Can China's 100-Aircraft Type 004 SuperCarrier Rival US Navy Carriers?

By Kris Osborn, Warrior

China’s carrier fleet is experiencing what could be called “explosive” growth and progress, as its 3rd carrier the Fujian is now operational and in the South China Sea and the PLA Navy is also surging forward with a new, first-of-its-kind “supercarrier. In the mere flash of an instant it appears the People’s Liberation Army-Navy will soon be a four-aircraft carrier force, something which seemed like a distant thought or wish just 10 years ago. Not only has the PLAN now had three aircraft carriers at sea at one time, but China also appears to be building a massive, “supercarrier” capable of projecting more power than the US Navy’s USS Ford.

Citing commercially available satellite photos, numerous reports now say China clearly appears to be progressing with a huge, Type 004 aircraft carrier which may be the largest the world has ever seen. Available specs indicate that the USS Ford can travel with up to 90 aircraft, yet China’s 004 is said to be capable of carrying at least 100.

Very little is known about the carrier apart from what can be observed in satellite images seen at the Xianglujiao drydock in Dalian, a major shipbuilding site used to build China’s first two carriers, the Liaoning and Shandong. China’s 3rd carrier, the Fujian,now operational and the PLAN has on several occasions conducted dual-carrier war preparation drills.

There is a lot of public speculation and analysis regarding the look and configuration of the large new carrier, yet few specifics can be confirmed. There does appear to be consensus that the ship will be China’s first nuclear-powered carrier and operate with electromagnetic catapults.  The existence of these technologies point to what could be interpreted as the first and most self-evident observation regarding the carrier ….and that is the simple issue of being a USS Ford copycat. The PRC has a well-known and documented history of copying or stealing US technologies, and it was therefore not surprising that China’s 3rd carrier features a large, flat-deck and electromagnetic catapult similar to the USS Ford. The PLAN’s Type 004 seems quite similar in configuration, yet larger 

China’s View on Carriers

Another significant element of this may be that perhaps the PLA does not think that big-deck carriers will become obsolete or simply too vulnerable in an age where modern threats such as long-range anti-ship missiles can target large platforms thousands of miles off shore.  The fact that China’s ambition to become a dominant global power capable of projecting and maintaining influence and military prowess far beyond the Pacific is well known, yet China’s apparent belief that there is still a significant and highly valued place for carriers in a modern threat environment seems quite significant. Essentially, the emergence of this Chinese ship seems to offer a window into PRC thinking on the value and continued utility of carriers, something which has occupied a central space within Pentagon and Navy debates about the future of maritime warfare.

Chinese Ship Defenses?

Does China plan to operate the carrier in locations where there are few to no threats from long-range, shore-fired precision anti-ship missiles?  Perhaps a more likely scenario is that China is advancing with ship-defense technologies in a manner similar to the US Navy. Can China protect carriers with lasers? EW?.. or Interceptor missiles from surrounding warships? Does China have the multi-domain ISR connecting air, surface, land and space targeting technology together in real time such that incoming anti-ship missiles can be seen and destroyed early in their trajectory?  It would seem likely that China is also progressing quickly with the development of layered ship defenses, as there appears to be confidence that a ship of that size could provide unique and extremely valuable advantages in war. This view does seem to parallel the US Navy to some extent, because although the US is likely to build more unmanned ships and smaller-faster, less vulnerable aircraft-carrying platforms, there does appear to be a clear belief among US decision makers that carriers not only provide unprecedented value in warfare … but are also hear to stay for decades into the future.

Training & Experience Deficit

However, any advantage the PRC may have in the realm of high-speed carrier construction is likely “offset” or mitigated to a large degree by the US Navy’s decades-long “experience” operating carriers at sea. The US Navy has used aircraft carriers in maritime war since the World War I era and has more than 100 years of operational experience with floating runways and maritime air attack. In the modern era, the US Navy has operated a fleet of at least ten carriers for decades and used them with great success in a wide range of conflicts to include WWII, the Gulf War and Operation Iraqi Freedom, among others.

Coordinating at-sea take-offs and landings and, in addition, operating a massive air attack campaign with an integrated Carrier Air Wing clearly presents a series of complexities not easily replicated by the PLA-N. Furthermore, the simple task of “landing” a fighter jet on a carrier decks is also known to be extremely difficult; pilots must account for the wind, sea-state and aircraft op-tempo to descend upon and land on a carrier with a safe and effective “glide slope.” Added to this advantage, the US Navy now operates both F/A-18s and F-35Cs with advanced software able to assist pilots with smooth, successful landings. Pilots follow a light or “ball” called the fresnel lens to align properly for a carrier deck landing, and pilot experience is now supplemented on F/A-18s with a glide-slope enhancing and stabilizing software known as "magic carpet.”  In a related capacity, the US Navy F-35C and US Marine Corps F-35B now operate with Delta Flight Path, a software designed to help automate and assist carrier landings. 

Perhaps most of all, there is the irreplaceable value of operational war experience, something which the PLA simply does not have. The US Navy now operates with generations of wartime-driven lessons learned in the realm of carrier warfare and has become extremely adept at networking Carrier Strike Groups together, coordinating weapons and sortie rates and learning how to sustain air campaign operations while under attack or facing adverse conditions. Therefore, while the PLA not only suffers a massive numbers deficit in the realm of carriers when compared to the US Navy, but also operates with a massive disadvantage in the realm of training and war experience. 

Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University. r