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.

70
Leave a Reply

avatar
10 Comment threads
60 Thread replies
29 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
29 Comment authors
faroukPeterMWDouglas NewellDomSceptical Richard Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
farouk
Guest
farouk

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

BB85
Guest
BB85

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.

Adrian
Guest
Adrian

I wonder what impact the damaged carrier Australia sold them had.

A_Builder
Guest
A_Builder

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!

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Do the Chinese have CIWS? The plans mention SAM only.

BB85
Guest
BB85

I’ve seen something that looks like a rip off of a Phalanx on PLA ships before, I think they use Russian CIW on some ships as well, but no idea why it is on these ships.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Hmmm, thanks. I was interested as to what level they arm their carriers, as so many here say ours are under armed. Yet other ex RN types on this forum say not at all, and that there is no need.

farouk
Guest
farouk

Danielle,
In answer to your question, yes. The two ships are fitted with 3X Type 730 CIWS:
“The Type 730 is a Chinese seven-barrelled 30 mm Gatling gun CIWS. It has a PLA Navy designation H/PJ12. It is mounted in an enclosed automatic turret and directed by radar, and electro-optical tracking systems. The maximum rate of fire is 5800 rd/m, and the effective range is up to 3 km”
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/year-2013-news/march-2013-navy-world-naval-forces-maritime-industry-technology-news/951-chinese-navy-liaoning-aircraft-carriers-hpj-14-type-1130-new-generation-ciws-.html

These are backed up by 3 Flying Leopard 3000 Naval (FL-3000N) missile systems.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Thank you Farouk.

farouk
Guest
farouk

comment image

Mr Bell
Guest
Mr Bell

Yep reversed engineered, copied, the Dutch goalkeeper system. Nothing is safe from the Chinese in terms of intellectual property.

james
Guest
james

Mr. Bell, a slight correction to your comment if I may: “Nothing is safe from the Chinese.”

Mr Bell
Guest
Mr Bell

They copied the Dutch goalkeeper system. That is their most common CIWS mounted on PLAN warships

Gavin Gordon
Guest
Gavin Gordon

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.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

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?

Gavin Gordon
Guest
Gavin Gordon

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… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

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.

Julian
Guest
Julian

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.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

True that Julian. Get Gavin back!

Julian
Guest
Julian

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!

Gavin Gordon
Guest
Gavin Gordon

Thanks, Daniele, I’d appreciate the vote of confidence. Oh……..Williamson-?

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

Get Penny back!

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

never heard a word from her. did ? we?

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

Disappeared of the map

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

i wrote to my ;local m.p and asked if gavin has finished pulling the knives out of his back yet? i also asked him if he would ask boris if he would reconsider gavin for having the defence job again

John Clark
Guest
John Clark

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… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

My thoughts exactly.

John Clark
Guest
John Clark

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!

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

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

james
Guest
james

good point GG

Harry Nelson
Guest
Harry Nelson

My concern wrt the “review” is that 3 of the top jobs in MOD are now ex Army Officers ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Steve Taylor
Guest
Steve Taylor

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

Mr Bell
Guest
Mr Bell

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.

Steve Taylor
Guest
Steve Taylor

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.

Gavin Gordon
Guest
Gavin Gordon

Well, I’m not so sure. Sounds like a good question for ‘Pointless’, though.

spyintheskyuk
Guest
spyintheskyuk

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… Read more »

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

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

james
Guest
james

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.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

I agree James.

He can sort out procurement and finance all he likes, but no further.

PeterMW
Guest
PeterMW

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!

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

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

james
Guest
james

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.

Frank62
Guest
Frank62

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.

Cam
Guest
Cam

A cheap Ukrainian copy then! Just like other Chinese junk.

The Big Man
Guest
The Big Man

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?

Mr Bell
Guest
Mr Bell

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

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

it will spend more days refuelling at sea, than operating.my first ship, blake ran on fuel oil, liquidised tar, awful stuff almost impossible to keep a smokescreen at bay. smelt nasty too and took ages to boil out of my ‘(overalls)oi couldn’t manicure for 3 years!

Steve Taylor
Guest
Steve Taylor

Chinese junk!! 🙂

Frank62
Guest
Frank62

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… Read more »

Alan Reid
Guest
Alan Reid

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.

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

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

Helions
Guest
Helions

Like the USN, the PLAN may also be rethinking its carrier force plans.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/technical-problems-slowing-economy-cut-chinas-carrier-ambitions/

Cheers

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

PLAN is planning for SIX carrier groups, well they DO have escorts ships to operate them whereas the royal navy won’t operate two why build two, if one one of them is always going to be unavailable?

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

So at least one is always available Andy, when the first is in refit.

Andy
Guest
Andy

They were planning for six, but now they think they are too vulnerable.

MSR
Guest
MSR

Why does the diagram show waist catapults with AEW aircraft?

Mr Bell
Guest
Mr Bell

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… Read more »

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

fuel oil?!!! back to the 1960’s

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

as bad as our astutes.

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

My question as well

crabfat
Guest
crabfat

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?

Sceptical Richard
Guest
Sceptical Richard

Yep

crabfat
Guest
crabfat

Thanks, Richard.

Jon
Guest
Jon

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.

MSR
Guest
MSR

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?

Dom
Guest
Dom

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.

nigel
Guest
nigel

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

Citizen
Guest
Citizen

This article plagiarizes Wikipedia. Disappointing to see on this site.

Douglas Newell
Guest
Douglas Newell

at least the chinese give their ships some defensive arms ….

farouk
Guest
farouk

testingcomment image