- far less Chinese experience at long range, inter-ocean logistics (supply chains) for Liaoning and its
whole carrier group
whole carrier group
- far fewer port arrangements, physical facilities and supporting ocean rim allies than the US
- Liaoning only carries 36 fighters/helicopters (nothing like the unique Osprey) vs up to around 80
fighters/helicopters/Ospreys on Nimitzes.
- China's only carrier fighter type, the J-15, lacks the stealth of F-35Bs or Cs and there seem no plans
to make carrier capable stealth prototypes of China's J-20 or J-31.
- as with India's INS Vikramaditya (ex-Kiev) and Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov, Liaoning’s old Soviet
steam turbines were badly designed, were poorly maintained, of limited range, limited to 20
knots cruise. This is even though China modified Liaoning's propulsion in a reported "1,000" ways.
- This means Liaoning would take longer to arrive on station and be less able to flee from threats.
- Meanwhile Nimitz-class can travel nuclear, around the world, at 30 knots.
- the J-15 ski-jump launch requires the J-15s to use more fuel than catapult assisted aircraft US
aircraft.
- Lower power to weight aircraft types (eg. AEW aircraft and cargo aircraft - standard on Nimitzes)
cannot be used on Liaoning
- of course, no catapult assistance limits fighters to smaller fuel-loads (far less range) and to lighter
weapons and/or sensor loads
- Liaoning’s pilots, airwing crew and ship crew are far less experienced (by around 94 years) than
their American counterparts, especially in fire and kinetic emergencies
- Liaoning doesn’t appear yet able to launch and recover aircraft at night, crucial for combat
effectiveness and safety (pilots don't want to underestimate when darkness comes)
All this makes Liaoning far less flexible and less effective than Nimitzes.