>>64282544
>middle
Who is the retard.

>>64282544
Sinofags will claim its peak and that they can do no wrong.

To answer your question, they don't care. Its all for show. "Look at us we have a supercarrier! Its got electromagnetic launchers! Fear us!" meanwhile any digging will tell you that the EML is untested, the carrier has troubles moving, and we've yet to see it have to perform in a way the US forces its carriers to in simulated combat.

They wanna look cool and tough so they can act like they're not a shitty country run by shitty people with no innovation.

>>64282584
That shit's more than enough in the way that if you needed to land & launch aircraft at the same time that it would slow down deck ops.

>>64282544
Looks fine to me, and it's amazing you took the time draw it out and didn't even notice your "middle" is actually the boundary line.

>>64282592
I’ve spent countless hours flying planes off aircraft carriers in MSFS, and based on that experience, I can confidently say carrier operations shouldn’t be an issue during sorties. If I can handle it as a simulator pilot, a professionally trained navy pilot certainly can.

>>64282612
Its more than just on the boundary line, it reaches into the actual landing zone
Also, how are they supposed to reach the forward elevator? Or are they supposed to just block the entire landing area while they drive their asses to the rear elevator?

Cause that shit is very in the way and if you need to launch and recover at the same time, that kind of thing will slow you down

>>64282616
I can't tell if you're fucking with me, calling me an idiot, or none of the above. I've been on this site too fuckin long.

But on the off chance its not you calling me a fuckin moron. If you were landing and that was up, its a risk that could impede further operations if something goes wrong with the arrestor wires (It happens, its rare but that's not a gamble you'd wanna take) and now you've got a broken deflector, burning plane, and partially disabled carrier. You go from 2 launchers (If you're doing simultanious operations then the last launcher would likely not be being used) to one if the blast deflector is fucked, assuming the Chinese pretend to give a fuck about not jet blasting their carrier crew.

Plus if the deflector is up you lose 8 of those lines (Not sure their length, sorry) of landing space, at which point why even have that extra space?

>>64282657
i mean, it looks less janky than the elevator in front of the catapults that they had on the Forrestalls, but that's just me looking at it without the J-15s, J-36s and whatever the AWACS is on the carrier.

Doesn't seem like that big of a deal though? The Chinese can live with it. and it's unlikely that it would become a massive problem on the operational level. Sure it might be a bit slower than American CVNs, but they have 20 thousand tons over the Fujian in displacement and the Americans have nearly a century of experience operating aircraft carriers.

to put things in perspective, they went from the Liaoning to the Shandong in less time than it went from the USN to go from Langley to the Yorktown's (i know it's kind of a shitty comparison, but the jump in capability from shit ass training carrier to an actual fleet carrier kinda makes sense in my head)

>>64282544
This isn't a design flaw since you don’t use that catapult while you’re recovering aircraft. When recoveries are happening the blaster is down and flush with the deck, so it doesn’t obstruct the landing area.

File: USS Abraham Lincoln drifting.webm (3.43 MB, 854x480)

3.43 MB WEBM

>>64282587
Shit, I bet the EMALS doesn't even work. Look at Chinese roller coaster accidents vs US roller coaster accident rates and how many chinkshit roller coaster companies copy US and European designs.
>wtf do rollercoasters have to do with EMALS anon
It's the best analog for the tech. The USN and NASA worked with Disney Imagineering and consulted engineers from both Disney and Vekoma for direct tech transfer to EMALS. Even with decades of institutional knowledge from these engineers working from all over, they've only just got all the kinks worked out over the last couple years.

Don't even get me started on the propulsion, why does it take the Chinese carriers 2 miles to do a turn when the half century old Nimitz class does donuts.
>>64282592
>>64282657
They probably just accept the risk of crashing head on into the deflector as part of flight ops because clearly choreographing and training means that nothing can go wrong. Just look at how poorly compartmentalized Chinese naval vessels are and how little they pay attention to damage control contingencies to see how much they expect things to go wrong.

>>64282750
>When recoveries are happening the blaster is down and flush with the deck, so it doesn’t obstruct the landing area.

Only during peaceful times.
Or do you really think that during a war the US carrier crew will think: "The damage airplane can wait for the blaster to be down. It can't land right now."

>>64282544
Uh, that's the landing strip. No planes take off from there, you can tell because there aren't any catapults.

I swear you fags are either Indian or chink shills trying to make the other side look bad.

>>64282544
>I have the impression
You have a wrong impression. China hate is the new fuddlore. The millennials who rightfully laughed at M14s and 1911s are now making the same mistakes as their dads.

>>64282808
Have you never seen a carrier flight op? The leftside catapult deflector is in the way of the landing strip. No room for error.

It is simple, all the chinese has to do is to never fail to catch the hook.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf7oCNHucb0

>>64282544
>do bugmen think
a visual signature of a real carrier is enough for them, like ants they just follow a trail with no thought involved

>>64282740
The problem with looking purely at the jump in operational capability is that the Chinese from what we've seen aren't inventing new stuff a majority of the time, they're stealing what they can and lying about some of the others, its difficult to know what their capabilities actually are.

Also it definitely feels jankier to me, the Forrestal's Forward Elevator was further back. You could move planes onto them or off of them while you had others on catapults. The Fujian's forward elevator looks like half of it would be blocked by a bird on the catapult waiting to go.

Its definitely something you CAN work around, and the Chinese have shown by actually building this stupid thing that they've decided its a workaround they're willing to do, but I don't know if its a good idea to slow down carrier ops when the US has evidence from WWII that's publicly known that when carrier ops are slower, it can cost you the ability to strike your targets. It forces you either to reduce the range of your fighters due to the first ones having less fuel than later ones, or send them peacemeal which is a worse idea.

>>64282750
I mean SURE in optimal conditions you're gonna be able to do that, but in the kind of conditions that the South China Sea is shaping up to be, assuming that's where the Fujian is deployed and for this example it doesn't get evaporated by ASMs?

You're gonna want aircraft in the air from the carrier as often as you can. Obviously they need repair so you can't get 100% uptime, usually that means being supplemented by other aircraft, either from carriers or in the SCS case you'd be close enough for land based aircraft, but if you want a carrier to be performing its duties as often as possible, you're inevitably gonna run into a problem of "We have aircraft that need to land" and "We have aircraft that need to take off" are inevitably gonna line up, and then you either slow down launching to recover aircraft, or slow down aircraft recovery and risk the problems that come with planes not being able to infinitely stay in the air, even assuming no battle damage.

>>64282947
That was the royal we slipping out, sorry faggot. Please feel free to disregard all the rest of my post for that, sliteye.

File: tails.jpg (50 KB, 600x383)

50 KB JPG

>>64282947
It's spam. You volunteer wumao have multiple threads up at all times, and more that got deleted because you can't check the catalog before making them. If removing spam is censorship, then how do you feel about 2 Babies 1 Fox?

>>64282988
Its also lies a good chunk of the time. You find out real fuckin quick that if the Chinese claim they've invented some new bullshit, its all lights and sounds and no actual breakthroughs.

The CCP has made a culture of "Cheap and impressive." it doesn't need to be any good. Look at their construction industry, or their "High speed rail" that reddit fags can't shut up about.

>>64283020
>High speed rail
The funniest shit about it is that compared to the Japs Shinkansen, no one rides it and they can't reduce ticket prices any lower because the rail companies are so deeply in debt.

>>64283044
They've dropped them as low as possible and that's with govt subsidies.

Why bother with HSR when you can just take a cheap Green Train and get there, just schedule a few more days for travel.

File: 1750833427529306.png (889 KB, 596x1002)

889 KB PNG

>>64282544
This is what happens when you just copy without knowing the reason why things were done the way they were. If they had real experience they would understand why the deck is laid out this way vs just approximating the look.

File: 1758307775938484.jpg (438 KB, 1824x1156)

438 KB JPG

It can be saved.
Move everything on the right to the back of the ship as much as they can.
Then tilt the catapults a little bit.
There you go, just as good as the american one.

>>64283510
>if we rebuild the ship it can be better
yeah, just a small modification. shouldn't take more than two weeks.

>>64283527
Anon that sounds like its doubting the CCP's ability to get things done.

-1000000 social credit

>>64282789
How time sensitive is turning a carrier though? In the grand scheme of things that's a meaningless difference.
>>64282933
Stealing is jsut outsourcing innovation. Le west is basically the fools for even blowing all that money when you cram infinite Chinese spies into universities collaborating on critical research.

>>64282806
>>64282950
You’re right that in wartime you want maximum jets moving, not peacetime niceties. But “no landings with the waist JBD up” isn’t a nicety—it’s a hard safety/throughput rule. A single trap into a raised deflector can shut the deck for hours and crater sortie generation. If a damaged aircraft calls inbound while the waist catapult is launching, the Air Boss halts the waist cat, drops the deflector (seconds), and clears the landing area; overhead tankers, diverts, and wave-offs cover that brief gap. As for overlapping launch and recovery needs in a high-tempo fight like the SCS, angled-deck carriers manage this with cyclic ops: during recoveries the waist cat stays cold while the bow cats can trickle launches between traps if necessary. The waist cat’s real value is surge launching before a recovery window, not operating while trapping. That’s why Fujian’s “mid-deck” JBD isn’t a flaw—it’s the standard trade-off to maximize sustained sortie rate under combat conditions.

>>64283795
The fuck is this slopbot doing

>>64283977
idk I found that pretty convincing, but I don't navy

>>64284020
The slopbot just spewed out random things about the waist catapult when the quoted anons didn't even mention anything about it. The issue lies in that the left bow catapult cannot operate (or at least safety) while landings are being conducted due to the extremely close deflector but the slopbot doesn't know that the Fujian's deflector layout doesn't allow that and is reciting training data off the layout off a Nimitz. And obviously the waist catapult isn't going be used while landings are being conducted so that last part is pure slop.

>>64282544

What do you expect? They have 0 practical experience and in any war this will cost them dearly early on. Historically it's why they always have massive casualties in most wars. They have no near peer rivals to war with around them so when war finally comes their inexperienced officer corps is full of useless bureaucrats, nepobabies and sycophants. They usually course correct to a meritocracy and they have the numbers to throw into a slog to end up reforming and coming back unbeatable, but that's in a land war. A sea war is going to see a lot of coast hugging, but they don't have the numbers or time to learn. Plus it's not like a game, a ship destroyed out at sea doesn't guarantee you a handful of more experienced survivors you can build a new crew around. In a big war it isn't unheard of at all to lose both a warship and all hands. And I'm pretty sure that's our expected strategy, lure/catch them out and seal club them with our better seamanship.

>>64282789
Because they welded a flight deck to a container ship hull.

>>64284003
Can't speak for the others but I just want the Chinese to copy correctly if they are going to do a blue ocean fleet.

>>64284107
>welded a flight deck to a container ship hull
I'm not seeing an issue here. A lot of that is going to be going down on all sides if ww3 goes hot and India sides with the Chinese.

>>64284093
Probably gonna work considering their carriers have deployed for a maximum of 24 days with the next longest deployment being 16 days and their whole doctrine (at least from all the chinkshills I've seen) assumes a CSG will be parked right off the coast because they keep saying how one will always be in range of a dongfeng 21

File: china.navy6.webm (2.91 MB, 480x284)

2.91 MB WEBM

>>64282544
Chinese copy stuff like Africans, or a child would. Like they are looking for acceptance from white daddy, and want a pat on the back.

>>64282544
Maybe they had no choice due to the dimensions of the naval aircraft they have.

>>64282544
they have roughly equally qualified scientific and engineering base, if they copy something 1:1 it means it's the most conservative option and they are not sure what to do yet

>>64282544
in the next version kind sir

>>64284114
>I just want the Chinese to copy correctly
That's the thing and the problem they're encountering. A fleet is not like an army. In an army a soldier even by himself has the ability to realistically kill or maim at least one or maybe even more enemy combatants. In a navy an individual sailor is effectively harmless. Navies require decades of continued and consistently improving organizational structures, training and development of weapon systems is constant and men experienced with every quirk every system has and the best ways to exploit them.

As stated this takes decades, and even garbage can be lethal if the men that use it are familiar with every inch and trained to exploit every component to just before failure. The "just copy it" approach doesn't work.

You need to understand why, and failing that you need to have men that are motivated, organized and capable enough to bypass, jury rig and improve in the field every retarded design flaw you have. And the Chines don't have that.

>>64284144
>And the Chines don't have that.


But they're working on it. The main issue is whether or not they will let time move their hand. The best time to invade Taiwan is approaching. Now if they move with what they have they might win, they might lose. It's a toss up. They might risk it or they might decide they'll win without firing a shot if they just wait 30 years. Who knows? But I do know that if we wait 30 years we will lose.

Right now? We can definitely, without any doubt in my mind, defeat the PLAN in blue or green water zones. Easily. It would be a one sided slaughter. If we give them time to prepare, develop a culture of professional sailors and seamen? They will come at us like the Japanese did but with substantially more men, allies, and industrial might behind them than the Japanese could have ever dreamed of.

But we don't start fights. Not at the big boy table at least.

>>64284180
The best time to invade and take a naval war was yesterday. More accurately, 2017-2018, when China had revealed all their newfangled missiles, the US-China trade deficit was at an all time high and US doctrine and gearing was still stuck on COIN. Of course China didn't have nearly as many sealift ships and still don't have enough today to support crossings, but an opening blow to both would've been much more effective back then.

Now that the US and even Europe is in full gear to make more munitions and development systems to directly counter China, that window is closing fast and will only flutter open once more again if they make some sort of breakthrough in a weapons system.

>>64282544
Were you so fucking stupid you thought the edge of a runway was the middle of it?

>>64284371
I implore you to watch some carrier ops videos to see why it's a problem even on the edge of the lane.

>>64282592
That literally never happens. Launch and recovery are two distinct evolutions. After launching all fixed wing aircraft, everyone clear has to clear the landing area and then the waist catapult guys still have to do their shit to make a ready deck.

>>64282947
still waiting on the video of the ship mounted railgun firing btw

File: Japanese_aircraft_carrier(...).jpg (258 KB, 1280x953)

258 KB JPG

>>64283691
>How time sensitive is turning a carrier though?
4/10 bait got me to reply

>>64282544
The J-35 is built with a front-opening canopy that is clearly copied from the F-35. Ordinarily you'd think this wasn't that big a deal, but the whole reason the F-35's canopy opens that way is to give clearance to the B model's lift fan, something the J-35 does not possess and has no plans to accept.

>>64284471
Last time this was pointed out a chinkshill replied with a photo of their MiG-21 clone. What makes it even funnier is that only the early versions of the MiG-21 had forward opening canopies.

>>64282750
One of the Japanese carriers at Midway eventually got sunk because they got hit while switching between recovering and launching aircraft, and had a shitload of aviation fuel and bombs laid out underneath the flight deck. Needlessly slowing down launch/recovery ops is absolutely fucking retarded, but then again we are talking about chinks here.

File: 1507079072289.png (218 KB, 337x360)

218 KB PNG

>>64282544
>It is 2025 AD
>China's "super carrier" cannot launch and recover aircraft at the same time.
>The US perfected this technology in the 50's.
Lol, Lmao even.
Next we'll find out that their aircraft can't take off unless they're sailing into the wind.

>>64282808
You vastly overestimate the intelligence of most American posters here, fren.

>>64283044
You have never seen Chinese HSR ridership data.

>>64283454
Kek

>>64284391
I implore you to take a look at >>64283454 and try to figure out why you’re so fucking retarded.

>>64282544
>I have the impression they copy stuff, without knowing the reason behind it, and then do some shit that doesn't work.
finally this one understands what the chinese have been doing for decades now and currently still do, and plan to do
people will think this is merely a jest

File: 1297219608508.png (122 KB, 254x349)

122 KB PNG

>>64284664
Are you stupid? Please look at >>64283454 What do you think the other two extra launch catapults and blast deflectors on the landing strip are for?
What do you think is happening in the bottom part of >>64282544
's pic?

>>64284471
>>64284477
You dipshits realize the FC-31 has a back hinged canopy, right?

>>64284686
Wow, you’re actually retarded!

why is everyone ignoring the 3rd catapult?

>>64282947
>Chinese innovation posts
no such thing, chinks haven't innovated once in 500 years, neither in technology or their posting style

File: Flex Deck.png (740 KB, 500x609)

740 KB PNG

>>64282544
Wait until you find out about "Flex Deck"

File: 1758321932371768.png (866 KB, 596x1002)

866 KB PNG

>>64283454
>>64282544

File: 1682628936492.png (398 KB, 602x350)

398 KB PNG

>>64285050
>>64283454

File: R91.jpg (798 KB, 1365x2048)

798 KB JPG

>>64282544

>>64285050
>>64285053
Still the whole point of the angled deck is so that under normal operations you can launch planes at the same time as recovering others.

The two rear cats on US ships are secondary to the two main catapults, for occasions where higher volumes of aircraft are being launched. In which case the deck will be too busy with aircraft movement for anything to land at all until the launches are completed.

The Chinese layout with one main cat intruding into the recovery area means you only have half the launch capacity that a US carrier has during a recovery, so a significant decrease in sortie rate while this shit >>64285062
the French are doing, is just terrible and more or less means you can't launch and recover at the same time.
Of course, you can gamble that the aircraft being recovered wont overshoot the cables and will stop well before the launch area, but that's flying in the face of why those decks are separate in the first place.

>>64282544
>middle of the landing runway
>"Do chineses even think[...]?"
Clearly you don't.

File: MilitarySportsHoliday2017-03.jpg (803 KB, 1200x800)

803 KB JPG

Isn't the chinese carrier just a russian carrier without the cope jump ramp?

That's why it fucking sucks?

>>64282544
lmao, if right blast deflector fails, nothing can go in or out of the front elevator.

>>64285494
No. (003 isn’t Russian in origin)
You’re dumb. (Because you’re retarded)

>>64285169
Where are you getting this idea of simultaneous launch and recovery from? See >>64284442
Better yet, enlist

>>64282544
>>>/a/282410515

GATE 2 is getting an anime, k bros.
do you like naval guns VS communist pirates?

>>64282947
>jannies censor most of the Chinese innovation posts here but 4chin isn't the only source of info in the world.

your own CCP gov blocked 4chan. you should be in jail according to your own commie lawls. gtfo

>>64282544
We’ll never know because America is too busy saber rattling with its own tributary states rather than focusing on its enemies.

>>64285945
It's literally a part of training and the design. Every US Aircraft carrier can launch and recover simultaneously. All day long. That’s part of the purpose of the angled flight deck. That’s the purpose behind CATOBAR carriers such as those used by the US and France.

>>64285945
Imagine this:
>Get into war
>Radar officer: Enemy fleet detected south-east!!
>Captain: Launch all aircraft available NOW!
>Second in commnand: We can't captain, some returning aircraft are still landing now, we can't launch and recover at the same time.
>Captain: OH NONONONONONOON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>64286065
What training? You've never been on a carrier. Stop making shit up.

>>64286040
it's fighting latinx cartel now.

>>64286143
>u must be enlisted to post!
ok post time stamp with your enlistment form.

Why are so many but-mad pro chinese propagandists posting here?

The chinese carrier is crap, just accept the reality.

>>64286247
Because everyone is a "chinese propagandist" living rent free in your diseased mind.

File: 1758321932371768.png (867 KB, 596x1002)

867 KB PNG

US carrier is better.

The two forward elevators are not blocked by the the deflectors in any way.

The landing path is not blocked by the forward deflectors.

>>64283691
>How time sensitive is basic warfare?
Very, slower and less agile ships cost the Japs the Pacific and gave birth to carrier speed naval ops (2-5knts faster than battleships at the time, probably double digit these days

File: DDG-105 takes a nose-dive.webm (2.91 MB, 720x480)

2.91 MB WEBM

>>64286281
To put this more into perspective, a Carrier is actually the fastest and toughest ship in the Navy. It can steam at full speed indefinitely while the escorts will be limited by a range of 2000-3000 knots and sea states at full speed.

>>64285945
nigga is speaking about the circumstances where all 4 cats are being used to get all aircraft in the air for a strike or defensive action
In day to day operations protecting the fleet there is a constant stream of aircraft going up on patrol, returning from patrol, Carrier Onboard Delivery flights etc. etc. etc. and only the front two cats and their elevators are being used to launch while the landing deck and other elevators are being used for incoming fixed-wing aircraft, rotary wing operation, and replenishment

File: 1000022472.jpg (1.7 MB, 3120x2674)

1.7 MB JPG

>>64286175
faggot
>>64286352
pointless AI slop

>>64282657
they wouldn't let you to land to begin with if the deflector was up I mean come on that's just comically stupid

File: united states states numbnuts.png (1.92 MB, 942x858)

1.92 MB PNG

>>64282544
>US does the same
what the fuck was america thinking!!

>>64286672
That's the waist catapult. OP is talking about the bow catapult.

>>64286672
Are you fucking retarded, american carriers have 4 catapults.

The 2 on the front don't interfere with the elevator nor the landing zone.

>>64282584
>"In the middle of"
Is a kind of modern turn-of-phrase colloquialism people use to refer to anything that is in the way. No, it doesn't mean exactly scientifically measurably at the 50% mark.

Chinese/Mandarin is fucking LOADED with colloquialism that is complete nonsense if directly translated, btw.
Offhand example - like, it's a bullshitting example but the meaning is there,

In chinese sometimes you'd say some shit like:
>Horse wind mountain, dog water
and it means
>Go to the store and buy some bread
It's no small wonder why they can't get anything done and have to lie, cheat and steal.

So fuck off. :)

File: dong.png (1.72 MB, 866x1071)

1.72 MB PNG

>>64282544
It looks like they just copied their previous Kuznestov class carrier except they added catapults and got rid of the ramp. Bottom of picrel is their Shandong carrier, top is the Russian Kuznetsov carrier

>>64282789
The PLAN's sole purpose is to soak up some of the incoming missiles while the rest of their military tries to figure out how to cross a 100 mile trench.

>>64286692
>>Horse wind mountain, dog water
>and it means
>>Go to the store and buy some bread
Flurting must be impossible!
>hey babe, wass ur name?
>boot nose lick high

>>64286797
I mean hell...if she's hot enough...I'd lick all day. Depends on how she reacts after a half hour of being called a little piggy yellow whore and having her throat choked.

>>64282544
Yes you fucking retard, the PLAN are also smarter than you.

>>64284122
You're posting an old training video where they're training for a catastrophic failure, that's why the door opens inwards.

>>64286692
Xi Jinping literally means "cleaning a golden bottle."
Translate 洗金瓶 and use text to speech if you don't believe me.

>>64282740
>to put things in perspective, they went from the Liaoning to the Shandong in less time than it went from the USN to go from Langley to the Yorktown's
Ok, let’s put it in perspective for you. Take a 14 year old kid. Give him a go cart with a clapped out Briggs and Stratton motor. He tinkers with it, gets it running, cleans it up, and spends weekends running circles at the local go cart track. Fast forward 2 years. Kid turns 16 and gets his drivers license. And then jumps behind the wheel of a Formula One racecar. How competitive do you think that kid is going to be on the F1 circuit?

>>64286667
Yeah but the problem remains the same anon. If you either can't launch aircraft from your two forward catapults at the same time, or can't land aircraft while launching them, you've weakened your capacity

I'm not assuming the Chinese Navy is so retarded they'd say "Yeah land while the JBD is up!" but the problem is that you have to account for the JBD being up while performing landing ops, which is more shit to account for on a very busy ship. Especially in wartime where waiting an extra 10 minutes for the plane to land could mean you've missed your window for a successful strike

>>64284456
surly that tactic wont be used again

>>64287117
This

But the retarded anon will insist.
>B..bbut all they have to do is wait for the airplanes to land, and then take off. No problems.

Imagine this:
>Chinese Captain: -This is the chinese captain, we are asking you, our enemy, to wait in your positions, while our returning aircrafts are landing. So we can sortie a squadron to hit you where you are now. We can't do both at the same time, sorry.

>>64287286
I mean both the Japanese and Americans ran into the problem in WWII, the 'better' choice for most of them was to delay landing until the aircraft sortied, but it ran the risk of running out of fuel and ditching. Even if you can recover the pilot you've now lost a plane. Also you had the problem of if an enemy attack showed up while you were recovering aircraft (See: Battle of Midway)

Its funny watching that anon argue "Oh you can just wait!" like motherfucker we had this problem and the Royal Navy Solved it, everyone else adopted it, and here's China going BACK a step.

God bless Dennis Royle Farquharson Cambell, they don't name em like him anymore. And god damn the Chinese Design Bureaus who looked at that and said "Nah we got it." And don't have it.

>>64286822
Not smart enough to build a carrier with clearance between the Jet Blast Deflectors and the landing area.

Reading through the replies has got me thinking, why are the chinkshills so defensive and resorting to insults without discussing the design whereas anons are actually having a discussion and proposing ideas here?

>>64287862
Because they're not supposed to have these discussions, they're supposed to shill for their government and talk up how great it is and how evil Americans can't build anything GOOD and any of their faults are actually propaganda.

I do feel a little bad for them to be honest, nationalism is a hell of a drug and when you overdose you stop being able to see your country for having any faults. The CCP has been force-feeding people that stuff, and there's a chunk of the Chinese populace who's bought into it and believes it. I know they have a term but I can't be bothered to look it up

>>64287884
yet you ignore the only poster who seemingly has any idea what he's talking about >>64286460

>>64282544
cargo cult

>>64286744
Shandong doesn’t have catapults.
This board is full of retards.

>>64287862
>>64287884
Circle jerking retards like you is why this board is now fucking trash.

The speculated capabilities and specifications of the Fujian are intriguing, but who here knows what they're talking about when it comes to aircraft carriers?

>>64288221
Idk about >>64287884 but I was making an observation and you seem to have solidified that status by doing nothing but insulting people.

>>64286839
Uh what happened to the guy who had his head next to the hatch?

>>64288276
You're spamming "chinkshill" copes and mass reporting legitimate posts as spam nonstop. It's impossible to have a decent talk about Chinese weapons on a weapons board with fudds like you shitting it up over your political fears. Neck yourself.

>>64288355
>chinky getting this butthurt
lol
No one on this board wants anything to do with the chink. Fuck off retard

>>64288094
Not me chinky. Also even there you're talking about a nonissue, because the waist launchers wouldn't be used on a US carrier during recovery ops.
>>64288221
Aww, what's wrong faggot, can't handle the idea that your chinkydink carrier being garbage?
>>64288355
Ahh yes, because one person SURELY is responsible for every board of bullshit getting reported. Go find a bridge to cry under, since in your fake ass economy you can't afford a house to live.

>>64288369
They can't. They're being paid a whole 5 american dollars, more than they'd see in a year, to act like they're changing out minds on this stupid fucking site, because the CCP thinks somehow this'll win.

>>64288212
That... Anon? That's not a positive thing. A lack of catapults is not something that should be positively seen. We had carriers with catapults in the 50s and a lack of catapults severely limits what aircraft you can put on the carrier, and more critically, how much weight you can put on em.

A catapult will up your total takeoff weight by an order of magnitude. With it you can take a full fuel and weapons load, without it you have to give up range or armaments and both options reduce operational capacity

>>64288444
>because the waist launchers wouldn't be used on a US carrier during recovery ops.
WE (USN) DON'T LAUNCH AND RECOVER AT THE SAME TIME. Get that shit through your skull. Our carriers could have JBD2 in the landing area just like the Chinese carrier, and it wouldn't fucking matter.

>>64288592
Once again your CCP funded English scales make you look like a faggot Anon.

You are correct, we dont do it. The difference is that the US could do it and lose 50% of catapult capacity and still have 2/3 of Fujien's max laumchers. If Fuijen was in the same situation it would be down to 1/3 of its launchers and 1/4 capability of the US carrier's full launch capability

>>64288734
>English scales
So you're retarded, and also still talking about a hypothetical situation that will never happen.

>>64288734
you really don't understand carrier operation tempo.
you need to stfu.

>>64288592
Are you fucking retard?

If they don't launch and recover at the same time, never. Then why waste monkey building an angled deck?

They made it an angled deck because THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO LANCH AND RECOVER AT THE SAME TIME.

>>64288212
>can't read
>calls me retard
It's not about the catapults. My point is that they used the design of their previous carrier (Shandong) and slightly modified it and added catapults (Fujian). The deflector being partially on the runway is reminiscent of the Shandong, and the Shandong is a Russian designed carrier so you should actually blame Russia for putting the deflector there. China just did the bare minimum and rebuilt the Shandong except added catapults and flattened the ramp.

Wow, so many paid china shills here.

>>64289368
Except in the Kuznestov, the right deflector doesn't block the front elevator.

So the chinese made it worse than the original.

>>64289276
Post your flight deck jersey. I'll wait.

>>64286845
Anon, if you want to be racist you have to be correct to begin with, otherwise you will look like a fool. Xi Jinping Is 习近平. 习 means "an habit/to study", 近 means "close by" and 平 means "peaceful/flat/equal". Make of it what you wish.

>>64289368
>>64288592

You fuckin faggots continue to argue a point I'm not even making, hope the CCP is paying you well while they can.

GET IT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING SKULLS, IM NOT SAYING THEY FUCKING DO IM SAYING THEY HAVE A CAPABILITY TO IN A WAY THAT HAMPERS THEM LESS THAN FUJIEN. THEY DONT DO IT BECAUSE THEY DONT NEED TO.

>>64289368
This whole fuckin discussion has been how a catapult is blocked from use by the landing strip. Also Fujien is a Chinese built, even if it is designed off of the Shandong, if that catapult was in the way shouldnt they have improved on that problem?

>>64289706
Post yours if you're sooooo above us normies

>>64289915
>>64286460
The nut in my balls has more sea time than you

>>64286268
Nice squiggly line that you conveniently drew right ove rthe actually relevant part there.

>>64289368
>and slightly modified it
You have to be retarded to actually think that.

What is it with the chinkoid shills now?
Did they sink one of their own ships again?

>>64289941
So you're talking a load of bullshit, got it.

>>64289984
No idea Anon, the chinkshills suddenly showed up, probably just got told to start doing this cause the CCP found out their carrier is a lemon that wouldn't last a day against its US Counterpart.

>>64289945
Anon you can see all four launchers and their deflectors even with the line there. There's enough space for them to draw a line like someone who's drunk.

>>64289912
it's cheaper to be lazy
>>64289950
I guess you could consider adding catapults and flattening the bow a full redesign

>>64284135
>they have roughly equally qualified scientific and engineering base
I'm a geologist and have dealt with my chink counterparts, I'm going to disagree.

>>64290236
> Its cheaper to be lazy

Pretty much why the US doesn't do simultaneous ops. Its more expensive and more risky. If its not necessary then they'll obviously skip on em because its just a good call.

>>64290041
Podt your own jersey, then retard. And try to describe these theoretical simultaneous launch and recoveries that you're so sure we train for.

>>64282544
>I have the impression they copy stuff, without knowing the reason behind it, and then do some shit that doesn't work.
This happened routinely in USSR, so it's a given that sometimes it would also happen in China.

>>64290496
Faggot you've done nothing to prove you know anything about this shit, get the fuck outta this thread.
> "Oh neither have you!"
You're the one telling me to fuck off. Show you got some actual knowledge and I will, but you can't you fuckin chink

>>64290499
It happened a TON. To give the USSR a crumb of credit, they were good at being the first to come up with certain things. Sometimes those things could even do what they were telling the government they could do!

But most of the time you'd get a piece of Soviet tech and it was either built so simple that it wouldn't break, because once it broke you were just fucked, or Soviet tech that looked super impressive but wasn't used because using it would reveal its kinda fucked

File: i-dont-watch-baseball-v0-(...).png (126 KB, 640x684)

126 KB PNG

>>64284118
>Anon asks why chink carriers sail like shitty container ships
>because they are in fact container ships
>chink claims thats a "good thing" (tm)

>>64290504
Nigger, I'm the only one here who's deployed on a fucking carrier. We do not do simultenous launch and recovery. Understand? How many more times do I have to say it?

>>64290523
Chink you've done nothing to prove you've been within 10 miles of a carrier. Post proof or fuck off.

File: received_569221245272230~2.mp4 (2.08 MB, 720x1280)

2.08 MB MP4

>>64290532
Jersey pic isn't good enough? You want my DD214 and full social as well?

>>64282544
the fujian is 20k tons less than a ford so they probably dont have the beam for the elevator to be completely out of the way of the other deck

regardless, carriers dont do simultaneous take off and landing operations so the whole point is moot anyway

>>64290541
You know what? Fair

File: file.png (653 KB, 1200x550)

653 KB PNG

>>64282544
sorry they copied us baguettes. We have a small aircraft carrier, can't fit everything on it like the americans do

File: imperial Japanese aircraf(...).jpg (536 KB, 991x1300)

536 KB JPG

>>64286086
why worry about somthin that ain't gonna happen

>>64290523
>We do not do simultenous launch and recovery.

Then why waste money building an angled deck?
A simple deck would work the same way.

>>64282544
Chinks are just a really advanced cargo cult.

>>64291758
He won't bother to answer, he just wants to try to act like being on a carrier makes him the god of knowledge in this thread.

To give an answer? Its not really needed. The capability is there and having it is valuable enough that they'd rather keep it than risk not having it when they need it, but the US hasn't in a war that needs that level of activity in close to 60 years

>>64292251
Best post to come from this clusterfuck

>>64292262
It helps to be a little knowledgable and a little able to push that knowledge past what you're told. If the US keeps building carriers with it, then clearly there's a value in the potential of doing simulops whether they do it or not.

>>64292251
I didn't respond because I'm not a fucking retard speculating about shit I don't know and passing it off for fact. All I do know is it never happens and we never train for it. Goofy ass wiki readers.

File: 634acaa144bfe.image-2405428945.jpg (47 KB, 800x436)

47 KB JPG

>>64282544
harbor freight knockoffs are never quite right

Does it really matter?

The PRC's carriers are better than anyone else's, except for America. And that's ok. They don't need to be the best. They just need to be good enough.

China doesn't need to project power beyond Asia east Africa, so they don't need the sortie rate of a Nimitz.

>>64288759
war has a funny way of making the specific thing you were sure would never happen and therefore didn't need to plan for happen at the worst possible time

>>64292377
You can say whatever the fuck you want faggot, people aren't gonna KNOW if you're lying, this is fuckin 4chan not an official Navy press release.

>>64282988
THE LEFT EYE OF EXODIA
BEGONE YEE CURSED IMAGE

Isnt this ship a chink an one of its kind diesel carrier? Chinks do iterative developement, first they make a mediocre copy, then they make an improved copy, then they make a further developed and improved copy, then they keep developing it until it is unrecognizable from the original. Look at what they did with their Romeo submarines that they got from the USSR. The final variant was completely unrecognizable from the original.

So in case of carriers, it would go first ex russian carrier, 2nd carrier copy of russian ex carrier, 3rd carrier further improved copy of russian ex carrier (this one), next one would be the one where they stuff in new ideas.

File: chinese_space_program_training.mp4 (1.48 MB, 340x480)

1.48 MB MP4

>>64292551
>better than anyone else's, except for America
>fujian is literally one good hydraulic failure away from losing a chunk of its air wing to the deep blue

Having lower requirements doesn't excuse bad design.

>>64290523
kek, this reminds me of Sea Power devs telling modders pretty much the same thing, because they were annoyed that they couldn't do carrier ops quick enough.

>>64293540
>here is why being a retarded monkey who never thinks about what they are doing is a good thing

File: G1cRjflaIAAGvQU.jpg (91 KB, 1199x797)

91 KB JPG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxkgQAt8b2I

The Chinese navy just released raw footage of the launch and recovery of the J-35, J-15T and KJ-600 from the Fujian. Surprising they didn't release a corny edited video with military marching music.

>>64290548
American carriers do. Not often since there's a bit more risk than usual but it's the reason we have slanted runways to begin with. We can be mounting planes on the forward catapults while another plane is landing.

>>64293705
That's some chinesium grade ai slop.

>>64287140
Any weapon directed at a carrier no matter what it is would warrant an evasive maneuver. Even if it was a guided antiship missile or a torpedo, the carrier changing course would be a given, otherwise even a weapon that encountered a decoy and "went stupid" could still hit a non-maneuvering ship. The carrier would also need to turn to unmask its launchers against a threat, which in the case of a sea skimming hypersonic missile might leave it less than a minute to react from the moment it's detected. The list of reasons maneuverability is important just goes on and on, forever.

Lmao, all the coping faggots ITT.

I bet most of /k/ users don't even have a university degree in STEM, they know nothing besides some memes, twitter, reddit posts.

>>64293763
>a sea skimming hypersonic missile
no such thing

>>64293818
Yet. You don't win Tomorrow's war by preparing for Yesterday's war.

>>64294145
I don't think you are aware of the physics problems having both things in the same equation introduces.

>>64294169
You only really need hypersonic speed for the terminal phase to bypass point defense. Kind of like Hypersonic Boost Glide missiles aren't really hypersonic on impact.

>>64294235
This is completely backwards from millitary reality. You sound like a child. Spend 5 minutes reading a missile manual before you spam the board.

In real life, the purpose of a hypersonic missile is minimizing transit time. A high-speed terminal sprint is of negligible use against modern missile defense.

File: 1731884832733940.mp4 (3.42 MB, 534x356)

3.42 MB MP4

>>64282544
>通往危险地带的高速公路!

File: 15246134246223.png (1.74 MB, 948x1268)

1.74 MB PNG

>>64282544
It's not a problem because the 3 wire will stop the airplane long before the deflector comes in the way

>>64294520
What happens when you miss the wire

>>64294520
>bolters never ever happen and if they do, the plane deserves to die and disrupt flight ops until it can be shoved overboard

File: smug smoking.gif (512 KB, 160x160)

512 KB GIF

>>64294544
>>64294545
Literally a skill issue

>>64294520
>Thinks the airplane is always caught by the wire.
>Doesn't realize that planes land at full power in case they miss the wire and need to take off for another pass.

File: J-35.png (1.29 MB, 1200x783)

1.29 MB PNG

>>64282544

>>64294682
40000 feet terminal phase is not sea skimming

>>64294682
>chinkcels actuarry berieve dis

File: 1742762921640116.webm (3.79 MB, 1280x720)

3.79 MB WEBM

>>64282544
https://x.com/Hurin92/status/1970116733076652349?

Jannies you were supposed to keep one thread up for containment wtf
Now the chinkspammers are gonna go to other threads

File: 1717856677719473.jpg (80 KB, 720x960)

80 KB JPG

>>64294544
>>64294545
>>64294563
Geez who let the low-functioning autist brigade in here

>>64294809
Rude to talk about your fellow chinkshills like that, anon. I'd get fired if I insulted my coworkers like that.

>>64294809
What, did you try to use sarcasm through text? You know that doesn't work, right?

>>64294872
Pretty sure thats just helmettard. He's one of our more womanly schizos.

File: 1744952471195173.mp4 (2.28 MB, 1280x720)

2.28 MB MP4

>>64282544
CATOBAR Flanker is now real...

>>64295061
>only 4 decades late

>>64282544
>Do chineses even think when they copy stuff?
No. They steal first then try to reverse engineer without understanding the precepts of why things are they way they are. That's how you end up with navy jets that have a flight radius under the range of F-18 launched ASMs, making them basically fucking useless.

>>64294707
Two people shadowing one qualified person is stupid

Why should they not copy? America has done all the hard work and spent the research money and developed the doctrines. They'd be fools to re-invent the wheel. There will come a time when the Chinese surpass America and the US starts imitating them.

>>64295175
lol, lmao even

>>64295093
We could have seen them in the 90s had the USSR not collapsed and the Ulyanovsk Carrier got finished instead of being sold for scraps by Ukraine

>>64294248
Many actual Soviet ASMs had a cruise phase and a sprint phase for bypassing/minimizing time spent in point defense range. That anon knows more about the topic than you're pretending he does, clearly.

File: fsn.png (210 KB, 534x312)

210 KB PNG

>>64295195
There's no law which says that a fake can't surpass the original.

How many carriers will china have by 2035?

>>64295247
>Soviet
Your own words should have given you reason to examine yourself.

>>64295248
My lol, lmao is because the chinese people are incapable of the thought processes needed to innovate at that level. The ones that can will rightfully flee or go high in the party not touching the sciences.

>>64295248
But the problem is, if you only ever copy you don't build up your own home-grown engineering base.

> Why should they not copy? America has done all the hard work and spent the research money and developed the doctrines

And because of that, we have the knowledge base to further expand them, and the tech base to innovate further. No need to cultivate that when you can always be a little behind and not fully understand the tech.

>>64295253
5, unless they start building 2 at once right now.

>>64295258
> The ones that can will rightfully Flee

Pretty much. They don't want projects that are actually expensive to learn this shit. They want big 'expensive' projects that they can siphon massive amounts of funds away for their own personal use, and that look good on paper but fail in practice.

>>64295261
Which is exactly how you end up with a jet blast deflector in the middle of a runway.

File: 1991_unclass_jasons_df21.png (169 KB, 1314x744)

169 KB PNG

>>64295253
>Visualize something you can win with
They're not trying to carriermax. They're rich enough they can afford to build a little of everything on the side while other nations have to focus. Chinese carriers are the modern version of American WW2 icecream barges.

>>64295269
I'm gonna be that guy Anon. That's not the runway its the landing zone.

It doesn't change the fact that its stupid as fuck, and that it impedes your landing area if the JBD has a failure. It is in no way a good idea to do that, and if they had the domestic knowledge from past carrier building they'd know to NOT do that. This may get them the knowledge they need, but its an expensive way to learn "Hey this shit is in the way"

>>64295261
They already have a strong home-grown engineering base! They've had it for about 15 years!

You're living in the past. You should compare your copes against similar situations. We said this about Japan and South Korea in the mid 20th century. England and the Netherlands said it about us in the early 1800s, word for fucking word.

>>64295278
>Chinese carriers are the modern version of American WW2 icecream barges.

That got a laugh outta me anon. Good joke

>>64295293
Then why is their modern carrier so fucking stupidly built? Why are their 'stealth' 'sixth generation' aircraft not actually functional.

Or hell to make it simple. Why are their buildings still so shit? If their engineering base is there, why is it that they're still making the shittiest buildings possible with the cheapest concrete that can be crumbled by hand.

Fuck off Wumao.

>>64295293
How does this zoomer always make himself known the moment he posts something

>>64295293
engineering base doesn't mean shit since they aren't innovating

>>64295313
>why is it that they're still making the shittiest buildings possible with the cheapest concrete that can be crumbled by hand.
You are watching videos from the 2000s reposted by millennial shills kicked out of china to exploit senile boomers' dying donations. It's time to start living in the present.

File: 1756988247882227.gif (385 KB, 300x240)

385 KB GIF

>>64295343
yea

>>64295337
Might be the dumbest post I ever read on this site.

>>64295248
You are not Shiro Emiya. Shiro Emiya is Japanese. Shiro Emiya actually understands the principles of the weapons he's recreating, including their intended usage and history. It's why Archer's weapons outperformed his in their first few clashes.

>>64295313
> Then why is their modern carrier so fucking stupidly built?
This is actually an indictment of your retardation because all you have proven is that you are stupid and blind.

>>64295964
You didn't say anything to disprove his points though

>>64295983
His “points” can all be debunked by looking at >>64283454 and some critical thinking

File: 1623316063479.png (29 KB, 200x200)

29 KB PNG

>>64294816
>>64294872
>>64294901

>>64296002
>reinforces the chinese cloned something without thinking about the why
yeah

>>64296031
You’re retarded too.

>>64296289
You are coping wumao

>>64296002
Okay, explain to me the critical thinking that makes my points invalid. Clearly I'm too retarded to get it, so please. Explain.

>>64296002
What's a completely unrelated carrier supposed to prove?

>>64282657
It's a risk you can entirely mitigate by having one bug chink in the tower ready to press the drop button on the deflector in case of incident.
It's a 2 ton block of steel held up by easily emptyable oil via an emergency switch that will only really be valuable for am actual war, one sleepy eyed chink is more than enough to lower the risk substantially.
For civilian operations there is virtually no risk.

File: Ejdeney.jpg (186 KB, 1768x1080)

186 KB JPG

>>64295343
>>64295313
China swapped from building shit housing in China to contracting in Africa (where they dont care who dies) almost two decades ago anon. Get with the times, nearly all those videos are either old stock getting deleted or cheap contractor work in foreign countries.

>>64296543
>n-nooooo tofu dreg doesn’t exist anymore!!!
Lol, lmao.

>>64295278
>trying this hard to jam in a comparison to icecream barges because they make you seethe
>a-actually c-china are the rich ones that can afford excess now
no lol.

>>64295278
>rich enough

>>64282988
Not a fan of this image kitten can you take it down for daddy?

>>64290541
That is absolutely fucking vile lmao

I’ve had to deal with toilets shitting back at you a few times in my career, but thank god it was never on the scale of a navy ship

>>64296543
So they didn't stop selling tovu drug construction, they just started selling it to people who had almost no construction at all.

Neat.

>>64296694
This head would always flood, and the plumbers were too busy to drain the space, so it would stay like that for weeks at a time. One time I had to waddle out with my pants around my ankles and shit on my ass, trying my hardest not to fall into the creeping puddle of shit water as all the toilets backed up at once while my legs were totally dead from sitting on the awkwardly short toilets. Carriers are fucking shitholes.

>>64285169
whole point of the angled deck is to save pilot's life when aircraft falls from deck into water after failed landing and aircraft carrier is threatening to run over it.

File: 1751129509434693.gif (501 KB, 500x258)

501 KB GIF

>>64297496

>>64297511
What does happen to plane falling into water from straight deck again?

>>64297522
>whole point

ESL, please go and stay go

>>64282624
It appears that they designed it to conduct either launches or recoveries but not both at the same time. My understanding is that US carrier operations typically cycle launches and recoveries so that you don't have aircraft landing at the same time you have aircraft taking off, even though the deck may be designed to physically accommodate simultaneous launches and recoveries.

Carrierfags would have a better idea than I would, but the Fujian's physical limitation would seem to be a problem only in situations where you have to unexpectedly recover aircraft while still in a launch cycle, e.g., aircraft damage/mission inoperability, or launch aircraft during a recovery cycle, e.g., addressing an unanticipated threat arising while sorties are concluding and landing aircraft lack the capacity to address the threat.

>>64297496
>>64297522
Shills should study english, but they wouldn't be worth half a penny an hour if they did.

>>64295257
>le vague, one sentence, low effort "argument" that contains zero information on its own
Bravo, you truly showed us how changes in missile warfare since 1990 somehow made terminal velocity meaningless with this one brilliant stroke of wit.

>>64296517
>one sleepy eyed chink
I'll remind you that a sleepy eyed chink is essentially a man with his eyes closed