U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-08-2011, 11:51 PM
 
Location: Maryland not Murlin
8,188 posts, read 21,771,324 times
Reputation: 6116

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Oh really? In your navy what does a conventional carrier use for fuel? Sink the oilers and the carrier is dead in the water.....
The U.S. isn't the only country with carriers, but to my knowledge, the only country with nuclear-powered carriers. That means that all of the other carriers are powered by conventional means. And, by conventional, I mean non-nuclear power.

However, that is not the point. A fully fueled aircraft carrier can still travel to any spot it needs or wants. It just needs to get close enough to be within its compliment of aircraft's range[s]. Besides, Admirals of the World's navies are not like American drivers. They are not going to cruise around in the middle of the ocean until the No Fuel light comes on and then hope for a gas station to be around the next corner. Sure, they will have limited amount of time in the operational zone, but they can still get off multiple strikes before they leave-which is my point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Tell that to Saddam

As I said in a previous post when you rely on stolen technology you will always be a step behind.
Tell him what?

Technology is only as good as those who are studying it. It doesn't matter where it comes from as long as it is understood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Lotsa words but makes no sense..... weapons systems can do serious damage.... no really? I thought they did comical damage.
Yes, it does make sense. The Chechnyans were able to repel the Soviet Army-who dropped an average of 30,000 shells a day onto the capital city Grozny-with basic RPGs and other small weapons. Heck, the Afghani's did the same. Oh, and they are doing the same to us in case you want to go off on a The Russians are weak tirade. Iraq? Yeah, really using our technology to kick butt, there, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Are you telling us something new? America has dominated the waves since the late 40's..... As the PLA has stated, they expect parity with America by 2050....
I hope I am not saying anything new here. I hope that readers know about the history of the World. The late 40s equals the end of WWII. Prior to that, most, if not all, first-world nations had impressive naval fleets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
And by 2050 space will be where the weapons are located.
Yeah, more than likely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2011, 12:08 AM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,875,248 times
Reputation: 7625
Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Luv View Post
The U.S. isn't the only country with carriers, but to my knowledge, the only country with nuclear-powered carriers. That means that all of the other carriers are powered by conventional means. And, by conventional, I mean non-nuclear power.
You must really think people are idiots... What other propulsion system is there for a carrier? Sail? Paddle wheel? Oars? Coal? Wood fired?

The Russians weren't weak in Chechnya... they were militarily inept in their warfare efforts:

Foreign Military Studies Office Publications - Why the Russian Military Failed in Chechnya

First Chechnya War

Again, you think people are idiots....
Quote:
The late 40s equals the end of WWII. Prior to that, most, if not all, first-world nations had impressive naval fleets
Impressive by whose standard? Most American war vessels were old, the Italians had a joke of a fleet, ditto for the Russians. The German High Seas Fleet for the most part was scuttled at Scapa Flow in 1919.

Anyway, what does Pre WW2 have to do with anything?

Last edited by plwhit; 01-09-2011 at 12:21 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 12:18 AM
 
Location: Maryland not Murlin
8,188 posts, read 21,771,324 times
Reputation: 6116
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
You must really think people are idiots... What other propulsion system is there for a carrier? Sail? Paddle wheel? Oars? Coal? Wood fired?
Are you testing my patience or are you just that thick headed? What-ever the case, I'm done with you. I've stated my point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 12:24 AM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,875,248 times
Reputation: 7625
Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Luv View Post
Are you testing my patience or are you just that thick headed? What-ever the case, I'm done with you. I've stated my point.
TY for the compliment..... At least I tried to stay with the OP... My first reply still stands...

Quote:
Sorry, don't buy what the article says...
A huge carrier fleet in 9 years? I guess they could have a huge carrier fleet if they continue buying and refurbishing other countries worn out flattops...
I'm sorry if I came across as trying the patience of an elitist know-it-all...

What was your point? You drivel on so much it's hard to remember.... oh yeah, that carriers can project massive amounts of force anywhere in the world. ~duh~ That's why we have 10 battle groups. (backed up by our HK subs)

~sniffle~ bye

Last edited by plwhit; 01-09-2011 at 12:33 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 08:04 AM
 
1,837 posts, read 1,587,306 times
Reputation: 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
They will destroy us economically long before they are able to militarily.
Exactly. But this is our own fault, for many reasons but mainly one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 07:55 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,875,248 times
Reputation: 7625
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-Ducky View Post
Exactly. But this is our own fault, for many reasons but mainly one.
Good response to an OP on Chinese carrier fleets
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 12:05 PM
 
14,777 posts, read 34,570,689 times
Reputation: 14280
Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Luv View Post
Technology is only as good as those who are studying it. It doesn't matter where it comes from as long as it is understood.
That's a statement that we could pick apart. Let's take for example the current most common air dominance/multi-role fighters. The worlds best in this department are the "4th Gen" American F15 and Russian SU27. Both of these were designed in the 70's. The replacement for the F15 which is the F22/35 began work in 1981 and the F22 just came online in 2005. In the meantime the Chinese agreed to buy 200 SU27's from the Russians. The Russians then capped this order at 105 units after they found out the Chinese were building knock off copies dubbed "J11's". So, from the mid-90's until now, the Chinese have been trying to build their own inhouse version of the SU27 and have reverse engineered much of the plane.

What they have NOT been able to do is reverse engineer the avionics, radars, targeting and flight control systems which the Russians refuse to sell them. The Chinese J11 is a decent air-to-air fighter, but completely lacks any of the precision targeting equipment that makes the F15 and SU27 such good all around aircraft. Essentially the J11 can do nothing more than drop unguided ordinance. It has been said that the old F4 Phantom would be a match for the J11 in all but flat out speed and maneuverability.

This is the shortcoming of the Chinese program. They can copy all they want, but they are still not capable of building the pieces that make the weapons systems what they are. From their "stealth" fighter to their carrier program, they are nothing more than cheap copies that lack any of the real capability. These are the things that the mainstream non-military media doesn't pick up on. They see that they are building a carrier, without realizing where it comes from. They talk about their advanced fighters without realizing they lack any of the systems that make fighters advanced.

It will be 20-40 years before the Chinese reach the level we are at today, but where will we be by then?

For comparison:

U.S. Defense budget for 2010 (not counting special appropriations) = $678 billion.

China's Defense budget = an estimated $78 billion.

So, we spend roughly 8.5 times the amount of money on defense that China does. In fact our R&D budget is equal to the entire Chinese budget and our weapons procurement budget is double their entire budget.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 01:00 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,875,248 times
Reputation: 7625
Finally one of the few who has actually read up about this subject

Thanx NJ.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 10:22 PM
 
Location: Sarasota, Florida
15,400 posts, read 19,062,112 times
Reputation: 11048
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 Foot 3 View Post
I was just reading about how China is building an aircraft carrier fleet to rival the USA. I'd like to hear from our military/weapons experts and former carrier vets here like PITTSTONTOSARASOTA and Ashville Native etc. about what they think.

A new power on the high seas... China to build its first aircraft carrier as Britain scraps hers | Mail Online
Thanx for the vote of confidence. I agree with other posters.....just hype and the article is "clueless" as it takes at least 5 years to build just one aircraft carrier.

So even IF China had a Nimitz Class ship design it would take decades to build an operational fleet....as we retire our oldest carrier and start the Gerald R. Ford Series of Super Carriers with advanced electronics, propulsion, electromagnetic aircraft launchers etc....this first in the series should be finished in 2015.

So I think the Chinese are just trying to begin to project a Regional Naval presence in Southeast Asia and not a Blue Water Navy as does the United States.

GrogNews: Planned Chinese Aircraft Carrier Fleet Revealed

The U.S. Navy's Newest Class Of Aircraft Carriers: The Gerald R. Ford Series.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g5I_lIsK9U


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuztX...eature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELeY0...eature=related

The middle movie is a great propaganda clip and the music rocks..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 11:05 AM
 
13,140 posts, read 36,009,837 times
Reputation: 12077
Hey PITTS

thanks man as it's good to see you back as you are one of my fave posters here
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top