back to article China launches aircraft carrier the length of 2.1 brontosaurs

China has launched its own aircraft carrier – the first ship of its type to be built from scratch in the rising Asian superpower's yards. The yet-to-be-named warship was launched at a ceremony held in the northeastern port of Dalian, according to local media via the BBC. Al Jazeera reported that the 50,000 tonne carrier (she …

Silver badge

Re: Units

Well, my copy of the Dirty Old Man's Handbook of Measurement gives it as about 176 hookers laid end to end. ☺

4
0

These mean nothing to me, I only know football pitches and olympic size swimming pools.

1
0
Bronze badge

Re: Units

176 dead hookers? Surely that is in the Heavy Goods Vehicle owner/operators manual.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Units

"laid end to end" - wasn't that Dorothy Parker, talking about the girls attending the Yale prom?

7
0
Silver badge
Headmaster

Shurely the length should measured in double-decker buses?

Shirly not.

Maritime use rules please. Oak smoked kippers.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Units

RE: "Heavy Goods Vehicle owner/operators manual"

BoooooooM!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Units

176 hookers laid end to end

on a plate. A bit stretched, but will do.

And now for the fun part...

0
0
Silver badge
Coat

Re: Units

You'd surely have trouble walking after that...

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Oak smoked kippers.

What a guy!

1
0
Bronze badge

badgers

New unit of measurement (to me, even after many Wales, swimming poosl and other reg units). But - male or female badgers?

1
0
Silver badge
Coffee/keyboard

Re: badgers

Yeah, and the subhead claims it weighs as much as "5.7 million" badgers, yet the third paragraph specifies "5.74 million". That's some rounding error. Do 40,000 adult badgers mean so little to you, Register writers? Are you so callous and inured to the world that a compressed stack of millions of badgers is merely a numerical curiosity? For shame! I shall be cancelling my subscription forthwith, etc.

14
0
Silver badge
Headmaster

Re: badgers

But - male or female badgers?

The mass difference between male and female African badgers is negligible, but if we are talking about European badgers then it's a different story.

3
0
Silver badge

Re: badgers

Al Jazeera reported that the 50,000 tonne carrier (she weighs the same as 5.74 million adult badgers)

Given that it's a ship, isn't that going to be displacement tonnes? In which case it doesn't weigh the same as all those badgers -- they need to be displacement badgers.

Quick, someone fetch me a bathtub and an adult badger. Brock is going to have to learn how to hold his breath.

5
0
Silver badge

Re: badgers

@Nolveys The mass difference between male and female African badgers is negligible, but if we are talking about European badgers then it's a different story.

And of course if it's honey badgers , well, I hear they don't give a ****.

Come to think of it, an aircraft vessel made of 5.7 million honey badgers would certainly send out that certain "don't mess with us" message. Anyone want to suggest it to President Trump?

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: badgers

More to the point - African or European badgers?

0
1
Silver badge

Re: Honey badgers

Does anybody know if Nick Cummins can swim?

1
0
x 7
Silver badge

Come on, this is a marine environment, so we should be measuring the tub in units of blue whales

6
0
Anonymous Coward

"Come on, this is a marine environment, so we should be measuring the tub in units of blue whales"

Thank you, Alan "x 7" Davies :-)

1
0
Bronze badge

Slightly disapointing

On the one hand, it's an impressive testimonial to China's shipbuilding industry.

But on the other it's a copy of a flawed design - they could at least have improved it, got rid of the ski ramp and put in a catapult. Yes I am aware that for a steam catapult they'd have needed a different power design. But the Royal Navy ran cordite powered catapults for many years on their older carriers which worked perfectly well - i.e. using a charge of slower burning gunpowder to drive the catapult.

Instead what they appear to have created is a copy of the Kuznetsov only with working toilets and on-board WiFi.

One such ship (the Liaoning) can be justified on the grounds of "we are training on how to run a carrier", but two such flawed designs is a bit silly.

3
1

Re: Slightly disapointing

Not so.

1. Buy and learn.

2. Build new based upon above incorporating learnings.

3. Repeat option 2.

Most of the time this is how all warships (of any type) have evolved - the exception being the "game changer" design (ie Dreadnought) which is a gamble for anything other than a country having an extremely large lead in power supremacy/projection.

Look at the carrier evolution since the early 20's - it took 20 years for most countries to realise that they were the "new" battleship - the tool of power projection. And it took a very pain lesson (ie WWII) to introduce the rapid changes necessary that enabled the current US nuclear carriers (we wont mention the current British fiasco).

Torpedo boats (the fore-runner of the modern small missile boats) and which we seem to think were a creation of WWII in the UK got their education from such events as the Agar's sinking of the Oleg in 1919.... but yet again the technical innovation over the next 20 years wasnt exactly staggering.

Thankfully China has not engaged in conflicts that will allow those sort of capability leaps - but also perhaps we are forgetting where China's interests lie - the countries which China is most likely intending to "impress" with its carriers have no possibility of getting their own - now or in the near future - which will of course ensure that China stays technologically ahead of them.

Personally I think most carriers are a waste of space & money - but its the reality in that they "look impressive" rather than what they can really deliver (I'm still not going to comment about the QE class) - in any real battle situation I would go for swarm tactics with low-level drones against targets and you dont need so many badgers to launch them from.....

3
0
Silver badge

Re: Slightly disapointing

I don't think so. China is long past simply copying stuff. They are also very patient and work their way towards long term objectives slowly, one step at a time. Then there is the circumstance that it's nice to have matching aircraft for your carrier. IIRC, China has also their own "copy" of the corresponding jets. None of these, ships or planes, are simple knock-off copies. The designs will have been evaluated, compared with other designs and somewhat altered, with future developments in the designs in mind.

As to catapults, well...

3
0
Silver badge

Re: Slightly disapointing

But on the other it's a copy of a flawed design - they could at least have improved it, got rid of the ski ramp and put in a catapult.

It was built to match their current fleet arm which uses a purloined blueprints clone of Su-33 which is not catapult launched. It is short take off, arrested landing.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Slightly disapointing

> "Instead what they appear to have created is a copy of the Kuznetsov only with working toilets and on-board WiFi."

So, I take it the Russian crews just waddled over to the edge of the poop deck when nature called?

0
1
Bronze badge

Any marine architects here?

A fascinating subject but in the context of the article : several centuries ago, in response to a Dutch strategy of designing and building Bigger and Better Vessels the UK Government threw resources at designing and building Even Bigger and Better Vessels. Some years later : British Empire.

Dunno how much but there must have been some advantage in having suitable trees in Blighty back then (after all, whisky is better when aged in American Oak barrels so why waste ours?) or possibly expertise in building barns helped.

Moral : Government support of R&D helps.

Moral 2 : There will be immense pride in China at having built their own carrier. You can guess where it could lead from here.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Any marine architects here?

Dunno how much but there must have been some advantage in having suitable trees in Blighty back then

Not much, unfortunately. By the time of the Napoleonic Wars the navy had for years been forced to build its ships from imported French oak.

2
0

Badger size

From http://www.badgerland.co.uk/animals/size.html

The weight of an adult badger varies throughout the year - depending on how much fat it has laid down for the winter months. In spring an adult badger will have an average weight of 8 to 9 kg, rising to 11 to 12 kg in autumn. Occasionally individual specimens do weigh more than this, but these are generally the exception rather than the rule. Also, in territories which provide a poor food supply for the badgers, weights may be less than this.

In addition, adult males will generally tend to be about 1 kg heavier than females of the same age; and lactating females will be as much as 1 kg less than non-lactating females.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Badger size

Badger:

Length: 34.80 m (114 ft 2 in)

Wingspan: 33.00 m (108 ft 3 in)

Height: 10.36 m (34 ft 0 in)

Wing area: 165 m2 (1,780 sq ft)

Empty weight: 37,200 kg (82,012 lb)

Gross weight: 76,000 kg (167,551 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 79,000 kg (174,165 lb)

5
0
Trollface

Re: Badger size

So we are roughly talking about a variation of +/- 1.15 million badgers then.....

....but wont they weigh more when their fur is wet?

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Badger size

Volume. They're displacement badgers so we need the volume.

2
0
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Badger size

So we are roughly talking about a variation of +/- 1.15 million badgers then.....

Or the new carrier simply displaces more in autumn than it does in spring.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Chinese kit

I'll bet the bag of extra screws and washers left often from construction must be huge...

6
0

Re: Chinese kit

Even better - turns out the kit was made in Taiwan, and the website is down and no-one is answering the phone line.

6
0
Headmaster

Ukraine

It is just Ukraine, not The Ukraine :(

2
0

for now China's aircraft carrier capability has no real ability to threaten Western interests.

The main goal of an aircraft carrier is to blast third world countries: any other country could transform the carrier in a beautiful wreck quite easily.

2
1

Why not?

All aircraft carriers should be built with a bullseye painted on the side of them.

At least the old UK carriers were small enough to have a chance of being missed.

Hence why the larger Atlantic Conveyor took the hit instead.

2
2
Silver badge

Re: Why not?

Repeat after me, 'size has no bearing on radar cross section'.

1
0

Re: Why not?

But you get the medals for tonnage sunk.....

1
0

Chuff chuff

Powered by Aussie coal no doubt.

0
0

"Western analysts have long feared a rise of Chinese naval power, particularly in the disputed areas of the South China Sea where an awful lot of Western goods pass through. "

Does it matter? Considering most of those "Western goods" are probably from China. So much it bought from China these days and made, we and the Americans would be screwed either way in a war. But also China would screw itself as it would have less of the world that would buy its stuff. What would happen to Apple for a start? They rely on China so much.

0
0
Bronze badge

But

what is the displacement of the latest Chinese carrier in average adult giant pandas? According to the World Wildlife Fund, pandas can swim ...

0
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017