071 LPD thread

Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
I thought, as they come out and we get good clear pics of them, we should odument the latest of the various Type 726 LCACs. The only two I have seen clearly are 3320 and 3321. I know there is another one (3322?) that is afloat, and that there are up to four we have seen in the yards.

But here are a couple of good pics of 3320 and 3321, an a pic of them landing together:

Type 726 LCAC Pennant 3320
3320-01.jpg

3320-02.jpg

Type 726 LCAC Pennant 3321
3321-01.jpg

3321-02.jpg

Type 726 LCACs 3320 & 3322 together
PLAN LCAC 3320-3322.jpg
​
 
Last edited:
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
asif iqbal said:
Jeff in your last picture foreground is 3321 and back ground is 3322

I posted a high resolution image of that over in Type 726 thread which is clearer
Click to expand...
GREAT! I thought the foreground was indeed 3320, but my image was not resolute enough and so thought the rear one was 3321.

I will look at your higher res pic.

---------

I did look at the higher res pic and it is clear that the foreground is 3320 and the one further off is indeed 3322. Great! I have been looking for a 3322 pic.

I am going to replace the pic above with the higher res version.
 
Last edited:
Engineer

Engineer

Major
shen said:
LCAC style bow thruster is just one way to provide increased directional control.

China did use bow thrusters in previous Type 724 hovercraft

a06LdFQ.jpg


There are other ways to provide control
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I wonder if the circled part shows puffer port, which is another mean to provide directional control, on the Type 726.

3eTXHCr.jpg
Click to expand...
Hey, good catch! I hope you are right, although the section of Google Book you have linked to criticized such solution of being inefficient. On this issue, I would be glad to have my assumption proven wrong.
 
Last edited:
D

delft

Brigadier
Engineer said:
Hey, good catch! I hope you are right, although the section of Google Book you have linked to criticized such solution of being inefficient. On this issue, I would be glad to have my assumption proven wrong.
Click to expand...
Probably inefficient under some, not all, circumstances.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
steve_rolfe said:
As the 4th 071 was only launched on the 22nd January.........this means the outfitting took less than 8 months to complete.
That seems a very fast time to me for such a large vessel.
Click to expand...
Well, these are probably initial builders trials...so there may be more to do.

In addition, the may have launched her with more of the outfitting internally complete than earlier vessels now that they have so much experience with the others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top