071 LPD thread

[franco-russe]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

AK-176 and AK-630 - little white elephants...

 

[Geographer]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

Why is China still putting the AK-630 on their 071s? People used to say it was to save cost and because the 071 would always be protected by escorts. But the CV-16 will always be protected by escorts and China put its latest, greatest CIWS systems, but gun and missile, on it! The 071 may not be as important as the CV-16 but it's still very important, and certainly more important than the 054s which have modern gun and missile CIWS systems.

 

[Lion]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

Why is China still putting the AK-630 on their 071s? People used to say it was to save cost and because the 071 would always be protected by escorts. But the CV-16 will always be protected by escorts and China put its latest, greatest CIWS systems, but gun and missile, on it! The 071 may not be as important as the CV-16 but it's still very important, and certainly more important than the 054s which have modern gun and missile CIWS systems.

I will rank 054A frigate more important than 071. I think you already explain why AK-630 is install onboard 071 instead of the more expensive CIWS.

 

[Geographer]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

I will rank 054A frigate more important than 071. I think you already explain why AK-630 is install onboard 071 instead of the more expensive CIWS.

There is no way the 054A is more important than the 071. The 071 is much larger, much more expensive, carries more crew, and is the mission critical vessel in an amphibious fleet. If cost was a concern, why not put the AK-630 on every new PLAN ship? Why not put the AK-630 on the Liaoning?

The 071 is always going to have escorts in a war zone, but so is CV-16 and the CV-16 is bristling with newly developed CIWS systems. Why the double standard?

 

[bd popeye]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

As long as you limit those deployments to shorter periods and low sea state conditions were these's not much sea water washing over the assets, those army attack helos seem to be able to work pretty well off large amphib decks.

No, no, no..Even on a CVN it's impossible to keep the effects sea water off of any aircraft. Impossible. So the aircraft need to be washed...

The number one way to stave off the effect of sea-water on aircraft is washing them weekly as does the USN/USMC. Every USN/USMC squadron has a Corrosion Control work center whose sole job is to apply corrosion control techniques to the squadrons aircraft.

There are many preservatives and techniques used to prevent corrosion.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And there are about four super sized manuals on how to do the deed.

The US Army and USAF alps perform regular CC on their aircraft.

 

[kwaigonegin]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

No, no, no..Even on a CVN it's impossible to keep the effects sea water off of any aircraft. Impossible. So the aircraft need to be washed...

The number one way to stave off the effect of sea-water on aircraft is washing them weekly as does the USN/USMC. Every USN/USMC squadron has a Corrosion Control work center whose sole job is to apply corrosion control techniques to the squadrons aircraft.

There are many preservatives and techniques used to prevent corrosion.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And there are about four super sized manuals on how to do the deed.

The US Army and USAF alps perform regular CC on their aircraft.

yup. And metals can can corroded even w/o a single drop of seawater ever touching them because salt does not dissolve in air and 'sea air' can be a corrosive agent in itself on highly sophisticated machinery.
Ever noticed that the air on the beach is a lil heavier than say a thousand miles inland or up in the mountains? even worse in the middle of the ocean.
When it comes to military equipment maintenance is everything! A 25 yr old aircraft painstakenly maintained is far more reliable and effective than a 1 yr old one with untrained maintenance crew or one who does not take their jobs seriously.

 

[Sczepan]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

.... If cost was a concern, why not put the AK-630 on every new PLAN ship? Why not put the AK-630 on the Liaoning?

The 071 is always going to have escorts in a war zone, but so is CV-16 and the CV-16 is bristling with newly developed CIWS systems. Why the double standard?

071 LPD will be part of a landing flottilla, which is protectet by other ships to. So the AK-630 is only for self-defence and in combination with (much) other AK-630 close-in weapon systems (CIWS). As I can see, AK-630s also are used in combination with others at one ship. The 956 Sovremenny class missile destroyers has four (!) six-barrel 30mm AK-630 close-in weapon systems (CIWs). So this will give a lot of iron shield by air-defence. You will never see AK-630s as single air defence.
Type 730 seven-barrel close-in weapon system (CIWS), used with the air-defence missile destroyer Type 051C (NATO codename: Luzhou class), air defence guided missile destroyers Type 052C (NATO codename: Luyang-II class) and Type 052B (NATO reporting name: Luyang class) multirole missile destroyers, for example, should also protect other ships, and are used by single ships away of convois, as I think. So they could work as single air defence.

 

[MwRYum]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

Why is China still putting the AK-630 on their 071s? People used to say it was to save cost and because the 071 would always be protected by escorts. But the CV-16 will always be protected by escorts and China put its latest, greatest CIWS systems, but gun and missile, on it! The 071 may not be as important as the CV-16 but it's still very important, and certainly more important than the 054s which have modern gun and missile CIWS systems.

Given when the 071 LPD was developed that's not surprising, and the reason why subsequent ships still carries AK-630 probably because to put the units originally ordered into use, else it'd be a waste. Like I said, most likely time for them to swap out the AK-630 would be when the 071 LPDs are due for their next major maintenance cycle.

 

[duskylim]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

071 LPD will be part of a landing flottilla, which is protectet by other ships to. So the AK-630 is only for self-defence and in combination with (much) other AK-630 close-in weapon systems (CIWS). As I can see, AK-630s also are used in combination with others at one ship. The 956 Sovremenny class missile destroyers has four (!) six-barrel 30mm AK-630 close-in weapon systems (CIWs). So this will give a lot of iron shield by air-defence. You will never see AK-630s as single air defence.
Type 730 seven-barrel close-in weapon system (CIWS), used with the air-defence missile destroyer Type 051C (NATO codename: Luzhou class), air defence guided missile destroyers Type 052C (NATO codename: Luyang-II class) and Type 052B (NATO reporting name: Luyang class) multirole missile destroyers, for example, should also protect other ships, and are used by single ships away of convois, as I think. So they could work as single air defence.

Uhm,,, I thought they (the later Sov's) were equipped with Kashtans; which would probably have inspired the PLAN to test out various gun-missile combinations to determine the relative merit of each system.

The only PLAN vessel I know of with single AK-630's are the 022 FACs.

Subsequently it may have been that experience with ex-Soviet/Russian systems like the AK-630 and the Kashtan led them develop the Type 730/1130 and the FN-3000 as separate units rather than in combination.

Of course I could be widely wrong as tests with missile equipped LD-2000's is on-going.

 

[franco-russe]

re: PLAN Type 071 LPD & its Landing Craft

The only SOVREMENNYY's with Kortik/Kashtan are the two Chinese 138 and 139. In combination with the fixed hangar, this cost the rear 130 mm turret. I am not sure that was a good swap.