On November 5th, the third aircraft carrier of the Chinese Communist Party, the Fujian Ship, was officially commissioned. The CCP leader personally presented the flag, triggering enthusiastic coverage from CCP media emphasizing the start of the “electromagnetic catapult” era and the “three aircraft carrier” era for the Chinese navy. Some Hong Kong media even praised it as “leading American aircraft carriers by 10 years.” However, experts believe that such claims are not based on scientific facts. Several experts pointed out that the biggest shortcoming of the Fujian Ship is the lack of combat experience, with only operational capabilities, falling far short of actual combat abilities.
The commissioning ceremony for the Fujian Ship took place on November 5th at a military port in Sanya, Hainan. According to Xinhua News Agency, Xi Jinping personally decided on the adoption of electromagnetic catapult technology for the Fujian Ship, stating that “its electromagnetic catapult technology is at an advanced global level” but avoiding claims of being “ahead of the global advanced level.” In relative contrast, the Global Times claimed the commissioning of the Fujian Ship carries “four significant meanings” and “three leaps,” etc.
Notably, the CCP’s mouthpiece in Hong Kong, Ta Kung Pao, described the Fujian Ship as the world’s first conventional-powered electromagnetic catapult aircraft carrier, challenging the notion that only nuclear-powered carriers could support such technology. They also achieved heavy fighter and stealth fighter electromagnetic catapult capabilities.
The report quoted “military issue expert” Liu Le as saying, “The difference between the Fujian Ship and American aircraft carriers is like the difference between a 5G phone and a 2G phone.” He claimed that the U.S. lags behind China by at least ten years in this respect due to China’s more advanced electromagnetic catapult technology.
In recent years, due to the CCP’s ambition to take Taiwan and the militaristic expansionism trend, the ongoing military competition between China and the U.S. remains a critical focus.
Veteran Taiwanese media figure and military commentator Qi Leyi told Dajiyuan that Ta Kung Pao’s statements echo past CCP claims of “surpassing Britain and catching up to America,” suggesting political motives behind such propaganda, which may not necessarily benefit the CCP.
In Qi Leyi’s view, everyone understands that China is a latecomer to aircraft carriers and cannot compare to the U.S. The U.S. has had 11 aircraft carriers since World War II, while China is just starting to learn from scratch. The claim of being more advanced than the U.S. by ten years is highly unscientific.
Qi Leyi emphasized that U.S. aircraft carriers have been in combat operations since World War II, while Chinese carriers lack real combat experience, making them far from being considered more advanced than others.
In September, the CCP CCTV highlighted the Fujian Ship, revealing footage of three types of carrier-based aircraft being catapulted from the ship, showcasing China’s capabilities in electromagnetic catapult and recovery on carriers.
Qi Leyi informed Dajiyuan that this is merely operational capability and not combat readiness.
“Carrier-based aircraft can take off and land on the aircraft carrier normally. This is the minimum requirement; without the ability to fly, there is no combat power, which means a lack of combat capability. From operational capability to combat capability, it takes a long time and continuous experience accumulation,” he stated.
Qi Leyi stressed that real-world combat situations will reveal the true performance of an aircraft carrier. Usually, general training may not uncover all the carrier’s flaws.
Colonel Carl Schuster, who served on two U.S. Navy aircraft carriers, and Lieutenant Colonel Keith Stewart, a former naval aviator, both pointed out after reviewing photos of the Fujian Ship’s flight deck last month that the design of the ship’s flight deck limits the speed at which fighters can take off and land simultaneously. Comparing it to the Nimitz-class carriers, this limitation becomes more pronounced.
Schuster said that the design of the Fujian Ship’s flight deck makes the landing area more congested, with an angle of only 6 degrees between the landing area and the deck’s centerline. The smaller the angle, the closer the landing runway is to the position of the catapult, restricting the efficiency of aircraft takeoffs and landings. In contrast, the U.S. carriers have a 9-degree angle.
Furthermore, the excessive length of the landing area on the Fujian Ship causes the aircraft to land too close to the bow catapult area, affecting the aircraft’s launch after landing. Schuster stated, “The longer landing area and narrower deck angle diminish the space for aircraft to reposition after landing.”
As a result, Schuster assessed that “the combat capability of the Fujian Ship is only about 60% of the Nimitz class.”
Stewart pointed out that carrier operations are one of the least experienced areas within the Chinese military, with these experiences only being learned through operational practice in various environments.
Stewart said, “I have witnessed several people perish on the carrier’s flight deck and know how dangerous that environment can be. Building a brand-new carrier is undoubtedly challenging, but in my view, China has many unknown areas when it comes to carrier combat operations.”
Qi Leyi stated that U.S. experts are right as U.S. aircraft carriers have accumulated experience through real combat scenarios. In fact, all of China’s main combat equipment lacks practical verification, which is the most significant shortcoming. The current expression of confidence is mere nationalist propaganda, and once they engage in actual combat, problems will arise.
Several international experts also believe that the combat capability of the Fujian Ship is its biggest shortcoming.
Naval equipment expert Alex Luck told Agence France-Presse that it will take many years for the Fujian Ship to possess sufficient combat capability. Furthermore, China must have more of these types of carriers to break the current power balance with the United States truly.
Collin Koh, an expert on Asia-Pacific naval issues at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, also told Agence France-Presse that the Chinese navy lags behind its potential opponents, especially the U.S., in accumulating operational experience, fleet operations, and combat experience. The lack of combat experience is a significant weakness for the Chinese navy.
A spokesperson for the People’s Liberation Army Navy, Liang Guowei, stated on November 8th that the Fujian Ship will be stationed at the Sanya Naval Base. When asked about when it would achieve combat readiness, Liang Guowei did not directly respond, only stating that “many equipment and technologies are being used for the first time,” and the ship will continue to conduct further trials to test the stability of the platform system, etc.
According to Chinese media reports, although the Fujian Ship has been officially commissioned, it does not mean it will be deployed for frontline combat. By international standards and conventions, it takes 5 to 8 years from commissioning for a warship to develop combat effectiveness.
The Global Times quoted military expert Song Zhongping, emphasizing a similar meaning to “making a risky pass on a curve.” He stated that the Fujian Ship did not continue using steam catapults used for nearly a century and instead took a different path, focusing on developing electromagnetic catapult technology to accelerate the development of aircraft carrier performance and combat capability.
Currently, there are primarily four types of aircraft carrier takeoff methods in the world: ski-jump, steam catapult, electromagnetic catapult, and vertical short takeoff and landing. Previously, only the U.S. Ford-class carriers used electromagnetic catapults, while other U.S. carriers mostly used steam catapults.
Interestingly, U.S. President Trump recently pointed out at Yokosuka Naval Base in Japan while aboard the USS “Washington” that he intends to sign an executive order requiring the U.S. Navy to revert to using steam catapults on new aircraft carriers. He stated that electromagnetic catapults are costly and often fail to operate properly even with top-notch maintenance. In contrast, steam catapults have been in service for 50 years and are reliable.
In response to Trump’s statement, Qi Leyi explained that U.S. aircraft carriers have undergone years of practical testing, leading to the discovery of issues with their electromagnetic catapults. Steam catapults are stable, which is why they are now focusing on them. Nevertheless, electromagnetic catapults need continuous testing and will ultimately be used. Trump’s remarks are based on scientific considerations and are very practical.
Veteran military commentator Mark told Dajiyuan that China and the U.S. employ different technologies. While issues with the electromagnetic catapult system on the U.S. Ford-class carriers are apparent, the U.S. is more open about its information. China boasts about its technology, but its information is closed, with the key drawback being the lack of combat experience. “The U.S. Ford-class carriers have had several years of real operational experience, whereas Chinese carriers have not experienced high-intensity combat at all.”
Some Chinese military self-media claim that the U.S. Ford-class carriers require nuclear power to implement electromagnetic catapults, while the Fujian Ship achieved this technology with a medium-voltage DC power system on conventional power.
Mark assessed that there are significant potential risks with Chinese technology since a localized issue with a DC system may lead to a complete system shutdown, which is why other countries use AC power. “China claims to have overcome this challenge, but no one knows if there are problems in practical use. Of course, even if issues arise, China won’t publicize it, and the media won’t report it,” he said.