Fujian Type 003: China's Incredible First Aircraft Carrier

[@megaprojects9649]

Head to www.squarespace.com/megaprojects to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code MEGAPROJECTS

[@jamesleate]

The deck of the Chinese carrier broke in half and collapsed. Don't believe anything you hear about Chinese engineering, it is all propaganda. They even paint brown countryside green with big spray trucks to look better for publicity shots. RECAP: This carrier broke in half (the deck at least), I have seen the footage after the sea trial which China has suppressed. All their claims are fake, they just make cheap copies of current tech.

[@thomgizziz]

Trash creator is still trash. You just have a team and you are a content mill that puts out so much misinformation that you all should be prosecuted.

[@minutemanhomestead7214]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... deep breath BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... passes out.. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA what a joke

[@LordEmperorHyperion]

Bro, you're late the Chinese has launched their new NGAD 6th generation aircraft! I do wanna know your thoughts on it

[@jamesleate]

@@megaprojects9649 The deck split in half, it's a Tofu Dregg Aircraft carrier.

[@Torven99]

Yes, China lacks experience being an aggressive empire, and hasn't fought a war in over 40 years. That's something to be proud of, not ashamed of.

[@AL-pv2bq]

Does building power projection ships mean they want to change that?

[@echadit]

@@AL-pv2bq Don't think that is necessarily the case. It does make sense if they're using it as a deterrent considering they're basically surrounded by many potential enemies (India, S. Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and the majority of SEA).

[@AL-pv2bq]

@@echadit Let's acknowledge the elephant, China wants to invade Taiwan. Right? Their official stance is that it is rightfully theirs and they won't disavow the use of lethal force to make it happen. The only reason they have not tried yet is because they think they would lose due to Taiwan having Japan and America to back them up.

[@dgreendam6577]

No, just to make sure other countries not to force China to change that.​@@AL-pv2bq

[@IluvMypigg]

It's not from lack of desire fool. Its lack of ability.

[@RealSerie26]

Regardless of what China does, we keep dismissing them or minimizing their technological advances. This is the absolute worst mistake we can make.

[@djinn666]

I think it's quite funny that we're being told to believe 2 diametrically opposed perspectives, first that they're a danger to us, and second that they are weak and decades behind us.

[@Huaxiaviewpoint]

Sober people.

[@DarrenSaw]

People on KZbin might, the actual people in decision making positions do not in any way underestimate the opposition. You think anybody in this comment section has any relevance to?? 😅.

[@gibbonbasher8171]

I don’t think KZbin commenters represent the ideals of the US government. The govt likely is not taking any chances with China’s recent advancements.

[@kenaidiun3736]

No worries, is the Temu team, go back to sleep.

[@wintersl4544]

The era of overcapacity for electromagnetic catapults has officially arrived. The Type 076 amphibious assault ship is officially equipped with an electromagnetic catapult and was launched yesterday.

[@Hystericall]

lol, overcapacity, I can't get enough!

[@PhillAccio]

"Overcapacity" 😂

[@wind_5]

Man you are hilarious 😂

[@Gringosaurus]

Amphibious ships don’t need catapults everything is vstol or helo because amphibious ships are troop carriers not aircraft carriers. LoL

[@wintersl4544]

@ Brother, China's Sichuan, the first ship of the 076 amphibious landing ship, has an electromagnetic catapult. As for what it will eject, I think it remains to be seen, but it is indeed an amphibious ship.

[@garethgriffith792]

Just because the Gerald Ford is nuclear powered doesn’t mean that she doesn’t need regular replenishment for, food, fuel for its jets, spare parts etc. The biggest advantage is that she can sustain a relative high cruising speed, which however is limited by the slowest ship in its battlegroup.

[@xeenslayer]

I love how all the Western xenophobes and jingoists are rushing in to dismiss Chinese progress. =) While most of you make valid points, this complacency is exactly what the Chinese need and love.

[@JDRogers65]

Finally someone I agree with.

[@Introspection-01]

Yup. They are fools playing right into China's hand.

[@nzhong169]

I don't think China really inspire to win battles against US. CCP just needs to prove that if engaging battles, it has sufficient capability to inflict enough deaths on the US side to change the American's' opinion to stop the war (as long as China doesn't initiate attack to US like Japan did to peal harbor.) I believe China knows it. China isn't like US which has an unrealistic goal to change the world to its liking.

[@davidleonardo7292]

Well said! This is exactly what the Chinese wants. Any deviations from expectations here in the West will create disarray, an advantage to China.

[@freddiemercury2075]

Well if it is made in china it's probably shit, so I won't be worried.

[@stc2828]

Imagine releasing this video, China release a new carrier and 2 6th gen fighters in hours 😂

[@kamakazi339]

No one has a 6th gen fighter

[@Global-yt]

@@kamakazi339 6th-gen isn't a well-defined term yet, so countries kind of make it up as they go

[@kamakazi339]

@Global-yt well, considering China's entry to the 5th Gen fighter club is questionable at best I think it's safe to say they don't have one. The USA doesn't until the NGAD program actually produces something and no one else is really in the running right now

[@Global-yt]

@@kamakazi339 their entry isn't questionable actually. Afaik most analysts put the J-20 between the Felon and Raptor in terms of observability. So they're pretty good there. Of course, it's highly doubtable that anyone has fully-operational or even half-done 6th-gens, but China seems like it might be pulling ahead of the US in terms of research and testing.

[@TheManInTheRing]

@Global-yt observability is cute. they cant project theyre power over a area, theyre a forthought

[@Strangelove101]

The US does not necessarily have more combat experience than China. Committing war crimes across the Mid East for 3 decades is not combat experience.

[@davosam1968]

Specially against countries who can't defend themselves

[@matthummel8306]

They never fight an army with air defense

[@Kfabiano10]

Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

[@RiteMoEquations]

Yes it does. Have you forgotten that in 1941, Germany and Japan had more combat experience than the US? The fact that war crimes committed doesn't negate the fact that Russia currently has more recent combat experience than NATO.

[@RiteMoEquations]

​@@matthummel8306You're not familiar with US combat history because Baghdad and Damascus had air defense and were both attacked.

[@DragonYang01]

Many commentors are quick to compare Chinese aircraft carrier with American ones. But, this is really beside the point because China does not strategize to fight any war far away from China. The real important message is how China upgrades their military capabilities from ground up with much SMALLER budget and much SHORTER time, with much BIGGER manufacturing capacity. Their trajectory of superiority (not dominance) makes the statement.

[@larsnystrom6698]

The Chinese are very good at building nuclear power systems. No doubt they could have done that in their carriers by now, if they wanted. And no doubt the will do so in a future generation of ships. I'm waiting for their first ship, or submarine, with a Thorium Molten Salt reactors. Rest assured that they have a well thought out plan for this.

[@tonyatgoogle6076]

It will come. Say in 5 years time.

The chinese make nothing of quality.

[@trustandbelieve9173]

90% of our military is made from china 😅

[@tonyatgoogle6076]

The Chinese Tian Gong space station is much better than the ISS.

[@Flightman453]

Cope.

[@tonbopro]

btw historically TW belonged to Fujian province before Japan annexed it

[@JDRogers65]

And now they are their own country. Seems simple to me.

[@jesselu143]

simple to you, not recognized by your government officially

[@vivavivo5071]

​@@JDRogers65Read their constitution

[@bbbear2900]

​@@JDRogers65并没有成为一个国家，联合国不承认，欧美国家也没有一个承认的，只要他们还继续使用中国人建立的国家，把中国人作为国父，把中国人的节日作为国庆日，他们就没法真正独立成为国家。很快就会被大陆统一了

[@realdreamerschangetheworld7470]

Belong to the ROC, yes.

[@jorgearmas9310]

Is there no mention of the battle group? A carrier without an effective battle group is extremely vulnerable regardless of how impressive it is.

[@NightPhoenix.Y]

Well the Chinese regularly train out in the Pacific with their battle groups, recently gad one with both Liaoning and Shandong

[@TheBinarygenius]

The battlegroup is in the post but there's some problems with the WishDotCon order so they are using some ships from the bottom of Russian cornflake packets

[@BTM666-t7r]

​@@NightPhoenix.Yeffective is the key word comrade. And they still can't go anywhere without a fleet of tug boats following close behind.

[@VaioletteWestover]

They have Type 055 which is arguably the strongest destroyer in the world right now. But yes, they regularly train with a full service group out in the open seas.

[@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket]

@@VaioletteWestover Lol arguably because unlike American destroyers it's not definitive right? You can argue anything but you can't deny that we're still decades ahead despite your best efforts to rip off our designs and tech.

[@agustinseguy]

For the people saying "what about the carrier battle group" brother, they have those, THE THING they lack is simply experience, they dont join wars just for the sake of it so they dont have any battle experience operating carriers

[@presleynotalt5530]

Finally another sane person.

[@hkfoo3333]

battle experience ? What experience does US has? Fighting vs the Houthis? In this day of AI, Quantum communictions, drones etc , you want grandpas to fight a war? No lad, the way it is going no country in the world is anay match even close to fighting China. Tell us which weaponry US tech is ahead of China? ...almost none. Get out of your cocoon and start to innovate and dont waste money on wars.

[@truthseeker8123]

Sorry. This is a lie. This POS takes 48 hours just to generate enough steam to leave port. Its planes are such garbage they can’t take off with full fuel and weapon loads. It needs multiple oilers to follow it around since it diesel electric. Easy targets for any first world navy. Worst of all, the generals in charge of it were arrested for scamming money out of the program by using cheaper steel. Dude. It’s a coral reef in first hour of a conflict.

[@KingLoa-t1n]

Don’t underestimate Chinese intelligence. What they lack in experience they make up for in sheer brain power. They are very well versed in operations and well trained. Real world experience will come with the Taiwan situation sadly.

[@dontworryiamsmurf5307]

Thats exactly what Russian navy said when they attacked japan in 1904, it was one of the most one-sided naval battles. For japan.

[@barrywong4327]

It’s absurd for Americans to be boasting about its fighting experience. That is nothing to be proud of. In fact, you should be ashamed of your country’s belligerence and having levied untold amount of killing and destruction around the globe. If the US is serious about being a true leader, don’t lead in starting and fighting wars. Instead lead in conflict resolution peacefully, trade, development, cooperation, collaboration, helping other countries to improve, building bridges not walls and address challenges facing humanity. Which is exactly what China is doing, rather successfully.

[@kmrtnsn]

Need a tissue?

[@jbl6338]

Good coverage, more on China please. The link on Fujiam being the closes province to China was good insight.

[@dimsimbogan.]

The last major carrier battle was fought at the Battle of Midway. Japan lost 4 carriers Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, and Hiryu to USA's 1 carrier USS Yorktown. Nobody had carrier battle experience ever since, unless if you count carrier "gunboat diplomacy" as such. All battles were fought using tactics and strategies from the last war, Midway was 82 years ago. That's how the British and French lost to the Wehrmacht's Biltzkrieg tactics, because they thought they could stop the Germans by digging trenches

[@GeographyCzar]

Philippine Sea in 1944 was far bigger. The Japanese super carrier Tio was sunk by a single torpedo from an American sub. But they had half a dozen more carriers we had to deal with! Unfortunately for Japan the U.S. brought over a dozen aircraft carriers and our defensive firepower brought down hundreds of Japanese naval aviators in one day. But you can be excused for forgetting it. It is ignored by “History” for reasons that I can’t understand. It was basically the Battle of the Bulge of the Pacific, but sadly overshadowed by the Normandy campaign in Europe. There was a much more dangerous moment for the U.S. Navy late October 1942, the Battle of Santa Cruz, which nearly cost us the entire Guadalcanal campaign…

[@Srcabulozo]

Kid, in ai era, forget about your heroes.

[@nafisfuadayon6832]

China also has carrier killer anti-ship ballistic missiles and submarines.

[@chriskola3822]

The impressive/troubling thing is that they can probably knock out another 20 of them in the time it would take other countries to create two.

[@speedingoffence]

That's true. Would you rather 1 US Supercarrier or 10 of these? I'm not sure I have an answer to that.

[@AL-pv2bq]

That's what everyone keeps saying, but it took them 7 years to build it. That's not exactly impressive since the Ford class for the USA is built in just 4-5 years.

[@speedingoffence]

@@AL-pv2bq Was that from the actual start of construction or the start of planning? I bet it took 20 years of arguing in Congress before the Ford was even a picture in someone's head. From a doodle on a napkin to a supercarrier in seven years would be VERY quick.

When there's no worker safety, forced labor, and being able to pollute as much as you want, you could probably build a carrier in less than a year.

[@AL-pv2bq]

@@speedingoffence we aren't talking about prototyping or inventing tech, we are talking about large scale production of existing designs here. The Ford was designed to be built in as little as 3 years should the need arise, and that is per shipyard. I haven't read anything that suggests China could do it faster.

[@jackvos8047]

Last time I was this early people thought Ice would make a good aircraft carrier.

[@trailblazer632]

Ice? No. Pykrete? Absolutely 😂

[@jamesleatherwood5125]

Damn. .. Ice Burn!

[@dhyde2025]

He said all this with a straight face. That’s the most impressive thing about this video.

[@a.m.9357]

Comments like this shows how terrified you guys are of your ongoing demise. Mocking is the first sign. But it's not going to help. 😅😅

[@keithmoore5306]

definitely shows old hair boy is mental!!!

[@keithmoore5306]

@@a.m.9357 take your meds the delusions are back!!

[@EvaExplores-x2x]

@@keithmoore5306 not sure who is the delusional here. Their 6th gen just came out today and a EM catapult 076 amphib was just launched too. Their shipbuilding dwarfs US capability that can't even churn out a frigate now.

[@xBINARYGODx]

I see china bots (or from their pretend best friend) are here

[@phamductri]

China used to be behind 60 years in aircraft carrier technology, now they are only 10 years behind the US.

[@jaybrown4246]

I believe that China was one of the first countries to invent warships back in early Chinese history.... I think ?

[@wenjunliu1663]

FYI, China has just lanched its first em catapult equipped landing carrier, type 076, and maiden flew two 6-gen fighters in two days back to back.

[@danielch6662]

The 076 is in the water already? I'd thought it'd be still under construction for a couple more months. I still doubt they few 6-gen fighters off it though. For one thing, they don't have any 6-gen fighter yet. Binkov just released a video about a possible candidate 6-gen fighter from Chengdu, but that one is so gigantic, it doesn't look like even the USS Ford is big enough to launch it, nevermind the 076.🤣

[@justonecornetto80]

Flying mock ups around an airport as a propaganda stunt on Mao's birthday hasn't impressed anyone. As usual China is full of shit!

[@kamsunleong6648]

​@@danielch6662 There's a second candidate from Shenyang that flew on the same day.

[@ttuliorancao]

@@danielch6662well, being able to operate in a carrier is not a requirement for being a 6th-gen fighters is it? Being honest, if those 6th-gen planes are really so stealth and fast as people think they'll be, probably they can afford to be gigantic bombers that happens to cary air-to-air missiles for shooting any fighter getting close...

[@Edz2023]

There is even a debate in China whether they needed a nuclear power carrier. But I bet China will build one. We should find out in a year or two.

[@hifinsword]

The Fujian is physically comparable to the U.S. last generation aircraft carrier, before they switched to nuclear power. We will see how well China is able to execute their capability of launching aircraft and recovering them as well. I suspect there will be a long and painful learning curve for China.

[@krzysztofbaus1311]

The US has decades of experience in constructing and using aircraft carriers. I would not call it a combat experience as there was no threat to the carriers. It was like an intensive exercise level training. China is catching up. What is going to be in 10, 20 years? Some reflection. Have you heard about battleships Repulse and Prince of Wales meeting the Japanese bombers? The introduction of missiles were the beginning of the end of aircariers and the hypersonic missile is the end of aircraft carriers, like the airplanes were ending battleships. Aircraft carriers are to keep smaller countries in check, not to openly fight superpowers.

[@javantm1676]

saying AUKUS somehow strengthen australia is insane, those guys are getting ripped of by ridiculously unbeneficial deal

[@SUSTHUNDER-i6s]

This guy needs his own TV series

[@karloftinker2832]

what's a t v?

[@yaoypl]

US: has 11 aircraft carriers and 800 military bases worldwide to protect its money-printing machine. China: develop a blue-water navy to safeguard its international trade.

[@郭先森dylan]

at last ，we found that don't argue and fight with each other... It is most cost-effective for us to collaborate and divide the spoils from other countries.

[@doug3512]

The "latest in naval technology" doesn't include a diesel powered ship that maxes out at 30 knots.

[@Storm-zr5qw]

Regardless of not being nuclear powered what’s the problem? British and French carriers have pretty much the same speed

[@raw9973]

when it comes to huge ships be military or civilian 30 knots is already fast, what are you expecting? this ships will evade missiles?

[@cyrusharman1291]

Now everyone knows you don't know anything about carriers.

[@016.kazinakibafjal2]

You know that China builds nuclear powered submarines? This type- 03 carrier is the testing design for future nuclear super carriers. China has the capability to make 2 carriers in a year. While the USA takes years to build just one carrier. In the next 10 years, China could have up to 5 super carriers Which will give China upper hand in the Asia Pacific region.

[@eat_ze_bugs]

I don't think you have any idea how fast 30 knots is for a supercarrier, and those are just the official figures from the Chinese.

[@atarisidequest]

This isn't exactly their first carrier dude. They know how to operate carriers. Who wrote this script?

[@williambenedictalava2634]

One can maintain and repair ships on time, while the other relies on allies.

[@WhyInnovate]

It will take another 15 -20 years of work to get this on par with a USA carrier, and about that much time to train the sailors. But you have to start somewhere and this is a good start

[@trustandbelieve9173]

They already have aircraft carrier experience since the commissioning of their first two ships in the last decade . For the Chinese it only takes about 5 years for a ship to be combat ready including its sailors and pilots. The west has to stop underestimating these people. Just take a look of what they have done in last 10 years with the high speed rail network and Ev car market.

[@joshlewis575]

​@@trustandbelieve9173just look what they've done with 2 ginormously wasteful hugely subsidized government projects 😂😂😂 both those "accomplishments' are fake gdp pumping government mandates. Both are evergrande all over again

[@pooyasafaei2538]

In 15 years entire US navy will be decommisioned 😂 given the rate their navy is rotting and they cant even replace one at that pace

[@WhyInnovate]

@@pooyasafaei2538 well your not a foreigner military person commenting! Totally not!

[@WhyInnovate]

@@trustandbelieve9173 yes I admit they are moving fast but war is hard to practice for, especially with thousands of sailors, it will take time. And in war things go south quick, the USA long term memory given in training and in the minds of the officers of the navy will be mega hard to replicate!

[@Socratic2308]

I would personally say it's not comparable between the Fujian and the R. Ford because China most likely wants the 003 to stay in the South China Sea along with the Liaoning, the Shandong, and the 004 which is most likely is also conventional engines since from what I heard it's the 003's sister ship. The nuclear carriers in the future will be used to travel further as far as Guam according to what I heard. When war breaks out and the nuclear carriers fighting on the frontlines, the 4 conventional engine carriers will most likely stay behind in the SCS to protect the coast because you can't leave yourself completely vulnerable if you send all of your armies to fight without any protection.

[@overcooked123]

Battle experience means nothing, the manufacturing ability to keep pumping out war gears, and the resource to back them back, is the key for any long term war. US Navy was rookie compared to IJN before WWII, we all know how that worked out eventually. Maybe the US should plan a pearl island-like event against China before it becomes too strong, to get the upper hand. Additionally, US actually had a decent middle class during WW II to build things, right now most of them are looters and junkies, demanding high pay/benefit without doing much work at all.

[@urbanstrencan]

China marine power is getting better and better

[@guangzhouguide]

the fact is, CV-FUJIAN is not an attack weapon but a defence shiled, it protects the 055 Cruiser from air dominance and let the 055 ships play the offence role, this is the whole difference strategy in using CV in real combat from US Navy, lets see what will happen in coming conflicts.

[@joem0088]

The fact that Chinese has all the power train, inclduing propelling, and generation engines for such a vessels is amazing. That it's builds all its own air wing and air-defense missiles on the carrier is even more of a statement.

[@Daginni1]

Tofu Aircraft Carrier.

[@martinsnow4611]

@@Daginni1 Yeah doubly true for the lameass 7th fleet liner-rammer destroyers.

[@skyserf]

No.

[@kamsunleong6648]

​@@Daginni1 Like that tofu spacecraft that got some astronauts stranded in space without a ride home. So when are they coming back ?

[@joem0088]

@@Daginni1 you mean like the Tofu 737 Max, or the 777X which nobody wants any more )))

[@WED-CREW]

比起福建航母，你可以了解一下076四川，作为军事迷，我认为是比航空母舰更具有代表性的。想象一下人类第一台海上无人机作战平台，上百种蜂群攻击与防御作战编程，Ai算力，以及海下看不见的无人潜艇😅

[@David-yx3bd]

The trouble with carriers, and why they aren't really seen outside of the US navy at any scale that makes them practical tools for projecting power is the sheer scope of the logistics, technology, and training involved is prohibitive in the extreme. The US spends less on its military as a percentage of GDP than other nations, but our GDP is so much larger than other nations it allows us to do these things anyway. Even on a budgetary scale, we spend about 10-15% of our budget (depending on the year and the actual details of how it's spent - often defense spending ends up being used for other things) - that said: We still complain daily about how much we spend on the military. The common meme is that it's why we don't have universal healthcare, forgetting that more than half of the budget already goes to those kind of programs: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and other health care programs. The point is, even with all of our advantages, and current capabilities, it's likely we won't have any carriers in the decades to come as we move further down the road to returning to an isolationist society. So how likely is it that China will go full tilt? I'd argue they'll build at least three because that's how many you need to have an actual carrier always available and thus have a credible ability to project power, but beyond that? I doubt it. The costs associated with them and the capabilities they provide only make sense if you're looking to either rule the world or play peacemaker for the world. I don't think China honestly wants to do either. Regional superpower, sure, global superpower? I don't think it's really what they want. Economically sure, militarily? I just don't see them wanting to go that route as we've already shown the world the benefits don't really outweigh the costs on a practical level. China would have to have a pretty radical change in "cultural morality" to want to play policeman, and world domination? It's not really practical since the creation of nuclear weapons.

[@Emphasis213]

Did you also factor in the ~1 trillion the dod was not able to account for? And what about all the secret funding projects that wasis not included?

[@chinathesideyoudontsee8157]

For people that love the argument "experience counts " then why isn't the Royal navy still the most dominate Navy ? And what about Battle of Tsushima (1905) when Japan crushed Russia ? and they are just a couple out of plethora of examples ! By the way when was the last time the U.S navy has had any experience fighting someone that could fight back since WW2 ? Oh I also forgot to mention where is all that experience in the Red Sea where the Houthi that don't even have a Navy have managed to make the U.S carrier fleet run for cover 🤣 This is a fact, while experience is helpful , in an every changing Technical environment it can't be relied on to deliver a positive outcome ! I would like to see how the 7th Fleet would deal with a wave of Hyper-sonic missiles

[@MichaelCuthbertson-zl6in]

One missile = NO carrier! No matter what country. They are dinosaurs matey!

[@pocketfox743]

Just to clarify, AUKUS is not an alliance, it is a strategic partnership.

[@edytha2090]

If France joins it will faukus

[@jaredray7034]

How would you clarify the difference?

[@markc6140]

Whatever, three warmongering Anglo-Saxon gang members, nothing unusual.

[@chengxin2928]

​@@jaredray7034 u just nailed it.

[@ElijahHull-z6z]

the alliance is called blood , Anglo-Saxon ,five eyes ,ANZUS,Commonwealth etc etc

[@tonywei423]

Excellent review, two things needs to point out, one is the cost to build and maintain will be fraction of the cost of US, the other is the speed to service ready will be far quicker than people think.

[@georgyj111111]

One hypersonic missile, and these ships are history. Stupid, to invest such amounts of money. The US has no experience fighting equal opponents.

[@JDRogers65]

Didn’t the US save you from Japan during WW2? Just curious.

[@nafisfuadayon6832]

So as U.S Navy's carriers.

[@altimetrosencero8553]

Beginning of 2025 and the Fujian returning from his 8th ocean trial😂

[@enissay9950]

If the last few years showed us something is that the single power hegemony over the world is bad and leads to a lot of abuse. Like a chair, the world needs many legs to balance itself, 2 is okayish but more is better.even less powerful, other powers will have positive impact on the world peace. We are still in a transitional period though during which the old hegemon is not sharing power without a fight, it is the most dangerous period so far...

[@derelicts9503]

In the comments we have pro-US people that keep forgetting that China for thousands of years has been the most advanced civilization on the planet, and that their entire policy is aiming to return them to that status. This fact should not be dismissed. "The Dragon rises in the East" as some people say. However, those same people also keep forgetting what the "The Dragon" will go against. The USA is a cosmic leviathan that rises from the black depths, reaching with its million tentacles across the world, and it still has to show its teeth.

[@Taygetea]

haha, new kaiju franchise as metaphor for war just dropped. though in that light isn't the US just still godzilla...

[@pobregringo88]

state of the art and cutting edge? This thing is a TEMU USS Gerald Ford. It has diesel engines. The only impressive modern tech are the catapults and those really dont matter nearly as much in the grand scheme.

[@joek7031]

Temu better than boeing...

[@keshawnalexis5333]

@@joek7031sound dumb😂🤦🏿‍♂️

[@joshlewis575]

How often can the catapult actually run using those far weaker diesel engines? Just more paper tiger nonsense from the tankies.

[@joek7031]

@@keshawnalexis5333 yo mama

[@xinyaoyin2238]

lol dont compare this to american overpriced junks that are getting beat by russian shovels

[@DeEmperor1]

For those who don't know. In 2022, China accumulated 4 million IPs submitted to World Trade Center. Not only that China became the first country to surpass 3 million IPs. America's IP ownership is less than 3 million till now.

[@gulanhem9495]

And yet the J-35 is a copy of F-35 and the 004 copies the Geral Ford class lmao

[@DeEmperor1]

@gulanhem9495 Which ones are the J-36 and J-50 copies of?

[@gulanhem9495]

@ I don't know, but we don't even know if it's a good plane yet. Perhaps they stole the plans for an American 6th gen fighter and are using that.

[@DeEmperor1]

@gulanhem9495 True. Even China's map is stolen from America too.

[@horridohobbies]

EMALS is an American trademark. It cannot be applied to the Chinese carrier. Moreover, the Chinese electromagnetic catapult is based on a very different design. It's powered by Direct Current, instead of Alternating Current like in EMALS. (This may also explain why EMALS has had a number of problems forcing the Gerald R. Ford back to port for adjustments and repairs.)

[@SeanGelarden]

Former carrier crew member here: There are so many things it takes to support carriers not to mention all the moving parts they're still a long way from being a warship

[@RichardsMiscCorner]

yes, but they have had active carriers for 10 years. they have also actively gone out and hired carrier crew members from other countries to help train.

[@kindface]

"So many things" go into a Boeing and we know how "good" Boeing stuffs are these days. By contrast, China's sending assets to the dark side of the moon and to Mars in impeccable fashion while NASA failed and never did. Yeah, sure, let's talk about "so many things it takes to support (whatever)". China has laid down 40,000 km of high-speed rail track across the country while you guys can't even pull off one that's less than two dozen km long from Las Vegas so, yeah, please refresh our memory when the last time was that the US successfully executed anything new that required those "many things" to come together. I count NONE. The fact you're a "former" whatever and here talking about crappy old things is an embarrassing statement about the sorry state of American tech, especially military tech.

[@SeanGelarden]

@kindface chinese bot

[@ttuliorancao]

@@SeanGelarden that's why the Chinese are pumping out ships, planes and drones like crazy. They're building what's necessary to support those carriers. If I'm not mistaken, they produce more than half of all commercial ships in the globe, the numbers are around 50x what the US does. Imagine how this capacity would affect any war...

[@SparklingSparks-ow5kf]

⁠@@SeanGelardenso? As if accusing someone “bot” would change reality. Also, even Chinese bots are now putting US bots in shame.

[@wiphosphophyllite]

Just finished my type 03 donut today.

[@曾林-k7q]

China's aerospace fighter: low-altitude flight, speed of Mach 8, payload of 60 tons, can carry nuclear warheads, high altitude, high speed, radar cannot detect, missiles cannot catch up

[@recondax]

@@曾林-k7q On the aero fighter, there are some issues. Using the SR-71 as a basis, let's see what is possible and not possible. The SR-71 goes through a lot of fuel. After taking off, it needs to be refueled. For long distance missions, it is going to need to refueled again. China has a few aerial refuelers but is not well known for aerial refueling. Now for the speed part. China is well known to have poor jet engine performance. I find the ability to jump from the Mach 1 to Mach 2 range to Mach 8 range is highly unlikely. The slow down from Mach 8 would leave a signature of some sort easily to be picked up. Now, for my last item: The weapons and weapon system. China would have to developed a new class of weapons to handle the initial speed and aerodynamics from the aircraft. The weapon deployment system has to be able to deploy the weapon in such a way to not get sucked up into the weapons bay, drop the weapon that it does not cause any air disturbance, and have the capability of updating the weapon in midflight. The SR-71 has a bay door for the camera system but the ability to drop anything of the bay was not possible (but there was some talk about doing so). So, I have a very hard time believing that China developed a Mach 8 aircraft that can drop some sort of weapon.

[@skyserf]

@@曾林-k7q No.

[@tonysu8860]

Welk, the Fujian isn't China's furst domestically built carruer. But is the first indigenously designed carrier The Shanding was the first 100% domestically built carrier based on a Russian design and tweaked

[@weihan-u2k]

liaoning is first,china spend alot human power and money to made it a real carrier

[@scottbullock3045]

A paper tiger Simon.😅😂❤

[@MGZetta]

All you have to do is google Chinese shipbuilding global market share and compare it with the US. Then you realize why pentagon keeps crying about China every other week.

[@TheBigExclusive]

Remember when this channel focused on quality videos and not quantity? Pepperidge farm remembers...

[@NnH_Kairyu]

Remember when writers got paid for good work and not per word? Pepperidge farms doesn't...

[@yummydishes2279]

Keep living in your past glory

[@TinnyTiT4N]

Awesome!

[@riflebird4842]

Remember everyone gets grumpy when someone truly praises china

[@flowblow9880]

​@@riflebird4842 - It's called HYPOCRISY. A few months ago, the host of this channel said Aircraft carriers were a waste of money in modern warfare. Now he's praising this new Aircraft carrier. This channel is a joke.

[@mickdanger]

Let's not forget that their planes are so heavy that they can't take off with a full load of weapons.

[@keithmoore5306]

and have engines that think they're grenades!!

[@johnpalmer5131]

This is incorrect… typically modern fighter/attack aircraft takeoff with full weapons but not fuel… they top off fuel thru in-air refueling.

[@omrilapidot6770]

@@keithmoore5306 🤣🤣🤣

[@aaronstevens6469]

Real world scenario where you have to launch hundreds of sorties, this tofu, temu , show will fail

[@Flightman453]

This is a myth. Please stop spending so much time on Reddit.

[@argonx666]

0:28 "for china's navy" sounded a little different than what Simon really said.😺 Please tell me I'm not the only one. LOL

[@ALWH1314]

One key difference between Fujian and Ford is Fujian uses DC electric magnetic catapult and Ford uses AC based electric magnetic catapult. With endless large supply of electricity from nuclear engine Ford can operate catapult directly from power supply and Fujian uses battery to store electricity to power the DC catapult, kind is like how an EV operates. The advantages of DC is it’s more stable but way more complicated than AC to construct and maintain. BTW, Taiwan is only 100 mikes away from mainland, there is no need for carrier to invade 5:08 when the island is reachable by land based planes and even conventional rockets. Taiwan strait is a very shallow sea in between, too shallow for big submarine or carrier to pass without submarine protection.

[@petepanteraman]

Interesting break down, also a valid but double edged point at the end

[@passthetunaporfavor]

After watching a few videos on carrier operations that have been sharpened by decades of deployment I have no doubt that the Chinese are in for a world of hurt just trying to operate a real aircraft carrier. Just watching flight operations and one realizes just how many individuals are choreographed into a dance to make safe operations possible. You don't learn this overnight but over decades of experience on what works and what does not.

[@danielch6662]

You are right. And you are also wrong. Nobody can gain experience by simply standing aside and NOT going in to get that experience. Everybody is new at some point. Today, they are noobs playing with very expensive shinny new toys. Give them 20 - 30 years, they wouldn't be noobs anymore.

[@kamsunleong6648]

In 2007, China still does not have a single high speed train line. While the Japan and Europe have them since the sixties and the eighties. Less than 20 years later they have built and now operate a 45k km hsr network running all over their vast country. Some of these lines transverse some of the most challenging geographical terrains on earth. Something that the Japanese and Europeans don't have to deal with. Learning to operate an aircraft carrier efficiently like the US Navy should be a less challenging endeavor, given sufficient time. Like their HSR or space program.

[@KinLee919]

note: fujian province is not only close to Taiwan, the taiwan island used to be part of fujian, and under the administration of fujian province. people from fujian and taiwan island share similar culture and language, many pro china taiwannese saw fujian as their ancestor land.

[@Kevin-x4p4y]

They couldn't even trap aircraft until a retired US Marine helped them out 2-years ago and who is now being extradited from Australia to US for trial xD

[@justonecornetto80]

Same here in the UK. A couple of years ago it was revealed that 30 former RAF and Royal Navy pilots were training the Chinese military via a South African contractor and worst of all, it was perfectly legal at the time.

[@riceball4u172]

6:24 it is an defense carrier since it need refueling, once it goes nuclear, then it is offenses

[@zhipengyan6332]

I like your videos, your explanations are very professional.

[@watb8689]

you do know the ford class has issues when plane launch the radar doesn't work at all, call it a disruption. it is well known among the crew members

[@wackyaces5316]

Non nuclear means welcomed in every port !

[@martinstallard2742]

0:46 fuojam type 003 4:02 groundbreaking technology 7:25 toe to toe 9:10 the role of the fujian in China's military strategy 10:53 challenges and limitations 12:39 global naval dynamics

[@vernonkuhns3561]

...for China.

[@RadicalFloat_95]

You actually dropped this king 👑

[@horridohobbies]

The J-35 is now in production. It's very much a match for the F-35.

[@joshlewis575]

No it's not, and the f22 will destroy it

[@trailblazer632]

China has an extremely limited blue water navy. The us navy out classes the chinese military in every aspect. The us navy is nearly 3 times the tonnage of china. 😂

[@andrean2247]

What is this? Pillow fight? Smacking others with tonnage?

[@recondax]

​​@@andrean2247 The Chinese do have larger count of ships but when you compare the overall tonnage, the US wins hands down. A bigger part of the weight is in the 11 carriers. Beyond that, US ships are built to take a beating and survive. Can not say the same for China.

[@SengpoSatbang]

You are right, the US navy is incomparable. It even shot, not 1 but 2, its own F 18 That is a really superb navy 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@trailblazer632]

@@SengpoSatbang it also shot down a satellite. Twice. From ships.

[@jaredray7034]

You’re forgetting that the USN has its fleet spread out over every ocean on the planet. China can muster its entire navy in its own backyard (which is where they will need it).

[@davosam1968]

Everybody tough until they meet DF-21

[@iupring]

After reading many comments, how can the Ford aircraft carrier be compared with the Fujian aircraft carrier? The Ford aircraft carrier has not yet reached the attack range of its carrier-based aircraft, and it has already been silent. The 055 is equipped with a carrier-based version of the DF-21

[@佯谬]

你说的没错。

[@Bvoid-b]

Props to them for this achievement! But I can't help but wonder if they couldn't come up with a more modern ship doctrine, as aircraft carriers of this kind are from a previous era, before drones and hypersonic missles... placing a lot of people and craft on a single ship seems like a trend that shouldn't be followed anymore.

[@nnf9431]

bUT iT's NoT nUClEaR!!!! Except the Fujian is just an in-between iteration - China is already building 3 nuclear powered carriers with the same displacement.

[@echomande4395]

Personally I consider Fujian either a proof of concept (or several) or at best a prototype. I would consider it more the general equivalent of a Forrestal or even enlarged Midway rather than something that could go toe to toe with a Nimitz or Ford. The EMALS and the (presumably) electric propulsion system are likely only some of the things being tested and in due course EM, laser and railgun weaponry might also find their way onto this ship before spreading more widely in the PLAN, assuming that the PRC survives that long. My assumption is that Fujian is conventional powered only because the PRC is currently incapable of designing, building and operating a naval reactor powerful and dependable enough for them to install in it.

[@danielch6662]

Too many new techs all at once increases the risks to such an unacceptable level, the entire project could fail. Just ask the USN about it. The inclusion of the EM cat into the 003 instead of delaying it until the 004, that decision itself was already an enormous risk. This is only their 3rd carrier. Twenty years ago, they had nothing.

[@佯谬]

​@@danielch6662你忽略了技术是指数增长的。

[@Flightman453]

This isn't a video game. CSGs aren't going to be going at each other one on one. And no, the Fujian is Kitty Hawk sized. And to think because the Fujian isn't nuclear powered because "the PRC is currently incapable of designing, building and operating a naval reactor powerful and dependable enough for them to install in it" is further proof none of you people know what you're talking about or understand the PLA or China's geopolitics. Because I'm sure, the country who leads in nuclear power, already has SSNs and has started to mass produce them, and has been building nuclear propulsion civilian shipping ships for years is "incapable of designing, building, and operating a naval reactor". China doesn't need a CVN right now. Educate yourself and get off Reddit.

[@stuffjunk5019]

It'll be a long time before china can challenge the shear amount of experience and hard lessons learned by the US navy over the last 80 years.

[@Introspection-01]

That experience isn't a secret. The USA hasn't fought a peer military in that time and has never fought a nation with space assets.

[@jaybee9269]

I haven’t seen them launch an aircraft off that thing yet.

[@曾林-k7q]

China's aerospace fighter: low-altitude flight, speed of Mach 8, payload of 60 tons, can carry nuclear warheads, high altitude, high speed, radar cannot detect, missiles cannot catch up

[@recondax]

@@曾林-k7q You missed the point. There is no real reports of any aircraft taking off or land on the Type 003. That takes time to get your crew to be proficient with carrier ops. You can try to use the Type 001 and 002 for comparison but the launch systems are totally different.

[@threebox11-o7o]

it is a floating nothing burger. reminds me of those futuristic cities they built but no one lives or works there

[@LordScat]

The comment is what i expected from this channel honesty 😅

[@boatymcboatface666]

Not CIWS! PDC'S! If you know, you know 😂

[@danielh4032]

Packed with cutting edge [US] technology

[@danielch6662]

Yes other Daniel. The US does the R&D, and then China manufactures and uses them.

[@SengpoSatbang]

You are right, the US navy is incomparable. It even shot, not 1 but 2, its own F 18 That is a really superb navy 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@AL-pv2bq]

@@SengpoSatbang You sound like a broken record, when dealing with lethal weapons accidents happen, doesn't happen to china because the weapons are not very lethal lmao

[@SengpoSatbang]

@@AL-pv2bq Absolutely. I agree 100%... So don't fret, the US Navy reigns supreme. The Chinese navy will never ever have the ability to shoot its own fighter jet. And the Chinese navy will never ever have planes like the F35, which has the strong tendency to submerge into the sea. 🤣🤣🤣

[@aceca5147]

All I see is a future promotion opportunity for a US submarine Captain

[@AL-pv2bq]

LMAO THIS IS GOLD

[@Ben734]

Not the one who ran into a mountain in the South China Sea i hope...

[@glorihol6803]

@@Ben734 LMAO THIS IS GOLD

[@nzhong169]

Given most of the heavy military assets aren't the key winning battles in Ukraine war, arguing about carrier battles are futile in the future battles. This is especially true that if there are any battles between US and China, it will be near China shore. Then all that matter are drones, missiles, anti-submarines, air defense capabilities and industrial bases on both sides.

[@kmrtnsn]

The statement; It says, “we have no idea what we’re doing or whether we want to run the radar or launch planes”.

[@tenormdness]

Imagine how many plans and blueprints they had to steal to make this.

[@Nukedk]

Yeah, and they didn't even steal any good ones.

[@cnmddsb]

沙雕，003的船体是借鉴苏联航母

[@Mr.mysterious76]

Considering China's shipping industry is bigger than Us' and Europe's combined

[@darkhorseinamerica1935]

They stole because your media say so, and you were taken in.

[@EAWanderer]

02:04 - Ooh nice! You dont see that kind of slick feature on any American carrier 😅 When its launched 04:20 - Nice

[@thomgizziz]

You mean EMALS? Which is already on US carriers and has been for a long time. The original version of it was made in the US in 1946. God you are a terrible shill, go away.

[@EAWanderer]

​​@thomgizziz I was actually talking about the 3 decorative feature on top of this Chinese ship that stands out Not the EMALS usage history

[@Brian-zl6ib]

The GR Ford is the sum of decades of experience, development, design. It's taken decades to get there and a number of previous aircraft carriers to work out the kinks. While China still has improvements to make, it's first carrier is not overly far behind the US. China will continue to develop its aircraft carrier design. There's advantage with starting from fresh . It's not "obligated" to previous technologies. There's no retooling process. While skeptics may laugh at China's first carrier, the second and third will be the ones that'll scare people and those are being built now.

[@sowelie1]

I often disagree with Simon but I always like the videos solely for his presentation skills

[@dt4092]

F-35 Battle tested LMFAO !!!

[@johnandrewmayne]

So they have 1 carrier , essentially. 10 more to go to rival the US

[@SengpoSatbang]

You are right, the US navy is incomparable. It even shot, not 1 but 2, its own F 18 That is a really superb navy 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@nbamaziokereke8228]

@@SengpoSatbangwumao army we know you

[@shinre]

@@SengpoSatbang Hey how did the Chinese first nuclear submarine work out?

[@SengpoSatbang]

@@shinre Very good.. Thanks for asking.. And "if" we want to learn to shoot our own jet fighter, we'll come and ask you. But don't hold your breath bud 🤣🤣🤣

[@SengpoSatbang]

@@nbamaziokereke8228 Wow.. the anger 🤣🤣 When the Chinese navy want to shoot their own fighter jet, they'll give you a call 🙂🤣

[@jonbaker3728]

Based on their construction methods for building, I question if that ship will still be floating and functioning in 5 years. Tofu Dregg

[@SengpoSatbang]

You are right, the US navy is incomparable. It even shot, not 1 but 2, its own F 18 That is a really superb navy 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@danielch6662]

Careful there Jon. China is actually better at building ships than the US today. Not saying that will last forever. But right now, they are ahead. Why do you think half the biggest commercial ships in the world are being built over there today? It's not China's warships that are cracking and unable to go out to sea when the wind is blowing stronger than a breeze. After 3 consecutive failures, the USN had decided _we really need to replace those old destroyers and cruisers. We'll just buy an off-the-shelf design from Europe to fast track everything._ And then they managed to screw up even THAT !!! By tinkering with a known working design. 🤣 Go look for Sal's channel you YT. It's a complete 💩show. It'll be a hoot, if it were not so serious. Please do not fall for the CCP propaganda. The commies are smart and devious. All those "American patriots" proudly proclaiming the US is far ahead, China is not capable of doing anything. They aren't patriots. Or Americans. If they are such patriots, why are they telling us to be complacent and let China catch up?

[@jonbaker3728]

@@danielch6662 I question everything that comes out of China. Including their population numbers. I think they just make shit up. The chinese are terrible at creating things, but pretty good at copying things and really exceptional at producing shit versions of things.

[@cA7up]

Lmfao c'mon Simon you buying that bull💩 😮😅

[@ejmproductions8198]

Nice clean lines on that ship

[@user-hk9ny7qk9u]

Fuj -Simon is what it should be called.

[@Chuck-up7vn]

There's a reason it called 003 for the three major problems problem 1 the Catapult is not dependable problem 2 lack of range and problem number 3 and it's a biggie the material they building it out of is sub quality that has already been reported to have stress cracks under its own weight

[@danielch6662]

And the next one is 004, and you already know it is going to have 4 problems? That's an interesting take. 🤣

[@DaveG7920]

Thank you for your insight, it's rare to have a Chinese ship builder comment on KZbin. You have been involved with it's construction right.

[@willythemailboy2]

Don't make fun of it, they managed to make an aircraft carrier that is no more than 30% tofu by weight.

[@cyrusharman1291]

The biggest problem with this ship is that you weren't invited to be the chief engineer, unfortunately your intellect isn't up to scratch

[@bobsmith3983]

@@danielch6662 It just shows his lack of intelligence.

[@FreeThePorgs]

Its not close to the ford class, not even close. More to a US Forrestal class, the processor to the nimitz class from the 1960’s. That doesn’t mean its not a threat however. A 30 year old weapon can still kill a 3 year old ship. When compared to the ford it would get its ass kicked, now the ford is still being developed itself and not fully combat ready.

[@jaredray7034]

Particularly when it’s backed up by dozens of destroyers, hundreds of land based aircraft, and hundreds more land based ASMs.

[@jetli740]

@@jaredray7034 you forgot 5000km range hypersonic aircraft killer missile

[@larry059]

Question how do you know it’s packed with cutting edge systems have you been on it or in it??

[@Adole123]

How do you know it don't? Have you been on it?

[@larry059]

@@Adole123 it doesn't trust me china only knows how to copy not innovate have you noticed how it looks like the American's ship LOL also my buddy in China says the phones in china suck always crashing if china can't get that right you want me to believe they can with a ship LMAO

[@michelebelfiore921]

@@Adole123 well, the burden of the proof fell on those who want to claim something is true, not the other way around

[@Adole123]

@@michelebelfiore921 Ok than explain how he can prove it. Your move!

[@michelebelfiore921]

@@Adole123 dude, can'y you read or is it understanding the problem? I do not have to prove anything, it's people who wants to say that something is true that must prove their claims. If you want to say that this carrier has cutting-edge technologies you need to have evidence for your statement; I do not have to do the same cause I'm not making any statement. Can you prove that flying donkeys don't exist? No, you can't, cause it's impossible to prove that something don't exist. If you make a positive statement you have the burden of the proof, anything else would be logically impossible.

[@molecatcher3383]

The battleship became obsolete technology due to their vulnerability to aircraft attacks. The supercarrier has also become obsolete technology due to unstoppable hypersonic anti-ship missiles.

[@paulh5801]

Tofu dreg boat from temu 😂

[@Unbreakable528]

Christmas gift for the Pentagon guys 😂😂😂

[@JoeC1688]

A nuclear Carrier also NEEDS SUPPLY SHIPS to supply food, water, necessities for it's crew and oil/gas/fuel, YES - OIL/GAS/FUEL for the fighter jets and other ship equipment to function! Not to mention the protecting warships around the Carrier! China thought of all these drawbacks and opted to spend the excessive cost of Nuclear power, to energy power savings/storing/usage, etc.