Type 003 Fujian vs USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) - Unbiased detailed analysis !

On May 8, the PLA Navy’s newest and most advanced aircraft carrier Type 003 ‘Fujian’ returned to a pier at Shanghai’s Jiangnan shipyard after what has been described as a successful 8 day maiden sea trial.

China’s state-owned media announced that the platform tested its electrical and power systems and achieved “the expected results”.
While it is unclear when the carrier will be fully ready for military missions, its deployment in the operational role is unlikely to take very long.

In 2022, the U.S. Navy’s next-generation supercarrier USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) set sail from Naval Station Norfolk on its first combat deployment.
The deployment comes nearly six years after its delivery from Huntington Ingalls Industries Newport News Shipbuilding and subsequent commissioning in 2017, marking the first new-design aircraft carrier delivered to the Navy since USS Nimitz (CVN 68) in 1975. It is also the first aircraft carrier to join the fleet since USS George H. W. Bush (CVN 77) was delivered in 2009.

The time is right to pit the two carriers against each other.

In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how Chinese Fujian compares to American USS Gerald R. Ford ?
The two carriers will be compared in 5 categories.

#defenseupdates #ussgeraldrford #ussgeraldrfordvsfujian

Chapters:
00:11 INTRODUCTION
03:10 CAPACITY
04:48 SPEED & ENDURANCE
05:54 AIR-WING QUALITY
07:35 RADAR, WEAPONS & ROBUSTNESS
10:54 COMBAT EFFECTIVNESS
12:48 CONCLUSION

"Giant Wyrm" Kevin MacLeod (Licensed under Creative Commons)

[MultiCconway]

This whole video is truly extraordinary. There is NO comparing the two platforms. One is a 4th Generation Aircraft Carrier and the other is still trying to be an aircraft carrier. The Chinese PLAN has not been able to stand up a Naval Aviation Community or build reasonably carrier capable aircraft of any consequence for several decades now. The fact is the USS America (LHA-6) "Lightning Carrier" is more capable and could probably take out any PLAN aircraft carrier if required in short order...PERIOD!

[krzysztofoleksij]

theres no comparison. Ford is nuclear, carries extremely good fighters and support planes like E2 and its crew is extremely qualified and well trained. Decades od experience. Fujians pilots train night operations on land to not damage the ship and the airplane they use now ( j15) is trash. Its going to be another decade before China can dream of catching up to the US. That being said US is also not stagnant and by that time will have a whole host of new air wing airplanes and drones, so most likely - China will never catch up.

[acars]

The last things the Chinese did without copying someone else were fireworks and spaghetti.

[i-on-u]

There are NO nations with aircraft carrier(s) that can compare with The US aircraft carriers, especially The Ford Class carrier. NONE.

[johnsilver]

Fujian is NOT even a supercarrier. Sure it’s large but it only has 3 catapults compared to 4 on either Ford or Nimitz. And NO portside elevator, meaning aircraft will have to cross the deck to get to the portside catapult which is not only time consuming but would also impede the landing of other aircraft. Total of only 2 elevators unlike 4 on Nimitz meaning aircraft and munitions will have to line up longer to travel to and from the flight deck and hanger. So YES Fujian is slower in terms of sortie rate. It even has less power than the older non-nuclear powered Kitty Hawk class. It’s more comparable to QE class carrier. Similarly matched in the number of aircraft both can carry. Though QE has a more efficient propulsion. So in terms of capabilities Fujian sits in between a small “lightning” carrier and a Ford or Nimitz class supercarrier.

[gutstompenrocker]

The Chinese choose to not use nuclear power, leaving their carrier underpowered for the ELS system before it even leaves port.

[richardlongman]

There needs to be another category of comparison. A carrier is nothing if it is not the center of a battle group. The submarines and surface combatants that accompany the carrier have a great deal to do with its survivability. Heck, even the underway replenishment ships have a dramatic effect on effectiveness.

[johndyson]

Goes to SHOW!! Ya, DON'T mess with the U.S.!! china you got a LONG WAY to go BABY!

[Jakery]

There is no comparing the two other than they float on water and have the ability to carry planes. Technologically it's night and day..the chinese carrier is in it's infant stage while the Ford is ultra advanced. Like comparing a propeller plane to a jet.

[scottmcintosh]

Ford over Fujian 003, not because of American Pride, but simply because of technical superiority & 84 years of practical training & combat experience.

🇺🇸 U.S. WARS SUCCESSFULY FOUGHT WITH AIRCRAFT CARRIERS:
At least 4 wars & uncountable missions.
EXPERIENCE: Beyond measure.
WARS LOST: 0 《Vietnam? 🇻🇳 》
🇨🇳 CHINA WARS SUCCESSFULLY FOUGHT WITH AIRCRAFT CARRIERS: 0
LOSSES: 0
EXPERIENCE: 0 《& it always will be 🖕🏻😘》

🤨 Is it REALLY necessary for me to make it any simpler?

⚠️ I can explain it TO you, but I cannot understand it FOR you 🤦🏻‍♂️

🌌🔭 🖕🏻😘

[sosministriesrev]

China will never catch up. The aircraft carrier dominance of the U.S. can not be overstated, the fact China is trying to run emals on a conventionally powered carrier is laughable. Though Gerald R Ford has had teething problems, this is to be expected in the 1st of a new class of carrier. The next ones will come out quicker and the Ford class are in a league of their own.

[michaelschuette]

Why would they go with stream turbines and not nuclear?

[fabricemartin]

How is it possible that the Fujian of 80, 000/85, 000 tons only has a capacity of 50 planes while the 87, 000 tons of the Kitty Hawk allowed it to accommodate 70 planes and up to 85 at most?
The 2 have a similar size and tonnage. How do you explain that? 🤔

[vanroeling]

It will be interesting to see how long it takes the PLAN to launch their first aircraft off the Fujian. It took the USN over two years to get EMALS to work on the Ford, and that’s with > 100 years of aircraft carrier experience! An aircraft carrier that can’t launch aircraft is useless.

[jairo]

The US carrier not having proper antisubmarine capabilities is a huge drawback, very recently in a drill with nato allies the whole strike group was shamed by a single diesel submarine. And the ship that was supposed to take that job was such an spectacular flop that the program was cancelled and the vessels retired early (the LCS were supposed to have "packages" which would had included antisubmarine warfare, yet were scrapped.).
Edit: Also, you including laser weapons is kind of out of place for making a comparison, CVN 78 doesn't have one of those yet (granted the reason the vessel has 2 reactors is precisely thinking about the future), but you are to be comparing their *current* capabilities.

[jeffmachul]

Bull Shit how in God's name are they going to teach them on to land. It will never go into service. ❤

[richardtardo]

The People’s Army Navy is a green water navy.

[TamagoHead]

No competition. The US Navy as a power and is only 2nd to the US Airforce.

The US has far more blue-water experience, better planes, better crew & training.

China’s economy and infrastructure is in peril, and is only decent at copying attempts.

[chinogixxer]

I'm curious as to whether the Chinese have figured out that one of the biggest reasons we can carry so many more aircraft is because we make all our or nearly all of our carrier aircraft with folded wings folded wings. I wonder if they're taking this into consideration during their next iteration of carrier aircraft aircraft design... As an Aerospace engineer, this is what I think about LOL

[amunra]

The Type 004 Nuclear Powered (currently being built) China plans to build 7 of these.