Exclusive: Satellite images reveal China's aircraft carrier 'factory,' analysts say

By Greg Torode, Michael Martina

 

FILE PHOTO: A combination image of satellite photos shows Jiangnan Shipyard in Shanghai, China on October 3, 2018, April 17, 2019 and September 18, 2019. Mandatory credit CSIS/ChinaPower/Maxar Technologies and Airbus 2019/Handout via REUTERS

 

HONG KONG/BEIJING (Reuters) - High-resolution satellite images show that the construction of China’s first full-sized aircraft carrier is progressing steadily alongside expansive infrastructure work that analysts say suggests the ship will be the first of several large vessels produced at the site.

 

The images of the Jiangnan shipyard outside Shanghai were taken last month and provided to Reuters by the non-partisan Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), building on satellite photos it obtained in April and September last year.

 

Noting a series of pre-fabricated sections, bulkheads and other components stacked nearby, CSIS analysts say the hull should be finished within 12 months, after which it is likely to be moved to a newly created harbor and wharf before being fitted out.

 

The vast harbor on the Yangtze River estuary, including a wharf nearly 1 kilometer long and large buildings for manufacturing ship components, is nearly complete. Much of the harbor area appeared to be abandoned farmland just a year ago, according to earlier images CSIS analyzed.

 

It dwarfs an existing harbor nearby, where destroyers and other warships are docked.

 

“We can see slow but steady progress on the hull, but I think the really surprising thing these images show is the extensive infrastructure buildup that has gone on simultaneously,” said CSIS analyst Matthew Funaiole.

 

“It is hard to imagine all this is being done for just one ship,” he added. “This looks more like a specialized space for carriers and or other larger vessels.”

 

Singapore-based military analyst Collin Koh said the modern, purpose-built facility on a sparsely populated island in the Yangtze may provide better security than the congested shipyards of Dalian in northern China. It could also help deepen co-operation between commercial and military shipbuilders.

 

The London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies noted this year that China’s military shipyards were focusing increasingly on larger surface warships, “adding to the sense that Chinese naval-capability development may be entering a new phase.”

 

China’s navy has recently launched four large Type 055 cruisers and its first large helicopter carrier, known as the Type 075.

 

China’s military has not formally announced the plans for the third carrier, designated Type 002, but official state media have said it is being built.

 

The Pentagon said it in its annual survey of China’s military modernization, published in May, that work on the third carrier had begun.

 

China’s Ministry of Defence did not respond to questions from Reuters.

 

Funaiole said the latest images appeared to confirm the earlier photos, which suggested the latest carrier would be somewhat smaller the 100,000-tonne “supercarriers” operated by the U.S. but larger than France’s 42,500-tonne Charles de Gaulle.

 

The images are due to be released by the CSIS China Power Project later Thursday.

 

Asian and Western militaries are tracking developments closely. They say this carrier would represent a vital step in China’s ambitions to create a far-ranging navy that can project power around the world to serve Beijing’s expanding global interests.

 

A series of recent Reuters Special Reports showed how that effort is challenging decades of U.S. strategic superiority in East Asia.

 

It is expected to be China’s first carrier with a flat deck and catapult launch system, allowing the use of a wider range of aircraft and more heavily armed fighter jets.

 

China’s first two carriers, which it has dubbed Type 001-class, are relatively small, accommodating only up to 25 aircraft that are launched from ramps built onto their decks. U.S. carriers routinely deploy with nearly four times the number of aircraft.

 

Foreign military attaches and security analysts say the Type 001 ships are expected to essentially serve as training platforms for what they believe will be fleet of up to six operational carriers by 2030.

 

They say the construction and deployment of aircraft carriers is considered exceptionally difficult to master. Protecting such a large and vital surface target with escort ships, submarines and aircraft is a core part of the problem.

 

“The PLA navy is not saying much in detail about its plans now, but we can see from their building works that their ambitions are vast,” said one Asian military attache, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter. “And they will get there.”

 

Koh, a research fellow at Singapore’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said the new Jiangnan facilities looked permanent and reflected China’s long-held ambitions to bulk up its fleet with more carriers and other large vessels.

 

“We are talking about infrastructure being built quickly and on a large scale. It could well be the start of a ‘factory,’ if you like, for carriers and other very large vessels,” he said.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-10-17

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

Just now, snoop1130 said:

Asian and Western militaries are tracking developments closely. They say this carrier would represent a vital step in China’s ambitions to create a far-ranging navy that can project power around the world to serve Beijing’s expanding global interests.

A series of recent Reuters Special Reports showed how that effort is challenging decades of U.S. strategic superiority in East Asia.

 

We are a decade or so away from a world where there are two world class navies capable of projecting power far from their shores, and that'll have some major consequences. Many believe that there will be naval 'contests' and 'frictions' around the world and especially around Africa in a competition for resources. But, I have never really bought that; I have always felt that the development of a Chinese navy is solely to deliver "defense-in-depth'.

 

I've long felt that the Chinese B&R policy will (eventually and subtly) try to create land-links among far-flung shores as too great a reliance on naval power is dangerous and expensive. And, I have also long thought that one day China will simply stand up and announce that there will be no further business or discussion of any kind with the Western world, coupled with an invitation that can't be refused to its Asian neighbours. No huff, no puff, just declare that they are done with the West, period.

 

The remaining question, in my view, is when? I always thought that it would not occur in the next twenty years or so, but as I look out into the world, I am not so sure anymore.

 

May you live in interesting times.

 

 

 

Edited October 18, 20196 yr by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

We are now in a period when the west is destroying itself with stupid controversies about gender and climate etc, while the real threat is building, but ignored by the western news organisations.

The Chinese are not, IMO, building a world class navy just to have them show the flag. 

The British navy kept world peace- I have no hopes that the Chinese will do the same.

PS, it's ironic that the Chinese are building the means for world domination with our money. Another thing to blame Nixon for.

Troll post reported and removed.  

 

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

PS, it's ironic that the Chinese are building the means for world domination with our money. Another thing to blame Nixon for.

Blame HK. RMN never had an original thought in his life.

The  people of most countries in the world now prefer China over the United States.  Nothing wrong with bringing some balance to the world's oceans.  Another thing, you never hear of Chinese navy ships running into other ships like like you do with the American navy's.

24 minutes ago, pegman said:

The  people of most countries in the world now prefer China over the United States.  Nothing wrong with bringing some balance to the world's oceans.  Another thing, you never hear of Chinese navy ships running into other ships like like you do with the American navy's.

Well, I will agree that Chinese totty is superior to western totty these days, but how many would prefer to being ruled by the Chinese? Ask any Tibetan or Uighur for an answer on that.

36 minutes ago, pegman said:

The  people of most countries in the world now prefer China over the United States.  Nothing wrong with bringing some balance to the world's oceans.  Another thing, you never hear of Chinese navy ships running into other ships like like you do with the American navy's.

 

Could you provide the links to the related research that supports your stated preference assertion please?

 

Or did you just make it up?

 

 

Mere vanity. You can't win a war with an aircraft carrier, only bomb a few things at a distance, make a lot of enemies, and be worse off than when you started. Territory is never won by air strikes, only by bayonets on the ground. Any evidence that they are planning any actual invasions?

 

 

4 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

Territory is never won by air strikes, only by bayonets on the ground.

Thank you, Corporal Jones

35 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Could you provide the links to the related research that supports your stated preference assertion please?

 

Or did you just make it up?

 

 

A sampling... there’s plenty of articles available... MAGA!

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/28/other-nations-view-china-more-favorably-than-the-us-survey-shows.html

6 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

Thank you, Corporal Jones

They don't like it up 'em.

12 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

Mere vanity. You can't win a war with an aircraft carrier, only bomb a few things at a distance, make a lot of enemies, and be worse off than when you started. Territory is never won by air strikes, only by bayonets on the ground. Any evidence that they are planning any actual invasions?

 

 

Didn’t world war 2 end with a bomb?

The days of the superiority of the aircraft carrier may be on the wane. The battleship was at the end of its life when WWII began. The much vaunted Bismarck was sunk by the old Swordfish that had a top speed of of just over 100mph. Not one was downed when they torpedoed the battleship. The huge Japanese battleships with their enormous guns were also sunk by planes. These aircraft carriers are very vulnerable to hyper speed cruise missiles to which there supposedly isn’t any defense. Once again history repeats itself. Navies building white elephants at great expense. Chinese Communists appear to be no brighter than their American or British counterparts. 

3 minutes ago, jany123 said:

Didn’t world war 2 end with a bomb?

Only because Japan didn't also have one.

Not sure which world power the Chinese are aiming to defeat with a nuclear attack. If the target is Taiwan, correct me if I'm wrong but surely their missiles can already reach there from the mainland.

I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming, given their history, that they see the aircraft carrier as defensive than offensive, though mainly, as I said, just for show.

China has just leased a deep water port in the Solomon islands for 75 years .And is building many aircraft carriers . With a base there they will dominate the Pacific. Do some research .

3 hours ago, zydeco said:

Blame HK. RMN never had an original thought in his life.

I found Kissenger’s book, ”On China” an interesting read.

1 hour ago, pegman said:

The  people of most countries in the world now prefer China over the United States.  Nothing wrong with bringing some balance to the world's oceans.  Another thing, you never hear of Chinese navy ships running into other ships like like you do with the American navy's.

Wumao ?

10 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

Only because Japan didn't also have one.

Not sure which world power the Chinese are aiming to defeat with a nuclear attack. If the target is Taiwan, correct me if I'm wrong but surely their missiles can already reach there from the mainland.

I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming, given their history, that they see the aircraft carrier as defensive than offensive, though mainly, as I said, just for show.

 

you suggested that aircraft can’t win wars, but now acknowledge that they have, because the enemy didn’t have the same capability.

 

china is seeking the same capability as those divided states, ergo by your assessment, it should protect them from being outclassed and defeated, as Japan was, because it did not have the same capability. That is certainly defensive.... but a strong defense is a good offense.

 

That said.... are US aircraft carriers just for show? Are they just defensive? Will the ability to bring an aircraft carrier into the Red Sea (for example) impact geopolitically, enhancing Chinas reach and influence? Will it reassure its allies that might be threatened by a US strike force on its doorstep? Will it not neutralize US aggression.?

 

Sure, i do agree that it can be seen as potentially defensive, but fail to see why it should not also be seen as potentially aggressive... why anyone would not see an armed strike force/ carrier group as potentially aggressive eludes me

 

And.... I’m not sure why you ask who China would wish to defeat with a nuclear attack. Are US aircraft carriers designed to defeat some unspecified nation with a nuclear attack? .... and/ or have they ever?

An off topic post has been removed. 

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The British navy kept world peace

???????????? Nothing to do with empire building, right? ????????????

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

PS, it's ironic that the Chinese are building the means for world domination with our money. Another thing to blame Nixon for.

And the British navy you claimed was built for world peace was built with colonial money... what is your point, if there is one?

2 hours ago, Fex Bluse said:

Wumao ?

Debunked by Harvard in 2013.

 

Do keep up.

The Chinese can make anything why are we surprised at them making aircraft carriers. I doubt they will be sent to the shores of the US for some time, but they will probably be used to deter the US in the Taiwan Strait and around the disputed islands.

7 hours ago, jany123 said:

Didn’t world war 2 end with a bomb?

No it dident the Japanese wanted to continue the fight it was the russans pushing the Japanese out Korea in less than 2 weeks the specter of a Stalin occupying japan was the major part of their decision along with the (bomb) any nation has the right to build warships the trick will be how to operatit safely that will take some time who knows what the future will bring

4 hours ago, Traubert said:

Debunked by Harvard in 2013.

 

Do keep up.

If you say so 

The  Houthi rebel attack on the Saudi oil fields has shown the face of war is changing. Why spend billions on an aircraft carrier, when one can do just as well at a fraction of the cost with thousands of drones against which defences are helpless?

Surprise  supplies?

The  "How  dare they !" crie that rings such alarm bells is puerile.

A nation that has been propelled  by the ignorant  self inflicted  abuse of greed  of others to economic advantage that has enabled it  to develop and produce military capacity can hardly  be of  surprise.

It could be safely assumed  China  has many more surprises should it be tested.

 

 

 

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, I will agree that Chinese totty is superior to western totty these days, but how many would prefer to being ruled by the Chinese? Ask any Tibetan or Uighur for an answer on that.

Personally i prefer the chinese. You know what you get. China is ruling many places with buying them instead of bombing them.

 

They are open about it. I will take china over US any day.