- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: China's new bathtub toy
Posted on 5/13/18 at 5:08 pm to Roaad
Posted on 5/13/18 at 5:08 pm to Roaad
This type carrier can only launch fighters and small planes. The kinds with the ramp type deck have no takeoff assist and therefore could not launch or recover fuel tankers, cargo planes or some of the high altitude bombers and surveillance planes.
2
Posted on 5/13/18 at 5:10 pm to Purple Spoon
Agreed, to them it’s a training platform though.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 5:22 pm to tigerpawl
quote:
45 days before refueling. U.S. Flatops: indefinitely.
Well, they don’t need to project their power around the world like we do. They are a major regional power.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 5:28 pm to Purple Spoon
quote:
The kinds with the ramp type deck have no takeoff assist and therefore could not launch or recover fuel tankers, cargo planes or some of the high altitude bombers and surveillance planes.
That's what they have those islands for
Posted on 5/13/18 at 8:15 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:We have 9 or ten that size, and 9 or 10 twice that size.
50,000-ton carrier.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 8:31 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:How bout Target Practice...
Officials still have not named the 50,000-ton carrier.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:31 pm to LSU alum wannabe
no catapult...or insufficient one.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:34 pm to Homesick Tiger
Why do ours not have the jump on the end? What are drawbacks to that design vs flat like ours?
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:38 pm to Homesick Tiger
Chinese naval aviation probably not much better than Russian. Certainly not equal to US, Britain, or even Japan, which has 2 small carriers capable of using F35B's. And if they continue to expand their fleet of carriers, Japan will have no choice but to build some of their own large carriers, as America cannot match their production potential in that theater alone.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:42 pm to Homesick Tiger
Two things:
1. The carrier is entirely unimpressive
2. You may be thinking "holy shite look at the pollution of that city," but rest assured that it's just a normal day in a Chinese city.
1. The carrier is entirely unimpressive
2. You may be thinking "holy shite look at the pollution of that city," but rest assured that it's just a normal day in a Chinese city.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:42 pm to Junky
quote:
Well, they don’t need to project their power around the world like we do. They are a major regional power
I don’t think it has anything to do with that. If there was ever a major naval battle, it would be a major disadvantage for them to have to go refuel right in the middle of war.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:46 pm to Barneyrb
quote:
TARGET!!!!
Like Hyman Rickover said about future navies: Submarines. Everything else is a...TARGET.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:48 pm to Knight of Old
quote:
Officials still have not named the 50,000-ton carrier.
Boaty McBoatface?
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:51 pm to Tigertracks
Now? Yes.
They’ll get better in time though.
They’ll get better in time though.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 9:55 pm to Robin Masters
quote:
Why do ours not have the jump on the end? What are drawbacks to that design vs flat like ours?
Carrier decks aren’t long enough to allow aircraft to get airborne without assistance, generally.
The ski jump is one way to solve that problem. It gives the aircraft additional altitude when it leaves the carrier, and in turn additional time, once it drops over the edge of the deck, to build up speed.
We use a steam powered, and now electromagnetic catapult for the same purpose. The catapult accelerates the aircraft rapidly, allowing it to take off from the short carrier runway.
Catapults are more complicated, and more expensive, but they allow us to launch larger and heavier aircraft.
This post was edited on 5/13/18 at 10:06 pm
Posted on 5/13/18 at 10:07 pm to NC_Tigah
But they’re spread across the globe.
Posted on 5/13/18 at 10:22 pm to Homesick Tiger
When will Harbor Freight put this on sale?
Can I get 20% off with the coupon?
Can I get 20% off with the coupon?
Posted on 5/13/18 at 10:29 pm to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
Why is the bow higher than the runway?
How long before a jet clips that thing on takeoff?
Many countries opt to add a ramp rather than a highly complex and problematic catapult system that we use.
This includes Western countries.
The American catapult system system allowed for tactically superior craft equipped with more fuel and ammo, but the design is Hell, both on the carrier side and designing aircraft that can take the stress.
Our latest design with electrically driven catapults had to go back to dock to work a lot of kinks after sea trials.
US carriers launch aircraft in 300 feet that would otherwise need 2000+ feet of runway to take off.
This post was edited on 5/13/18 at 10:32 pm
Posted on 5/14/18 at 3:17 am to Homesick Tiger
Wow, look at that air pollution.
Posted on 5/14/18 at 5:37 am to OnTheLevel State Fan
Good one, mate 
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News