China's Aircraft Carriers are Catching Up...

Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/MEGAPROJECTS to get a special offer.
Got a beard? Good. I've got something for you: beardblaze.com
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
This video is #sponsored by Keeps.
Love content? Check out Simon's other KZbin Channels:
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Warographics: / @warographics643
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373

[@megaprojects9649]

Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/MEGAPROJECTS to get a special offer.

[@AnonYmous-cf2ci]

I only got a few minutes in, but just wanted to point out that the Chinese Fujian and Shandong class carriers are frequently brought back to port for repairs because of shoddy welding and low quality Steel. Their first carrier is doing better because it is a retrofitted shell made by the Soviets.

[@THE-X-Force]

When did Megaprojects become a CCP propaganda channel? This ridiculous fawning over China's carriers, without a *_SINGLE SHRED_* of criticism, is just embarrassing. Get a grip. They literally just steal everything, and then badly copy it. They haven't innovated since they figured out paper. Talking about non-existing carriers with non-existing jets and non-existing "laser weapons" on them .. as if they are all to be a lesson to the world .. is a serious monkey maneuver .. and you know exactly the kind of monkey I'm talking about. This video is a joke. Almost as funny as a bald dude shilling for hair products. 👎

[@victorwaddell6530]

I was in the US Navy from 1985 to 1995 as a radarman . As a member of the Combat Information Center watch team I was required to watch a training video about the Melbourne Evans Incident , The HMAS Melbourne struck the destroyer USS Evans amidships , and half of Evans sank with much loss of life .

[@TK199999]

Most Western naval experts don't consider the Fujian anything more than prestige project. Since the fear in West was that China would build a Forrestal/Kitty Hawk type super carrier for the Type 003. It would be still conventionally powered, use steam catapults/arresting gear, carrier around 60 to 70 aircraft/helicopters and only about be 60,000 tons. Not a nuclear powered Nimitz's or Ford Class Super Carrier, but Super Carrier none the less. Which is why the US still fielded them until the 2000's. It was expected that China could pump out 1 to 2 carriers ever 2 to 3 years and once China had 6 Forrestal/Kitty Hawk type super carrier Type 003's. That they would effectively box out the US from East Asia and Western Pacific. Instead we got the Fujian a approximately 100,000 ton, conventionally powered, bad copy of the Ford Class even down to the problematic EMALS systems. The US never built conventionally power carriers over 70,000 tons as steam or gas turbine engines were just not powerful enough to drive a carrier that size. It would burn up its fuel so fast that it would spend most its time refueling and could only be active for few days at time before have to refuel again (with how power hunger EMALS systems that may cut into the Fujian's sortie time if not greatly reduce it in order to conserve fuel). This convinced Western naval experts that the CCP was not intending on building a carrier fleet to challenge the US/West. Instead their carriers were prestige projects for CCP officials and lame attempts to intimate their neighbors, though that back fired and said neighbors have run to the US for protection. Which in the end makes sense as these kinds of prestige/intimidation military projects happen in authoritarian dictatorships. As success in CCP politics is the only goal on civilian and military leaders minds not world power games. Which is why Xi didn't even bother to shop to the christening/launching of the ship, he knows its just a white elephant and has moved on to other prestige projects.

[@dakitz]

Who the f would advertise keeps w cue ball here f in idiots

[@bobbrown8661]

The Liaoning - When life gives you lemons, you make lemonade.

[@uberfu]

I thought that's what the chinese word for lemonade was.

[@yuejiang4601]

@@uberfu 西方把困难比喻为柠檬，不能直译。用中国成语只要四个字：逆流而上

[@PlugInRides]

But first you tell the country selling the lemons you only plan to use them for a decorative, table centerpiece.

[@danielch6662]

Is lemonade even a thing in China?

[@billshun3963]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@yuejiang4601这里柠檬是指有问题的东西 比如這辆车是lemon car, 和 junk 或defective 大同小异.

[@EricCoop]

Varyag was not a Kiev-class. She was to be the second of the Kuztnezov-class fleet carrier.

[@jons4917]

Kuznetsov is not a fleet carrier, the Ruskies don't have that classification - and it's limitations as a carrier are well known - it is classed as a heavy aircraft cruiser - in order to be allowed to pass through the Bosphorous straights into he Black Sea - the Turks have limitations on which classes of ships can pass through

[@Decrepit_biker]

​@@jons4917irregardless it's still a larger ship than a Kiev class, and had a ramp system the Kiev didn't. The Indian navy converted a Kiev class to have a ski ramp so it was possible but it's is a significantly smaller ship than Liaoning

[@ianjardine7324]

@@Decrepit_biker you make a good point however I can't take anyone who tries to use the word irregardless even remotely seriously.

[@Decrepit_biker]

@@ianjardine7324 I successfully used that word!

[@WildsDreams45]

Kuztnezov missile cruisers carry some support fighters, but they're not aircraft carriers. Aircraft carriers are not allowed to pass through the Dardanelle according to international law. 😉

[@ericneely8821]

Thank you for trying to have the most videos on youtube, bud. I'm always happy to find more of your content. Am I right, Peter?

[@AbbyNormL]

Technically, the US carriers are also steam driven. The difference is the source of heat used to boil water. I spent several years boiling water on US Navy fast attack submarines.

[@phantomechelon3628]

Yeah but with normal steam power you don't have to worry about radioactive contamination. 😉

[@spartancrown]

@@phantomechelon3628no it just takes days to get up to power and out to sea.

[@factsoverfeelings1776]

I was in the US Navy for 20 yrs and deployed on numerous Nimitz class carriers and NEVER worried about contamination.@@phantomechelon3628

[@jamielujan2539]

Ford-class are not steam but rather Electromagnetic (EMALS). I'd imagine the other carriers are retrofitted but no sure

[@spartancrown]

@@jamielujan2539 their catapults are EMALS the ship is steam driven through nuclear power. It’s highly unlikely the U.S. would put money into refitting Nimitz carriers with EMALS when they’re building a whole new class to support it.

[@ignitionfrn2223]

1:30 - Chapter 1 - Early days 2:35 - Mid roll ads 3:40 - Back to the video 6:15 - Chapter 2 - The liaoning 10:35 - Chapter 3 - The shandong 14:05 - Chapter 4 - The fujian 18:25 - Chapter 5 - Type 004 & beyond

[@bluedragontoybash2463]

thank you

[@331SVTCobra]

The main advantage of a big deck carrier is the ability to operate fixed wing AEW aircraft, which will vastly increase the air wing's effectivity.

[@shenzhenfactory2713]

周一周三周五：中国即将崩溃 周二周四周六：来自中国的威胁

[@greggpon7466]

​​@@shenzhenfactory2713can't disagree.😂. Sunday day of rest to think up new false flags.

[@robertmaybeth3434]

did you mean effectiveness? Never heard that last word before

[@lagrangewei]

people underestimate the value of logistic, the same fixed wing aircraft can send cargo between land bases and the carrier. that is a huge improvement in flexibility, from emergency operations to transporting VIPs.

[@kingwing3203]

This is just a small boat. The US military exaggerated the threat in order to make its ally Japan spend more on military expenditures.

[@getgaijoobed6219]

6:32 Liaoning/Varyag is a Kuznetsov Class “Heavy Aircraft-Carrying Cruiser,” and not a Kiev Class vessel. Essentially it is the sister ship of Russia’s Admiral Kuznetsov, but upgraded and actually able to leave port without a tugboat (because China actually had the cash to maintain and modernize it)

[@icu17siberia]

yes, but it takes a few hours to get it moving

[@gagaronpew4382]

and they failed to replicate the "intimidating smoke plume" technology the russians have installed

[@monmonfiasco6391]

Im still wondering why Russia didn't ask China to retrofit the kuznetzov even though China offers it years ago during war against isis because it always breaks down now it got more damage in the port than on service

[@getgaijoobed6219]

@@monmonfiasco6391 honestly probably a matter of national pride. Russia is a major arms exporter - imagine what would happen to their image among countries that buy arms from Russia if they asked China, the country that bought the hulk from a former Soviet republic, and until recently, a major purchaser of arms from Russia, to refit their ship because they don’t have the capability. It would be akin to political suicide for Putin’s government.

[@andrewlim7751]

​@@monmonfiasco6391 Russia have its own defense shipyards, two things, 1. Keep the shipyards running 2. Pride ....can you imagine one have to resort to it's previous student for battle ship? So they no choice but to bite the bullets.

[@khrystleooo6994]

Without catapults no planes can take off with a full load, even fuel.

[@CorePathway]

Launch strike craft heavy with ordnance, light in fuel and then refuel once strike craft attains altitude. Inefficient but possible.

[@zenden9]

It actually can but a lot of things need to factor in. Full load J-15 take off is only possible from 3rd launch pad much further away from bow which will block the emergency landing pad. The aircraft carrier will need to go 25 knots against the wind. But this will put lots of restriction or delay crucial operating time in war. US aircraft carrier with steam catapult don't need 25 knots speed and against the wind and can launch full load F/-18 from twin bow launch pad. This gives much flexibility and greater reaction time in war scenario.

[@aeronautics6673]

​@@zenden9👌

[@user-ng2nt7dg3w]

F35B?

[@emanuelfigueroa5657]

That's true for big plane like Su-33 (J-15), MiG-29K can do it from the long jump line.

[@xsu-is7vq]

The delay in 2017 was a redesign to switch from steam catapult to EMAL. originally the EMAL was planned on the next carrier after 003, but development was much faster than expected and beat out steam catapult in comparison tests.

[@AG-en5y]

😂😂😂😂 yah ok. EML that can't pull more than a trust can further than 10meters

[@dakotaDklunsford]

You mean the researching (other nations systems) and developing their "own" version based off the nice carriers real nations have.

[@user-yd4om1qw3n]

@@dakotaDklunsford wow their security sucks

[@uberfu]

There's a gaping problem with the switch to EMALs though ... WHERE IS THE ELECTRICITY COMING FROM ?? The ship is underpowered for that system. There's a reason that EMALs are tied to nuclear powered ships. SO EITHER with the FUJIAN being still a bit smaller than a standard US carrier; it has a massive electricity generator hidden in the hull in addition to the Diesel-powered steam systems which in turn displaces any aircraft numbers coming from this video orr any other source ; OR the ship is simply not capable of going toe to toe with a single US carrier (not including the shit ton of support craft the US maintains with each carrier). Launch and recovery times will be significantly slower while they wait for whatever electric capacitor used to charge the launchers builds up power after each launch.

[@andrewlim7751]

​​@@dakotaDklunsford Actually, different, the u.s. and french (purchased from u.s.) uses AC emal while the Chinese are using DC emal, more advanced than existing u.s. standard.

[@Decrepit_biker]

The Kiev class is a very different ship to the Kuznetzov class Liaoning was refubished from and the Shandong was developed from.... come on Simon, you dropped the ball there!!

[@jxmai7687]

His channels is going down hill in content, I came here for reading the comments, not for the video, I have no interest on it, all information is old or all online anyway.

[@zachhoward9099]

It’s odd because in like the next breath he mentions it being a Kuznetsov class

[@Decrepit_biker]

@@zachhoward9099 that was my point, he said the 2 Kiev class ships in the video were Kusnetsov class ... they aren't.

[@jorge113355]

7:00 Varyag ( Liaoning ) was NOT a Kiev class carrier

[@philbarrett3739]

So the Australians knew to 'strip' technology off the vessel before 'selling' it but didn't think the catapult tech was interesting enough? 🤔

[@CrackingGate]

It would have been agreed by the Yanks and Brits to leave those pieces of equipment installed..... nothing like friendly competition when it comes to war...

[@statementleaver8095]

Yanks.... Winning by Losing. British....It's not the Winning it's the taking part. After WW3......We'll all be back to Sticks & Stones anyway!!

[@kurtostara3274]

to be fair to us that tech was pretty old hat by then and im assuming us the yanks and the brits figured that if the chinese wanted to build aircraft carriers theyd know how to build catapults and arrestor cables already

[@commie5211]

The only thing they found out was, the arresting cables were manufactured by a Chinese company call "China Tremendous Power Group", they are a cable manufacture of all kinds of cables.

[@temper44]

@@kurtostara3274 Perhaps they didn't realize how far behind the Chinese really were.

[@JD_Racer97]

The audio filter you have been using these last few weeks is atrocious. Please refrain from using it in the future Mr. Editor Sir/Ma'am.

[@momolovesyou9969]

It really makes me want to stop watching as soon as I hear it

[@MaddogMD82]

​@@momolovesyou9969agreed

[@nepenthy9804]

Your choice of sponser caught me off guard🤣

[@sandraanders3721]

😂😂😂😂

[@magnaviator]

Varyag was a modern Soviet Stobar carrier (Admiral Kuznetsov class), you can see the Kiev class was more a helo carrier/cruiser.

[@RuminatingStoner]

Russia does not have an aircraft carrier. Russia has a floating ski jump that spends most of its time on fire or killing its crew or on fire killing its crew.

[@billwill7383]

That's accurate.

[@kurtostara3274]

the Kuznetsov is overdue for a meeting with poseidon i was hoping to see her meet the same fate as the Moskva but she hasnt left port for this war her tugs are probably broken down

[@Zman44444]

Don't forget the crane falling through the flight deck!...Cmon.. Can't do the crane dirty dude. Show some god damn respect. lol

[@420bengalfan]

it doeshave a really good tug boat though

[@smalltime0]

@@420bengalfan The USN has nothing that can compare

[@r1explode1]

It’s CHAMPing at the bit, Simon… CHAMPING!

[@spencerburke]

AdapTATion too. Not adaption...

[@KyngMark]

Frickin amazing vid Simon keep up the good work!

[@ambition112]

0:00: 🚢 The video discusses China's successful development of aircraft carriers and their strategic importance in modern military. 4:24: 🛫 China reverse engineered and replicated equipment from a retired Australian aircraft carrier, leading to the development of their own carrier fighter. 8:46: 🚢 The video highlights the significant role of China's aircraft carrier, the Le ning, in its naval arsenal and its operational history. 13:14: 🚢 The video discusses the advancements in China's naval technology, particularly focusing on the Shandong and Fujian ships. 17:02: 🚁 The video discusses the capabilities and potential upgrades of the Chinese aircraft carrier Fujian. Recapped using Tammy AI

[@feifei987]

这太重要了，谢谢

[@john4896]

Two words : Quality Control.

[@jaro4681]

6:38 Kiev and Minsk were ships of the Kiev class but Varyag was second of the Kuznetsov class carriers. Kuznetsov was bigger and had a ski jump thatnks to which it supports different and heavier aircraft than Kievs do.

[@jamesnicholls9969]

there are many reports of a second type 003 being built, and there being eventually 6 - 8 carriers, not including the 2 ski jump carriers

[@jilbertb]

shill or wu mao? you decide...

[@Ninus316]

@@jilbertb There's a lot of both in these comments. And a bunch of tofu dreg driven copium. You can tell by the lack of even Google levels of translation skills.

[@andrewlim7751]

They should sell the 2 ski jump to Russia, they're waiting.

[@_Chad_ThunderCock]

It's 6 carriers not more than that

[@rizon72]

There are reports China wants 6 CATOBAR carriers in service by 2035. Despite what some say, China isn't building carriers any faster than the US. Fujian was started about the same time Kennedy was and will commission roughly the same time. Rumors of the next carrier, 004, has started has been around now for about 4 years with reports it might have been laid down now, perhaps, along with a sister ship. The Fujian has had several delays and the next two being nuclear power would be surprising if they don't encounter problems. So will China commit to basically building 5 carriers at the same time without knowing about any flaws in the design of previous ships?

[@jeffreycarman2185]

Thanks for the video.

[@MattSherridan_29]

Any chance of a video on the other PLAN assets, such as the Type 052D or Type 055 destroyers?

[@ccczzz86]

那是我们国家的军事机密😎

[@andrewsmith2591]

Fascinating. I had no idea about the Melbourne.

[@blairreese3534]

As an Aussie, I'm embarrassed that an Australian government gave the PLAN this IP.

[@WestAdamm]

From an engineering perspective, I think they want the barebones version. By the way who trades the financial market? Is it possible to trade cruise lines or airlines?

[@BruceCartwrightt]

I do. Which aspect of the financial market are you referring to? Yes you can trade cruise line and airlines.

[@WestAdamm]

I was contemplating between stocks or crypto. How do you trade it?

[@BruceCartwrightt]

First of all, making use of a good broker. I tend to trade based on the volatility in the market. Cruise line and airlines have a good season to trade them. During covid airline stocks went down. I make use of good indicators. Although it wasn’t easy till I came across my mentor. He helped to keep me in the loop. My mentor is Bernard Paul.

[@RichardWest-]

You’re conversant with Bernard Paul. He’s been really helpful. I was a beginner in trading and didn’t know what to do till I came across Paul and he shared trading insights, gave me a strong trading foundation and introduced me to his firm, ever since then I’ve been profitable.

[@JonathanWhite9]

Paul demonstrates an excellent understanding of market trends, making well informed decisions that leads to consistent profit

[@zeddicus456]

The fact that it now has the same technology for the launch system as ours. Definitely something to take pause and understand what a huge difference that makes compared to a ski jump launch. More fuel, More ammo/ordnance etc when you launch… hitting harder and reaching further!

[@SupremeNoob3231]

Can we get a similar review of the US Navy and then maybe a third video on comparing the 2?

[@tgsgardenmaintenance4627]

Experience is invaluable, but the Chinese are very quick learners!

[@rachelleintexas338]

Without NCOs who can make decisions on the fly, they’re screwed. Officers aren’t there by merit, but by who they know or related too. Ask the Arab nations how well that works for them. They have no command of the logistics even with stealing the info, they won’t make it work. Yes, the can bully the crap out of nations, but sooner or later, the bully gets a dose of reality.

[@johntaylor2262]

Straight up thought the Chinese named their carrier the “Yao Ming” for a second lol 😂

[@nevets2371]

Ngl that would be extremely based

[@johnwinder235]

Great video!

[@markcorbett9916]

HTMS Chakri Naruebet (911), meaning 'Sovereign of the Chakri Dynasty', the Thai monarchy's ruling family) is the flagship of the Royal Thai Navy (RTN), and Thailand's first and only aircraft carrier, although the RTN refers to her as an "Offshore Patrol Helicopter Carrier".

[@HenriHattar]

It's NOT a real carrier!

[@jensonkiin3678]

She's not actually operational though and hasn't been for many years. She spends almost all her time alongside or just carrying the Thai Royal Family around. She's known as the world's largest royal yacht for a reason.

[@HenriHattar]

This is a vessel that is less than 12,000 T , less than 180 M, that is NOT an aircraft carrier, it is a toy!

[@qiyuxuan9437]

Well, its even much smaller than the Type 071 landing ship Thailand bought from China.

[@lukhanyokongisa8798]

Most honest n sincere advertising I ever heard

[@DeusEx1977]

Just a small note, the Kusnetov class is not the same as the Kiev class. The Kiev does not have a "ski ramp" at the front of the ship and the Island is set much further forward.

[@Zeknif1]

It’s worth noting that one of the Kiev’s was heavily modified for service with the Indian Navy, and that this ship does have a ski jump ramp… but that longer, forward placement of the island does limit it to two flight lines instead of the three available on the Kuznetsov’s.

[@temper44]

There is a video on KZbin where a vlogger recently went on a covert mission to spend the weekend on one of the Kiev class carrier/cruisers that have been abandoned as tourist attractions.

[@jxmai7687]

The Minsk.

[@user-dk4ko8yj9u]

我看过这个视频，如果他被抓住，应该会拘留 7 到 15 天。

[@jxmai7687]

@@user-dk4ko8yj9u 里面死鱼一样臭，应该拖出去沉海里

[@floydhuang220]

@@user-dk4ko8yj9u 天津滨海新区航母旅游区，是一个旅游景点游乐园，你可以在航母上拉屎拉屎，更不用说拍照拍视频了。

[@zdenekhruby9242]

Wondering why they did not convert two Kiev class carriers if they are the same class as Varyag (Riga) vessel? They are not the same class. Varyag is almost half as big. So they took for a blueprint the successor class (of which Kuznetsov in Russian navy today is one incarnation) instead of previous much smaller (about 2/3 displacement) vessels.

[@jetli740]

convert is more expensive than build new one

[@zdenekhruby9242]

@@jetli740 Thé point Is, it Is a different class.

[@user-dk4ko8yj9u]

​@@zdenekhruby9242我听说辽宁号进船厂升级去了，但我不认为会升级电磁弹射

[@eldridgep2]

There may only be 9 countries with dedicated carriers but the number of countries with large flat topped ships that could at a push handle the F-35 is a bit higher Japan and South Korea I'm looking at you here 😉

[@Kriss_L]

Japan has openly redesignated its big aviation capable ship class as an aircraft carrier.

[@CorePathway]

Yup and yup. Honestly the Ford is the last super carrier we should build. The age of AI enabled drones will make human pilots obsolete. Sorry fighter mafia and Naval A-vi-a-tors, you I’ll manage to delay it for a while. But face it; we could have an area-denial ai-stealth drone that could pull enough g’s to outmaneuver AA missiles, would be half the size (no cockpit and human life support baggage).

[@johnsamu]

The unfinished ship was essentially NEW (although in disrepair) while the other carriers were already used before. The way the Soviet Union/Russia uses their equipment means those other ships were probably completely worn out and in a very bad state. It's the choice between two trainwrecks or one half build new train.

[@lagrangewei]

the Kiev class that India use was alot smaller than the Kuznetsov class. as Kiev requires VTOL capable planes which China just doesn't have, and the cost of refitting the Kiev for converntional fighter for India show it would be more expensive than building a new ship since you have to remove part of the ship to rebuild it. the Kuznetsov hull just need to be polished and refitted. China actually receive submission for carrier design from european countries, so even if China didn't get the Kuznetsov hull would still have skip the Kiev and gone with a european design. the european design based on european carrier were considerably smaller than Kuznetsov, so when the chinese has access to a Kuznetsov class, it was really no contest. Europe would not build a comparable size carrier until the QE class... so the Kuznetsov allow China to leapfrog to having the 2nd most powerful carrier...

[@RosscoAW]

They probably also just agreed not to use them as warships when they purchased them, which just means they'd be put up as public education materials and allowed to be poured over by every interested local party for the purposes of, ultimately, increasing domestic capabilities. I'm sure many of the designers involved in the 003 and 004 types have walked through the "museum pieces" while in the process of designing their Chinese successors.

[@gaoxiaen1]

Essentially a new copy of an obsolete design.

[@joelcoots8782]

love SIMON WHISTLER's podcast, I just have one complaint needs to show more videos or pictures.

[@bamalaam]

just for a fun thought....during the animation with the type 004, why are there a bunch of sea harriers flying along with them? does china make them too?

[@outman1923]

Yes, the People's Liberation Army has equipped itself with flapping-wing drones.

[@rammpage4468]

7:10 the answer is pretty simple, when purchasing those “retired” ships, Chinese made agreement with those countries that they would not be used as battle ships, and in case you haven’t realized, the Chinese government honored every international agreement or deal, so they kept their word.

[@dakotaDklunsford]

Sounds like you've got a broken bone for china.

[@RosscoAW]

@@dakotaDklunsford If stating objectively true facts offends you that much then the people in your personal life have my deepest sympathies for the weird bs they must have to deal with.

[@amunra5330]

Its weird when people get triggered when they realize that China obeys contracts and laws. @@dakotaDklunsford

[@josephwait7384]

@@amunra5330I don’t understand some Americans desperation with making China our enemy. They’re the nation we have the most important economic symbiosis with. We give them all our money. They make all the stuff we want. It’s literally the biggest international cooperation system the world has ever seen between two nations. China doesn’t want war with us. They want our money. We don’t want war with China. Our stores would be empty and calling in our debts our dollar value would be disastrous. Our government is so desperate to get attention off what they do/don’t do they’ll try and make an enemy out of what should be our best friend just to get the magnifying glass off themselves.

[@yuugenr7549]

​@@dakotaDklunsfordSounds like you're broken and brainwashed

[@swampfox984]

Dear Editor, please stop ruining the audio quality. It sucks and isn't cool. Signed everone

[@deanwilliams433]

I personally think the future is a cargo like ship that hosts thousands of drones that can swarm any targets. Tie that with hunter killer versions and anti ship stealth missiles, I think the large ships are at very high risk against a sophisticated opponent.

[@alexanderrohaj4794]

CIWS are designed hit much faster and manourversble missile, drone wouldn't stand a chance. Your doing wrong way, something which permit unconventional movement (drone) shouldn't be used in conventional ways. Instead of flying drone think about submarine drone. Minimal size, mininal electronic signature, stealth, and can get under the ship. Why ? If swim deep enough it can bypass the aircraft carrier escort and went straight to aircraft carrier. Not to sink, but damage it enough to make it inoperable. Flying drone on the other hand would likely got shot down by destroyer or cruiser

[@RosscoAW]

Why would you drop hundreds of millions on a massive vessel when you can just sequester private maritime vessels into the navy virtually whenever you want, and have each of them dispatch small clusters of drones? China's coastline is massive, there are plenty of merchant and commercial vessels that can be easily rendered into guerrilla naval assets, with the added "benefit" of deeply confusing enemy (cough Western cough) forces in the identification of valid targets. The last thing you're going to do with a drone swarm is wrap it up in a gift box that can be identified from tens of kilometers away as a labelled "Shoot me, I contain millions of drones" box just begging to be smacked with ship-to-ship missiles. At the very least, you're going to give it a nice fly by with your air wing, so they know to keep their drone cargo WELL THE FUCK AWAY from anything that it could possibly be deployed against. No, drones are guerrilla materiel, and must be employed in an asymmetrical manner. You can't just "American-ify" drones with a giant drone aircraft carrier, it's counter productive and entirely pointless: launching a swarm from a swarm of fast attack boats or, hell, fishing vessels that were literally fishing up until the moment they launch the drones, is the way to go. Which is to say, you'd be a silly billy if you didn't already understand that the PLA almost surely has plans for such contingencies in place already. I doubt it'd take them longer than 72 hours to insert millions of drones over virtually any regional target, the problem is that indicating you have the capability begs reaction from peer threats (the US). Same reason the US doesn't publicize all the crazy, probably extremely, extremely fucked up contingency plans they have to do all kinds of *extremely dark-dark fucked up military shit* if they wanted. That and advertising you're developing weapons and military strategies designed specifically to do war crimes and contravene international protocol on a mass scale is generally bad PR.

[@songjunw8981]

The tactics policy they using is call: "Small step sprints" which allows them to caught up the western power much quicker

[@xjunkxyrdxdog89]

"Caught up" 😂 China as a modern nation is a facade. Keep up the cheap labor though, we enjoy that.

[@dupes6248]

Simon you are awesome for listening to us and fixing the volume issue 🤘🏿 we appreciate your hard work AND willingness to listen to your fans

[@sethbutterfield8521]

Why with the awful voice cuts lately Simon

[@danielforrest2952]

I’m guessing boredom and the desire to freshen up and not stagnate at the risk of offending us folk who don’t really like change

[@JimmieFae]

I think they are awesome 🎉

[@sethbutterfield8521]

Suddenly we lose 70 years of audio recording progress randomly in almost every non-DTU channel

[@TheArtofFugue]

Always done it ?

[@Never_Too_Soon]

Wait so you think hes the one editing these videos? He is the on screen candy only. He doesnt write, edit, research... he shows up sexy, reads, goes home...

[@cliveashleyhamilton]

I like this video just for Simon trying to sell hair loss product lol

[@markcorbett9916]

Thailand also has an Aircraft Carrier. I saw it with my own eyes at a Thailand Naval Base in Sattahip, Rhailand. HTMS Chakri Naruebet (911), meaning 'Sovereign of the Chakri Dynasty', the Thai monarchy's ruling family) is the flagship of the Royal Thai Navy (RTN), and Thailand's first and only aircraft carrier, although the RTN refers to her as an "Offshore Patrol Helicopter Carrier".

[@niagarawarrior9623]

you can go on guided tours onboard the ship, next time I'm in Thailand I'm going to check it out.

[@Gnomezonbacon]

It's also the world's smallest and lightest carrier and has been called a royal yacht in disguise.

[@smalltime0]

By that definition Australia has 2

[@johnsmith1953x]

It also has a large hidden secret down below.

[@ex0duzz]

We have 2 carriers? What 2 carriers? We don't have any afaik in name or in practice. Thailand actually has one.

[@TheMikeDaville]

Was just browsing the whistleverse looking for something to throw on. Perfect!

[@mukkah]

lol the "Whistleverse", that's pretty spot on man ^_^ And ye, was in same boat heh Great topics, delivery and length /chefskiss

[@Jayjay-qe6um]

"Patience is bitter, but its fruit is sweet." -- Jean-Jacques Rousseau

[@theenergizer248]

Next step will be to get rid of the "island" and have a completely flat deck. All observations can be done by having drones in the air.

[@SnowmanTF2]

Seems unlikely would be gone entirely. A nontrivial component of the island is a funnel to duct heat from ship's engines away from the flight area, even a nuclear carrier would need that. Then there is long range radar for ship defense and tracking their own aircraft, along with large cluster of antenna that need to be somewhere (with the higher typically better). The island is also not as impacted by heavy sea state, which might shut down drone operation. Even something simple like shifting to using camera views, and moving staff to a more secure position lower in the ship has some arguments against it, on being able to work through more types of system failures or battle damage.

[@crimsonsaturnian6763]

the fact that china can actually maintain and keep an aircraft carrier in service that they bought from russia is honestly insane

[@benjiro8793]

Ukraine ... the bought it from Ukraine, not Russia... Ukraine was part of the USSR when it was being build. But after the USSR collaps, it was still Ukraine build, just like the one the Russians literally stole (as technically, the carrier belonged to Ukraine). And that carrier has been a port queen most her life because they burned out the engines (not putting the carrier on shore power and constantly left the engines running for power for 10+ years in the 90's does that to a ship).

[@zhengwenping4764]

​@@benjiro87933:38

[@afrolitious7930]

Ukraine were lucky fo have them. Russia let them have them as a symbol of friendship. None of the high end military tech belonged to Ukraine after the Soviet split like with all the other new federations. Russia was absolutely keen on keeping Ukraine in her sphere at all costs. At first with sweet deals and when they were no longer sweet enough they had to use force. Ukraine didn't have the blue print for any of the ships just like the Antonov planes. They are supposedly Ukrainian but only Russia has the capability to produce and upgrade them. ​@@benjiro8793

[@StArShIpEnTeRpRiSe]

The fact is, the 2 Soviet carrier were both unfinished, when the Sovietunion collapsed. One of them is now a Russian carrier because it's Russian crew basicly stole it from Ukraine unfinished, and sailed it into a Russian port. That one is the one Russian carrier today which constantly broke down. The insane part is, the Chinese bought the other ship and made an actually working carrier while the Russian sistership basicly useless.

[@afrolitious7930]

@@StArShIpEnTeRpRiSe it wasn't stolen. It never belonged to Ukraine.

[@blastcrash8247]

hey Simon, have been watching your videos for a couple of years now. Love your covarage of the various Megaprojects widely known and specially the unknown. but this new oldskool TV segments aren't clicking with me, specially when listening to your videos as a podcast while on the move they are difficult to understand. Hope you don't take this the wrong way, I still love your videos!

[@rogaineablar5608]

It's awful.

[@dunning-kruger551]

This truly is a mega project!

[@afnanmehmood3827]

Weld the rudders but forgot About the main aircraft launching catapult yeahhhh I believe it 😂

[@davidvavra9113]

Now, all they need is a century of carrier experience

[@namelesswarrior4760]

Nah! Just another 5yrs. Cos, we are just that much smarter than the west. The US has years of experience but still loses every war that they have been in since WW2. You wouldn't be able to afford anything in your possessions if it weren't for 'made in China" products at affordable prices.

[@pagghr51]

They can copy that too. They copy everything

[@THE-X-Force]

@@pagghr51 You spelled _"STEAL"_ wrong.

[@pagghr51]

​@@THE-X-Forceyeah, call it whatever you want.. china calls it "innovation"

[@arthas640]

Exactly. They're currently at the same point the US was in the 1920s. It's also hilarious he said China was making something "all their own" when they're using Soviet designs, reverse engineered western tech, and training crews with hired American experts and their aircraft are similarly Frankenstein monsters of cobbled together Russian and American tech coupled with Chinese engineering to fill the gaps. Experience is also huge. The Japanese made a similar giant leap but found themselves lagging further and further behind the more well experienced American crews in WW2 and the Soviets were even further behind. Training and experience are huge when it comes to ships, especially something as complex as an aircraft carrier.

[@FlukeyM]

Nuclear reactors also produce steam. They just produce the heat to boil the water differently

[@jxmai7687]

So, you think liquid = water, or boil only relate to water.

[@henryorcustus3412]

The shipyard that is going to build 004 has just released the world's first molten salt reactor for a marine ship (a 300,000 ton container ship). It is widely speculated that this container ship's purpose is to test out MSR reactor for large marine vessels. China currently leads the world in MSR technology. It is interesting to see China leap-frogging on certain areas of naval technology such as EM catapult and MSR reactors.

[@ashrithrao06]

Hello there… What I heard is that China’s Experimental Molten Salt breeder is located in Gobi Desert with 2MW Capacity and aims to build a full functional reactor by 2030. So, China is planning to induct the reactor only after 2030 because Molten Salt Reactor’s primary fuel is Thorium and there is not much research in this field by world. India has 5MW experimental reactor called Indian Molten Salt Breeder Reactor (IMSBR) and another experimental reactor in Kalpakkam Nuclear Plant. According to the Union Minister, India has started construction of fully operational Thorium Reactor in Kalpakkam. India has been researching in the Thorium Field since 1960s. It was started by Father of Indian Nuclear Programme Dr. Homi Bhabha, but India faced a huge setback in it’s Thorium Research due to the Murder of Dr. Homi Bhabha. Would he been alive, the world might have got Thorium reactors.

[@MGZetta]

It's interesting the fact that the US invented MSR technology but abandoned it because the by products can't be used as a weapon like normal reactors do. lol

[@gjffudcgifvbju379]

@@MGZetta yes,that's why the us has so much weapons-grade nuclear fuel

[@ashrithrao06]

@@MGZetta That’s not the only case. Thorium can’t be used directly as a fuel. There is a process for it and highly advanced metallurgical instruments needed for Thorium Reactors aren’t developed at that time. There were many technologies that has to be developed and good amount of research is needed. Also Environmental Control at that time was least bothered, Humans wanted to exploit the proven Uranium Technology rather than investing in new technologies. Cold War also had an impact on Thorium Technology, no side was interested in it.

[@rizon72]

There is another rumor that the test reactor is the China/Russia nuclear powered ice breaker they are working to build together.

[@JuanLopez-jk9xg]

mega project Simon trying and successfully growing his hair back

[@Mas3452001]

They don't need to catch up regarding parity with US ships because they can produce more ships or retrofit civilian vessels for the war effort if they have to. They also have many missiles and will likely fight on their home court. A home court they've been preparing for war for over a decade.

[@patrickbrady519]

That they will loose at home . Exactly. China. $ uCcs

[@chrislui571]

Chinese phrase: "quick steps in a short stride". This approach emphasizes the effectiveness of consistent, small efforts rather than large, sporadic actions.

[@Western_Decline]

AGILE, DESIGN THINKING, rapid iteration, China is run by engineers.

[@RogueReplicant]

Chinese saying: If you can cheat, cheat. Arrogant copycats, ha ha ha ha

[@chrislui571]

@@RogueReplicant Former CIA director, Mike Pompano: We lied, we cheated, we stole. kzbin.info/www/bejne/bIPQdqaGepycp5Isi=6Hfzo7FF_TxRR-mX

[@user-rj9ee7hw8u]

It's just a matter of money and time. For Chinese people, everything in the West was no longer a secret a long time ago.

[@team3am149]

@@RogueReplicantJealous dog.

[@Harrington2323]

The Kiew and Minsk (+ the Baku and Noworossijsk) were Project 1143, the Admiral Kusnezow and the Liaoning were Project 1143,5. Because 1143,5 are totally different from their four predecessors they are seen as a different class of ships. Fun-Fact: The Baku is now the Vikramaditya, the indian flagship, and the Noworossijsk was scraped in SouthKorea. All six are not even aircraft carriers, they are (heavy) aircraft cruisers. The reason is simple, military ships as heavy as the Gerald R. Ford class carriers are not allowed to cross Bosporus and the Dardanellen. They were all build in the Black Sea Shipyard in Mykolaiv, Ukraine, and a normal carrier wouldn´t be allowed to leave the Black Sea.

[@SabreSix1980]

It wasn't just a verbal trick to get them through the Bosporus, it was also their genuine role in the Soviet Navy. Their aviation role was to get aircraft over the fleet in an air defense role, while the long range strike role was to be handeled by P-500/P-700 supersonic cruise missiles. Notice the difference with the Chinese who operate their variants purely as aircraft carriers, and they had the missile silos removed or not even installed in the first place.

[@vejet]

WOW such a fast ship! Moving as fast as planes! 😂🤣

[@cliffwoodbury5319]

nuclear also means u free a lot of space since there's no gas tanks needed

[@lagrangewei]

this is not true, as nuclear are heavier, so you end up requiring thicker hull to keep the hull from deforming from the weight as well as to contain radiation leak if an accident happens. DOD has a report on carriers and their conclusion is there isn't really that much advanatage as assumed, as the carrier don't actually burn alot of fuel, most of the fuel is burn by the aircraft. at full sortie rate, a nuclear carrier can exhaust it jet fuel in just 3 days... with close to 100 planes, they eat alot of fuel..

[@liujason2091]

no contry can lead or be left behind forever. It depends whether it can do a good job to develop and advance itself. In this aspect, China has performed perfectly. They have a good system, better than western world's "democratic system". They proved their advantage with RESULTS.

[@thefiveofour]

Saying Russia operates aircraft carriers is a bit generous 😅

[@user-fe5un8ku3j]

I believe it’s still siting in shipyard gathering snow as we speak

[@acewyvern3489]

as a russian, this comment hurt. But its funny, cuz its true haha

[@arturs2436]

I would say it was forgoten the mention of Brazil(NAM"Atlântico"(ex HMS"Ocean")) in the list of nations that have active/in service aircraft carriers. Yet i do understand why Thailand was not mentioned in that list. Has their sole carrier(HTMS "Chakri Naruebet") is everything else but what it should be in the first place. I believe the said ship atm has no active air wing.

[@Ubique2927]

Ocean was NOT an aircraft carrier. No plane could take off or land on the Ocean.

[@arturs2436]

​@@Ubique2927 V/STOL 1s can...Besides actual Jap carriers are not much different has they were originally helicopter carriers and are just starting to be upgraded and probably extended. Also the Spanish Carrier standard planes are V/STOL 1s.

[@lady_draguliana784]

I know calling planes "aircraft" sounds fancier, but then when you say "aircraft and helicopters" it sounds less-so, since Helicopters are also, in fact, "aircraft"... it's like "ATM Machine"... If you want to boost your fancy score, I suggest the terms: "Fixed-wing Aircraft" for jets/planes and "Rotary-Wing Aircraft" for all types of helicopters... 👍

[@fabiofboful]

China recently have announced plans to build a nuclear powered container shipping vessel with its new prototite thorium reactor. its a really clever move since it will allow China to gain experience and know how to be applyed on future military vessels.

[@zbalderdash215]

There are reasons why thorium is not the goto for nuclear reactors. For the Chinese who only steal tech and are crap for development actually building a functioning thorium reactor on-board a ship is highly unlikely and it's more likely, if done at all, to be a mixed fuel reactor. And knowing the CCP has no concern for the environment or their people what kind of pollution will this lead to. I offer up the Russians as a perfect example of what happens to your nuclear reactor and waste when you're done with them.

[@ursodermatt8809]

yeah sure.

[@tallflguy]

lol 😂😂 yea sure. No country has thorium reactors.

[@J_X999]

COPE​@@ursodermatt8809

[@hellogoodbyestaysavage6283]

@@tallflguy stop living under the rock your country is not the center of universe 😉

[@angelkilier]

It is believed that both type 004 and 005 are simultaneously being developed by Dalian and Shanghai shipyards. They will almost certainly have different designs. Edit: for the people who don't read the follow up comments, this is copied from one of my latter replies: I'm fully aware it's not pennant number we are talking about. Rather, 004 and 005 are going to be 2 different TYPES (or classes in US terms) It was in question whether it was going to be a second ship in type 003. It turns out the 4th carrier is going to be a different type thus 004. And the 5th is also going to be a different type. You guys need to understand the reason why they are in different types is because each of them has certain increment in technological advancement compared to the previous ship thus there are no 2 carriers in a single type/class.

[@malcolmjcullen]

They'll have got their hands on more modern Western blueprints, you mean.

[@aamerjamal]

There's no type 005... Next carriers is one sister type 003 + one new class type 004..or two type 004... Let's cby 28 China want 5 ac that's impressive when we saw they complete first one just in 2012...

[@angelkilier]

@@aamerjamalDude, simple logic. 2 ships are being built, no duplicate number is allowed because they are both different types/designs. so what are after 003? 004 will be similar to 003, call it a sister ship if you will, but it's still a new type.

[@lagrangewei]

@@angelkilierthe ship are number 16,17,18,19,20... 003 mean it the 3rd design not the 3rd carrier. the numbering are for blueprint referrences, nothing stop them from building 2 carrier following 003 blueprint. whether China will build another 003 is unknown as the procurement (yes surprisingly chinese military procurement is transparent as part of the policy to fight corruption) look like the next carrier will use different parts, but it all speculation atm, china has order the building of mock up after all, so those part could be for mock up than a production ship. it still too early to say for certain.

[@Komainu959]

@@angelkilier That's not how it works. The US has built 66 aircraft carriers in it's history. However there are only 15 classes or "Types" as the Chinese label them. Using your logic then the US has 66 types of aircraft carriers...that just isn't true for the US and it isn't true for China building a sister Class/Type ship.

[@acmelka]

Thailand has a carrier, but never fitted it out w offensive capabilities. It has been used for humanitarian relief efforts however.

[@HenriHattar]

it is NOT a carrier! It is a joke.

[@leonardlackey2813]

When Aircraft carriers have sky ramps, the airplanes can't carry many bombs.

[@captives6479]

China's aircrafts have no intention of bombing civilians. What China needs and has is long range air-to-air missiles. Their new PL-17 has a range of 400km, the longest range in the world. It can take out reconnaissance aircrafts and tanker aircrafts (re-fuelling planes).

[@lazzie7495]

@@captives6479You say that like missiles are significantly lighter than bombs. The point is payload matters.

[@captives6479]

@@lazzie7495 How many air-to-air missiles do you need for each airplane? 6 is plenty enough. For bombing ground targets or sea targets (ships), China only needs to use its guided hypersonic missiles launched from land or submarines. China's hypersonic missiles come in all kinds of ranges, from several hundred kilometers to intercontinental that can hit anywhere in the US mainland.

[@flyingtanks9313]

Most impressive thing to me is the armament on it. The 1130 and HHQ series missiles are actually insanely good. The 1130 is likely the most powerful CIWS in service in the world today, specifically. It can take down whole swarms of ASHms and cruise missiles.

[@raventhetraumjager]

...Yeah ... right.😑

[@Ferociousplayz_11]

@@raventhetraumjagerWatch KZbin clips. Besides, China is rapidly advancing. American Hegemony is in trouble within only 10 years.

[@flyingtanks9313]

@@raventhetraumjager it has 11 barrels and is 30mm. 20mm doesn't let you create real fragmentation. It has twice the firerate of the Phalanx and each round is a fragmentation round.

[@forcea1454]

​@@flyingtanks931330mm doesn't let you create that much fragmentation either, not that there will be any, because CIWS systems below 57mm tend to fire APFSDS. Gun-based CIWS tends to be quite bad, they can deal with singular subsonic missiles per system, perhaps a couple of they are widely spaced, any kind of supersonic threat basically cannot be intercepted in time, there's a reason why people are moving to missiles like RAM or CAMM for last-ditch defence.

[@quasarsavage]

Is this becoming chinaprojects 😂

[@todoleo]

That snap of the fingers. 👨‍🍳

[@iamscoutstfu]

I didnt know this. But Fujian is essentially just a remodeled Lioning. They are the same basic hull. That means china has just made an updated kuznetsov Theres been a lot of talk about them "catching up" but if theyre still not able to innovate enough to design their own hull makes me doubt their progress.

[@jeffwilson1394]

Do the catapaults on the 003 actually work yet? All your footage has the rebuild-sheds.

[@xcl9517]

工棚已经拆除，已经在弹射实验了，自己搜索一下就知道了

[@jeffwilson1394]

@@xcl9517 cool! I hope they've figured out a way to make it work different from the Americans. Solving the problem is good, but finding a whole new way to do things is Great

[@jilbertb]

​@@jeffwilson1394 But engineering isn't a Chinese "thing". Stealing designs and trying to copy them, is.

[@dsloop3907]

@@jilbertb I worked for a German company, they told us Chinese were wanting to buy our machines. We were told NOT TO SPEAK to them, when they toured the plant. They were not sold any machines.

[@user-dk4ko8yj9u]

​@@dsloop3907所以不想卖为啥又叫人参观呢😂德国人已经没有自信了

[@venomous7321]

After learning that China builds 1 to 1 replicas of world marvels, nothing they do surprises me

[@vladh5192]

Wonder when they’ll copy the Great Wall… oh, wait…

[@vladh5192]

I mean - they might do it “on principle” 🤣 and it might be hillarious.

[@Kevin-kd6hf]

if you work in academia and go to conferences, you will be surprised how china start to dominating top papers. but judging by your comment, i doubt you know anything about it.

[@adammckee3496]

​@@Kevin-kd6hfjudging by your grammar, I'd guess you're a Chinese propagandist?

[@venomous7321]

@@Kevin-kd6hf China will always be a step under Uncle Sam

[@Seanmmvi]

I think saying that, " Russia operates an Aircraft carrier" is a bit of a stretch...

[@acewyvern3489]

17:15, not exactly There is a variation of the J-15, that has an Catapult Launch bar, i think it was called "J-15T"

[@philbarrett3739]

16:26 We're not going to acknowledge and discuss what could be hiding under the enormous temporary structures then? 😮

[@generalrendar7290]

They are covered because the PLAN is having trouble weather-proofing the system. They were still being worked on and possibly exposed, so they covered them to keep prying eyes at bay.

[@nigelyorkshiremanwadeley6263]

Its obviously the tables set up for the dignitaries lunch...

[@remliqa]

Those are are where the magnetic catapults would be installed.

[@asdfghjkl92213]

by now those shed are alreadyy gone

[@seanbrazell7095]

PLEASE don't do that random simon talking out of a tv with headache inducing treble fixation thing!

[@phantomvapor]

Your vids are awesome and your delivery is spectacular!😎

[@mat3o557]

Oh you mean those cheap toys they are making at a fast rate? 😂

[@adrianw7011]

The Chinese carriers are inferior compared to their western counterparts. The ski jump carriers have multiple limitations that restrict their fighter aircraft operationally. Their new carriers of course will overcome a lot of these but I doubt they will match the capabilities of the western types. Building them is one thing, operating them successfully is another.

[@Kriss_L]

The new western-counterpart UK carriers have ski jumps.

[@adrianw7011]

They do, yes and the aircraft that operate from them are designed to operate from ski jump carriers, short field and vertical take off and landing areas. The chinese J-15 (or SU-33) is not and as such is limited in the payload and fuel it can launch with. The ski jump was orginally designed with the Harrier in mind and today the F-35B replaces it. Both capable of taking off at close to gross weight unlike the J-15. @@Kriss_L

[@nonconsensualopinion]

Bingo. Keeping things running while deployed is the real challenge. The US has unprecedented experience doing this.

[@J_X999]

​@@adrianw7011that's why he said "catching up"

[@supahsmashbro]

It's fine, Aircraft carriers are really used to project power and throw our weight around against others whom have not reached a certain level of technology. They're useful if you're aiming to extract resources from others, but building too many is a waste

[@smalltime0]

Didn't mention HMAS Melbourne's illustrious career, managed to sink 2 ships without firing a shot. A feat never again recorded in modern naval history.

[@victorwaddell6530]

USS Evans was one . What was the other ?

[@akaaoi]

@@victorwaddell6530 HMAS Voyager.

[@smalltime0]

@@victorwaddell6530 HMAS Voyager...

[@smalltime0]

@@victorwaddell6530 The ship was cursed

[@vakten8323]

Russia sinks ships all the time without firing a shot. Sad that it's always their own...

[@RaySqw785]

more efficient than UK empty Ski sailing stations lol

[@mh8748]

Likely they thought the Minsk and Kiev were two halves of a whole. But when they got in to it, those two were two left shoes. So they bought the Varyag and built on that.

[@28ebdh3udnav]

Thailand has an aircraft carrier as well. Small but one nonetheless. Japan doesnt own any right now. But technically they do since they will operate VTOL aircraft in the future. Also, South Korea, Egypt, and Brazil all operate anl ship that can carrier VTOL aircraft if they really want to. Also, Australian opertes some that can carry F 35s

[@nevets2371]

Japan has "helicopter destroyers," because since Japan has renounced offensive war and aircraft carriers are purely an offensive power projection tool, there's little reason why they would need such a thing. But they are pretty much aircraft carriers in all but name.

[@testusersg]

The story is incompete w/o talking about how China acquirred the arrestor cables. It's really exciting and makes the whole video more interesting. Highly recommended.

[@paulbeaney4901]

If the carrier is the "ultimate weapon," the submarine is the ultimate weapon killer 😂.

[@dwaynne_way]

I am a huge warfare history fan and my favorite naval ship is the aircraft carrier, they are like floating cities with an airport.

[@dougaldouglas8842]

The proper aircraft carrier, not the joke that we have with so many countries, and the main one being the United Kingdom

[@dwaynne_way]

@@dougaldouglas8842 I can't argue about that the new British aircraft carriers aren't living up to the hype at the moment. They have been a huge money pit.

[@Vaeldarg]

@@dwaynne_way China's "aircraft carriers", given its tendency to be caught faking everything, are likely more of a floating "Potemkin village" than a city.

[@navyreviewer]

Ah the carrier. "I live and work below an airport and above a nuclear reactor which sits next to a bomb warehouse"

[@dougaldouglas8842]

@@dwaynne_way Tell me about it. I am disgusted with what we have. Breaking down, no planes, no self-protection, and there were supposed to be three of them, and one was to be shared by France, but the electrics were not compatible with the French set up. I am British, through and through, and honest to boot, and continue to be disgusted what our government has sold to us, and the world. God help us if they had to go to war, would not last five minutes. The best engineering achievement has to to be Euro-Typhoon, a marvel of engineering that the U.S cannot match

[@NicolasAlexanderOtto]

4 years for the construction of a carrier? Damn, I am impressed.

[@user-ee9cz6mc1x]

They also build a hospital in 6 days; it leaked like a sive. Don't be impressed by the speed of the shoddy construction.

[@hermesliteratus882]

For any other country, this might be an impressive feat; however, for China, it's not such a big deal. After all, China possesses the largest and most powerful shipbuilding industry in the entire world, probably even bigger than the rest of the world combined.

[@Raksasaification]

​@@user-ee9cz6mc1xwhere did u get the news it leaks. Cos with modern pre fab and cast technology what they did was sensible - achievable by Asians countries like India, Korea, Japan if they pour in same resources to it.

[@ealan3694]

Yeah, don't be too impressed. Been following this for awhile and there are videos already questioning some currious satelitte imagery of the 003 carrier. Curious in that it looks like a fissure/split is developing in the flightdeck, indicating perhaps bad design or sub-par materials. As I understand it, Chinese steel tends to be incredibly bad, they regularly import steel from other countries. And that 4 years to launch the carrier was really just to launch the hull. That was the 002 carrier and to put that further into perspective, that is for a 60,000 ( full load ) ton ship vs the 100,000 of a super carrier. It's a sizeably smaller ship and ski-jump carrier is a much simpler design, because there is no flightdeck launch system. Planes launch under their own power using the ski-jump, and not fully loaded at that. Grantted, it was their first home brew carrier. Fitting out a carrier is a whole nother story and that took another 2 and half years till the ship was commissioned.

[@user-jp2tf5fj5k]

@@Raksasaification So why India didn't poured such resources into construction?

[@4TwentyFour20]

the most important naval vessel is the nuclear powered ballistic submarine...

[@kingwing3203]

This is just a small boat. The US military exaggerated the threat in order to make its ally Japan pay more.

[@GeekusKhaniCAs]

@SandBoxx recently did a video on the USA repourposing tankers, have you considered looking into whether China is doing this with their tankers / container ships (drones?) or fishing fleets?

[@zachattack_the_imperialist6065]

Kiev class aircraft carriers are different from the Admiral Kuznetsov in that the Kiev class could only operate a small number of VTOL fighters and helicopter where as the Admiral Kuznetsov class can operate larger more capable fixed wing aircraft with ski jump launch system although one Kiev class the Baku was heavily modified by the Indian navy to be fixed wing capable but China likely didn’t do the because of the horrendous condition those ships were in

[@chengkw8873]

Aircraft carriers are really no longer strategic when they can be easily sunk by a barrage of hypersonic missiles! The US can boasts of their eleven ACs but deep down they know their ACs are mere lumbering sea dinosaurs!😊

[@deanwilliams433]

Yes, but the US uses the carriers to fight countries that don't have that tech. Hence they are very useful for the roles we use them in.

[@nevets2371]

Hypersonic missiles aren't as powerful as you think they are. They may be fast, but they're nowhere near the speed of light, or radio waves, which is what the US uses to detect things in radar, so in order to avoid being detected too early, the missile would have to travel low, through thicker air which requires more energy to push through. In addition to that, when a missile travels at Mach 5 or 6, it begins to create a layer of superheated plasma as it pushes through the air, which blocks any radio waves from reaching or leaving the missile, meaning that once it starts going Hypersonic, it's flying blind, making it incredibly difficult to hit a moving target, like an aircraft carrier, especially if the carrier knows it's coming.

[@tiggalong227]

I think that well the development of china’s aircraft carriers is interesting it shouldn’t be seen in isolation having a state of the art carrier is good but effort needs to be made to have effective escorts which china is doing with more modern destroyer and frigate designs allowing it on the surface at least to field powerful battle groups. Time will tell if this allows them to develop into a true naval power or remain regional due to shifting political and economic considerations.

[@bbracing3925]

This might be a stupid question. Do all of these massive ships (military & civilian) all around the world contribute to rising sea levels? They are displacing water by moving material from the land (iron,glass,plastics) etc. And pressing it down against the water, aka a "boat". If i get into a "full" bathtub, it overflows. ?????

[@Raksasaification]

A bit of context will be helpful. What's the ratio of your body volume (or mass, for this purpose) vs your bath tub volume?

[@bbracing3925]

@Raksasaification you over complicated the thought I was trying to convey.

[@gggg-xv7nb]

The math is quite simple. Find the total tonnage of ships currently operating, from a Google search or something. That many tons of water is displaced by the ships. Calculate the volume of said displaced water, and divide that by the ocean surface area of the planet. You'll get sea level rise as a result of ship displacement. It should be quite miniscule

[@DonBlackBird71]

Russia does not operate A carrier, they have one but it's not really "operational"

[@phantomechelon3628]

Like most of their navy it seems...held together with duct tape and string.