<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: China Shows Off an Aircraft Carrier, but Experts Are Skeptical</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.markturner.net/2012/09/25/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.markturner.net/2012/09/25/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical/</link>
	<description>Perspectives of a Raleigh geek</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 12:11:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Turner</title>
		<link>http://www.markturner.net/2012/09/25/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical/comment-page-1/#comment-4790</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Turner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:53:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markturner.net/?p=13811#comment-4790</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yeah, what good is an aircraft carrier if you can&#039;t do power projection?

I hope this doesn&#039;t make the Chinese foolhardy enough to stumble into a dust-up with the Japanese over the disputed islands. The JDF would smoke them.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, what good is an aircraft carrier if you can&#8217;t do power projection?</p>
<p>I hope this doesn&#8217;t make the Chinese foolhardy enough to stumble into a dust-up with the Japanese over the disputed islands. The JDF would smoke them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Bullock</title>
		<link>http://www.markturner.net/2012/09/25/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical/comment-page-1/#comment-4789</link>
		<dc:creator>David Bullock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markturner.net/?p=13811#comment-4789</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Can you imagine the mess decks?

&quot;Chinese food....? AGAIN?&quot;

:)

And, an aircraft carrier is just the most prominent piece of the puzzle, you can&#039;t do power projection with just the carrier alone, you need the aircraft (obviously), you need the supporting battlegroup and other noncombatant assets to support it, otherwise your carrier is just a bigger than normal target.

As carriers go, -- it&#039;s first and foremost only a pocket carrier, with about have the displacement and 1/3 the capacity of the Carl Vinson.  It&#039;s also the lower tech and inferior ski-ramp design that will limit what they can launch off of it if they ever do get planes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can you imagine the mess decks?</p>
<p>&#8220;Chinese food&#8230;.? AGAIN?&#8221;</p>
<p> <img src='http://www.markturner.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>And, an aircraft carrier is just the most prominent piece of the puzzle, you can&#8217;t do power projection with just the carrier alone, you need the aircraft (obviously), you need the supporting battlegroup and other noncombatant assets to support it, otherwise your carrier is just a bigger than normal target.</p>
<p>As carriers go, &#8212; it&#8217;s first and foremost only a pocket carrier, with about have the displacement and 1/3 the capacity of the Carl Vinson.  It&#8217;s also the lower tech and inferior ski-ramp design that will limit what they can launch off of it if they ever do get planes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Turner</title>
		<link>http://www.markturner.net/2012/09/25/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical/comment-page-1/#comment-4785</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Turner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markturner.net/?p=13811#comment-4785</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In fact, it might have been more useful as a novelty casino in Macau, as the buyer originally claimed. Then again, casinos are known too waste large amounts of money! :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In fact, it might have been more useful as a novelty casino in Macau, as the buyer originally claimed. Then again, casinos are known too waste large amounts of money! <img src='http://www.markturner.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Turner</title>
		<link>http://www.markturner.net/2012/09/25/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical/comment-page-1/#comment-4784</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Turner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:30:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markturner.net/?p=13811#comment-4784</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, I know. Training. But no one expects anything to fly from this for probably a decade if that.

I agree with others when they say it&#039;s a colossal waste of money. China is nowhere near being a blue water navy. This ship&#039;s is good for whipping up patriotic feelings among the Chinese and little else.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I know. Training. But no one expects anything to fly from this for probably a decade if that.</p>
<p>I agree with others when they say it&#8217;s a colossal waste of money. China is nowhere near being a blue water navy. This ship&#8217;s is good for whipping up patriotic feelings among the Chinese and little else.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Bullock</title>
		<link>http://www.markturner.net/2012/09/25/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical/comment-page-1/#comment-4783</link>
		<dc:creator>David Bullock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markturner.net/?p=13811#comment-4783</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think you buried the lead on this one Mark :)

The mark “16” emblazoned on the carrier’s side indicates it is limited to training, Chinese and other military experts said. &lt;b&gt;China does not have planes capable of landing on the carrier and so far training for such landings has been carried out on land, they said.&lt;/b&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you buried the lead on this one Mark <img src='http://www.markturner.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>The mark “16” emblazoned on the carrier’s side indicates it is limited to training, Chinese and other military experts said. <b>China does not have planes capable of landing on the carrier and so far training for such landings has been carried out on land, they said.</b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
