[原创翻译]美国网友对中秋起降航妈的评论(有更新)

mffoda  From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 856 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 11:33:00 your local time (1 day 3 hours 29 minutes ago) and read 796 times:       

I like the 2nd pic with the movie theater barricades. Tickets please!   
And the last pic is very Top Gun... Why are there 2 guys pointing?? What if one them points the other direction?  

我很喜欢第二张照片，有电影院围栏的那张，我也要买票去看！
最后一张照片非常像Top Gun，但是为什么这俩人要用手指？？如果他们指的是另外一个方向咋办？

_
RIXrat  From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 746 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 11:57:29 your local time (1 day 3 hours 5 minutes ago) and read 785 times:       

I'm confused by the markings on the aircraft. Never seen anything like that before. Don't the Chinese use a red star in the middle with two red bars on each side, or is this a Navy version?

我被飞机的涂装迷惑了，从来没见过这样的。中国空军不是用的是一个红星加两条杠的标志么？难道这是海军的版本？

_
BladeLWS  From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 383 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 13:21:12 your local time (1 day 1 hour 41 minutes ago) and read 739 times:       

Quoting RIXrat (Reply 2):
I'm confused by the markings on the aircraft. Never seen anything like that before. Don't the Chinese use a red star in the middle with two red bars on each side, or is this a Navy version?

Those are test markings, usually for cameras so they know what to aim at.

（回复上一个人）这些是测试用的标志，主要是用来给相机作为对焦点使用的。（原来如此？）

_
RIXrat  From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 746 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 16:41:39 your local time (22 hours 21 minutes 15 secs ago) and read 658 times:       

BladeLWS -- thanks for clearing that up. I was really scratching my head on that one.

（回复上一个）非常感谢你的澄清，我真的被这个迷惑到了。

_
rfields5421  From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 5464 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 21:18:05 your local time (17 hours 44 minutes 49 secs ago) and read 540 times:       

I realize that is a test bird - but that is the ugliest color I've ever seen on an aircraft.

我知道这是一架试验机，不过这真是有史以来最丑的涂装了。
_
alberchico  From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2586 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 00:32:10 your local time (14 hours 30 minutes 44 secs ago) and read 449 times:       

This is what the aircraft will look like when in service:

BTW Am I the only one shocked at how fast the development of their carrier program is moving along ? To think that India has spent far more money and in the end only getting a used refurbished carrier...

这是这个飞机正常的涂装（附图）

顺便说一句，难道只有我一个人被中国航母计划的进展震撼到了么？想想印度，花了这么多钱，最后只得到了一艘二手翻新航母。

_
rfields5421  From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 5464 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 01:13:57 your local time (13 hours 48 minutes 57 secs ago) and read 426 times:       

Quoting alberchico (Reply 6):
Am I the only one shocked at how fast the development of their carrier program is moving along ?

Well, the program is almost 40 years along its development track.

Also remember that China has acquired three other aircraft carriers - to study even though some eventually were converted for other roles. They have also spend a lot of money buying and studying aircraft designs from other nations.

This carrier and program are a continuation of the development work done by the Soviets. The basic hull and design are the Soviet carrier Varyag - refurbished, completed and updated.

We will see their first locally 'designed' carrier no sooner than 2015.

What we are seeing now is the implementation of decades of work. And they are not at the end of the program.

（回复上一个）

好吧，中国的项目其实已经进行了快40年了。同时你也得记住中国已经买了3艘航母了，尽管很多最后被用在其他地方了，不过中国人还是做了研究的。他们同时也花了很多钱购买并且研究其他国家的舰载机。

这个航母计划其实是苏联的延续，船体和设计都是延续苏联的瓦良格号。我们要在2015年以后才能看到国妈。我们现在看到的是几十年工作的成果，并且不是最后一个成果...

Quoting alberchico (Reply 6):
To think that India has spent far more money and in the end only getting a used refurbished carrier...

While we know some of the numbers about the India program, we don't know the numbers about the China program.

I would believe that China has thrown more money at the problem than India.

But China's system would make the total amount of money to be used more efficiently in my opinion.

（回复上一个）

我们只知道印度人花了很多钱在航母上，但我们不知道中国人花了多少，我认为中国花的可比印度多了。并且我认为中国的制度比印度的在花钱上更有效率。
_
Acheron  From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1367 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 08:40:08 your local time (6 hours 22 minutes 46 secs ago) and read 221 times:       

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 7):
This carrier and program are a continuation of the development work done by the Soviets.

Considering how the Chinese seem to be aiming at copying the american style CVBG's and the fact that the Soviets used a completely different doctrine and employment for their "carriers", that seems unlikely.

The only thing this thing has in common with the soviets after all the modifications the chinese did to it, its the basic hull design and nothing else.

（回复上一个）

考虑到中国人似乎是要复制美国的航母战斗群模式而不是苏联的载机巡洋舰模式，中国的发展道路和苏联的是不一样的。辽宁号和瓦良格号之间唯一的相同之处只有船体，其他都是不一样的。

_
Revelation  From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 9386 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 11:39:26 your local time (3 hours 23 minutes 28 secs ago) and read 97 times:       

Quoting Acheron (Reply 8):
The only thing this thing has in common with the soviets after all the modifications the chinese did to it, its the basic hull design and nothing else.

Well that, and both are in various target identification databases maintained by the USAF and USN.

（回复上一个）

好吧，不过他们都已经进入美国空军和美国海军的目标数据库了...（汗）

_
moo  From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3284 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 22:31:34 your local time (11 hours 28 minutes 7 secs ago) and read 458 times:

Quoting RIXrat (Reply 2):
I'm confused by the markings on the aircraft. Never seen anything like that before.
Quoting BladeLWS (Reply 3):
Those are test markings, usually for cameras so they know what to aim at.

They are indeed test markings, but they are there to provide a known contrast and focusing point on the aircraft for the cameras, not just for something to aim at  

Take a look at the F-35 JDAM test drop photo below and you can see similar markings all over the place for the same reason.

（回复前面关于涂装的）

这些是测试标志，是用来为相机提供焦点的，而不是靶子。你看看F-35放JDAM的照片就可以看到那上面也有类似的标志。

_
BigJKU  From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 643 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 23:06:37 your local time (10 hours 53 minutes 4 secs ago) and read 439 times:       

Quoting alberchico (Reply 6):
BTW Am I the only one shocked at how fast the development of their carrier program is moving along ? To think that India has spent far more money and in the end only getting a used refurbished carrier...

Actually I was thinking I was quite surprised it had all taken this long since I have been hearing about it being imminent since the mid 1990's in some fashion. It will be really interesting to see how quickly they progress to an actual combat capability from here. In a lot of respects what they have done so far is the easy part. There is a lot yet to learn as you start having weapons around and attempting high tempo operations on a crowded deck with worn out crew members.

I also think STOBAR is a complete waste of time as a concept. It gains you none of the advantages of either CATOBAR or STOVL ships. There will be more learning to be done (more than they have to this point in my view) to go from a show pony to an operationally useful combat unit.

（回复第6条）
事实上我还是为这个项目进展得这么慢而感到吃惊，因为我从90年代中期就听说了这件事了。中国航妈从建成到服役的速度倒是很快。不过到目前为止，他们干的还是相对简单的活。在搭载武器、管理紧张的军事行动和疲劳的舰员方面，他们还有很多要学。

不过我觉得STOBAR（滑跃起飞斜角甲板拦阻降落）是一个浪费时间的想法，他既没有斜角甲板拦阻降落的优点，也没有滑跃起飞的优点。从一个更多是展示性的航母到一个真正的可以用于军事活动的航母还有很长的路要走。

_
kanban  From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2108 posts, RR: 19
Reply 12, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 02:43:23 your local time (7 hours 16 minutes 18 secs ago) and read 306 times:       

A side note, it was reported the that head of the aircraft company that built the plane died of heart attack during these tests. If I can find the article, I'll post the link.

顺便说一句，据说这个飞机公司的老板在测试的时候因为心脏病去世了。如果我能找到相关文章，我会贴出来的。

_
fsnuffer  From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 06:34:33 your local time (3 hours 25 minutes 8 secs ago) and read 139 times:       

Are there any disadvantages to using the jump jet approach as opposed to the steam catapult? As an armchair admiral, I would guess it limits the aircraft weights/payload that can be shot off the front of the carrier.

滑跃起飞比起蒸汽弹射器来有什么缺点呢？作为一个键盘军事家，我猜这会限制飞机起飞时的重量。

_
BigJKU  From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 643 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 06:50:48 your local time (3 hours 8 minutes 53 secs ago) and read 129 times:       

Quoting fsnuffer (Reply 13):
Are there any disadvantages to using the jump jet approach as opposed to the steam catapult? As an armchair admiral, I would guess it limits the aircraft weights/payload that can be shot off the front of the carrier.

The biggest problem is that it really only works for high thrust aircraft. You can make it work for fighters. You can use it to drastically improve the take off performance of VSTOL aircraft. What you generally can't do is make it get say an E-2 airborne. I doubt one could ever ramp launch an A-6 or an S-3 either. The biggest downside of this (other than not taking E-2/C-2 type aircraft which you might be able to replace with a V-22 type though I have my doubts) will be in the field of launching long endurance UAV's from your carriers. UAV's get their endurance generally by having large wing area and pretty low power to weight ratios. Most have pretty long and thin wings. They are just not suited for that kind of operation. That is a big benefit to EMALS for the USN is that it can smoothly accelerate more fragile drones allowing them to have lighter structures and experience less stress.

The load limit question is far more complicated and the best answer one can give is that it depends on the aircraft, deck length and jump angle.

最大的问题是滑跃起飞只能用于大推力飞机，也就是战斗机。用滑跃起飞可以显著提高垂直起降飞机的起飞特性。但是E-2就不行了，我猜A-6或者S-3也不能用滑跃起飞。另一个大问题是你不能在航母上滑跃起飞长航时的无人机，因为这些飞机往往有很大的机翼面积，很小的推重比，用滑跃起飞就很困难了。如果用电磁弹射器的话，因为他的加速更均匀，所以好处就更多了，可以让飞机的结构更轻，飞行员也不会承受太大的加速度。

至于最大起飞重量的问题，就很难说了，这取决于飞机的类型，甲板的长度和滑跃起飞的角度。
_
mffoda  From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 857 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 07:43:37 your local time (2 hours 16 minutes 4 secs ago) and read 94 times:       

Quoting Acheron (Reply 8):
Considering how the Chinese seem to be aiming at copying the american style CVBG's and the fact that the Soviets used a completely different doctrine and employment for their "carriers", that seems unlikely.

The only thing this thing has in common with the soviets after all the modifications the chinese did to it, its the basic hull design and nothing else.

Lets hope they did a better job on the carrier then with their Submarine's? If that is a model of how they improve on Russian tech... Then nobody needs to worry about the Chinese for the next couple of decades.

I remember speaking with a U.S. Navy sonar guy several years ago... He said the newest Chinese boomer sounded like a garbage truck dragging strings of cans (might as well have put a "Just Married" sign on the back of it!).  

希望他们在航母上的工作比潜艇上的做得好。如果他们能够这样提升前苏联的科技，没有人会担忧未来的中国。

我很多年前听一个美国海军的声纳兵说，中国的弹道导弹核潜艇听上去就像一辆垃圾车装着一串的罐头一样...


mffoda  From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 856 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 11:33:00 your local time (1 day 3 hours 29 minutes ago) and read 796 times:       

I like the 2nd pic with the movie theater barricades. Tickets please!   
And the last pic is very Top Gun... Why are there 2 guys pointing?? What if one them points the other direction?  

我很喜欢第二张照片，有电影院围栏的那张，我也要买票去看！
最后一张照片非常像Top Gun，但是为什么这俩人要用手指？？如果他们指的是另外一个方向咋办？

_
RIXrat  From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 746 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 11:57:29 your local time (1 day 3 hours 5 minutes ago) and read 785 times:       

I'm confused by the markings on the aircraft. Never seen anything like that before. Don't the Chinese use a red star in the middle with two red bars on each side, or is this a Navy version?

我被飞机的涂装迷惑了，从来没见过这样的。中国空军不是用的是一个红星加两条杠的标志么？难道这是海军的版本？

_
BladeLWS  From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 383 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 13:21:12 your local time (1 day 1 hour 41 minutes ago) and read 739 times:       

Quoting RIXrat (Reply 2):
I'm confused by the markings on the aircraft. Never seen anything like that before. Don't the Chinese use a red star in the middle with two red bars on each side, or is this a Navy version?

Those are test markings, usually for cameras so they know what to aim at.

（回复上一个人）这些是测试用的标志，主要是用来给相机作为对焦点使用的。（原来如此？）

_
RIXrat  From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 746 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 16:41:39 your local time (22 hours 21 minutes 15 secs ago) and read 658 times:       

BladeLWS -- thanks for clearing that up. I was really scratching my head on that one.

（回复上一个）非常感谢你的澄清，我真的被这个迷惑到了。

_
rfields5421  From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 5464 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted Sun Nov 25 2012 21:18:05 your local time (17 hours 44 minutes 49 secs ago) and read 540 times:       

I realize that is a test bird - but that is the ugliest color I've ever seen on an aircraft.

我知道这是一架试验机，不过这真是有史以来最丑的涂装了。
_
alberchico  From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2586 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 00:32:10 your local time (14 hours 30 minutes 44 secs ago) and read 449 times:       

This is what the aircraft will look like when in service:

BTW Am I the only one shocked at how fast the development of their carrier program is moving along ? To think that India has spent far more money and in the end only getting a used refurbished carrier...

这是这个飞机正常的涂装（附图）

顺便说一句，难道只有我一个人被中国航母计划的进展震撼到了么？想想印度，花了这么多钱，最后只得到了一艘二手翻新航母。

_
rfields5421  From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 5464 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 01:13:57 your local time (13 hours 48 minutes 57 secs ago) and read 426 times:       

Quoting alberchico (Reply 6):
Am I the only one shocked at how fast the development of their carrier program is moving along ?

Well, the program is almost 40 years along its development track.

Also remember that China has acquired three other aircraft carriers - to study even though some eventually were converted for other roles. They have also spend a lot of money buying and studying aircraft designs from other nations.

This carrier and program are a continuation of the development work done by the Soviets. The basic hull and design are the Soviet carrier Varyag - refurbished, completed and updated.

We will see their first locally 'designed' carrier no sooner than 2015.

What we are seeing now is the implementation of decades of work. And they are not at the end of the program.

（回复上一个）

好吧，中国的项目其实已经进行了快40年了。同时你也得记住中国已经买了3艘航母了，尽管很多最后被用在其他地方了，不过中国人还是做了研究的。他们同时也花了很多钱购买并且研究其他国家的舰载机。

这个航母计划其实是苏联的延续，船体和设计都是延续苏联的瓦良格号。我们要在2015年以后才能看到国妈。我们现在看到的是几十年工作的成果，并且不是最后一个成果...

Quoting alberchico (Reply 6):
To think that India has spent far more money and in the end only getting a used refurbished carrier...

While we know some of the numbers about the India program, we don't know the numbers about the China program.

I would believe that China has thrown more money at the problem than India.

But China's system would make the total amount of money to be used more efficiently in my opinion.

（回复上一个）

我们只知道印度人花了很多钱在航母上，但我们不知道中国人花了多少，我认为中国花的可比印度多了。并且我认为中国的制度比印度的在花钱上更有效率。
_
Acheron  From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1367 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 08:40:08 your local time (6 hours 22 minutes 46 secs ago) and read 221 times:       

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 7):
This carrier and program are a continuation of the development work done by the Soviets.

Considering how the Chinese seem to be aiming at copying the american style CVBG's and the fact that the Soviets used a completely different doctrine and employment for their "carriers", that seems unlikely.

The only thing this thing has in common with the soviets after all the modifications the chinese did to it, its the basic hull design and nothing else.

（回复上一个）

考虑到中国人似乎是要复制美国的航母战斗群模式而不是苏联的载机巡洋舰模式，中国的发展道路和苏联的是不一样的。辽宁号和瓦良格号之间唯一的相同之处只有船体，其他都是不一样的。

_
Revelation  From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 9386 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 11:39:26 your local time (3 hours 23 minutes 28 secs ago) and read 97 times:       

Quoting Acheron (Reply 8):
The only thing this thing has in common with the soviets after all the modifications the chinese did to it, its the basic hull design and nothing else.

Well that, and both are in various target identification databases maintained by the USAF and USN.

（回复上一个）

好吧，不过他们都已经进入美国空军和美国海军的目标数据库了...（汗）

_
moo  From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3284 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 22:31:34 your local time (11 hours 28 minutes 7 secs ago) and read 458 times:

Quoting RIXrat (Reply 2):
I'm confused by the markings on the aircraft. Never seen anything like that before.
Quoting BladeLWS (Reply 3):
Those are test markings, usually for cameras so they know what to aim at.

They are indeed test markings, but they are there to provide a known contrast and focusing point on the aircraft for the cameras, not just for something to aim at  

Take a look at the F-35 JDAM test drop photo below and you can see similar markings all over the place for the same reason.

（回复前面关于涂装的）

这些是测试标志，是用来为相机提供焦点的，而不是靶子。你看看F-35放JDAM的照片就可以看到那上面也有类似的标志。

_
BigJKU  From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 643 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted Mon Nov 26 2012 23:06:37 your local time (10 hours 53 minutes 4 secs ago) and read 439 times:       

Quoting alberchico (Reply 6):
BTW Am I the only one shocked at how fast the development of their carrier program is moving along ? To think that India has spent far more money and in the end only getting a used refurbished carrier...

Actually I was thinking I was quite surprised it had all taken this long since I have been hearing about it being imminent since the mid 1990's in some fashion. It will be really interesting to see how quickly they progress to an actual combat capability from here. In a lot of respects what they have done so far is the easy part. There is a lot yet to learn as you start having weapons around and attempting high tempo operations on a crowded deck with worn out crew members.

I also think STOBAR is a complete waste of time as a concept. It gains you none of the advantages of either CATOBAR or STOVL ships. There will be more learning to be done (more than they have to this point in my view) to go from a show pony to an operationally useful combat unit.

（回复第6条）
事实上我还是为这个项目进展得这么慢而感到吃惊，因为我从90年代中期就听说了这件事了。中国航妈从建成到服役的速度倒是很快。不过到目前为止，他们干的还是相对简单的活。在搭载武器、管理紧张的军事行动和疲劳的舰员方面，他们还有很多要学。

不过我觉得STOBAR（滑跃起飞斜角甲板拦阻降落）是一个浪费时间的想法，他既没有斜角甲板拦阻降落的优点，也没有滑跃起飞的优点。从一个更多是展示性的航母到一个真正的可以用于军事活动的航母还有很长的路要走。

_
kanban  From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2108 posts, RR: 19
Reply 12, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 02:43:23 your local time (7 hours 16 minutes 18 secs ago) and read 306 times:       

A side note, it was reported the that head of the aircraft company that built the plane died of heart attack during these tests. If I can find the article, I'll post the link.

顺便说一句，据说这个飞机公司的老板在测试的时候因为心脏病去世了。如果我能找到相关文章，我会贴出来的。

_
fsnuffer  From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 06:34:33 your local time (3 hours 25 minutes 8 secs ago) and read 139 times:       

Are there any disadvantages to using the jump jet approach as opposed to the steam catapult? As an armchair admiral, I would guess it limits the aircraft weights/payload that can be shot off the front of the carrier.

滑跃起飞比起蒸汽弹射器来有什么缺点呢？作为一个键盘军事家，我猜这会限制飞机起飞时的重量。

_
BigJKU  From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 643 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 06:50:48 your local time (3 hours 8 minutes 53 secs ago) and read 129 times:       

Quoting fsnuffer (Reply 13):
Are there any disadvantages to using the jump jet approach as opposed to the steam catapult? As an armchair admiral, I would guess it limits the aircraft weights/payload that can be shot off the front of the carrier.

The biggest problem is that it really only works for high thrust aircraft. You can make it work for fighters. You can use it to drastically improve the take off performance of VSTOL aircraft. What you generally can't do is make it get say an E-2 airborne. I doubt one could ever ramp launch an A-6 or an S-3 either. The biggest downside of this (other than not taking E-2/C-2 type aircraft which you might be able to replace with a V-22 type though I have my doubts) will be in the field of launching long endurance UAV's from your carriers. UAV's get their endurance generally by having large wing area and pretty low power to weight ratios. Most have pretty long and thin wings. They are just not suited for that kind of operation. That is a big benefit to EMALS for the USN is that it can smoothly accelerate more fragile drones allowing them to have lighter structures and experience less stress.

The load limit question is far more complicated and the best answer one can give is that it depends on the aircraft, deck length and jump angle.

最大的问题是滑跃起飞只能用于大推力飞机，也就是战斗机。用滑跃起飞可以显著提高垂直起降飞机的起飞特性。但是E-2就不行了，我猜A-6或者S-3也不能用滑跃起飞。另一个大问题是你不能在航母上滑跃起飞长航时的无人机，因为这些飞机往往有很大的机翼面积，很小的推重比，用滑跃起飞就很困难了。如果用电磁弹射器的话，因为他的加速更均匀，所以好处就更多了，可以让飞机的结构更轻，飞行员也不会承受太大的加速度。

至于最大起飞重量的问题，就很难说了，这取决于飞机的类型，甲板的长度和滑跃起飞的角度。
_
mffoda  From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 857 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted Tue Nov 27 2012 07:43:37 your local time (2 hours 16 minutes 4 secs ago) and read 94 times:       

Quoting Acheron (Reply 8):
Considering how the Chinese seem to be aiming at copying the american style CVBG's and the fact that the Soviets used a completely different doctrine and employment for their "carriers", that seems unlikely.

The only thing this thing has in common with the soviets after all the modifications the chinese did to it, its the basic hull design and nothing else.

Lets hope they did a better job on the carrier then with their Submarine's? If that is a model of how they improve on Russian tech... Then nobody needs to worry about the Chinese for the next couple of decades.

I remember speaking with a U.S. Navy sonar guy several years ago... He said the newest Chinese boomer sounded like a garbage truck dragging strings of cans (might as well have put a "Just Married" sign on the back of it!).  

希望他们在航母上的工作比潜艇上的做得好。如果他们能够这样提升前苏联的科技，没有人会担忧未来的中国。

我很多年前听一个美国海军的声纳兵说，中国的弹道导弹核潜艇听上去就像一辆垃圾车装着一串的罐头一样...