It's an airport at sea. It allows you to have air superiority at sea and in places near the coast. They where crucial in securing the Pacific during WWII. As for how many we have you can google that.

I assume your question is serious, so I will answer it seriously. The aircraft carrier has been the center point of every naval group since the battleship was proven obsolete in WWII. In that role, it is used as a platform for every kind of battle, primarily in support roles, as in Libya. To be sure, you can't will a fight without troops, but air superiority is key to maintaining ground superiority.

As for how many carriers China would have to build to worry the U.S., the answer is two fold: one, because this is the first move made by China to be able to project air-power as an offensive instead of a defensive prospect, and quite a few, because we have a long head-start on them.

With our current relationship in China, we don't really have to worry directly, but we do have treaties and responsibilities to protect other places in the area, like Taiwan, which China has wanted back ever since the leadership of the previous nationalist government took control of it in the communist revolution of the '40's and '50's.

It's troubling, but much less troubling then smaller, less disciplined states, getting or already having the ability to lob nuclear warheads at their neighbors.

I hope that helps.

A carrier is used for the projection of power in the open seas, but on occasion (Somalia) they pull up just offshore to remind the bad guys that daddy's watching. A carrier never travels alone. A typical US setup for a carrier includes up to 12 other supporting ships (destroyers, frigates, supply ships, and nuclear powered submarines), consequently, a carrier implies that there are many more forces available if needed. Combined, these 13 ships make up a "battle fleet" with the Battle Fleet Commander commanding from the carrier. The carrier's ability to launch aircraft quickly and patrol millions of cubic miles of airspace underlies the importance of our stealth technologies staying ahead of their radar systems.

The US had 7 fleets (each with one carrier) and recently announced its intent to reduce that number to five fleets with the suggestion that we could do so without compromising the security of open sea lanes.

The number of Chinese aircraft carriers needed to pose a threat is immaterial as long as we have silent subs that can sneak up on them.

The thing is with carriers in a possible WW3, with spy satellites and all, you could basically just drop nukes on em. They'd be in the middle of the ocean, and the fallout wouldn't hit civilians.

Carriers have defenses for anti-ship missiles and aircraft attacks. But a nuke there's pretty much no defense, and a carrier on the ocean is like a fish in a barrel if the satellites find em.

To add a caveat to thecavalier, in the US an aircraft carrier is part of a group which includes the planes and helicopters, destroyers ships, missile cruisers, and often a nuclear sub as part of the group but they can and do operate independently of the group as well.

In a big "shooting war" the carrier is quite vulnerable to a worthy adversary like say Russia or China. Nothing to fear from Iran even if its parked in the gulf. The Nimitz class carriers have an entire squadron of ships to protect it including an AEGIS strike cruiser, various destroyers and frigates plus a nuclear submarine. There are air assets overhead too spotting inbound threats from land or sea. Both the carrier and escorts have "point defence weapons" consisting of missiles or Vulcan Phalanx rotating barrel cannons which automatically fix on the closest threat and issue forth a hail of depleted uranium projectiles which eliminate sea skipping missiles. But in a big war the carriers defences could/would be overwhelmed by multiple threats. The Clancy book "The Sum of all Fears" showed what could happen to a carrier when subjected to multiple air to sea missile attack.

China would need to be quite a few more to really be any kind of threat, and something a bit more modern and powerful IMHO. The US has 11 carrier strike groups. That is, a battle group of frigates, destroyers, cruisers and support ships based around an aircraft carrier. Each US carrier is 100K tons and carries around 90 aircraft of various types, primarily based on the F-18 E/F Hornet fighter/strike aircraft. They can deploy anywhere in the world, and carry out air superiority, strike and land attack missions. The Chinese carrier is not a new design, and as noted, was purchased from the former Soviet Union. Even then, it took them 11 years to get it operational. Its about 2/3 the size of a US aircraft carrier, and carries about 1/2 of the aircraft of lesser capability. Its not intended to be a ship that projects power world wide, but in a limited area of operation. The US has been doing this a long time and Navy aviators are some of the best pilots in the world. Its not likely the Chinese would even dare challenge even a single US battle group in any real world situation, and as noted, there are 11 US carrier groups, so if the crap did hit the fan, they would be facing more than one. Carriers are a force projection weapon, and theres nothing in the foreseeable future that will challenge the US dominance in that area. This thing is more PR and "look, we have one now" than it is any really challenge to US naval dominance. Thats not saying they can build something big and powerful, but they are far behind and these things aren't built over night.

@Blackbird:

The Sum of All Fears really only dealt with CIWS, which is a last-defense anti-missile system. Carrier crews actually have anti-missile missiles that can take them out from a much farther and safer distance.

CIWS (sea-whiz) is basically a gattling cannon that sprays a ton of bullets at an incoming missile in hopes of destroying it. It's range is only about 4km, and the response time they have to work with is tiny.

@BOB MARLEY

Buff up on your history; Aircraft Carriers have been used since World War 1, but really came into thier own in World War 2!; They have been the crown jewels of the U.S. Navy ever since!

Aircraft Carriers can be used for ANY battles/war within range of the aircraft embarked! The U.S. Navy has the most carriers (at 12) then any other country....there are roughly a dozen countries with Aircraft Carriers although few match the capabilities of the U.S. carriers!

As to how many would China need to be a threat?;....1 is too many! They could easily use this carrier and its embarked airwing (once they fully trained up) in concert with thier submarines (both diesel and nuclear powered) and other naval assets to threaten or take over Tawain (for just 1 example)..and I most highly doubt that "resident"(thats NOT a typo!) obama would fully commit to stopping them...aside from maybe asking them nicely;...like he recently did to iran about getting our top secret drone plane back...HOW PATHETIC!

Hope the info. was helpful....I am retired 20yr. US Navy Veteran who did a tour of duty on an Aircraft Carrier back in late 80's...

What kind of battles are aircraft carriers used in?

The kind where we need to attack by air but there's no airbase nearby.

Another marvel obviously built with stolen US technology. You can't believe how many times the Chinese have tried to hack our servers here and we aren't even a military contractor...

China's carrier was not built by them. They bought it from Russia, where it used to be the Varyag

RJ,

Read the article, it was bought from Ukraine after the collapse of the Soviet Union. That thing is pure soviet tech.

The US Has 11 Active Carriers right now - 10 Nimitz Class super carriers, and one Enterprise Class Super Carrier. The next generation Ford Class Super Carriers are currently being built - The keel has been laid on the first, and steel has been cut on the second. The third is still in the planning stages. This does not count the 9 Wasp Class ships that can launch and recover Marine Harrier jets, and also serve as an amphibious assault platform. By the way, Added together, the 20 Air craft carriers the US has is nealry twice the total of the rest of the world combined (at just 13). However, unlike the super carriers, the Wasp Class do not form the core of a carrier battle group.

The aircraft carrier does not fight battles. It really is a floating airfield, with some defensive weapons, but no real firepower. The firepower comes from the aircraft it can launch and recover. The other ships in the Aircraft Carrier Battle group can contribute directly to the battle through the use of missles, or are used to defend the carrier and the group, or to provide resupply. Attack Submarines are the only ones that generally fight individual engagements at sea. Missle submarines generally patrol alone as well, bu only to launch missles when required.

Deus Vault,

The US has sent battle groups including Vincennes class Aegis missile cruisers many times into the Formosa strait as a show of what would happen if China decided to take Taiwan. As to "resident" (not sure what that means) Obama, maybe you remember the P3 forced down by China in Shrub. Jr.'s first term, he asked for it back, nicely. Thank-you for your service, but this BS that a Democratic president wouldn't honor American defense treaties is not backed by fact. Maybe we can invade Grenada again to get our tough guy bonafides. By the way the first US carrier was the USS langley, which was converted from a cruiser, well after WW1.

@Deus,

I would disagree to a degree with your enthusiasm for aircraft carriers.

1) Aircraft carriers are reaching the very end of their usefulness against any except essentially poorly armed or small opponents. The problem is that in thei day of satellite reconnaissance they are sitting ducks for missiles. Ship-to-ship and air-to-ship missiles are not so sophisticated that a salvo of even routine missiles such as the Advanced Exocet would be almost impossible to defend against.

2) The Chinese have tested and are deploying mobile MRBM's that are essentially anti-carrier missiles, complete with decoys and end-stage tracking. They are mostly deployed along the coast toward Taiwan as a deterrent to U.S. carriers which have NO defense against such missiles.

3) The Chinese have numerous advanced diesel subs that can lie on the bottom, complete undetectable, for indefinite periods, making their own oxygen from seawater. These are lethal carrier killers. A North Korean version presumably used this method to sink a state-or-the-art Souith Korean ASW corvette. There is no good defense for a carrier fleet against these "buried" subs.

4) The Yellow Sea is shallow. A combination of 12 advanced diesel subs and two carrier fleets could all but close the Yellow Sea to U.S. naval craft and turn it into a "Chinese lake." A third carrier fleet and 6 subs could do the same for the Taiwan Straits and together with anti-Carrier missiles deny defense of Taiwan to the U.S. Navy.

5) Ask any submariner which are the "jewels" of the Navy. You will get a lot of rude remarks about carriers.

6) It is probably the ultimate goal of China, not to project naval power around the world as we have tried to do, but to just close the Yellow Sea to the U.S. Navy and then do the same for the Taiwan Straits. This could then be used to blackmail Taiwan to return to Chinese control to avoid destruction. The Chinese already have the subs and part of the auxilliary vessels. All they really need is the three carriers (not counting this one) and the command and control to be able to handle a fleet. The latter is the hardest.

Carrier battle groups are dinosaurs in a nuke fight. However, if China wants MAD they get MAD. Other than that a carrier battle group can rain enough conventional pain to be a deterrent to anyone short of Armageddon. If our naval forces are vulnerable to the Chinese, just think how vulnerable they are to us. They should be afraid, very afraid.

12 count 'em 12 carrier battle groups. Carriers are critical but the silent Fleet Ballistic Missile submarines are what keeps the peace, nobody knows where they are and they can strike at a moments notice. The carriers are for the conventional stuff.

@DeusVult, how is that different from our EP-3 ELINT plane that landed in China in April 2001 and Dubya did nothing about it? I guess that little fact slipped your mind.

How many do you need?

Britain's Royal Navy was forced out of the carrier business when it became obvious that to have ONE, you really needed three - one at sea but due to return, another ready to go to sea, and a third under training and or refit. So the fact that the Chinese have completed building an old Russian one and are planning to or are actually building a second on their own still leaves them with less than ONE.

Then, of course, you need carrier aircraft . . . quite a different kettle of fish.

I was an Air Force intelligence weenie for ten years --- FBM's rule!

The two least appreciated elements of where the military rubber hits the road are boots on the ground and FBM's. It takes boots on the ground to win any military situation and FBM's are there to screw up anyone who does something bad enough to deserve it. FBM's are why Iran or North Korea will never nuke anyone.

And our boots are the best trained in the world (albeit a little tired right now.)

Old Technology...Can't beat the technology you don't know about

We have 747's that have a laser inside (that takes up the entire aircraft)

This is what they tell us about

I'm just surprised it didn't sink upon leaving the ship yard...

We should be worried but not too much, for many of the reasons already stated. Carriers are extremely expensive to maintain. There are only 20 total(listed) in the world and the U.S. has 11 of them. This would make 21. They are essentially floating bases. Most carriers have crews in the thousands and they also serve as troop transports for Marines. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe a fully loaded carrier can hold 9,000 sailors and marines and dozens of aircraft. They are both extremely useful and extremely vulnerable. That is why they rarely operate alone and usually have numerous support ships to protect them. Air support is crucial to any ground mission and some ground missions (think special ops) are launched from carriers making them a necessity. They provide both air superiority (fighters) and bombing missions. Carriers will never fully outlive their usefulness for those reasons. As stated previously they are vulnerable to missile attacks, enemy fighter/bomber attacks and the classified rail gun. The latter would be hard to target I believe but would be unstoppable if a viable targeting solution is found.

Just to add some speculation to this. Are military has plenty of things that they do not tell us about as many of us know. One former Lockhead executive openly said and I'm paraphrasing, "We have stuff in Nevada you can't even imagine." We do have stealth ships, I have seen photos and can imagine some other things. Just think for a second about what we might have that we supposedly can't imagine. China is catching up to us but they are really not that close that there is any real threat.

A Carrier Battle Group exudes raw power. Having served on CV41, CV61, 62, 63 and 64, there is nothing like it in the world.

It is not just the carrier, but the complement of aircraft. F/A18, (wish they hadn't retired the Tomcat), EA-6B Prowler, S-3 Viking that makes the carrier formidable. I read a lot of conjecture, facts and down right silly comments about the carrier.

It is true that Carriers do have a minimum of defensive weapons, onboard. It is the task of the picket ships to defend the carrier, along with her aircraft. We do have a radar system deployed on our picket ships, that has no match.

Our EA-6B Prowlers, (though the AF would argue that the EF-111, is better), is a formidable weapon, and it is non-offensive.

We don't know what the Chinese intentions are, but the post that said about cutting Taiwan off, may be the most accurate.

It does take a lot to keep a blue water Navy afloat. One of the most critical aspects of keeping a carrier at sea, the Russians, never mastered. Underway replenshment. That in itself is an art.

@sillybilly

Carriers do not carry Marines, except for the security detachment. They are called AIRCRAFT Carriers for a reason. The LHD/LHA class carriers, (which by the way are Helicopter carriers, carry Marines).

A full complement on a Carrier is about 5,000 men and women. The number of aircraft, about 90, which can be augmented as needed.

In any battle, air superiority is the name of the game. The Japanese knew this during WWII, and we refined it over the years.

We have lost a lot of good weapons over the years. The Phoenix missile, the Tomcat,(which its primary role was to defend the carrier), just to name two.

And to think the progressives want to cut the military to the bone AGAIN. God help us.

Tea1959,

There are no Marines on the carriers any more. They got rid of them by the time I hit the fleet in late 2000. The ship has a security detachment that is made up mostly of MA's and several ratings from the weapons department as its core. The rest of the security force was from the ship's company and the air-wing via TAD from their parent department. I got to enjoy this for a seven month stint.

I retired in 1996, so I stand corrected on the MarDet.

Don't just think of a carrier as a sea-going air base being supported by a battle fleet. It is more than an offensive weapon.

A carrier can act as a refueling point for autonomous actions at sea for smaller, more maneuverable ships. They have been used as floating hospitals. They can be anything you want it to be. The America was huge and there are bigger out there. You could mark out 3 football fields on the flight deck. 3000+ personell, 5 mess halls open 24 hours, FULL service hospital, theaters, a bowling alley (Iwas told.) It's a city and can be anything any city can be. I heard that McDonalds managed to get permission to open an outlet once in the early 70's. It's so big that the only time you can tell you're at sea is when you're sitting in the head.

BTW, China is building another one, from scratch.

That thing is half the size and has half the number of aircraft a US carrier has. It is a diesel which limits it's range and time at sea without refueling. A US carrier is nuclear we have 12 with two more under construction ( at a budget busting $6.3 billion or more apiece) Also one more is in the planning stage. So they would need 32 to catch up with us. We have 6 old carriers in mothballs better than that garbage scow.

Thanks Ruken....thata's precisely what I said...."missiles and Vulcan Phalanx".

Dragonmaster,

I left the fleet in late 2004 after spending 4.5 years on the USS Abraham Lincoln. There are a lot of misconceptions about how carriers operate. The flight decks are almost 1100' long, that's a tad over 3.5 football fields. There are 2 main ships companies mess decks. They were open 4am - 7am for breakfast, 11am - 1:30pm for lunch, 5pm to 7pm for dinner, and the fwd messdeck was open 11pm - 1am for midrats (midnight rations). There was a separate mess for E-7 and above, and there was 3 wardrooms for officers.

There are no theaters on the ship, nor a bowling alley. My division did maintain a space that was called the bowling alley because it was long and narrow. It was more or less a storeroom for personal junk accumulated on a deployment.

There isn't a full service hospital per say, but there is a large medical ward with several varying types of doctors that is open 24/7 and they can respond to varying maladies that pop up on a carrier. As for telling whether a carrier can move with the waves, it can, and very easily. The ship won't move as much as a frigate, but it will still bob no problem. Heavy seas were a favorite time of mine to hit the rack!

And that's the way we keep the peace in this world.

Let´s never forget that al Qaeda took out a U.S. destroyer with a rubber raft.

a threat is immaterial as long as we have silent subs that can sneak up on them.

Like the time in a joint naval exercise. An aging Australian submarine got in under a US carrier, photographed its propellers and recorded its sound signature then exited undetected. The US navy were so embarrassed the Australian ambassador had to apologise the US President.

I got to enjoy this for a seven month stint.

Hah. Same, except I was on the T.R. - they even sent me to Blackwater (when it was still Blackwater) for Advanced SF training.

Tea1959, I haven't heard anyone suggest that military spending should be "cut to the bone", but the vast majority of Americans (most of whom you wouldn't necessarily call "progressive") feel that the military budget, at 20-30% of the Federal Budget, is a tad out of control. Our military expenditures are greater than all other nations combined. We also have more active carrier fleets (11) than all other nations added together (9). Our carriers are also larger, more powerful, and far more modern than most.

US
Manpower fit for military service:
males age 16-49: 60,620,143
females age 16-49: 59,401,941 (2010 est.)

Manpower reaching militarily significant age annually:
male: 2,161,727
female: 2,055,685 (2010 est.)

Military expenditures:
4.06% of GDP (2005 est.) <--(?Guess they don't want us to know?)
country comparison to the world: 24

GDP (purchasing power parity):
$14.66 trillion (2010 est.)

GDP (official exchange rate):
$14.66 trillion (2010 est.)

China
Manpower fit for military service:
males age 16-49: 318,265,016
females age 16-49: 300,323,611 (2010 est.)

Manpower reaching militarily significant age annually:
male: 10,406,544
female: 9,131,990 (2010 est.)

Military expenditures:
4.3% of GDP (2006)
country comparison to the world: 22

GDP (purchasing power parity):
$10.09 trillion (2010 est.)
country comparison to the world: 3

GDP (official exchange rate):
$5.878 trillion

All info above is from the CIA's website. Using the "purchasing power parity" for better accuracy per the CIA's website, China spends 433 billion dollars on their military. The US spends 595 billion dollars. Remember, when these numbers were gathered (2010), we were spending billions on Afghanistan and Iraq. So a large part of the expenditures were for war support. China is not fighting in any war, or militarily occupying any countries. All of their money goes into research, development, manufacturing and training. So the bottom line is that China, whose GDP has been growing by about a trillion dollars per year for the last 3 years will soon pass the US in military expenditures and it is all going into research, development, manufacturing and training. This means that China will be able to turn out military hardware, once developed and ready for manufacturing, at a significantly faster rate than any country in the world. It is not impossible for the Chinese to produce a significant Navy and Air Force in the next decade or two.

China has developed modern warfare technologies that are a direct threat to the US's technologies. Remember, they shot down a satellite. With this ability, they could eliminate our GPS or any communications satellite as needed.

The only reason that China is developing significant amounts of military hardware is that it will need to flex its muscles for protection of its economic power and that requires protection of friends and threatening enemies so the resources can keep flowing. Just look at us. We don't have a huge military for no good reason. We consume more than 60% of what the world produces and China will need significantly more than the US to keep its economy rolling.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, there will be a point where China will have the hardware and the confidence to use it effectively and the battle for the worlds resources will officially begin. You can run around thinking this will never happen, but what are you basing it on? Facts or fiction? All wars are started over economics, all of them. Everything else is secondary.

All we can do here in the US is buy American. We need to increase manufacturing here in the US. We need to set up new manufacturing facilities with the latest and greatest and cleanest (green) technology. Putting Americans to work manufacturing safe and clean products is the only way to make our economy strong. Otherwise, we are just buying our way into the poor house while China's economy sees a trillion dollars per year growth. With their buying power, in a few years, most Americans will not even be able to afford gas. The world's gas prices will start going up consistently while China buys it for less. This is already happening, but it will get much worse over the decades to come.

If you don't think it can get any worse than it is right now, then picture this...Chinese currency becomes the new world standard. China consumes more than 60% of what the world produces (This is enough to support just the men OR women fit for military service age 16-49, which is just over 300 million each). How much do you need to support over a billion people? With the US and European Unions economies in a bad way, middle classes are shrinking at a fast rate and we are quickly heading into a situation that will make us the new second world countries. And maybe, the new "international language" will be changed to Chinese. After all, there are more Chinese speakers than any other language. All that is needed is the economic power to become the language of choice. Lets not forget that China will eventually take back Taiwan and it probably really doesn't like us setting up camp in South Korea and upsetting its friend North Korea.

I respect China and think they are a great people. But there is no denying the need for resources. And the chess pieces have to be in place to take control of the board.

Ya, I'd say we have a lot to worry about after seeing this Chinese aircraft carrier.

Aircraft carriers are built for one reason...to reach out an touch somebody! That is always your enemies. Protecting your interests fits under this vail. There is no other need for an aircraft carrier. Land and ship based missiles can protect you from air attacks. But, you need an aircraft carrier to go on the offensive.

It is a statement. Are you listening or are you putting your fingers in your ears and making weird noises?

In 2008 two Russian Tu-95 Bear bombers flew over the US aircraft carrier. Four F-18 fighters jets were launched to intercept the Russian bombers, but not before they had flown across the deck of the USS Nimitz at an altitude of 2,000 feet. The Russians proved their point, their nuclear capable bombers can bomb our ships UNDETECTED. Imagine what a Tu-160 White Swan can do.

That's only a little embarrassing for us. One would think, however, if we were at or nearing a state of war with Russia, we'd at least have AWACS in the air, and would not allow said aircraft approach so closely.

Prospect Survival, Your raw facts (about USA and China) might be correct, but conclusions are half-baked.

US has the under-pinning in several areas related to Military vis-a-vis China, in terms of R&D in military (drones, stealth aircraft, stealth ships, etc.). Our educational institutions and military labs produce the best caliber research on both military and civilian front and Chinese are no match.

I respect China and think they are a great people.

On the flip side, we are no match for Chinese thievery. Chinese are the best thieves in the world. I have experienced it first hand working with them in Universities as well as in work environment. Chinese have no morals. They stole the entire Cisco proprietory technology in the 1990s and then formed Huwaie Technologies with the stolen IP. The list is endless.

To quote from the Bloomberg article,

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-13/china-based-hacking-of-760-companies-reflects-undeclared-global-cyber-war.html

“a declassified estimate of the value of the blueprints, chemical formulas and other material stolen from U.S. corporate computers in the last year reached almost $500 billion per year, said Rogers, a former agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

That's how they got the blueprints of many of our military hardware, spy satellites, etc. Contrary what some folks have stated in this column, Obama and his administration are the ones who have been vocal in opposing Chinese trade and currency manipulation and host of other issues w/ China. Just because we are reducing our defense expenditure in FY 2012 and beyond, it doesn't mean we are letting our guard down. In fact, after his recent APAC Summit in Bali, President Obama dispatched 2,500 US Marines to be stationed permanently in Darwin, Australia.

Next they will want aircraft to put on the damn thing! better head to wall mart and buy some Chinese junk so they can build some fighter jets. Common people every $ helps their cause.

The Chinese are using SU-27K Naval Flankers and SU-37 Super Flankers designed by the "former" USSR and they already had them. To put it this way mob_barley 1 American ACC can destroy the US 40X over it is a platform to impose Military presence across the World.

kind'a look's like a big floating...ping pong table...

Devin- I hope we continue to stay ahead. Remember that we are fighting off their spies, while we continue to develop next generation equipment, so some of those secrets do walk.

BTW- One of China's biggest military developments recently is their long range missiles that can take out a carrier. Yep 1 carrier group against 4-5 deployed against them would be a hard battle to win, but if they can use their other systems against our groups we aren't quite as dominant. Just a thought.

I think the EU should step up and be the worlds #1 supper power and police the world while we consolidate and recuperate.

Our military strength is in our ability to innovate new technology... while the rest of the world is trying to play catch up by copying us, we are innovating bigger and better things.

Research and training my %$#.

Every time we buy Chinese products this is the kind of thing we’re paying for. The reality of this story is simple; as I type this, I’m sure this thing is being shadowed by at least two American Los Angeles class attack submarines. The Chinese know this and they also know that It wouldn’t last 5 minutes in a shooting war.

You must also remember that China builds most of our stuff so it easy for them to just copy the plans and build them for themselves. No they did not build the whole ship, but they probably build most of the inner parts so they would have had the schematics of how it was to fit in the overall design.

Well you're forgetting that their economy will overtake america's by 2020..they'll have more money to pump into a millitary machine if they want, so it's a definate possibility, though i do hope america maintains it's supiriority.

Sorry Grumpy, but China does NOT build most of the inner parts of US naval vessels...regardless of what you may believe. It most certainly doesn't build ANY advanced components. I don't know where you get your information, but I'd suggest finding a new source because you don't have a clue about what you're talking about.

US naval vessels and the vast majority of their component parts are still built here in the USA.

Carrier based battle groups are an outdated methodology when considering conflict between nations equipped for warfare in the 21st century. Similarly to outdated notions of large standing infantry in trenches, massive armor divisions, or battle ships with ever increasing gunnery range, carrier based battle groups only work when utilized against opponents with zero space based offensive armament platforms. Carrier groups are sitting ducks for newer stealth technology submarines, as well as, extremely vulnerable to cruise missile technology. In the Falklands conflict, Argentina sunk British ships with ancient wire guided air launched missile technology that was developed before Vietnam.

What Carrier based battle groups allow a nation to do, is bully smaller nations into submission, like Taiwan, or any other nation that is in the South China sea. China has been focused on space based weapons technology, as well as, submarines and modern strategic missile weapons systems in preparation for a conflict with the US.

Well seeing how it is their first carrier and they still have to learn and figure out all its capabilities and limits, yes it likely will be used for research to improve the following models. But just because they say it will be used for research does not mean it can't be used for defensive or offensive purposes as well.

Used for research & training.??? Research & training to do what.?? Defense.??

I don't really think they need to hide this one...

Does it have lead paint?

Chopsticks with Pokeman stickers holding them together

well we all payed for it in buying there JUNK

Does it really matter the quality when they can crank this sh*t out by the droves. Russia showed in WWII that quantity can over come quality in war.

Midway through war there's going to be a gigantic recall, just wait.

uh Grumpy, without the US and a little help from mother nature being invovled in the war Russia is part of Europe these days and under facist rule. Quantity did not overcome quality it just slowed it down. If you need an example look at the results of the tank battles during desert storm.

Uh... they've had Spy Satellites that can pick up rank insignia off of peoples shoulder's for years now. That's actually a pretty distant view, compared to what we have out there right now.

The story says that its a COMMERCIAL satellite. Not spy, not gov't.

spy... commercial... they're the same. satellites with cameras spy, that's what they do. the owner of a particular satellite doesn't make it different.

and in fact, the story implies that that's exactly what this one will do: spy on the carrier to learn more about it.

then again, this IS msnbc. who knows if they've got their facts straight?

The whole article is a ruse , it's a government sat spying on the world. That's what america does it's in a cold war mental state. That's why these other governments build these things just like the nukes most countries around the world fear america with a first strike or intervention in their countries.

If you believe this is the first picture of this carrier your an idiot, the U.S has had 24/7 watch on this since its inception. and they have a file on every chinese sailor assigned to the carrier. do people not know we americans are the biggest spy's in the world. The argument that we need to stop countries from gaining nuclear weapons than why don't we get rid of ours this idea I can and you can't is absurd then you want to put people like newt in the white house. We went to war over oil not wmd's we destroyed a country maybe it was a terrible government, but where does it say the U.S. makes the decision to correct it. We have these troubles today, because we can't keep our noses out of these countries, which by the way have existed thousands of years before us. Our embassies are no longer what they profess to be their spy central. you have the state dept, the cia, homeland security the military spooks and contracted agents outside of U.S affiliation. plus all the hardware spy planes, satelites, listening devices the list goes on and on. Our country has become the most decietful country in the world and most corrupt and the common citizen has not got a clue. Did you know that some countries state that there country is in the poor state that it is in has been perpetuated by america and their intervention in the inner working's of their government. if this was a chinese sat looking down at new york city american's would be outraged, what you don't know it is already happening...

Don, that cold war mental state is what protects your freedom to be a moron and play video games in your parents' basement.

ahah, funny good one. right too.

Ha! it looks like the spaying mentality become to be a part of everyday life in US and it won't be long when you will have the spy under your bed and you will be paying for it in your taxes.

@ JCBwell: Indeed they did, what you're forgetting is that we've known about such technology for years, which means it's been in military circulation for much...much longer than that. And JerkinCoolclothes is correct, the military has been utilizing commercial satellites in addition to their own for quite some time now.

Not trying to be a dick or anything, sorry if I came off that way originally. But yeah, they've much, much finer resolution optics nowadays than really we could likely imagine.

your an idiot these weapons are their for first strike not to protect anybody, let's scale down the military and the spy agencies lets try egual footing not the guy with the big stick. It's guy's like you who think nukes are a deterrent.

Don,

That's at least the second time you've used the expression, "your an idiot."

Don't know if you appreciate the irony like the rest of us.

Besides, his grammar is atrocious.

Adn, good point Lost

So was the ship - at least initially - according to the article.

But yeah, china can't do anything on their own. They need to mooch and steal from other countries/peoples to get what they have. They can't even make cheap children's toys without deadly chemicals.

The sooner china vanishes off the face of the planet the better.

Most of that carrier was built by the Soviets prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The ship was then acquired by Ukraine and auctioned to the Chinese.

The Chinese then finished / renovated / did who-knows-what to it.

True it is soviet era. But the updates and "renovations" i say undoubtedly came from the US. In the past few years with all those espionage stories about chinese hacking and stealing information, im pretty sure theres some US technology in that ship whether acquired from the espionage or a defense contractor trying to make a pretty quick buck.

I really hope chinas ridiculously overstated and inflated economy tanks. They will come to us asking for help buying their cheap crap. Theres two classes there, rich and poor. I blame the existence of this on the people not taking action and refusing to better themselves individually and as a country. Thank god the US isnt short on people who wont put up with that kind of crap.

There are two classes here. Rich and poor.

Building other people equipment for them self, isn't their loss, its their saving of time and money that would be needed to develop it them selves.

We pay through the nose for they one, then they borrow steal it for a big saving, meaning they are smarter than a 5th grader, we aren't.

@Ruken,

The ship when bought by the Chinese was "complete but not seaworthy." It apparently lacked only elevators, any electronice including communications and radar and engineroom-to-con controls. The Chinese provided standard maratime fittings and sailed it to China and then did a bilges up refit. They basically took it back down to the hull and rebuilt it. That way they knew every nut and bolt on the ship.

The electronics are probably near the quality of ours. Chinese comm and radar have been rapidly improving for years. I would think that the primary issue is aircraft and aircrews. Landing on an aircraft carrier is not a piece of cake and is no fun. I did it once, a landing only, as a passenger, and was seriously humbled. Designing aircraft that can stand what is basically a crash landing is something that will take a long time for them to learn.

Couple that with the damage control issues (we are the best), the amount of training time afforded pilots (Chinese pilots get far less air time than ours), and command and countrol (Aegis is currently tops) and it will be a long time before carriers mean anything to the Chinese except lost aircraft and fishing airmen out of the water.

The Japanese never learned because they regarded aircrews as worthless and training as a waste of time. The Russians never really got the hang of what they could do with theirs, had lots of problems with propulsion systems and steering such a big craft, and lots a huge number of pilots and aircraft from their two WASP-type carriers. It will take the Chinese a long time and they may end up doing no better than the Russians and just giving it up.

Yeah, I think there will be some issues when they actually start trying to land airplanes on that thing. Good luck with that, China!

Its about time someone wrote something sensible given the paranoia and jingoism evidenced by a great majority of the posts.

We would react about the same as if the soviets did it back in the 70s-80s. It's more the issue that we're used to telling countries "Do as we say, not as we do". Unfortunately that's becoming tougher and tougher to enforce.

If the US was threatening to invade Cuba if they dont do something specific, im sure thered be some countries coming to their aid. Were in their neighborhood for Taiwan not because we have nowhere else to go. Chinas threatens an invasion if they vote for independence. Youre comparing apples to nuts. Theyre both fruits but not anywhere near the same.

You seem to be unable to realize China is trying to impose communism while we try to impose democracy. Pretty similar setup during the Korean War with North Korea as Chinas proxy....Round 2??

The South China Sea is bordered by numerous countries including China, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Taiwan. China has been flexing its muscle there for some time now, claiming jurisdiction far outside the internationaly-recognized 200 miles. The Spratley Islands, which are much closer to Vietnam and the Philippines than China, are a prime target of the Chinese because of potential oil and gas reserves.

Taiwan is a similar issue. If the Chinese can control the sea lanes around Taiwan, they can effectively annex the island without firing a shot. This is their goal, even though they have thousands of land-based missiles trained on Taiwan. They would much rather own the island than obliterate it, but the very threat of anihilation is still a useful tool to the Chinese.

It was actually made in the Soviet Union (most of it) China just bought it after the Soviet collapse.

Everything I own was made in China, or some other third world asian nation.

Don''t make them mad. They'll cut off our supply of christmas tree lights.

The PRC has good deployment of DF 21 missiles to knock off any carrier task forces that is hostile.

Where are the stores that sell American TVs?

sam-298381,

Oh, Sam... how we wish! Can you name a TV built in America? I can't....

Please, how is this the fault of the GOP?

And they didn't build it. They bought it from the Soviets.

Sorry Kevin...hate to hurt your feeling but Bill Clinton is the one who sold our asses to China in the 90's....do your homework.

not really...it's just as you stated a civilian company photographed it.....The US military could photogrpah a pimple on a Chinese sailors ass if they wanted.

It's probably using [mostly] Soviet technology. Most of that carrier was built by the Soviets.

The Soviets... who probably stole it from us. But seriously, how many different ways are there to design the flight deck of an aircraft carrier?

Boycott products made in China. Next time you're in a store look at the made in Tag, if it says made in China, put it back and find a different country. Everytime we purchase something made in China, it goes to their military.

China is not an ally to the US. Everday China hacks into the US' DoD stealing military intel, tech, and contractor IP. Yet, the US continues to buy their crap and send our jobs over to them....we can thank Bill Clinton in the mide 90s for this one. He set-up free trade with China, and sold us out to them.....not we're bearing this fruit of CLinton's labor. Enjoy.

It does not have a catapult. The bow is a ramp. Not at all like ours. But of course there are basic design concepts that are the same. All cars are basically the same because they have the same function. All tablets kind of look like the iPad because they have the same functions.

The first picture kinda reminded me of the beginning of the 1984 NES game Raid On Bungeling Bay. I was almost expecting to see an over-sized chopper on it. Don't know if anyone knows that game.

China is not interested in starting a war . look through history , just to name a few, Europeans and american occupy other peoples land in the name of 'freedom" ?? really ? colonization of asian countries by europeans ?? China was a powerful country until the invention of guns. japan and Germany was interested in taking over the world.. dont let the media scare people learn history then u can have a sense of the future..

Thanks, Nick-2023700

China has no interest in war.