China's first aircraft carrier 'starts sea trials'

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

The 300m (990ft) carrier has been one of China's worst-kept secrets, analysts say

The Chinese navy's first aircraft carrier has begun its sea trials, the state-run Xinhua news agency has said.
It quoted military sources as saying that the refitted former Soviet warship left its shipyard in the north-east and the trial "would not take a long time".
The move is likely to raise fresh concerns over China's rapid military build-up.
Beijing is currently involved in several maritime territorial disputes, particularly in the South China Sea.
The aircraft carrier left its shipyard at Dalian Port in northeast Liaoning Province on Wednesday morning, Xinhua reported.
"Military sources said that the first sea trial was in line with the schedule of the carrier refitting project," it said.
"After returning from the sea trial, the aircraft carrier will continue refit and test work."
Xinhua did not provide any further details.
The BBC's Michael Bristow in Beijing says China is years away from being able to deploy this carrier as a potent military tool. Even so, the country's neighbours will be worried.
Many are involved in disputes with China over maritime borders - and they will be looking anxiously at Beijing's naval build-up, our correspondent says.
Run-ins at sea The carrier in question is a former Soviet warship, which was formerly called the Varyag.
It is a relatively old design and it was not built by China. It was constructed in the 1980s for the navy of the USSR, but was never completed. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the rusting hull of the Varyag sat in dockyards in Ukraine.
Continue reading the main story

• China extending military reach

As other Soviet warships were cut up for scrap, a Chinese company with links to China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) bought the Varyag claiming it wanted to turn it into a floating casino in Macau. It took several years to finally tow it all the way to China, where it was then taken to Dalian.
In June, the PLA confirmed that China's first aircraft carrier was under construction.
However, Beijing has recently sought to downplay the capabilities of the carrier, saying it would be used for training and research.
China's military is generally believed to be 20 years behind America's in its development. But in its rapid expansion, China is focusing on weapons designed to blunt US military power, analysts say.
The PLA has invested heavily in submarines. It is believed to be close to deploying the world's first "carrier-killer" ballistic missile, designed to sink aircraft carriers while they are manoeuvring at sea up to 1,500km (930 miles) offshore, and it is building its own stealth fighter aircraft along with advanced carrier-based aircraft built from Russian designs.
All of these can target US bases, US ships and US carriers in Asia. They will make it much more dangerous for US carrier fleets to operate close to China's coast, pushing them out further offshore.
Taiwan, Korea and Japan that look to the US for their security may start to question how much America can really protect them in future, analysts say.
A Japanese defence study last week expressed concern about what it called China's failure to explain its military ambitions.
In the past year, China has had maritime run-ins with Japan, Vietnam and also the Philippines over disputed territories in the area.

SOURCE

Note: 10 August 2011 Last updated at 04:03 GMT

[TLAM Strike]

I can confirm the Shi Lang's slip in Dalian is empty...

[Torplexed]

It's weird to think that a ship that was laid down when Reagan was just beginning his second term, Madonna and Wham! were on top of the music charts and Back to the Future was the highest grossing movie is only now under going sea trials.

[Bubblehead1980]

We should sink it if possible, China having a carrier is just bad news bears all around.

[em2nought]

Every time an american spends a Chinese sailor gets his "wings".

[Anthony W.]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

We should sink it if possible, China having a carrier is just bad news bears all around.

I think we could do it discreetly and blame it on North Korea. Hell, our attack subs are faster and probably quiet enough to avoid detection, even after the carrier group's run in with one of their nuclear subs (surfacing in the middle of the group - we didn't even know it was there).

No doubt something must be done about China. Any time a country designs a missile specifically to take out a carrier, I think we could call it a hostile act.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Anthony W.

Any time a country designs a missile specifically to take out a carrier, I think we could call it a hostile act.

These weren't for hunting crab poachers you know...


Just building a weapon is not Casus Belli, its the intent behind it that provides that.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Anthony W.

No doubt something must be done about China. Any time a country designs a missile specifically to take out a carrier, I think we could call it a hostile act.

That would be rather impractical. Quite a few of the ASMs designed by the Soviet Union and Russia were made primarily for destroying aircraft carriers (Often with nuclear warheads too). Besides, the missile will stay the same even if you say it is designed for killing aircraft carriers or fish, it is only its effectiveness at either task that actually says anything about it...

[Diopos]

Originally Posted by Anthony W.

...
No doubt something must be done about China. Any time a country designs a missile specifically to take out a carrier, I think we could call it a hostile act.

Very interesting logic. I have the right to possess an excelent "superweapon" (as a CVN) but you have no right to attempt to defend against it or counterbalance it. Extending this kind of "preemptive strike" logic in USA's overall strategic posture (military, diplomatic, trade/financial and technological) would probably result in "us against all" situations. Do the US really want that?

.

[Jimbuna]

Do the Chinese have an effective means of protecting her?

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Do the Chinese have an effective means of protecting her?

Yeah a few years ago they built this great wall...

[Growler]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Do the Chinese have an effective means of protecting her?

hmm...

Wal*Mart, Target, 5 Below, Ace Hardware, Home Depot, Lowes...

Yeah, I'd say they do.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by Growler

hmm...

Wal*Mart, Target, 5 Below, Ace Hardware, Home Depot, Lowes...

Yeah, I'd say they do.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Special update:

The carrier has suffered a catastrophic malfunction and is now taking on gratuitous amounts of water. The cause is uncertain, however it might have something to do with a stray torpedo fired from the USS Spearfish in a completely unrelated exercise to see if The old boat could potentially sink a chinese carrier.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Diopos

Very interesting logic. I have the right to possess an excelent "superweapon" (as a CVN) but you have no right to attempt to defend against it or counterbalance it. Extending this kind of "preemptive strike" logic in USA's overall strategic posture (military, diplomatic, trade/financial and technological) would probably result in "us against all" situations. Do the US really want that?

.

China claims a sovereign nation(Taiwan) as it's own and will no doubt try to take it back if/when they feel they can get away with.China is emboldened by their prosperity(sadly fueled by the US) and has no legitimate reason to build up it's military as it is doing, other than those pulling the strings in that nation plan on trying assert power in the region down the road, fueling another cold war that could get hot times.The sad irony of it, US lives will prob be lost to equipment paid for with money paid to China by the US.Damn Nixon for even visiting, damn Clinton for his involvement, should have kept these people in the dark ages for as long as possible, that's how you prevent a war, well one that will cost much anyway.