Chinese Navy Builds Drone-Exclusive Aircraft Carrier. → America

Chinese Navy's "Drone-Only Aircraft Carrier" is too revolutionary... A game-changer?



Military information media reported that the Chinese Navy is believed to be constructing an aircraft carrier dedicated to drones. Experts point out that this carrier could be a game-changer in the arms race.

(omitted)

Full text
https://www.newsweekjapan.jp/stories/world/2024/05/post-104611_1.php

Let's build a jamming ship

The recent evolution of drones is insane, seriously.
They destroy expensive weapons at a very low cost.

The theory that drones are the strongest was proven in the Ukraine war.
China is quick to act as expected.

Suicide drones are really a threat, aren't they?

Saw it in Ghost in the Shell 🦀

When you say drones, at first they looked like RC toys with four wings, but the drones used in wars look like small fighter jets.

America should counter with an arsenal ship.

The Self-Defense Forces will probably be the ones to get hit and plan the strategies.
Poor Self-Defense Forces.

Wouldn't it be better to just put modified containers on a cargo tanker?

>>14
If you do such disguised operations, it would give a reason to attack civilians, like Israel's indiscriminate attacks on Gaza. So you shouldn't do that.

Using a sluggish ship as a base would just be a burden.
China is really bad at weapon deployment.

They were laughed at for saying they would build an underwater submarine base recently.

No one can stop China anymore, that era is just around the corner.

It's logical, a drone-only aircraft carrier.
Just do kamikaze attacks to destroy enemy ships.

If a small fishing boat class (which is itself an autonomous surface drone) loaded with a large number of small drones approaches...

Here comes the aircraft carrier

I can see a future where the drone's battery explodes on the carrier.

Past balloon bombs and dog bombs, if they function properly, they're useful.

If you sink an aircraft carrier, it just becomes a fishing reef.

Chinese people have low literacy in this kind of technology.
They think outdated technology that other countries have already used and discarded decades ago is groundbreaking new technology.

Drones are a prime example.
In normal advanced countries, practical use and legal frameworks were established in the era of RC toys, but China is rediscovering the wheel and thinking it's a new weapon. It's laughable.

Obviously, the technology for jamming signals to counter drones must be advancing too.

>>27
They'll probably do it with autopilot instead of remote control.

>>27
AI autonomous control.
More advanced than the latest drones in the Ukraine war.

It's actually a threat.
If tens of thousands of drone submarines swarm, any warship would be done for.

If you had a normal brain, you'd do it with a heavy airship.

Wumao-chan, you're working hard today too!

What's the difference from a missile ship?
If you put operators on it, the cost-performance wouldn't be that different, right?

They made it

Japan has Mabuchi Motor, Kyosho, Futaba, and Tamiya!

>>35
They should let those companies work on military technology more.

>>38
What would that be in Gundam terms?

If this becomes an airborne aircraft carrier, it would really be a threat.
Catching up with Ace Combat.

Was it End of State?
The one where they launch a lot of drones from a launcher and attack.
That's a threat.

Completely meaningless in tactical strategy.
It's just a show to make the Chinese people think "China is awesome."

Thousands of large drones each releasing hundreds of small drones to attack life forms.
Is that future coming soon?

They're probably just trying to see if it's useful.
America can't make decisions on a whim because of Congress.

Are they short on pilots and aircraft?

>>1
Hundreds of thousands of kamikaze drones, right?
That could indeed be a global threat.

America also had a similar Arsenal Ship plan, though it was with missiles, not drones.

200,000 drone carriers

This week's surprise gadget

Japan has to decide whether to side with China or America.

>>48
No, there's no reason to side with China in the first place.

So we just need a drone to sink this?

In a normal country, they'd notice the flaws at the design stage.

Doesn't an aircraft carrier alone mean nothing without escort ships?
If you're going to fly drones, wouldn't existing aircraft carriers do?
Are they going to make the aircraft carrier itself unmanned and mass-produce them?

Wait, didn't someone say aircraft carriers are outdated? lol

They might also build a drone version of the I-400 submarine aircraft carrier.

The balloon bombs of the Empire of Japan were kind of like drones, though they couldn't be guided.

>>55
They're the world's first intercontinental ballistic weapons, so a bit different.

Let's counter with Minovsky particles

They're on the cutting edge.
Japan still hasn't made drones.

Aircraft carriers are the first targets, but can China, with its low MD level and no sea battle experience, defend the fleet?

Again?
Aren't they just saying game-changer for the sake of it?

Using a ship as a base limits the range of drone operations.
The location of the operators will be obvious, making them easy targets.
They can only operate along the coast, and the mothership will just become a target at sea.
Someone stop them, it's pitiful.

How about launching drones from submarines that surface from the sea?

Doesn't a drone-only carrier make no sense?
You could just bring drones to the current carriers.
A carrier with only drones is actually weaker.

Just attack the Chinese GPS satellites the moment the war starts.

Military drones might cost billions, but if they can sink an American aircraft carrier with dozens or hundreds of them, it's worth it.