The USS Nimitz is nearly twice as large as the Liaoning, with a crew complement two and a half times larger.

Most comparisons of the US and Chinese aircraft carrier forces tend to focus on the newest ships, America’s Gerald R. Ford class and China’s Fujian. But a more useful comparison, perhaps, would be between America’s Nimitz-class carriers and China’s Liaoning, which say more about the respective maturity of the two countries’ carrier forces. 

The Nimitz class represents decades of American experience operating nuclear-powered supercarriers. China’s Liaoning, by contrast, started life as an unfinished Soviet hull, the Varyag, before China purchased and rebuilt it in 2012. A second carrier, Shandong, was completed in 2018 and commissioned in 2019; it is mostly the same as the Liaoning, but with a handful of small design differences. Both the Chinese and American carriers can launch combat aircraft to sea, but they represent vastly different levels of carrier capability. The Nimitz holds a massive advantage that isn’t just size, but a combination of CATOBAR flight operations, nuclear propulsion, decades of institutional experience, and a larger, more diverse air wing.

The Liaoning and the Nimitz: A Head-to-Head Comparison

Aircraft Carrier	USS Nimitz (United States)	Liaoning (China)
Year Commissioned	1975	2012
Length	1,092 ft (332.8 m)	1,005 ft (306.4 m)
Width (Beam)	252 ft (76.8 m)	244 ft (74.4 m)
Displacement	112,020 short tons	60,900 short tons (full load)
Propulsion	Two Westinghouse A4W nuclear reactors; four steam turbines; four shafts	Steam TV12 turbines, eight KVG-4 boilers, four shafts; four turbines; nine turbogenerators; six diesel generators, four fixed pitch propellers
Top Speed	31.5 knots (36.2 mph, 58.3 km/h)	32 knots (37 mph, 59 km/h)
Range	Unlimited	~3,850 nmi (4,430 mi, 7,130 km)
Armaments	Two Sea SparrowsTwo RIM-116 launchersTwo Phalanx CIWSFour Mk 38 25mm autocannons10 .50 cal turretsAir wing: 90+ aircraft	Three Type 1130 CIWSThree HQ-10 18-cell missile systemsAir wing: 40 aircraft
Crew	~6,000 (3,500 crew, 2,500 air wing)	~2,600 (1,960 crew, 626 air group, 40 flag staff)

How Are the Liaoning and the Nimitz Different?

Some obvious differences are apparent in the Liaoning and the Nimitz right away. The first of the US carriers displaces roughly 100,000 tons fully loaded, versus 60,000 for the Liaoning. That extra displacement translates into greater capacity for aircraft, aviation fuel, weapons, maintenance facilities, and crew. Accordingly, the Nimitz can embark with an air wing in excess of 70 aircraft, depending on deployment configuration. This includes a diverse collection of sophisticated aircraft, like the F/A-18 Super Hornet, F-35C Lightning II, EA-18G Growler, and E-2 Hawkeye. The Liaoning operates a substantially smaller aviation complement, built around the J-15 and a couple of helicopters.

One structural limitation in the Liaoning’s construction is its STOBAR configuration, where aircraft launch by accelerating down the deck under their own power before launching from the ship’s ski jump. The setup works, but it places strict limits on aircraft weight, restricting their fuel and weapons loadout—and therefore range and combat effectiveness. The Nimitz has much more operational freedom thanks to its four steam catapults, which can accelerate substantially heavier aircraft. As a result, the Nimitz can launch a variety of aircraft, not just fighters, but also enabler aircraft like the E-2D, which gives an American carrier strike group a powerful airborne radar and command-and-control platform operating hundreds of miles from the ship. All the Liaoning can do to match is launch helicopter-based airborne early warning capabilities, which simply cannot match the altitude, endurance, or radar horizon of the E-2D. This gives Nimitz an under-appreciated advantage in seeing, organizing, and managing an air battle.

The USS Nimitz Is Nuclear-Powered—Here’s Why That Matters

The Nimitz features two A4W nuclear reactors, whereas the Liaoning relies on conventional propulsion. The advantage here, conferred by nuclear propulsion, pushes the Nimitz into an entirely different tier of capability.

No aircraft carrier has a truly “limitless” range. As the crisis aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln shows, all carriers have supplies that must be regularly replenished—food, medical supplies, ammunition, spare parts, and other supplies. And while the ship does not need to be fueled, its air wing is another story, consuming vast amounts of JP-5 jet fuel on a daily basis. So both the Nimitz and the Liaoning need replenishment ships. But not needing to worry about fuel relieves a major logistical demand from the American ship, giving US Navy carrier strike groups remarkable high-speed endurance.

On paper, the matchup heavily favors the Nimitz. It’s not close. But the Liaoning was understandably an experiment in carrier aviation that has successfully led to more mature platforms, like the Fujian, the upcoming Type 004, and whatever comes next. America still carries a sizable advantage in both quality and quantity of its carrier forces, but China seems determined to close the gap.

About the Author: Harrison Kass

Harrison Kass is a writer and attorney focused on national security, technology, and political culture. His work has appeared in Tablet, City Journal, The Hill, The Spectator, and The Cipher Brief. He holds a JD from the University of Oregon and a master’s in Global & Joint Program Studies from NYU. More at harrisonkass.com.

The post Liaoning vs. Nimitz: America’s and China’s Aircraft Carriers, Head to Head appeared first on The National Interest.