Chinese New Years Photos Show Off Liaoning Aircraft Carrier

Liaoning Chinese New YearLining up 1,400 Chinese sailors and aircrew members on the country’s first aircraft carrier offers a bit of perspective on the carrier’s massive scale.

The sailors and air crew lined up on the ski jump of the Liaoning for a video celebrating the Chinese New Year, the year of the goat. Photos from the video offer the latest shots of the aircraft carrier first published in the U.S. by Jeffrey Lin and P.W. Singer in Popular Science.

China is using the Liaoning to test its J-15 fighter fleet as it continues to improve the aircraft’s ability to operate off a carrier deck. 

Liaoning Chinese New YearChina broadcast the video of the Liaoning crew weeks after reports surfaced that China is designing its second aircraft. Asian Defense and Diplomacy released Google Earth satellite images that show China building a model aircraft carrier in the Wuhan Province.

Model China Carrier

About the Author

Michael Hoffman
Michael Hoffman is the executive editor at Tandem NSI and a contributor to Military.com. He can be reached at mhoffman@tandemnsi.com.
  • Andy

    Billion people in the country and all they can do is STEAL… that so you how smart the Chenese is…..

    • blight_

      They bought Varyag, just like Kiev and Minsk.

      • Andy

        no, The business man use alcahol to black mail….was on the news a month ago.

        • steve

          Really, so the hull they bought from Ukraine is due to alcohol and The Business Man? Do some research, think about, THEN type.

          • Andy

            SEARCH FOR :
            China ‘Never Paid Businessman’ Who Bought Aircraft Carrier:

          • blight_

            The businessman paid for the carrier. The PLAN apparently didn’t pay him anything…go figure.

            In response to your original comment:

            “All they do is steal” is incorrect, since the carrier was purchased legitimately from the Ukrainians with money. And because the businessman acted as a front for the government to get around scrutiny, he deserves to be the poorer for this act. However, I suspect he was secretly compensated for his services.

        • blight_

          Also:

          “The ship’s purchase, which was completed in 1999, was settled by Xu and its Ukrainian owners “over several days of alcohol-soaked negotiations”, the newspaper reported.

          In case you didn’t know, that is how they do business deals in the Land of Vodka. Over Vodka. In Japan it’s over sake, and in Korea, soju.

          I’m not sure where this black mail comes in, but you’re probably right in that they used blackmail to assure that their “businessman” cutout achieved the mission.

        • Alan

          I doubt a Chinese could out drink a Ukrainian. More likely the Ukrainians got more Yuan then ore vodka that was consumed…

    • steve

      Stole what, exactly? I didn’t realize aircraft carriers were such a secret after 90 years. Before casting negativity against the I.Q of the Chinese, perhaps you should learn how to spell Chinese.

      I still think they are quite a ways from using their carrier. You need the aircraft, even if only to train up the crews and get some institutional experience in carrier operations.

      • Andy

        DO SOME RESEARCH? REALLY ? THEIR JUST REMOVE MY POST FOR U

        China ‘Never Paid Businessman’ Who Bought Aircraft Carrier:

        • blight_

          The PRC government did not pay the “businessman” who bought the carrier, but the “businessman” “gave” them the carrier after paying a pile of money to bring it home.

          It’s absolutely shady, but…

      • Andy

        All of their Militaries are copy From the US and Russia that not STEALING????

    • steve

      We get it Andy, you don’t like the Chinese. Yes, there’s no person in China capable of designing anything. Paper, gunpowder, and metallurgy were all just flukes.

      • Canuck

        As well as silk.

        If you study the history of civilization no one has been above “stealing ideas” as we can see in the case of many different nations.

        • blight_

          America leapfrogged ahead in the industrial revolution by taking techniques from the manufacturing leader of the world: the UK. We in turn are being leapfrogged by the People’s Republic. It happens.

          • steve

            Yes, in fact, there were skilled tradesmen concealing their tools and identity to emigrate to the colonies, which was against the law.

            Henry Ford didn’t even invent the assembly line, that was a Brit who found a way to mass produce pulleys and such for naval use. It was in the early 1800s.

    • poebrick

      If you are going to mouth off before the world you should first learn grammer and spelling.

    • Fairness

      You mean like the Allies stole the much more useful portable fuel tank design from the Germans to replace their “flimsies”?…

      Source here: http://www.carryology.com/utility/carry-history-t

      “…The Jerrycan was such a superior product that Allied Forces eventually recognised the incredible design and then reverse engineered the canister for their own use, successfully producing countless units to aid in their wartime efforts…”

      Carrier or fuel tank people use what works, war or peace time (especially in war).

  • GI dude

    Second-hand piece of russian junk. I hope they at least got a few towboats in the deal, they are going to need them. The world wont even know for at lease 40-50 years how many hundreds, if not thousands, of chinamen died trying to learn how to fly their crummy little planes of this rusting garbage scow.

    • blight_

      China and South Korea are the world’s premier civilian shipbuilders. Plenty of tugboats of their own.

    • tiger

      Vs. US made junk? Our yards are not exactly quality is job one.

      • fred

        Lockheed can build anything, once.

        • moza

          like the glorious F35?

    • Crisp

      Third hand actually. The Indians got fucked on it then sold it off to the ChiComms.

      • FormerDirtDart

        That is not true.
        The Indians purchased the Admiral Gorshkov, a Kiev-class aircraft carrier. Which they foolishly contracted the Russians to convert to a STOBAR carrier. It now serves the Indian Navy as the INS Vikramaditya.

        The Liaoning was the uncompleted Admiral Kuznetsov class carrier “Varyag” purchased directly from the Russians, and refurbished in China.

  • Godzilla

    There are a couple of replicas of the Liaoning deck in China. They are probably used for several things other than pilot training.

    The rumor mill has it that they are building a second carrier identical to Liaoning to prove they can replicate it fully with Chinese tech and then they’ll build two more carriers of their own design and retire Liaoning. Their own design might differ a lot since the Chinese have plans for other carriers and are rumored to be working on EMALS. Their own carriers are likely to be CATOBAR.

    • blight_

      They might be better served doing explosives tests on the Liaoning, and then using those lessons on their next carrier.

      Edit: PLAAN will likely take Kiev and Minsk as SINKEX targets to learn how to build stronger ships. Such a fate may be reserved for Liaoning, but not for a while.

      • tiger

        Wishfull Tom Clancy daydreams. We have enough trouble with guys in Toyota pickups. Forget attacking the PLA Navy ever.

        • blight_

          “They” being the PLAN. I don’t know what you were thinking, since Tom Clancy isn’t Chinese.

          The PLAN isn’t going to mass produce an reverse-engineered design just for the sake of having something to produce. They want to learn how to build their own: and to do so means learning from a Russian design. In addition to learning its strengths, they must learn its weaknesses. And the best way to do that is to take the Kiev and Minsk and throw anti-ship missiles at it and determine the weaknesses of Russian designs, and adapt accordingly.

  • anthony

    hahah well put, that sure is a fat target for some LRASM’s!!

    • Cataldo

      Yes the same type of fat target of a …. Nimitz class :)

  • Lance

    So they have a carrier but no plans for it yet. More Chi Com propaganda.

    • Godzilla

      They have the naval doctrine. To control the 1st island chain and eventually the Strait of Malacca. They are also working on sea denial on the 2nd island chain (with ICBMs and long range bombers) and starting to do some sparse patrols on the Indian and the Pacific oceans. They keep visiting naval ports further and further away from China.

      They are also building an organic fleet around that carrier. But it is still going to be mostly used for training.

    • tiger

      We have plans for many things and $18 trillion in debt. So do not throw stones at the PRC’s ideas.

  • guest

    The Chinese have nothing but contempt for the American fighting man. They proved it in Korea. Our Army and Marines were many times defeated. The Chinese Army never defeated.

    • blight_

      Korea is divided today, due to the sacrifices of the PVA and the UN soldier. Without the PVA, the UN would have won. Without the UN, the Norks would have won in ’49.

    • Colin

      Really? Japanese never beat the Chinese Army in WW2? Or is that a state secret?

    • IronV

      What history is that? The Chinese Army was repeatedly, ruthlessly mauled by the American Army. Far, far, more Chinese soldiers died than Americans. Over 600,000 Chinese troops died vs 30,000 American.

      • UK Grant

        Real history, as opposed to fake history taught in the US. Only a complete moron would believe that only 30,000 Americans died in the Korean War.

    • GI dude

      The women of Nanking sure enjoyed all those “visiting” Japanese soldiers!

    • sw614

      The Korean stalemate is hardly the shining example to be held high.

    • Bob

      You need to get your history straight. The Marines during the Korean War humiliated the Chinese Army. The Marines inflicted heavy casualties and defeated many Chinese attempts to win the war in Korea. Here are the facts if you’re the least bit interested in the truth. Sounds to me like you’ve been brainwashed with tainted historical facts.

      • UK Grant

        BS. Stop making things up, will you.

      • Joe

        The US Eighth Army in 1951 suffered the greatest humiliation and longest retreat in the history of the US military, pulling back nearly 1000 miles when the North Koreans and their Chinese allies used a “Shock and Awe” infantry offensive that was quick and overwhelming. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_United_States

        By the way, the casualty list frequently quoted of 600,000 Chinese troops dead is a made-up number by the US in the 1950’s. The more creditable numbers are now: S.Korea 227,800 killed, 984,400 total, US 54,229 killed 169,365 total, PRC 132,000 killed, 392,600 total. see http://www.zzwave.com/cmfweb/history/krwarcost.ht

    • Lagomorph

      When China can transport an Army across the Pacific, I’ll give your remarks some thought. Until then, you’ll just have to wait for us to do, again.

      • UK Grant

        China doesn’t need to. At some point the US military will do a coup and replace all the Banking / MIC puppets in Congress and the White House.

        You are confused about who your enemies are. Don’t worry, 80-90 percent of Americans don’t have a clue.

      • Joe

        You mean like the last time in Vietnam 1964-1973 ? That didn’t work out too well, did it? I still remember that iconic picture of the helicopter on top of the US embassy while North Vietnamese tanks were crashing through the gates. Oh, well, maybe the US will have better luck the next times, like in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. What do you mean those didn’t go too well, either? Maybe the Chinese are prudent not to send armies across the oceans…

    • michael

      Never defeated? I’ll take “Who is the Japanese Imperial Army for 500 Alex. :D

  • Brian B. Mulholland

    The Chinese have a long term plan to raise military power to levels commensurate to levels of economic prowess. Rehabbing a decrepit carrier into a seagoing vessel is a good start. It will enable the PLAN to start to create the vast range of skill sets, personal and organizational, needed for carrier operations; it will show the flag, cow the weak, put an extra edge on arguments over waters within the nine-dashed line, and give marine architects a point of departure for ships of the future. Ranting that they copy the innovations of others is silly (to put it mildly). Limiting myself to the current day and hour, China is producing VHF and command systems that have no Western equivalent, they have demonstrated an ASAT capacity that is entirely their own, and it’s folly to think that their progress is simply an act of theft. Their culture has always stressed education and work. There is no Chinese equivalent to crackpot resistance to STEM education. No one regards Beijing-mandated attempts to improve their scientific skills as Federal tyranny, an idea that’s popular with the lunatic right here. There is no equivalent to those anti-education fundamentalists intent on limiting scientific education to protect the creation story in Genesis (if the kids learn about science, they’ll learn about evolution, and if they learn about evolution, their souls will be lost to Jesus.) We’d do better to cease to hobble ourselves as we do than to pretend that the DF-21 is something Chinese spies swiped from DARPA.

    • oblatt22

      There is nothing stopping America competing with China but the fact is Americans simply don’t want to.

      • Colin

        Pretty sure the Chinese will poison themselves the way they pollute their own water and air.

    • Auyong Ah Meng

      Please note China is doing a lot and investing a lot in Thorium Nuclear Reactors…and what the US is doing again…please don’t fall too far behind…zzz

    • RBeaman

      Agreed, there isn’t much better for our Chinese friends (not foes, as of yet) to replicate or attempt to recreate the Varyag. However, if any of us “Defense Fanatics” have obserevered is that America has mastered and demonstrated the superiority in Carrier operations. When the time China has exercised and trained this muscle it will be long ineffective and antiquated.

      • Brian B. Mulholland

        The use of carriers may not stay the same. Carriers look to be a premier tool of power projection. And since China’s first concern is the conquest of Taiwan, they don’t need a carrier fleet comparable to ours to gain plenty of leverage in such a contest. The carriers are far more likely to give China a major edge over nations on the periphery in territorial and mineral-right disputes than to engage in warfare against US carriers in a WW II sense. China is more likely, IMHO, to rely on land-based systems to preclude US intervention, and the most potent naval weapon against US carrier units will continue to be submarines.

    • JTZ

      This is the most intelligent comment here compared to the chinaman/chicomm/stealing crap i’m seeing. The Chinese are playing the long game, and are a legitimate long term threat. The US and the West’s best strategy is to improve relations and export the best parts of our culture and values (IE democracy, value for human rights), while importing theirs (focus on STEM/eductation, ability to make decisions and investments without gridlock) before their growing economic and military might allows them to ignore us completely.

    • anthony

      you’re right the USA and its research community has been sitting on their hands, enjoying the CHIcom show…. lets be real the Chinese navy has made huge strides, but they still have a lot of work to do. This carrier is step 22 in a 300 step plan. A strong china doesn’t imply a weak US. Both can co-exist in their own hemisphere of influence

    • GJD

      You know, STEM has nothing to do with evolution theory. Only the ignorant claim that real science involves swallowing whole the idea of non-directed evolution based on “random” processes and something called “survival of the fittest.” Apparently you do not understand real science from something that essentially has no value in any way from a predictive perspective. F=MA at velocities relatively low compared to the speed of light. I use this all the time as a practicing engineer. This is a predictive mathematical formulation that allows one to determine the value of one variable given knowledge of the other two. Just what can one predict using “evolution?”

      Frankly, I get pretty tired of folks who equate evolution with science. Did you know that if someone were to find a chariot, a conastoga wagon and a dodge caravan that one can make a pretty good case that one “evolved” from another. So what?

    • jack

      Well said. We (objectively thinking people) need to respond more- to the facts rather than to the ‘feel’. How we feel and believe should not interfere with real time observation. It is what it is if becomes something. I am not negating a persons opinion, just the justification for dictating reality.

    • Joe

      A well-argued statement instead of the racist garbage I read in a lot of other posts. For those neanderthals that think all the Chinese do is copy and steal, just take a good look around just in the US. Go to the AMC math competition statistics (google AMC 12) and check how many single-syllable last names you find. Look at the numbers of Asians in the top universities. Here in California, it’s between 30-40%, or more than double their percentage of the state population. Go to Silicon Valley, and see how many of the “movers and shakers” are of Asian origin. Keep thinking that they’re just a bunch of cheats at your own peril.

  • Virgil Cuttaway

    The US is going to really have problems with the Chinese military in the future and it all will go back to US consumers buying Chinese products, transferring high-tech know how to Chinese companies, educating Chinese students in our top universities and then the students going back to China, and their massive espionage efforts. All the while our incompetent leaders in Washington sit back and watch it all happen.

    • oblatt22

      No its really just down to the fact that Americans would rather complain and lose then compete. Its cultural.

    • eric

      really, been seeing it years ago.. we are paying for it know!!

    • aaa

      went to school with several exchange students from China. They couldn’t have been more gracious as visitors at my university. one, a kid named felix, (clearly not his real name but it is the name our spanish prof gave him) loved everything NBA. he was a huge Kobe Bryant fan. The Chinese students i met we all very kind, very appreciative to be in the US, and, somewhat surprisingly, these Chinese students look up to their American counterparts and just want to absorb the college experience like everyone else. They are just kids who want to make their parents happy and find a job where they can provide for their family. can’t we all just get along

  • Canuck

    Despite what anyone has said about the apparent power of the Chinese Navy, the US has an advantage with their satellites as they can continually track where the ship is, as the bigger it is the easier it is to spot. Let the Chinese build carriers as they do not actually have much use for their navy as submarines would, and it helps them use up their money.

    • blight_

      In the future the opening gambit of any war will be to knock out enemy satellites. We will have to fight blind and disconnected from Washington, which should suit any leaders trained to fight their ships without micromanagement.

    • Rthompson

      War, will have a new meaning in the next 85 years. Hopefully I won’t have to see it first hand.

    • john

      nothing has to fly off the deck, for it to be effective,the projective power it shows the plan, and it works

    • DanD

      … or do you mean, “use up our money.” If the Chinese called in all America’s debt now, WE couldn’t perform. America is no moral (or economic) GIANT anymore.

      DanD

      • guest

        What do you mean “call it in now”? Haven’t you ever bought a treasury bond? It matures when it matures, there’s no calling out in early.

  • Law Leman

    This is old news, this “model” had been there for years… 5, 6 years ago??
    http://www.chinasmack.com/2009/pictures/concrete-

  • guest

    The worst thing we can do is to ever underestimate any portion of the Chicom military.

  • Captain Obvious

    Given America’s strategic position and economic potential, the US will inevitably suffer a large loss in the future, either economically or through an act of war. People forget that America was a quiet power until World War 2 rained on Pearl Harbor and the nation stood up in a magnificent fashion to hold back both war fronts.

    Now of course today is a different world but America’s secret weapon lies with the Black Projects that we have heavily funded since the invention of the atom bomb. No country is stupid enough to cross that line to find out what America would produce in a time of war.

  • Shawn McFadden

    Well, It looks pretty.

  • Muttling

    China’s navy isn’t currently on our level, but they are definitely working to develop blue water capabilities. This ship isn’t much of a concern, but it is a step in a direction that will create many concerns 10 to 20 years from now.

  • blight_

    It’s just one ship that will probably do very little to hold back the American Navy. They will likely keep it as fleet in being, and waste our efforts hunting it while they use other means to go on the attack. Keeping the Navy at arms length from land is their priority, and doing so will involve lots of SRBM’s and MRBM’s on our fixed bases. Being able to sortie undetected from Asia to strike targets across the Pacific is rather…unlikely.

  • Leo Johnson

    I believe that the Russian Name for this Ship was “Kiev” .When it left the drydock in Russia it almost sank.They had to tow it back into the drydock.Then they tested it in sea trials and they had to tow it back into its homeport and repair it .While it was in the Russian Fleet they always had entineering problems with it so they put it in their reserve fleet.I think it was there for about 10 years before they gave it to China.I think the Chinese are having the same problems with it that the Russians had because they don’t put it to sea very often.

    • Brian B. Mulholland

      If you treat the Liaoning as a training platform and a baseline for study, none of that is a real problem. Engines are unreliable and cranky? That equals a chance to build up a cadre of engineers, and do lots of design studies and simulations. Hull is old and iffy? So much the better for the development of a shipyard or two that’s well familiar with repairing (first) and building (second) large naval warships.

    • Joe

      No, Kiev was sold to China in 1996 and got turned to a floating amusement park in Tianjin. This ship was the Varyag, that was left in a Ukrainian shipyard unfinished when the Soviet Union dissolved and then sold to a China in 1998. Everybody keeps talking about how decrepit was the ship, but it’s the last carrier the Soviets tried to build and a sister ship to Russia’s only operational carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov. All the stuff about unreliable and cranky engines, etc., is nonsense, because the ship as sold was just a hulk, and all the machinery, equipment, and weapon systems were added later by the Chinese.

  • Franklin

    You know the Chinese are going to steal some islands and threaten a lot of countries, and there is one simple easy way to stir the pot. The USS enterprise is being decommissioned right now. I say lets give it to the aussies as long as they pay for the refurbishment. they already fly and co build the F18b, and are a solid allie. We would make money on the refurb and put a very friendly carrier battle group right were its needed. Its a no brainer. This kind of support for our allies is what the world needs to see, and its not like we haven’t done it before.

    • Joe

      Steal some islands? If you’re talking about the shoals and islands in the South China Seas, they’re all uninhabited and have been claimed by China dating back to the 1940’s. There’s a reason why the sea is called the “South China Sea”, because Chinese fishermen and merchants have been traversing it for centuries. Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines started getting in on the game afterwards, but what makes their claims any more legitimate than China’s? It also looks strange to me that the Western media keep referring to the islands and reefs by their English names made up by the British colonialists from 100 years ago.

  • Brian B. Mulholland

    That would eat the entire Aussie defense budget, and then some. They’ll be better off buying new submarines and working up to speed with the Wedgetail and, ultimately, the F-35.

    • Franklin

      Respectfully I disagree. All the Aussie air assets are in fixed positions and easily targeted. A carrier battle group could hit or defend anywhere. Nobody could attack australia without first neutralizing the navel defenses, and their defensive/offensive capabilities would be a huge threat to counter in the entire region. The F-35 is a joke, and submarines are limited in their defense capabilities.

  • Big-Dean

    The bubblehead community is salivating over the possibility of putting four MK 48 ADCAPs under her hull and seeing what happens-Chinese new year!

    • TheCanuck

      Does it even require 4?

    • Cataldo

      Mk 48 is too old designed to defeat a modern antisub defence, the Navy needs something new in torpedo, something like the new Wass NSP ;) but unfortunately USA buy only “american” or “china-american” so ….

  • Cataldo

    Is there someone that can give us info about this ship engine ? There were doubts about ship capability to reach operational velocity.