So, What's the Deal With the Drone Carrier
mindset over material
Like I said on Sunday’s Midrats, the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) “drone carrier” is, if nothing else, cute.
The good folks over at Naval News put out a nice explainer for the overhead shot that got everyone in a tizzy over the weekend.
Their description is all you really need to know detail wise;
It is immediately apparent that it is, in general arrangement, an aircraft carrier of some sort. It has a marked runaway (sic) running along the port (left side) with an island superstructure on the starboard (right) side.
Beyond this, it is unusual in every respect. The hull is a widely spaced catamaran. While catamarans are often featured in aircraft carrier concepts because they allow a large deck area, no one has actually built one before. Additionally, analysis of satellite imagery shows that the flight deck is very low. It appears unlikely there is a hangar deck below the flight deck. If there is, its ceiling is very low. Therefore, it does not appear designed to support high tempo or prolonged flight operations.
The flight deck is wide enough to comfortably operate aircraft or drones with a wingspan of around 20 meters (65 feet) such as Chinese equivalents of the Predator drone.
However, the mere existence of a flight deck suggests that aircraft intend to land on it. A catapult or launch rail of some form would be sufficient for launch if recovery wasn’t necessary.
What they may or may not do with it really isn’t the story here. This is a datapoint of something more important.
One of the coping mechanisms, especially since the PLAN became larger than the USN, is to tell ourselves that we are more sophisticated, that the PLAN is like China - what it has it steals or copies, they are rote and predictable while we are imaginative and innovative, etc, etc.
Well, no.
What we see here with the PLAN is an organization that is actively experimenting and exploring. Somewhere the observation was made, “Drones are showing their worth both at sea and ashore in the Russo-Ukrainian War. We have some ideas how to make this expeditionary, but we really need to try the concept out at sea.”
After that, a more senior person with access to funding and levers of power said, “OK, have a plan to me in X-weeks and I’ll find the money.”
I don’t think you will see a fleet of these cute little flat-tops, and that is not what should focus your mind. Neither should PLAN drones at sea be your focus.
No, what you need to do is adjust your assumptions. Check your ingrained biases. Tear down your coping mechanisms that keep you from seeing the PRC and PLAN for what they are.
They are not a “pacing threat” - a phrase no serious person should still be using unless they enjoy half the people hearing it rolling their eyes - they are a peer adversary. They are very serious - and better than most of the myopic people stuck in DC games think.
Give them a nod of respect, and then look to our military. Wonder what is standing in the way of a nimble capability development culture. Wonder if, really, we are more imaginative and innovative.
I sketched out a very viable, inexpensive drone carrier a couple of years back. It wouldn't take much to build a fleet of 20k ton drone carriers, lofting and recovering long endurance drones that could be armed with an ASCM or LWT or two. There's a huge need for sea control ships like that, that aren't part of the battle fleet.
Perhaps a test bed with some combat use?
I do not know their operations concept well enough to say how the PLAN intends to operate.