 1960s / 1990s MUST NOT happen again.

[@paulbedichek2679]

What navy? The Chinese have no navy.

[@arbiterodie7685]

Is incessantly threatening and promising to invade your neighbor (Taiwan) somehow part of this "Chinese point of view" that you speak of? It sure seems to me like the CCP military buildup has a lot more to do with their stated military desires, than with some odd compensating behavior to reassure themselves that their past military weaknesses are no longer a reality today.

[@zeflute4586]

@@arbiterodie7685 U do know Taiwan's official name is "ROC, the Republic of China", right? Until they change their own constitution, they are still China, not a "neighbor" of any kind. And we are not in a rush, give it one or two decades both Chinese governments might have ways to work everything out.

[@angelarch5352]

Looking forward to the next video! Great stuff.

[@tonbopro]

Exciting premise for future updates 👍

[@samwouters9984]

This is by far one of the best (and your best) videos about this subject! I can't wait to see part 2 of this video! PS: It could be usefull to put Part 1/part 2 in the video discription btw :) Keep up the good work!

[@catonpillow]

Hey there Millennium! With regards to the CATOBAR, I would recommend you a video called 'How Important are Electromagnetic Catapults for China's Type 003 Aircraft Carrier?'. It pains me saying that, but this is one of the really rare occasions of someone having even greater insight than you. And that says a lot. Since your videos are second to none. Except in this case :) Keep being awesome, your videos are a treasure!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I will have a look. Thanks for pointing out!

[@catonpillow]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech Anytime Millennium!

[@tyharris9994]

Great video. I really look forward to part 2!

[@bryf2787]

I love how you added a clip of yourself cooking dumplings

[@NDAGR-]

You’ve gotten good at this.

[@marshmellow1162]

I am very curious about next part 😘

[@anonymoususer3561]

Damn I want to watch a lot more about this, now to wait for the next video

[@teddy.d174]

There’s no better way to start a Sunday morning, than watching a video from Otis…oops, I meant Millennium 7.

[@wiryantirta]

The learning curve for the PLN would be brutal indeed, and its actually interesting to see them squeeze 3/4 century of development into several decades. Not to mention unlike i.e Britain and France being able to learn from the US through shared operations etc China can't learn it from anyone else and has to go at it alone (no the Soviet/Russia Navy doesn't count at this level lol).

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Well,there will be a learning curve, but they already operate two carriers. CATOBAR is the big difference. Second, I would say the Brits, till when they operated CATOBAR ships, had nothing to learn from the USA, nor France did. Actually the very fact that it was done before by someone and it worked makes the job simpler for someone else. Even if you have to painfully rebuild a capability autonomously. Even without technology transfers.

[@ex0duzz]

It's a globalised world, it's easy for china to just watch and learn/copy from USA and west. Like flight deck operations, China has color coding and same hand signals and everything. China already operates two carriers, the learning curve is only catapult that's different, which isn't much. If we look at their space program, China takes slow but steady path, and are most always successfully, even if they skip a few steps like they did with their Mars mission, which was 3 missions in one. An orbiter, lander and rover. All successful on their first Mars mission. The carrier itself is far less of a risk than that. They've mastered basically almost all other carrier operations already. By the time they get the third carrier, no doubt they will have mastered most basic operations, including night operations.

[@GoSlash27]

@@ex0duzz The hard part isn't conducting carrier ops, it's conducting blue water ops. This is something the Chinese haven't even begun to try and the Russians never did. The learning curve is much steeper than you think.

[@tyrantfox7801]

When it comes to learning , never underestimate East Asians , especially when it's the Chinese

[@phillip_iv_planetking6354]

@@tyrantfox7801 Except innovation. Even Chi himself has said this of his own people.

[@doc0core]

Not even one full minute watched and I knew will like this!

[@xnz6525]

When I hear the term ' learning curve', I think the channel has integrity and honesty. China's military power is not as strong as some people describe, they are still learning, and they are not as hypocritical and weak as some people describe, they are growing. Strong, but not enough.

[@MAMINSHA]

Excellent job, keep it up.

[@Ace18928]

I really like your content, keep up the good work 👍

[@markjackson7467]

Private Chinese company purchased it for use as a 'Party Boat' - it is a brilliant story on it's own

[@jonseilim4321]

The man who purchased the carrier spent his entire fortune, if I'm not wrong he went broke afterwards

[@markjackson7467]

@@jonseilim4321 poor Billionaire he's still well into the 100's of millions - he's doing just fine

[@aison2735]

@@jonseilim4321 He's fine now. The Hong Kong businessman contacted the Chinese military on his own initiative. He said he could buy Ukrainian carrier as an intermediary，The Chinese military needs to pay, and the Chinese military agrees, But he later misappropriated part of the money to buy real estate, repay his debts and invest in his own company，Because Ukraine did not receive enough money, the plan has not made progress, After the Chinese military noticed the abnormality, it decided to bypass the businessmen and send people directly to negotiate with Ukraine,finally reached a transaction. But the businessman did contribute to it，provide a new possibility option, Made the previous contact and negotiation work, etc.

[@joelau2383]

​@@jonseilim4321 Yes, but he got a seat in political conference for at least 10 years and now he is GM and chairman of board of a green energy company developing methanol gasoline.

[@james_l4337]

@@aison2735 Thanks for the story for the business man; I had some other story in mind from other gossips source

[@eymeeraosaka2954]

I like you apolitical and objective analysis...

[@pjeverly]

Thanks!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Thank you very much!

[@kw8435]

Since you brought out the topic of the 003 and 076, I personally think that it would be a really good idea to also talk about the already existent type 075 LHDs/helicopter carriers. Considering China´s current maritime conflicts with its small neighboring countries, they may play a more important role in the PLAN´s regional power projections compared to it´s more costly and limited in number carriers. These ships also seem to be an alot more relatable topic to discuss considering their exceptionally fast production and sea trial phase, something that we actually expect to be mass produced and deployed for the foreseeable future (at least for the next 5 years). Since the end of last year, all three of China´s first batch of 40000 tonned type 075 amphibious assault ships have been launched with two in service and the last ship "Anhui" approaching its final sea trials, all which have been achieved within 2 years of its construction in 2019. Together with the already in construction type 076 LHD/UAV carriers, a dozen of ships are most likely form the centerpiece both China's huge amphibious force and assets for regional control within the South China Sea.

[@ELMS]

Just an excellent analysis! Thanks.

[@weiboliu5613]

Interesting video and comments

[@oscarmoloneydaly8205]

The intro reminds me of coffezillas AI co-host, I love these videos keep it up 🥂

[@uconnjames]

Thanks for the great video. The US has 11 fleet carriers, and a long history of operating carriers. The PLN has neither the number or the experience to match the US navy. So their carriers are not fight against carriers, but to secure strategic sea routes that provide food and energy. Their counter to the US carriers are the missiles.

[@cannonfodder4376]

I admit to not knowing a lot about the Type 003 other than it being comparable in size to the Gerald R. Ford class in size and being CATOBAR. Interesting to learn that there is still some debate within the PLAN regarding the doctrinal use for CV's for them though. Can always rely on you to teach me new things. Excellent and informative as always.

[@asiftalpur3758]

Type-003 is frankly a watershed moment for Chinese naval designs. While it may not be pound for pound mirror equivalent to Ford, perhaps the important thing to remember is that Chinese aims are largely regional and in that context, it's a massive leap (heh). That, and Type-055 Destroyer/Cruiser have shown that PLAN intends match technologies as well as in numbers/tonnage. Again, it's the regional context that's important.

[@92HazelMocha]

As it's been said many times, Carriers are about power projection, and the PLAN probably realizes that this is not an end goal for Bejing. The Carriers are currently necessary to prevent western navies from posing a threat to the mainlaind, but this will likely not be the case permanently which begs the question, what's the point of even fielding Carriers today if in ten years they'll have no need for them.

[@92HazelMocha]

@@MrFlatage I'm a US veteran. There is no propaganda here, just pragmatism. And if you're sticking around on this channel, you'll find that's the status quo.

[@forgaoqiang]

@@92HazelMocha At least someone says something pragmatism rather than politics or propagandas

[@digitalpostman]

Indeed PLAN seems to be fond of "missile destroyer" or "missile cutter" to deter Carriers, I bet deep in their mind Carriers are more or less sitting ducks under massive hypersonic missile or drone attacks.

[@tunnel598]

I can't wait to see her launch

[@tyharris9994]

Why? Looking forward to Chinese power protection and intimidation of the free peoples of Asia?

[@nitroxide17]

Cliff hanger ending. Very interesting!

[@brianjiang2287]

I think Chinese carriers are not necessary to defeat US carriers, there are many more efficient weapons for them.

[@andyc3103]

Like DF-21/ DF-26 also the Type-055 carrying variant YJ-12.

[@thebesttheworldhastoofferchann]

Taiwan numba one.

[@jonahhekmatyar]

But they want to be able to do force protection in the India ocean, this is certainly a reasonable investment to accomplish that.

[@thebesttheworldhastoofferchann]

@明 陈 Taiwan is missile island, no point in going anywhere china.

[@zachariasvan3965]

@明 陈 what do you mean?

[@Castragroup]

Love your channel

[@lordtartarsauceb8348]

another good video

[@bjjace1]

Very Good video

[@kilianortmann9979]

Without nuclear or conventional oil-fired steam turbine propulsion there are no large steam generators on the ship to drive the catapults. I don't know if the decision to go with the EMALS catapult or IEP was first, but adoption of one also necessitates, or massively simplifies adoption of the other.

[@Bialy_1]

And they have localy produced magetic trains...

[@JYF921]

Catapults aren’t like tech trees, electromagnetic catapult can be developed with little experience with steam. The 003’s oil boilers and IEP will provide sufficient electricity

[@zwen3763]

For China the steam catapult system was just as foreign as the electromagnetic one so either way they have to go through the learning pain, if thats the case might as well go with the more modern one.

[@teddy.d174]

@@zwen3763 Also the catapult is inferior due to the fuel and munition constraints, because of the weight limit upon take off.

[@douginorlando6260]

The leaked Electromagnetic signature from an EMALS launch might be detectable from outer space and require serious consideration. That kind of current surge has got to create a huge unique EM spike if not shielded.

[@zenscape4594]

don't you just love how a countries that just wants to protect its interest is view as the threat while the ones that are trying to trap and surpress others are view as the defenders.

[@zeflute4586]

It's the odd world we live in today 🤣 哈哈哈

[@vyros.3234]

? One of the reason China is building so many ships is because it knows it needs a ton to invade Taiwan.

[@zeflute4586]

@@vyros.3234 No need carriers for Taiwan, jets from land airports are better and cheaper, the straight is only 100 miles FGS

[@zenscape4594]

@@vyros.3234 I really do hope the citizens of the collective west does not thinks like you or else any countries that want to build a defense because they are being surrounded is labeled as building up army to invade others. Even if china sends army to taiwan it would be pacifying a rebellious province and not invading taiwan. This would be like if hawaii is being funded by china to separate from US and if US sends army to hawaii then you would label it as invading hawaii.

[@immikeurnot]

@@zenscape4594 Maybe if China hadn't invaded and annexed places like Tibet, operated concentration camps, all while murdering any political opposition that might rise in their country, the rest of the world might be a tad less nervous about them.

[@amos325]

I am a Chinese subscriber even though most of the points were not new to me but loved your comments about the Indian viewers... lol

[@John83D]

Nice

[@lxjilyfe]

it will be launched on 3rd June this year. 1month to go

[@thomas_jay]

1. Aircraft carriers in the strait of malacca would be fairly easy targets. There is room to maneuver but not a whole lot. 2. The chinese would not necessarily need 10 carriers. They would just have to bring down the number of US carriers available to the US navy to a more manageable level, i.e attacking or sabotaging repair and maintainence facilities and supply and service ports.

[@ruoyuli4091]

don't need worry about any of the above mentioned, we build chinatowns everywhere, its fucking game over already

[@defencebangladesh4068]

@@ruoyuli4091 😅

[@zeflute4586]

I think we need six. Liaoning and Shandong as training and reserving forces, 003 and 004 as the near-shore defence, 005 and 006 as the long range operational units. The time of aircraft carriers has passed. Drones and missiles are cheaper and maybe better.

[@sgt.grinch3299]

Without the proper aircraft this carrier is nothing but a huge target. Great video.

[@GoSlash27]

Blue water ops is a whole different ballgame. Maintaining cyclic air ops in bad weather and heavy seas when there's no divert field. Conducting underway replenishment. Providing logistical support for months- long cruises providing ASW screens that are effective in deep water. The tribal knowledge and doctrine can only be built and maintained by doing blue water ops consistently for years.

[@copetimusmaximus3363]

They have maglev trains and similar stuff, should be no problem to make a catapult.

[@liran547]

that maglev train in Shanghai i believe was inported german techology, very expensive so they only have one very short range for airport transportation, dont think that was a good example

[@copetimusmaximus3363]

@@liran547 it's technology is not magic, it's been researched by Chinese through and through. Lol, the catapult is much shorter than that maglev track, and the catapult uses a less sophisticated technology. Let's hope the US toilet fleet won't see it in action😂

[@liran547]

@@copetimusmaximus3363 i only talk about the maglve train in Shanghai, not ideal technolgy for long distence travel yet, thats all

[@copetimusmaximus3363]

@@liran547 Got it. I guess it's more like a prestige project and a proof that they can build it maintain it for how many years now?

[@liran547]

@@copetimusmaximus3363 it was an experiment of technologies, they were testing two paths for the Chinese highspeed railways, the conventional and maglev, which only germany had that tech back then, so they brought one short distance( i believe about 30km) and had test runs for sometime before going on conventional way on national level..the maglev is still runing in Shanghai, acting like the shuttle bus to airport, ticket is still expensive...

[@lizadonrex]

Good more practice target for LRASM.

[@franksun4017]

That picture made by 西葛西. Dude actually makes a lot of very detailed computer 3-D models and he has a channel here too. Lol, never thought I’d see it here.

[@The1983333]

VERY high class videos are publishing by this channel...

[@hongruicui2806]

I hope that the current pandemic lockdown won't affect the schedule of building this ship though.

[@jonseilim4321]

It already has, the 003 was sitting idle in drydock for the entire month Shanghai was in lockdown Edit: 理科男士 had a video on that

[@hongruicui2806]

@@jonseilim4321 Pandemic is the worst

[@tyharris9994]

Given the hopeless and appallingly stupid Zero-Covid lockdown policy currently being implemented in ShangHai, it will certainly be delayed. The whole Chinese economy is going to be wrecked at this rate. Omicron is too contagious to stop and I don't care how much lime powder they spread, how many people they lock into their apartments, or how many dogs they kill. It's going to rip through China the same way it has ripped through the rest of the world and the work on all Chinese projects will be impeded until this thing has run it's course. For which the free world can be grateful.

[@immikeurnot]

@@hongruicui2806 If only CCP hadn't caused it...

[@SlowrideSteve]

I came to a similar but not exact conclusion. It's always good to check your work against someone elses

[@shenpanda3277]

you even know type 076 interesting where do you get info about type004 .I dont find any

[@eto1842]

interesting idea, but I still thinks Chinese carriers are used to shield China from US forces intervening possible restart of civil war against Taipei government. of course amphibious transport docks are also essential in such operation, this is how China considering Taiwan issue its "fundamental interest"

[@obsidianstatue]

Another important aspect to the 003 Carrier, is that it's a conventional carrier that can power the EMALS catapult. which means the Type-076 shown at 10:50 can be developed. Which means China would have a very capable and affordable 50 to 60 thousand ton Assault carrier, that can independently be the center of an amphibious expeditionary force. On top of the Type-003, one of the most significant piece of military hardware, China revealed this year is also the J-35 5th generation stealth carrier based fighter. The J-35 was seen equipped with a new engine, likely the WS-19, which means it can operate from the Ski-jump carriers as well, instantly increasing their capability.

[@David-dl3vj]

If the fucker floats???? with the corruption involved, it will be lucky if the welds aren't painted over silicon and half the wiring is there? And the world has seen their building prowess? What's their building standard called???????????? Oh that's right, THEY call it Tofu Dreg. I wonder if they will name it that? I know I will.

[@obsidianstatue]

@@David-dl3vj You look like you've been on a 20 hour anti-China marathon on youtube, get some rest =) and take it easy on the copium.

[@jonseilim4321]

@@David-dl3vj I imagined a Karen voice while reading your rant, it was great 😂

[@ex0duzz]

Based on history, China's military is very very capable. China not only produced for themselves but is top 3 military exporter, and number 1 manufacturer and exporter of well, basically everything the world uses. Everything you use is basically made in China, your mentality is like 4-5 decades in the past. It's not India, who's domestic system is corrupt and inept, which makes their domestic manufacturing capabilities a joke and takes decades to build a sub par product, if it ever completes at all. India is currently at where China was like 3-4 decades ago.

[@ex0duzz]

Lol, you know china is the worlds biggest producer of large ships? China's shipyards are some of the worlds largest and most advanced. Most countries and companies buy massive ships from China, from the same shipyards that build China's warships. In fact the "Singaporean ship" that recently fished out the crashed and sunken f35 from bottom of the south China seas was made by China. USA did not have that capability which is why they needed to get Singapore to do it on a Chinese built ship. The Chinese ship worked fine, unlike the f35 at the bottom of the ocean. Chinese orders are still continuing and rising. Chinese GDP is still rising, and sooner rather than layer China will be worlds biggest GDP in nominal terms, having already overtaken USA GDP(PPP) in 2014. Which proves all your anti China rant wrong. If Chinese quality was bad, no one would buy and keep buying Chinese made goods. But keep crying on the Chinese made computer or phone you're using currently. China thanks you for your patronage(and continued patronage). Lol

[@edwinchandeck7231]

Excellent, can't wait for the next part

[@pilgrim8610]

is that rational they change propulsion system to nuclear in a big upgrade???i mean in technical aspect....if possible technicaly to do that such upgrades cost effective or not?

[@markjackson7467]

Chinese Maglev train development experience came in handy for the EM catapults

[@deth3021]

The chinese maglev was german.

[@markjackson7467]

@@deth3021 No the Chinese HSR originally licensed from Germany but still needed RnD before being deployable, Maglev is a domestic program

[@deth3021]

@@markjackson7467 so germany put 20 plus years into the tech... And china took a year to change the spacing of the pilons... Totally a chinese domestic product.

[@markjackson7467]

@@deth3021 Wrong again - HSR High Speed Rail was licensed German technology that needed years of extra RnD to make it deployale such that now 40,000km of track has been deployed. Maglev IS a domestic developed technology that took decade+ of development in Tsingtao

[@deth3021]

@@markjackson7467 what are you talking about? The chinese high speed rail isnt maglev.

[@astrixau8928]

Some of if not all the of China's artificial islands can be considered as just as much power projection as Aircraft carriers that can't be sunk. They have changed the balance in the pacific and should be looked at as military bases with their airfields. These islands are what forced the USA's pivot to Asia seeing a dramatic change in in China's power projection in the South China Sea and causing angst to US allies in the region.

[@muzikizfun]

They can't be sunk, but since they are static they are easy to hit with cruise missles or B-2 flights.

[@ezekielrojas2362]

Hey millennium, what was the music you used jn this video, it was hypnotic

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

It’s just stock music, with no name

[@ezekielrojas2362]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech where'd you find it millennium?

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

@@ezekielrojas2362 From Storyblocks

[@amp5275]

Maybe the type 004 will be a class of many carriers if they feel they have a good enough institutional knowledge of carrier construction and operations after the 003

[@james_l4337]

From gossips UTube channels and some more trusted cahnnels, 004 is under construction and likelihood that it is nuclear is high supposedly have x4 launching system and similar in size with largest US carrier

[@alexandermarken7639]

I agree that the Chinese look long term. I would be very surprised if the long lead items for the next 7 carriers are not already ordered. By that I mean the electric motors and catapults etc. The reactors can be built but not fuelled etc. China has how many shipyards that can build Carrier sized ships. The Type 003 will be used I think to design the perfect air group and train as many pilots as possible. The Chinese aeronautical engineers are progressing fast with design and I can see the type 004 carriers being very well equipped to go toe to toe with US carriers. the real question is will they have the extra force multipliers available and will the American CVBG have evolved to counter it. We live in interesting times and the next ten years will be critical.

[@doc0core]

Actually what M7* is saying is that 004 and up *have not yet been planned out* So at the same time China (well Asians in general) is *capable* of very long mega projects that takes multiple leadership successions to complete, and also highly responsive to technical and military lessons learned along the way. And of course changing geopolitical environments. Imagine: in 2022 PLAAN still have not yet decided the total fleet size (6 or 10 carriers?) and key missions (A2AD vs regional conflict vs blue water total war) and yet 004 may be specified, designed, constructed and become combat-ready within 10 years).

[@obsidianstatue]

Although a China vs US scenario is always talked about, but I believe China's military prowess will be too much for the US to even want a war. Instead, we might see a strategic retreat of the US from East Asia back into the Pacific, we are already seeing it in some bomber deployment reshuffles.

[@manofsan]

​ @obsidianstatue - and what would become of Taiwan, Korea, Japan? Will they have to nuclearize? With a base in Solomon Islands looming, China seems to be establishing its outposts in the Pacific pretty quickly.

[@92HazelMocha]

@@obsidianstatue That's kind of the whole point though. China only builds enough to deter an armed conflict. The better the chance of the US losing large assets like CSG's, the smaller thr chance of an armed conflict. It's MAD, but with convential weapons.

[@92HazelMocha]

@@manofsan I doubt very highly there will ever be a PRC base in the Solomon Islands. The entire point of the agreement (from the perspective of Bejing) was to prevent Australia from having their own military base their, something they had been pushing the Solomon Islands towards. China doesn't want an escalation, but with increasing animosity from both Australia and the US agreements and deals have to be made to prevent encroachment.

[@The136th]

I wonder what would be the roles of Chinese ship based ASBM in those future carrier confrontations

[@user-vw9nj2yw9p]

反舰弹道导弹的作用是尽量将敌方航母的部署距离向外延伸，中国管这个叫“区域拒止能力”，目前在台湾周边一千五百海里范围内，要有能力第一波打击下瘫痪美国舰队作战能力，但并不需要击沉航母，只需要破坏航母起降设备就行了

[@zeflute4586]

Both side would stay out of the ASBM range in the confrontation. When they close in that's called a Charge

[@drewblackmatter6669]

prepared for the twins Air carrier with tow type airfields.. nuclear propelled... Lazer Hevi Reactive arm.. 50.000 Gigawatts in impulse quick response.. in any formation of enemies

[@max2008abhi]

This isy personal assessment. To defeat a carrier battle group you need hypersonic antiship glide vehicles that can destroy a carrier.

[@formateuramzal1567]

i'm waiting for the next video but i can definitely say that it's not going to be easy to beat the USN in blue water (they have far fewer SSN's which have the needed range) and above all they are limited by geography, they have to go through the miyako straight which is easy to blockade

[@liran547]

no one dare to think they can defeat the all mighty roman army, until they had to and did do, then no one feared the romen anymore

[@goteborger]

It is not difficult for PLAN to wipe out the USN mighty fleets around the world in less 100 mins. But why do this? There is no reason to do it if PLAN is not attacked first. Be aware that PROC loves peace, it has No war for decades.

[@formateuramzal1567]

@@liran547 the chinese are not all powerfull and neither are the americans

[@formateuramzal1567]

@@goteborger the chinese have not discovered kryptonite last I know so no they can't do it, for your second point, the skirmishes with India on the border say otherwise .....

[@liran547]

@@formateuramzal1567 your words are meaningless, waste of time, if you have an opinion, state it, if not, dont reply with empty statement like this

[@shenpanda3277]

Great content, would like to see more Russian Navy content

[@bluemarlin8138]

Might need scuba gear and a tetanus shot for that one.

[@JMiskovsky]

Kra Istmus channel is must.

[@erwingobig1954]

In my opion, Type 075 is the real future. Think about it, when unmaned aircraft become the major player, 075 is kind eaqual to a carrier.

[@tonysu8860]

Most analysis I've heard and read suggest that the Type 003 is more comparable in size to the Nimitz and not the Gerald Ford class carriers. Aside from total size, analysts should also recognize that both current and proposed future carrier aircraft are substantially larger than American aircraft (both current and proposed future). In fact, the US seems to have pretty much settled on some standard dimensions that won't likely change much. Larger aircraft of course means fewer airframes can be carried. They'll also likely slow the wartime tempo of moving aircraft around and especially on the elevators between hanger and deck. The possible advantage of larger aircraft are that they might carry a larger weapons load, longer range weapons and themselves have greater range. China's current technology is reputedly advanced in missile weaponry but deficient in fanjets and no one really knows how China's aircraft perform. So, IMO it's unlikely that the Type 003 will have similar capability as the Gerald Ford in numbers of aircraft, and likely wartime tempo (besides one less catapult and elevator). Because of all the untested and unproven technology in the Type 003 and China's reputation for rushing weapons and systems before they're ready, the Type 003 will likely be more of a proving platform than an actual weapon of war. And whenever the Type 004 is built, it too will introduce a new set of unknowns which will need to be understood and fixed. These aircraft carriers China is building are notable for being practically the only threat to the USN on the horizon, but will more likely be research and development ships than real threats to the USN. That said, these Chinese carriers might pose a threat to lesser naval superpowers, so the world needs to keep watching.

[@MrGanbat84]

I think China has to right develop its Navy because China has the biggest trading on ocean so they need to defend its trade. US also did same before. 🇨🇳🙏💪. I am from Korea🇰🇷

[@b_de_silva]

except theyre clearly not using it as a defensive navy.

[@sys3248]

@@b_de_silva and US Navy that ACTUALLY committed piracy is defensive?

[@b_de_silva]

@@sys3248 sources: trust me bro

[@mrrm5280]

Remember rise of China is the rise of the east, Korea Japan even south east Asia will all benefits from it. Asia United is closer.

[@rendelbariuan7583]

If ur from South east asia u wouldnt say that its not for defendi g but attacking and invading islands from West Philippines sea. The sea is proven to be part of philippines but China didnt listen and still claim they call it south china sea.

[@allenluis7360]

003 is waiting the F31 jet, the 4th Generation Fighter Jet used on the Carrier

[@MrMangoman48]

That’s hope the forth and fifth are much much bigger and super deadly

[@janissaryone1906]

Just like Russia trying to keep up with the US in military assets, the Chinese are going to have a go with carriers, but they don't have any practical experience with them and how to use them. Lots of things get overlooked by Russia & China when they copy military assets. Flight operations and damage control process for example. Only US have extensive combat experience with carriers on how they should be designed and used. I would point to recent Russian loss of the Moskva as an example of poor damage control professionalism.

[@olivertseng8466]

interesting, damage control like USS Bonhomme Richard? or USS Fitzgerald DDG-62? or USS John S. McCain DDG-56? or Seawolf class？what a great damage control.

[@donjobi9400]

hahaha Russia just propa to lure united snake inside black sea

[@classicgalactica5879]

@@donjobi9400 Why? So the United States Navy can turn those Russian rust buckets into artificial reefs?

[@protorhinocerator142]

Here's the thing about carriers. They become targets unless they're in a carrier group. Here's the thing about carrier groups. They drink a lot of fuel. This isn't such a problem if you're the USA and have tons of fuel. It's a problem for China. Without power projection, the Chinese carriers can be avoided simply by not ailing near China. US carriers have global power projection and can't be avoided. I lose no sleep worrying about Chinese carriers, traditional or nuclear. Neither one can stray far from mainland China.

[@dabo5078]

You do realize that China is one of the largest oil producing and extractors in the world right? Not to mention they have land connection to Iran and Russia. Also they have most of the world’s shipping containers and 40% of all container ships are produced by them. Of all things I don’t think logistics would be a problem.

[@donjobi9400]

Youre funny..... this is mighty dragon... not like united snake

[@classicgalactica5879]

@@donjobi9400 Paper Dragon.

[@wiryantirta]

I know the J-11/Su-33s aren't built for being hurled by catapults, but does converting them to CATOBAR jets would mean they can finally unlock the full payload potential of those jets that are currently gimped by having to be strictly ski-jump'ed?

[@ex0duzz]

Yes. Also, doesn't emals catapult mean that the load on the airplane is lessened since the power is gradual and adjustable to fit the planes requirements?

[@joelau2383]

@@ex0duzz No, steam catapult also has different setting for different loadout of planes. EMALS has the advantage of steady acceleration, so structural lifespan of the plane is longer.

[@user-hl7vh1yb5c]

yes, so we use j15 instead of j11

[@qiyuxuan9437]

Not converting, but building newer catapult variant. China didnt build many J-15, probably only enough for the two ski ramp carriers. There will be a J15B that is built for catapult and also more advanced with AESA radar. J35 is also in testing phase already, its a stealth carrier based fighter developed based on FC31.

[@zhangdayu2206]

003 wont carry j16 for long. 4th gen strealth fighter for 003 is already maiden.

[@jannegrey593]

Great video - though I can't find the previous one that you mentioned. Regardless - it is a possibility worthy of exploring. Even if they were defensive carriers - they would have to play occasional offensive role. After all almost all countries around China are their opponents. And some of them are also defended by US. So they would have to plan to fight US someday. And to do so they would need CATOBAR CV's and experience on them. Also China doesn't plan an invasion if they aren't sure they can be victorious at least in the theater.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

There is a card in the video with the link

[@jannegrey593]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech If I could see it, I wouldn't ask. I guess I have to check my YT settings.

[@erikdavidantonio5368]

The Chinese carrier 003 is a Charles de Gaulle on "steroids"! hahahaha

[@agent-j1451]

Nice content ! Considering that the less confident US is more willing than in the past to threaten the use of force against a larger country, it is necessary to develop several aircraft carrier battle groups to protect trade routes and break through “island chains”, not to mention counter US intervention in the liberation of Taiwan . Some other facts: 1) There is no solid evidence that Southeast Asian countries are loyal to the United States 2) Hypersonic anti-ship weapons are more suitable for targeting US aircraft carriers, China leads the US in this area 3) 003 was originally designed to use conventional catapult, but the development of EMALS catapult (developed later) was ahead of schedule. After the comparison test, they chose EMALS catapult, and even delayed the construction to change the design

[@phillip_iv_planetking6354]

The US has had hypersonic tech since the late 40's with the bumper rocket. And given the Chinese have little to no experience at sea it will be a huge meme.

[@blazinchalice]

@@MrFlatage The Battle of Bubiyan saw the USN defeat Iraq's navy in a rout, with the USN not losing any ships while Iraq lost 21 surface vessels. Also the last combat deployment of Mighty Mo, iirc. A Silkworm missile fired at it by Iraq was intercepted and destroyed by a British Dart missile in that conflict, a notable fact.

[@BagoPorkRinds]

LMAO "There is no solid evidence that Southesat Asian countries are loyal to the United States". Go ask the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand who have always been U.S. allies for decades. If there is ever a war and China is the agressor then there is zero chance any major Asian country will be on their side with exception of full support from N. Korea and Myanmar. Indonesia would close their straits to the Chinese navy and India would help in that with their navy in the Indian Ocean. Cambodia and Laos would be neutral. Vietnam however has no love for China. Don't be surprised for them to offer support bases.

[@ubermenschen3636]

How do you determine whether a particular aircraft carrier is offensive or defensive weapon? Answer: the type of propulsion. If nuke power, the carrier is offensive. If fossil fuel, carrier is defensive. Why? Fossil fuel supply can be vulnerable during a war. Hence, all Chinese aircraft carriers are defensive.

[@gyzq]

Nuclear powered carrier still carries a huge amount of fuel for air wing😹. For Chinese, carrier is definitely an offensive weapon.

[@kakavdedatakavunuk8516]

Instead, to describe this CVA as a Gerald Ford counterpart, I think it will be better to say that it is a new generation of modern Kitty Hawk counterpart. Or how Kitty Hawk would lookalike today. Real Gerald Ford mirror ship or class of ships (more realistic) will appear after a thorough inspection of how valuable is that class of ships for the Chinese Navy (what was the point of your video), and I suppose that it will be bigger in size (of course, it's only my prediction).

[@richardstuart325]

Aircraft carriers are very impressive, but they are also conspicuous, slow moving, high value and prestigious targets.

[@grumpusmaximus9446]

No of course they're not Michel Platteeuw. (Pat on head) Now run along and play.

[@coco-ni9ks]

Why do you think u will break through the defenses of 055 & 052？

[@user-lt5zz8gv3q]

@@MrFlatage no one cares about your opinion though.......

[@classicgalactica5879]

Aircraft carriers aren't slow. The United States carriers top speed is classified, but is believed to be in excess of 32 knots, making them some of the fastest ships in the U.S. fleet.

[@zwen3763]

What makes you think that the ASEAN countries will participate in your act to blockade their biggest trading partner and investor? Now you are thinking.

[@iqbang9236]

"The Chinese do not have any experience in the operation of catapults" ... The Chinese do have a steam catapult and an electromagnetic catapult side by side on land bases. They catapulted the planes more than a thousand times by using both methods. Reliability has been thoroughly tested, which is why it was decided to choose an electromagnetic catapult instead of a steam one. You might argue that land testing is not the same as sea testing, but the basics are there.

[@MXFoX408]

Looks more like the USS Enterprise CVN 65 look up the look of the ship.

[@naughtyfrog8257]

excellent technical content notwithstanding, you need to update yourself on the political situation with the ASEAN states which is in control of the critical waters between East Asia the Indian Ocean. sad to say, while we still welcome the Americans to engage in our region, we do not welcome the American’s stance that the Chinese is a threat to the region’s peace and stability. The most recent development: ASEAN-US summit to be hosted in Washington was postponed due to “many ASEAN head of states not being available on the proposed dates”. Also reference the recent working visit of Singapore PM to the Whitehouse, particularly his interviews with several think tanks which is basically: we have no intention of being in the chinese camp nor american camp, and if all the US wants to do is build an alliance against the chinese then we would not be in it. so those PLAN fleets (and long range AShBM) are for engaging the US Navy in the Pacific, and to A2/AD the US navy not much further west of Guam should hostilities arises.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Thanks for pointing out.

[@lagrangewei]

[ ASEAN-US summit to be hosted in Washington was postponed due to “many ASEAN head of states” not being available on the proposed dates ] it was postponed because US keep changing the proposed date so ASEAN leader just when to China for a meeting instead. US is not taking ASEAN seriously and keep changing the date. which is seen as disrespectful to ASEAN.

[@naughtyfrog8257]

@@lagrangewei exactly, that’s what i’m trying to say here. the US and Americans should realise that many countries no longer willing to take all the crap from the US because it is now not the most important to them, and more importantly they continue their heavy handed ways from before.

[@zwen3763]

Thats exactly what I was thinking when he assumed that the ASEAN countries will automatically side with the US. The US aren't buying nor are they investing in the ASEAN countries, the only thing the US bring to the table is "security", but if they are going to drag them into the a war with China, then they really aren't offering anything but a huge risk.

[@aap9167]

The Chinese evaluating the use and necessity of ACs in their doctrine may point towards their reluctance towards challenging U.S hegemony to begin with.. OR as some conspiracy theorist would want us to believe, an Invasion of mainland U.S. It may also show the lack of willingness to be the world's self proclaimed policeman... Unlike some one we know...

[@darkofc]

👍

[@josephpollard2725]

Didn't they also have a space shuttle, I think Russia had a version also.your choice which would love to take a trip on .

[@user-nq2sw6sg8q]

US has aircraft carriers for a century and their experience is unparalleled. Even if China catches up with the no., the experience is lacking.

[@JerrySeriatos]

Yea but they are catching up in experience because they learn quickly. Chinese IQ is above the american...which is going down..

[@user-te3pt6yu6j]

航母对航母？那航母杀手造出来是干嘛的？你不会以为海战还是二战一样，飞机飞到航母附近才攻击吧？

[@user-nq2sw6sg8q]

@@user-te3pt6yu6j 那打过才知道嘛！你想中国打战吗？

[@xfactor6099]

excuse in fighting camel riders is no experience.

[@JerrySeriatos]

like the Libyan Syrian and Iraqi came forces., agree

[@wkrapek]

Three things to keep in mind. First: there are thousands of small breakthroughs the Chinese need to make before they can challenge our current (and fading) generation of carrier groups. Second: do not underestimate the ability of Americans and Westerners in general to “pull a rabbit out of the hat.“ For example, China is far richer and more technologically advanced than we were in the 1960s. And we put a man on the moon. And built nuclear aircraft carriers. We’re on our third generation! We’re seeing it again SpaceX. I have not seen any evidence that the Chinese can match that ability. Third and finally: the United States has always had an unequalled command of the sea. When we fought the British Navy in the War of 1812 on even terms we consistently beat them. In fact I was born in Plattsburgh, New York near Lake Champlain. There was a big naval battle there where we beat them. The only way they were able to drive us off the high seas is to bring in the bulk of their navy to shut us down. When they captured one of our warships, British engineers declared it was the best built warship they’d ever seen.

[@rxsquared]

Who has the worlds most supercomputers in the TOP500 list? China Who owns the most patents to 5G technology? China Who operates the worlds largest and fastest high speed rail network? China Who produces the most STEM graduates a year? China Who leads the world in scientific paper citing, by both volume and quality? China Do not underestimate China either. If you don’t follow China closely on an annual basis, your info will be out of date because this is a country that measures its change in months where other countries measure their theirs in decades.

[@rurarararagi3394]

"Second: do not underestimate the ability of Americans and Westerners in general to “pull a rabbit out of the hat.“ What the fuck are you even talking about lol. If the USSR had not managed to defeat Nazi Germany you'd all be speaking German right now. Shitty stupid talking points about the space race which the USSR LITERALY got all the major breakthroughs and achievements, literally the only thing the US managed to do was land on the moon. Another stupid westoid brain hur dur don't underestimate the US hur dur even though we lost the space race like 20-1 and even though NASA is being completely dismantled, even though the ISS is doomed and relied on Russian rockets for decades hur dur you have to look at SPACEX!!1!!!!

[@goteborger]

There is a famous and old Chinese saying "Fu Bu Guo San Dai", which explains why "the third generation" american empire is declining inevitably.

[@wkrapek]

Small change. Who’s made the biggest leaps in rocket technology? SpaceX. Who’s made the biggest leaps in computer chip technology? Apple. Who folded a telescope up like origami and set it in orbit on the other side of the moon? America. Who lowers their giant probes from levitating cranes on the Mars? America.

[@wkrapek]

I don’t know what that means. And I’m not impressed by the Chinese. I know that those beautiful buildings that they’re throwing up all over the place are on the verge of collapse because their contractors are corrupt. I also know their military officers are corrupt. The only people I respect - the only people I consider truly to be our peers - are the Russians.

[@winwin-gc4ru]

it makes sense. China needs to protect itself.

[@Ameer-is3dh]

Maybe you can make video about ..how can China counter USA navy on next decade or what type of strategy should Chinese navy adopt?

[@yuey0602]

China will not use the carrier the same way as the US does. and I dont think Chinese carrier need to be as good as American ones to win a sea battle. Chinese fleet mainly use anti ship missles to attack other ships.

[@grumpusmaximus9446]

" Chinese Fleet mainly use anti-ship missiles to attack other ships" I got a news flash for you..... so does the US. The US aircraft carriers are used primarily to project airpower far away from US Shores. They're used for sorties, air cover for ground operations and to protect US interest around the world. You may not realize this, but when a US carrier sails, it has a large flotilla of ships and Subs protecting it.

[@chanalex8358]

@@grumpusmaximus9446 That's means U.S navy never face real fleet power after WW2.

[@yuey0602]

@@grumpusmaximus9446 "mainly" chinese use buth sub-sonic and hyper-sonic cruise missles and ballistic missiles for anti-ship purpose, american only use sub sonic cruise missles as far as I know. and I dont mean which one is better, they are just different.

[@grumpusmaximus9446]

@@chanalex8358 .... and your point is.... what?

[@grumpusmaximus9446]

@@yuey0602 Any ship carrying hypersonic capable Weapons Systems, is a priority Target in any conflict or war between countries, and just like a carrier group, would need a large armada of ships and subs protecting it, and like a carrier group, these ships would be tracked, targeted and attacked before they could be placed in a strategic position. Needless to say deploying hypersonic weapons on a ship creates problems all on his own. China may have the advantage now with questionable and untested Hypersonic weapons, but that becomes mute in 2023 when the US is scheduled to deploy their own Weapons Systems. So unless China plans on attacking Taiwan or the US in the next few months, especially with the current Administration in charge. I really don't see any advantage China have.

[@hohohohoho262]

For those who claim that the PLAN would have a steeper and a lot more difficult learning curve. I mean, what was there for them to learn from the last century. ok damage controls and etc maybe. But surface combat with new technologies have changed fundamentally from 50/40/30 years ago. In reality the USN might have as much to learn in the new century compare to the PLAN. Had USN faced any capable opponents equiped with similar technologies in the last 30 years? I don't think so. And this blind confidence from the west would be dangerous on the battle field.

[@pankajsaroj64]

Review ins vikrant design and amca , tedbf design

[@alanbailey5621]

I see the Chinese installed the latest "battering ram" technology on the ship's bow.

[@jiangyewei9184]

Chinese carriers are purely for defensive purpose. We never sail ship thousand miles away to US coast and support separatists on their soil. We Chinese citizens are becoming aware that China is facing the threat from an Anglo-Saxon empire which tries to contain our development and strangle our possibility of becoming a developed country and squeeze our living space. A powerful navy with modern carriers is not only vital to protect our oversea interest and security, but also secure a better life for every Chinese citizens.

[@blazinchalice]

Taiwan is an independent country.

[@jonseilim4321]

5,000 years and China has never colonised South East Asia, as long as China maintains their "no interference into internal matters" policy I welcome the reclamation as the center of gravity of Asia

[@russelfang7434]

​@@blazinchalice If you say so.

[@artnull13]

@@jonseilim4321 5,000 years the people it tried to colonise in South East Asia fought back, don’t give us the BS “China never tried to colonise”.