The commissioning of the Shandong has placed China in a small club of nations with multiple aircraft carriers. The nation is also building a third.

China has one other aircraft carrier, a former incomplete Soviet vessel bought from Ukraine, known as the Liaoning.

The Shandong is a first-generation Chinese aircraft carrier. It is the country’s second aircraft carrier after the completion of Liaoning, and the first built domestically.

The aircraft carrier’s design is largely based on China’s first carrier Liaoning, which was itself built from the partially complete hull of the Soviet Kuznetsov class aircraft carrier Varyag.

001A.jpg
Type 002 aircraft carrier after launching at Dalian in 2017.

It retains the ski jump takeoff, which limits its air wing to helicopters and Shenyang J-15 jets and the ship is powered by conventional oil-fired boilers driving eight steam turbines derived from the Soviet designed examples installed on Liaoning.

Image result for chinese aircraft carrier shandong
Image via SCMP.

It measures about 315 metres long with a displacement of about 55,000 tonnes.

Local media report that the vessel features modifications and upgrades compared to Liaoning. It has increased storage for ammunition and fuel, with a larger aircraft capacity of 44 aircraft, eight more than Liaoning. It also has a broader flight deck, while the island superstructure is also shorter to give more space for aircraft movements.

Tom Dunlop
Tom Dunlop
Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

64 COMMENTS

  1. It would be interesting to know if they reversed engineered this, or if they managed to procure the plans from Russia/Ukraine

    • I would like to think they are only using the Russian design as a very high level base line with the final detail completed by themselves. The Island looks like its entirely their own design, I would like to think they are using modern engines and not something re-engineered from a 50 year old design.

      • I’m amazed they haven’t used a more up to date power plant. I’m not sure I believe they stuck to such an old heavy costly complex design.

        The Chinese are building hybrid ferries for P&O so they clearly have the electric drive tech to some degree.

        Steam for the catapult could just be a dedicated steam generator/accumulator?

        Although it goes to show building a carrier is the sum of a lot of knowledge!

  3. Just in time for DomCum to seize control of the Defence Review – alongside everything else. Hates carriers as they’re incapable of defending themselves. Bless.

    • Carriers are built, he can hate them all he likes. Would only save on running costs, and then it is goodbye F35B, the CHF, and most RN aviation.

      So not going to happen.

      As far as inefficiencies in defence procurement, he has a point.

      Anyway, where has it been definitely announced that he is in charge of SDSR2020? I think the armed forces may have something to say about that.

      Or is it just the usual leaks and speculation from the press?

      • Morning, Daniele
        Understand what you say, but would you put it passed him. Seems to be the one-man-cabinet from his own perspective, which is ‘efficient’ from that angle, maybe. The tories still need to bear in mind that they’re not seen as the cure to all ills; they drew the long straw with the majority by having Corbyn as the alternative – as in ‘not’.
        Again we have the entire political wing of defence in the hands of the land forces brigade. This is not a go at them, per se, as we need a balance among all branches. But with a nod to your entirely justified comment on procurement, there is a regrettable but arguably justifiable reason to state they have demonstrated the least cognitive approach on that matter. Not all their fault, of course; but even with the common sense return to Boxer, they appear to be allocating a rolls-royce standard battlefield ATV where many units will be adapted to what perhaps disrespectfully refer to as admin rolls (admin rolls-royces, maybe?).
        Leak was on Forces Net.

        • Morning Gavin.

          You are right of course, especially concerning Corbyn.

          As for land Centric, I hope not. When was the last CDS from the RN? Boyce? Don’t remember. Current DS is army too. Is it me or has he been almost anonymous so far? Certainly compared to Williamson.

          Maritime, Air, Intelligence strategy for me.

          • Rumours are of a big cabinet reshuffle after 31-Jan Brexit deadline so who knows who the DS will be in less then 2 months time.

          • I agree. I suspect he would be working in a more receptive regime now as well. At least the next few months won’t be boring!

          • I rather think that we are looking at at a Canada plus trade deal.

            With that in mind, I think a considerable uplift in defence spending is inevitable, the US will probably insist on this as part of the back channel communications about the future Anglo US
            relationship, already going on.

            The Royal Navy should be the focus of increased spending (as it’s been hollowed out, as the main victim of the cuts) and hopefully the 2020 SDSR will bare this out.

            We certainly need someone in the new government to ensure that defence money gives maximum value to the tax payer and provides the equipment needed by the Armed forces.

            No more procurement like the eye watering expensive Wildcat, that while an excellent Navy asset, is almost bloody useless to the Army!

            Procurement needs a bloody good shake up, for the money we spend on defence, it buys us comparatively little actual equipment.

            Any new military requirement or replacement is first viewed through the prism of ‘UK Industry’.

            This can lead to very late and overpriced equipment, with the Armed forces pulling their hair out with frustration and often not getting the numbers required because of spiraling cost.

            There’s an odd juxtaposition going on, the main job of the MOD appears to be supporting BAE Systems shareholders…

            I personally look forward to a clean sweep, with a stiff yard broom…

          • We can but hope Daniele, I’m cautiously optimistic, things are different this time round however.

            The UK is about to take a bold step and we need the equipment and people to backup the new reality.

            2020 Defence and security review …. Don’t let us down Boris!

          • Think we’ll all be very disappointed. Lot’s of competing calls for money and Boris will have to make good many of his promises to his new working class voters. Service Chiefs have already been warned by SecDef since the election to cut their cloth according… Big hole in equipment budget. So no new money I don’t think

        • Why is this is a surprise? The Army has dominated the UK’s defence planning since 1945. If you were to stop the average man in the street and ask him the key service in defending the UK you can bet they won’t say the RN

          • That’s wrong Steve, technically, the RAF dominate defence spending with circa 50% of the MOD spent on the RAF. The budget needs to be more fairly distributed.

          • It’s not about spending. It is about the direction of security policy. You are confusing that with expenditure. Armies are personnel intesntsive, navies and air forces are capital intensive. The RAF is a provider to the other two services. I will give you an example, BAOR wasn’t there for RAFG, RAFG was there for BAOR.

            Technically…………..good grief.

      • Its going to be a part of the general flame thrower through the Civil Service that Cummings is going to be a big influence in his views on the Civil Service are well reported and Boris has admitted there will be a thorough review of all things Civil Service so the two seem to be inevitably linked at the hip. Two worries jousting by the documentary on Boris and the Foreign Office only the Civil Service bods seem to have kept him remotely in the job and kept his screw ups to a minimum though no doubt that won’t stop him blaming him in his mini Trumpish fashion.
        Secondly referencing his henchman Cummings he is renown for his (re)organisational skills but will that be restricted to reorganisation in the MoD judging by his pronouncements re the carriers and drones that seems unlikely. He has no real knowledge of Military matters but just hates that there are so many errors in all aspects of them, don’t we all. Trouble is Military is always going to be a high error Department its no different in the US or France or Germany especially when politicians get over active in making and changing decisions, its the nature of the beast. All it needs is him to think he has the skills to alleviate this (for who has a higher opinion of his apparent endless skills) and you can guarantee that the end result will be worse (probably far worse) than when it started unless a massive chunk of luck comes along in more than equal measure to his interfering that he has little influence over.

        Being a fan of a football club with just that style of management, overblown self confidence and inability to accept limitations or fault and simply manoeuvre between regular self inflicted disasters as result, I really do not feel confident about the end results of his interference with many of the same faults of character. So lets hope he keeps to re organisation of the suits. However he won’t the temptation will be far too great for a man with an ego the size of a planet.

        • I’m with you spy. I’m really worried for our beloved services. And having worked with US, Canadian, French, German, Italian and Spanish MoDs, I can say that although things could always be improved, our MoD is not all that bad. Pretty good actually. Only ones that impressed me more were the Aussies

      • D: yes we must acknowledge the procurement problems and solve them, but if he has the ear of the PM in the 2020 review I fear it will go further than just finance and procurement. A dangerous person is he.

      • Yes, seems to be a two-pronged attack being made at the moment against the concept of carriers by DomCum and Max Hastings. Hastings had a double-page piece in The Times day after the election. Sir Max should know better as an alleged military historian and analyst that as well the concept of the carrier as a wartime asset there is also the concept of the carrier as a peacetime weapon/asset. If you’re looking in DomCum, happy to explain further!

    • I hope not but I fear that real PM Cummings is going to wreck havoc with our armed forces, especially our beloved navy…

    • GG: If I may add that “DomCum” is a dangerous man and acts like an unelected Minister without portfolio, and should be kept well away from defense matters. We are all aware of the historic funding problems, but I don’t see how he has any experience on defense matters. Im worried that the may influence the PM into changing yet another minister of defense. Thank you.

    • When most capabilities are already below minimum, further cuts are treasonous blows to our ability to defend ourselves, our interests & contribute to our allies. I hope HMG has finally realised how precarious the remaining forces are.

    • Can’t believe the propulsion system.
      As for the fast jets, according to Wiki they have only built 20 and written off two, so similar number to our F35B.
      With no cats, how effective is this plane? Can it actually take off with a credible fuel and weapons load?

      • Fuel load delivers a similar radius to an F35B, approx 400 miles. However not sure of weapons load, rumour is only 50% payload on the J15

    • Underestimating your enemy never works out well. Look at how we wrote off the Japanese & their equipment before they kicked our butts in WW2.

      China is a great nation & for millenia had been leading technology. They learn quickly. They steal a lot & copy.
      But what chills me is why are they building the ability to project power? Will they seek to proliferate dictatorial authoratarian regimes &/or try to seize more countries for living space & resources? Taiwan could find its former allies picked off by PRC diplomatic & financial blackmail.

      The PLAN is clearly building & expanding with a view to defeat the USN & so be able to do what it likes in East Asia at least. Fortunately the USN, Japan & S. Korea are well aware & building up their forces too, but we desperately need to stop cutting our tiny fleet & wake up to how feeble we are.

      • I think China is still haunted by its “Century of Humiliation”, when it’s eastern seaboard was exploited by technologically superior European powers (particularly the British) – and later, Imperial Japan. It’s building the military capability to challenge Western influence in the South China Sea, and limit the operations of the US Navy.
        It need not be a “chilling” development, simply another example of
        the geo-political manoeuvrings that all major powers engage in.
        The West, however, should certainly maintain the principle of freedom of navigation.

      • However good or bad, the USN cannot ignore these assets. The more of these they build, the more US assets will be tied up keeping track of them and sinking them if necessary. In peacetime they are intimidating to China’s neighbours and in wartime they’d be disruptive to American plans in the region, at the very least, slowing them down significantly

    • It doesn’t, just launch and recovery routes I think. The type 002 will be something else, much bigger and definitely catapult launch and arrestor wire recovery. Aka similar to US carriers.
      That will be the game changer.
      How many type 002 the PLAN can afford or wants to operate is up for debate.
      Also warships IFR and Jane’s seem to think the Chinese are close to perfecting an EMALS system so catapult launch will not be steam powered. EMALS potentially enables larger, heavier aircraft to be launched. (With full payload) But acceleration and g force shock on air frame and air crew are likely to be substantial. Watch this space.
      The US navy is having a torrid time with perfecting its EMALS on the 13 billion dollar Ford Class.

    • A question from a non-ex Matelot… why does a carrier deploy fishing rods out of the sides, when at sea? I could make a guess that they are HF aerials. Would that be correct?

    • I was wondering the same thing. It looks like two catapults, one sharing a blast deflector with the long ski-jump strip, the other having its own blast deflector. That looks similar to Russia’s Lamantin hybrid model. There’s nothing to match on the photos of the finished article, nor on the plans published on the UnofficialChina blog.

    • Looked it up. The diagram in the article, which is labelled Type 001A, appears to actually be a representation of the Ulyanovsk, the Soviet project 1143.7 which was cancelled when 40% complete. That vessel combined STOBAR with limited catapult launch for AEW aircraft (hence the waist catapults).

      My question would then be, have the Russian’s sold the plans for Ulyanovsk to the Chinese?

      • Thanks MSR – I came here to ask that question too! That diagram is also definitely out of scale looking at the a/c on board – and the ASM silos forward, which I don’t doubt for a minute the Chinese have removed for more hangar space!

        All of the published/leaked designs for 002 show a three or four cat CTOL design in roughly Kitty Hawk weight class. Makes much more sense than the weirdly conservative Soviet design philosophy behind Ulyanovsk.

  7. Interesting that the picture has 3 lifts and waist cats, is that not the larger proposed former ussr carrier? would of been a good mix though, in my opinion a good stepping stone to a full blown CATOBAR carrier

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here