Should America Be Scared of China's New Aircraft Carrier?


China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning (PLAN CV-16). Source: Wikimedia Commons

Well, it's official now: China has one aircraft carrier -- and it's building a second.

Once known as the Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag, China's flagship now goes by the name Liaoning, and is the biggest ship in the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) by far. In 1998, China bought Liaoning from Ukraine as a half-built hulk for just $20 million (ostensibly for the purpose of turning it into a floating casino), then rebuilt it from the keel up for an estimated $2 billion.

Liaoning began its sea trials in 2011, then completed them, was commissioned into the PLAN, and began flight trials in 2012. Today, China has joined world powers Brazil, France, India, Italy, Russia, Thailand, the U.K., and of course the United States as a fully fledged member of the world's "aircraft carrier club." And over the weekend, Chinese state media confirmed that the country has begun construction on a second carrier...


It depends on what the meaning of "aircraft carrier" is. Source: Wikimedia Commons

Define "aircraft carrier"
Of course, what exactly qualifies as an "aircraft carrier" is itself up for debate. Around the world, so-called "carriers" range in size from Thailand's Chakri Naruebet -- a veritable bathtub toy at 11,500 tons displacement -- to France's Charles de Gaulle, weighing in at 42,000 tons, fully loaded, to the new 100,000-ton American supercarrier USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) -- currently under construction at Huntington Ingalls (NYSE: HII  ) .

So where does China's Liaoning place in this continuum? What are its capabilities compared to, say, the Ford? And are American taxpayers getting good bang for their buck with Ford, relative to the Chinese with their Liaoning?

Here are the numbers:

 

USS Gerald R. Ford 

Liaoning 

Length

1,106 feet

999 feet

Beam

256 feet

246 feet

Displacement

100,000 tons

59,000 tons

Speed

30-plus knots

32 knots

Crew

4,200

2,000

Aircraft carried

Up to 90 F-35, F/A-18, EA-18G, and E-2 planes, plus SH-60 helicopters and X-47B drones

30 Shenyang J-15 fighter jets

24 Ka-31 helicopters

Cost (ex-R&D) 

$12.8 billion

$2 billion

Naval superiority -- at a price
The stats make two things immediately clear. First, there's a huge disparity in cost between the two carriers. For a vessel less than twice the tonnage of the Liaoning, USS Gerald R. Ford is costing U.S. taxpayers more than six times the price: $12.8 billion, and that's before you count the $5 billion spent on researching and developing America's newest supercarrier.

That said, Ford is a more capable warship, and a more clear and present danger to enemy warships, than Liaoning. Once Huntington Ingalls finishes work on Ford, and Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT  ) delivers her complement of F-35 stealth fighter jets, Ford will pack three times as many fighter jets as Liaoning -- and better fighters to boot. Even were the capabilities of the fighters equal, China would need to build or buy three Liaoning-class aircraft carriers to match the capabilities of a single Ford.

China has a PLAN
Will China build three carriers to match each Ford-class carrier that America builds? Not likely. Current Pentagon plans are to eventually replace all Nimitz-class aircraft carriers with Fords -- 11 vessels in all. Building and maintaining 33 aircraft carriers might be beyond China's abilities.

But experts believe that PLAN does want at least four aircraft carriers by 2020. That includes the Liaoning, the second, homegrown vessel of similar size that China just confirmed is in the works, and probably two larger, 100,000-ton warships to be built at a future date.

The cost of these larger vessels would be significant. Colonel Li Jie at China's Institute of Naval Military Academy estimates it at "about 5 billion US dollars to build such a large-size aircraft carrier."

Still, People's Liberation Army Major General Luo Yuan is on record calling for no fewer than three aircraft carriers to be built for the PLAN. Explains the general: "If we consider our neighbours, India will have three aircraft carriers by 2014 and Japan will have three carriers by 2014, so I think the number (for China) should not be less than three so we can defend our rights and our maritime interests effectively." 

The upshot for investors
On the one hand, General Luo Yuan's statement makes it clear that in building its aircraft carriers, China has its eye primarily on maintaining parity with other regional powers -- not with challenging America's dominance in seas around the globe. That being said, the mere fact that China has entered the aircraft carrier club, and is racing to build more and bigger aircraft carriers, will make it hard for even budget-cutters in Congress to cut back on spending to bulk up America's fleet.

Regardless of the cost.


Artist's depiction of the new Ford-class aircraft carriers. Source: Wikimedia Commons

Oh, and one more thing
Did we mention that Huntington, which is building the Ford-class carriers, pays its shareholders a tidy 0.8% dividend yield? Try getting your bank to pay you 0.8% interest these days! While they don't garner the notability of high-flying tech stocks, dividend-paying stocks like Huntington Ingalls are also less likely to crash and burn. And over the long term, the compounding effect of the quarterly payouts, as well as their growth, adds up faster than most investors imagine. With this in mind, our analysts sat down to identify the absolute best of the best when it comes to rock-solid dividend stocks, drawing up a list in this free report of nine that fit the bill. To discover the identities of these companies before the rest of the market catches on, you can download this valuable free report by simply clicking here now.

 

Read/Post Comments (5) | Recommend This Article (1)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On January 21, 2014, at 11:03 AM, duuude1 wrote:

    1 anti-ship missile = priceless...

  • Report this Comment On January 21, 2014, at 11:13 AM, AFMS wrote:

    Didn't even read this article. Just read the title, and this answer is NO. China is not a threat, never was, and will never be to all the other anti american, pro enemy, scare tactic, dooms dayer's out there. There military capability is not even half of ours. They are scared of ussss

  • Report this Comment On January 21, 2014, at 2:21 PM, JERRYSTR wrote:

    If we had the satellites and technology in weapons we have today on December 7, 1941, the entire Japanese fleet would have been at the bottom of the ocean before they were within strike range of Pearl Harbor. Aircraft carriers and battleships are also called large targets. How do hide an aircraft carrier nowadays? We basically use them as intimidation for smaller countries and a show of our flag for higher tech countries.

  • Report this Comment On January 27, 2014, at 6:55 PM, TheRock0987 wrote:

    I hate to tell China, but that carrier isn't much of a contender. The sheer lack of variety of squadrons it can carry, the small number of their crew, and the useless "thumper" launch deck, make this craft easy pickings.

    They have stealthy aircraft aboard, but we know how to detect them -- over the horizon.

    They might intimidate North Korea (no actual carrier force) and Russia (only the antiquated Kuznetsov), but folks, they can't throw their weight around yet.

    I hope they like burial at sea, because that's what they're likely to get. remember the lesson of the Bismarck if you have any doubts.

  • Report this Comment On January 29, 2014, at 4:13 PM, quatra wrote:

    Hmmmm. Nothing is being said about China's coastal defenses with it's long-range supersonic surface-to-ship missiles (and probably updated versions now being designed and built). I guess they wouldn't attack a carrier directly but rather the support vessels. I also would prefer to have 10 smaller carriers than 1 big target.

    Anyway, let's hope it just stays at very expensive dick-wagging posturing.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2801418, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 12/21/2014 6:31:48 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement