China’s much-anticipated third aircraft carrier, Fujian, hailed as a technological leap in Beijing’s naval modernization drive, is facing mounting scrutiny over what experts call “critical design flaws” that could severely limit its operational capabilities. Despite featuring cutting-edge electromagnetic catapult technology, reports suggest that Fujian may operate at only 60% efficiency compared to a 50-year-old US Navy carrier.
Fujian: China’s Leap Toward a Blue-Water Navy
With an estimated displacement of 80,000 tonnes, Fujian represents a major step in China’s efforts to develop a blue-water navy capable of projecting power far beyond its shores. It is China’s first indigenously designed and built supercarrier and the world’s largest conventionally powered warship.
The vessel is the first Chinese carrier equipped with Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) — an advanced technology that allows heavier aircraft to take off with more weapons and fuel. This makes China the only nation besides the United States to field such technology.
In September 2025, the Fujian successfully launched three different types of aircraft using its EMALS — the stealthy J-35, the upgraded J-15T, and the KJ-600 early warning aircraft, marking a significant milestone for the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN).
The Design Dilemma: Flaws on the Flight Deck
However, despite the technological achievements, a CCTV documentary titled “Charge—Toward First-Class Military Strength” inadvertently exposed serious design issues. Analysts who examined the footage noticed that Fujian’s flight deck layout prevents simultaneous takeoffs and landings, a fundamental capability for large-deck carriers.
A South Korean defense report in The Chosun Daily and Chinese commentary site Haishifenbong pointed out that Fujian’s second and third catapult lines overlap with the diagonal landing strip. This overlap effectively prevents aircraft from taking off while others are landing — a critical limitation that drastically slows flight operations.
Furthermore, landed aircraft must cross the No. 1 catapult line to reach the maintenance area, further reducing efficiency.
“Both of the catapults are situated close to the middle-front section of the landing area, so either the J-15 or J-35 would roll over the catapults when they land, temporarily preventing them from being used for launch operations,” noted one Chinese defense analyst.
U.S. Experts: Fujian Operates at ‘60% the Rate’ of a Nimitz-Class Carrier
Former US Navy officers Carl Schuster and Lt. Cmdr. Keith Stewart, who examined deck photographs, concluded that Fujian’s operational tempo could reach only 60% of a US Nimitz-class carrier, despite being newer.
They highlighted several factors:
Narrow deck angle: Fujian’s landing area is angled only 6 degrees off centerline, compared to 9 degrees on US carriers. This reduces safety margins between landing aircraft and those preparing for takeoff.
Extended landing strip: The longer landing zone intrudes into the bow, where aircraft are positioned for launch.
Reduced deck maneuvering space: The longer and narrower configuration increases the risk of deck collisions.
“The only way to mitigate collision risk is to slow down flight operations,” said Schuster. “That means fewer sorties per hour and lower combat efficiency.”
‘They Don’t Know What They Don’t Know’
Lt. Cmdr. Stewart emphasized that China’s inexperience with carrier operations compounds the design problem.
“All carrier operational rules are written in blood,” he said. “The Chinese are still learning what decades of US Navy experience has already taught — carrier operations are the most dangerous and complex peacetime activity any military undertakes.”
He added that while Fujian is an impressive engineering feat, the PLAN still lacks the decades of trial, error, and hard-earned lessons that shaped US carrier aviation doctrine.
Last-Minute Design Switch May Have Caused the Problem
Reports suggest that these flaws may stem from a last-minute design change. Originally, Fujian was intended to use steam catapults, which require 70-meter launch strips. However, after the decision to adopt EMALS, which needs over 100 meters, designers faced space constraints, forcing overlap with landing zones.
Combined with its conventional (diesel) propulsion system, these design limitations have prevented China from achieving parity with the US Navy’s nuclear-powered flattops.
What next: Type 004 – China’s Next Big Leap
Work has already begun on China’s Type 004 aircraft carrier, which is expected to correct Fujian’s design limitations and potentially feature nuclear propulsion. If successful, it could finally give China an aircraft carrier that rivals the capabilities of the US Navy’s Nimitz or Gerald R. Ford classes.
Until then, analysts say the Fujian, despite being a technological milestone, remains a transitional platform — a powerful symbol of China’s naval ambition, but not yet a true peer competitor to America’s carrier strike groups.
The Fujian underscores both China’s remarkable progress and the growing pains of a nation rapidly modernizing its navy. While its EMALS system is a breakthrough, the reported flight deck flaws and limited operational tempo highlight the steep learning curve Beijing faces in mastering carrier warfare.
In the words of one naval analyst:
“Fujian shows China can build a carrier — but not yet operate one like the U.S. Navy.”
