075 LHD thread

[tphuang]

Nothing can have me believe there is an urgency as long as the military budget stays this low. China is not even half serious about military build-up. A tiny percentage of Chinese industry is still a lot but the effort is low in general.
That statement about Chinese shipbuilding is just another speculation and is likely to be wrong. The 003 was built in a drydock along with 3 civilian vessels all much bigger than the 003. Now we have another civilian vessel in place of the 003. Does this indicate that the drydock that the 003 was built in is not capable of building military ships anymore?

It's entirely possible that there are other dry docks in JN shipyard that could be used to build warships, but there are also only a few shipyards in China that have been qualified to build naval grade ships. Saying that only 10% of Chinese shipyard capacity is used for military ships is very leading, since we can see that the big 3 shipyards of DL, JN and HD are all quite full of naval construction.

There is no plan for using 075s as ASW carriers either. China will likely not build mini-carriers because such ships are usually bad ideas. China will likely use surface combatants, normal carriers, and fixed-wing land-based ASW aircraft, like almost every other country in the world.

Stop twisting my words. I said 075 has a role to play in ASW, because it can carry a bunch of helicopters. That's different than being an ASW carrier. So, you are fine with use CV-16 (a much higher valued ship) in ASW missions, but not 075. That's quite interesting.

"075 being one of a couple of ships capable of operating larger air wing will be required to carry different types of helicopters when it's not doing amphibious assaults. And most of the time, it will not be doing amphibious assaults. As such, most of time, it will need to be operating helicopters that can help offense/defense of the fleet it is operating in."

This is definitely not going to happen. You are conveniently assuming a lot of things to reach your conclusion. Where are CSGs with 075s in it? Let's look beyond China. Which country does it? The only time frame you can risk a 075 is after you achieve all your major goals in Taiwan and the first island chain. Until then, every single 075 is crucial and needs to be preserved. You can not risk an amphibious ship in high-risk missions that it is not designed for just because it is not participating in an assault at that moment.

I am stopping answering this discussion. You keep writing speculative things.

Actually America does it

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

French does it too

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/432978951667626110/

I don't think there are other countries that have both full sized carriers and LHDs.

You are also assuming that 075 would be safer in the port or somewhere by itself. That would simply take away protection offered by surrounding ships.

 

[BoraTas]

It's entirely possible that there are other dry docks in JN shipyard that could be used to build warships, but there are also only a few shipyards in China that have been qualified to build naval grade ships. Saying that only 10% of Chinese shipyard capacity is used for military ships is very leading, since we can see that the big 3 shipyards of DL, JN and HD are all quite full of naval construction.

Stop twisting my words. I said 075 has a role to play in ASW, because it can carry a bunch of helicopters. That's different than being an ASW carrier. So, you are fine with use CV-16 (a much higher valued ship) in ASW missions, but not 075. That's quite interesting.



Actually America does it

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

French does it too

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/432978951667626110/

I don't think there are other countries that have both full sized carriers and LHDs.

You are also assuming that 075 would be safer in the port or somewhere by itself. That would simply take away protection offered by surrounding ships.

You keep rejecting to understand what we are saying. Of course, CV-16 is okay to use for sea control of any type. It is an aviation ship that is not crucial for anything else. The 075 is for amphibious assaults. Its aviation capability is full of compromises. Its unavailability or loss decreases China's amphibious assault capability, unlike CV-16. Just because you can use it in ASW doesn't mean it is a good idea to do it. And no, there is no way for hiding at the shoreline to be more dangerous than sailing with a CSG. That is simply impossible.

And neither country you wrote uses LHDs or LHAs for ASW or augmenting a CSG. Those exercises are about using them in the same theater and they have both the carriers and LHDs doing their original mission. 075 in ASW missions is something that is not going to happen in normal circumstances.

 

[externallisting]

You keep rejecting to understand what we are saying. Of course, CV-16 is okay to use for sea control of any type. It is an aviation ship that is not crucial for anything else. The 075 is for amphibious assaults. Its aviation capability is full of compromises. Its unavailability or loss decreases China's amphibious assault capability, unlike CV-16. Just because you can use it in ASW doesn't mean it is a good idea to do it. And no, there is no way for hiding at the shoreline to be more dangerous than sailing with a CSG. That is simply impossible.

And neither country you wrote uses LHDs or LHAs for ASW or augmenting a CSG. Those exercises are about using them in the same theater and they have both the carriers and LHDs doing their original mission. 075 in ASW missions is something that is not going to happen in normal circumstances.

Quite crucially the reason for the French actually exercising them as such is also due to lack of other available platforms. For the US, its more about seeing if the capability tradeoff is worth it considering those constraints inherent to its design as an amphibious capable ship.

Given the Americans seem to reject the premise based on the reasons prior stated by other posters, it stands to reason it is seen as being a suboptimal use of these pretty specialised (and somewhat currently limited) assets. If anything I'd have thought 076 would have had this function if deemed necessary. I have fair faith the planners in the PLAN aren't going to turn out a LCS or Zumwalt.

 

[externallisting]

Quite crucially the reason for the French actually exercising them as such is also due to lack of other available platforms. For the US, its more about seeing if the capability tradeoff is worth it considering those constraints inherent to its design as an amphibious capable ship.

Given the Americans seem to reject the premise based on the reasons prior stated by other posters, it stands to reason it is seen as being a suboptimal use of these pretty specialised (and somewhat currently limited) assets. If anything I'd have thought 076 would have had this function if deemed necessary. I have fair faith the planners in the PLAN aren't going to turn out a LCS or Zumwalt.

To clarify re: the French I just realised I neglected elaborating upon, as they have the Mistrals (same which were built for Russia!), the Mistral's were fully employed during their last African jaunt, yet achieved little in terms of supporting helos as much of the well deck was stocked with vehicles, rations and equipment for troops as a glorified halfway ferry. Even if you purged that extra weight, you wouldn't have a safe way of transferring munitions etc to where its needed. I will give a source on that last claim, just remember watching france24 when it was going on and later seeing something written about it.

 

[TK3600]

Is this guy seriously thinking 075 is better protected by a fleet than docking in main land protected by vast network of land airfield, SAM, and anti ship missiles.

 

[tphuang]

You keep rejecting to understand what we are saying. Of course, CV-16 is okay to use for sea control of any type. It is an aviation ship that is not crucial for anything else. The 075 is for amphibious assaults. Its aviation capability is full of compromises. Its unavailability or loss decreases China's amphibious assault capability, unlike CV-16. Just because you can use it in ASW doesn't mean it is a good idea to do it. And no, there is no way for hiding at the shoreline to be more dangerous than sailing with a CSG. That is simply impossible.

oh, that's nice of you. If I disagree with you, I'm rejecting to understand, like I'm stupid, rather than I just disagree with you.

If PLAN loses a 075, it will still be able to conduct amphibious assaults with other 075s, 071s. It has 8 071s! If we are talking about Taiwan, 072s and RoRo ships are all going to be used.

If PLAN loses a carrier, it will have no way of maintaining presence in that very important area East of Taiwan. So yeah, I consider losing a carrier to be a bigger loss than a 075. I would want them to be able to keep that carrier safe and control the area East of Taiwan with all possible naval assets.

And neither country you wrote uses LHDs or LHAs for ASW or augmenting a CSG. Those exercises are about using them in the same theater and they have both the carriers and LHDs doing their original mission. 075 in ASW missions is something that is not going to happen in normal circumstances.

You said "Where are CSGs with 075s in it? Let's look beyond China. Which country does it?"

Clearly, America and France do operate LHDs alongside a CSG. And if LHD operate along side a CSG, then they will be asked to help CSGs in the areas that they can. Different military have different needs. USN does not have a shortage of quality SSNs, so it doesn't need LHA/LHDs to assist with ASW.

In PLAN's case, ASW is one such need. There are also other roles that it will be asked to do that's not amphibious assaults.

A military (like PLAN) with likely air/surface superiority facing opposing underwater superiority is not normal. Until 095s are built in large numbers, China does not have normal circumstances around its possible missions. If PLAN has something even on the level of late LA class, it would not need to resort to flooding nearby sea with as many MPAs and ASW helicopters as possible.

Is this guy seriously thinking 075 is better protected by a fleet than docking in main land protected by vast network of land airfield, SAM, and anti ship missiles.

Have a little respect and not call me "this guy".

Land airfields and Ashm do not protected 075s from long range missiles

 

[Blitzo]

Please read it carefully. I didn't say it's a great ASW platform. I said it's a great platform that can also carry a lot of ASW helicopters (as well as other types of helicopters).

If you are carrying a lot of ASW helicopters and you are operating those ASW helicopters from 075 in a theater of war as you have described in your last few pages of proposals for using 075s, then you are operating your 075 as a ASW platform by definition.

I'll rephase my argument using your words -- "075 is a great platform, which can carry a lot of helicopters of various roles, ASW helicopters, but it should not be used in a manner where it carries a lot of ASW helicopters to conduct the ASW mission, unless significant extenuating circumstances forces it to be used in that manner (namely if the opposing submarine threat is so great, and if the 075s are not required to be used in their amphibious assault role in the future)".

At the same time, is it actually safer for LHD to be sitting in a port without air defense ships around it or be as part of a large fleet?

A port during time of war will have extended land based air power and air defenses as part of its own defensive screen -- but more importantly it will also be defended by the "large fleet" that is deployed out at sea which would function as the outermost layer of defense.

Based on the maritime geography of China, the western pacific, and the location of various opfor capabilities, yes being in certain ports would absolutely be safer than being out at sea.

I think you are over simplifying my comments. I'm advocating for 075s to operate as part of a larger fleet rather than sitting in port and doing nothing. And if it's part of a large fleet, then it's helicopters will get used for different missions. You seem to ignore my comments about other missions and just focus in on ASW.

I'm focusing on your ASW proposal because that is the one I consider to be most egregious.


Depending on the conflict and the stage of the conflict, it would be far more logical -- if not necessary and vital -- to preserve your 075s in port where they can be defended by land based friendly aircraft, air defenses, than sending them out at sea to "contribute" to a stage of the conflict where their presence is not absolutely essential.


The problem is that you are seeing 075s during a stage of conflict (prior to the amphibious assault stage) as if they are a net gain in capability for a conflict by sending them out into battle --- whereas in reality if they are sent out into battle they are a liability because 075s are so important to the amphibious assault stage of the conflict that they will require substantial naval escorts to make them sufficiently survivable.

By sending 075s into battle, you either:
1: risk losing your precious, vital 075 that you need to keep alive until the amphibious assault phase of the conflict
2: risk compromising your naval task force's mission by dedicating so many escorts to preserve your 075s

That is why I've repeatedly said that the only way it makes sense to send 075s into battle for the ASW mission (or indeed, as part of any sort of naval task force prior to the amphibious assault phase of the conflict), is if you are forced to throw all of your capabilities and the kitchen sink at the enemy because they are just so capable, and if you do not plan to do an amphibious assault operation in the near future anyway in which case the primary and unique 075 capability is not that important and you have greater freedom to risk your 075s for other missions.

oh, that's nice of you. If I disagree with you, I'm rejecting to understand, like I'm stupid, rather than I just disagree with you.

If PLAN loses a 075, it will still be able to conduct amphibious assaults with other 075s, 071s. It has 8 071s! If we are talking about Taiwan, 072s and RoRo ships are all going to be used.

If PLAN loses a carrier, it will have no way of maintaining presence in that very important area East of Taiwan. So yeah, I consider losing a carrier to be a bigger loss than a 075. I would want them to be able to keep that carrier safe and control the area East of Taiwan with all possible naval assets.

I think this is something which your previous posts had not described.

The issue I had with your previous posts is that you made it sound like it would be normal or natural to use 075s or 076s in the ASW mission.

Whereas what you're really describing here, is stating that you think the ASW threat that the PLAN faces would be so severe that they are forced to throw everything they have at it (even suboptimal platforms), and also arguing that you don't think 075s are essential to an amphibious assault operation (thus willing to risk a loss of a 075).

In other words, you are describing a situation where you believe the PLAN are being forced to use 075s in the ASW role because they have no other choice.
If that's the case, then I have no disagreement with you.

You said "Where are CSGs with 075s in it? Let's look beyond China. Which country does it?"

Clearly, America and France do operate LHDs alongside a CSG. And if LHD operate along side a CSG, then they will be asked to help CSGs in the areas that they can. Different military have different needs. USN does not have a shortage of quality SSNs, so it doesn't need LHA/LHDs to assist with ASW.

In PLAN's case, ASW is one such need. There are also other roles that it will be asked to do that's not amphibious assaults.

The USN and MN operate LHDs alongside CSGs, but LHDs are rarely a fixture as part of a CSG except for photo ops.

Instead, during times of battle, LHDs operate with CSGs in the same theater where they are used for their own respective missions that they are optimized for.
LHDs for amphibious assault and employment of rotary air power, while CSGs provide fixed wing strike, AEW, area air defense, ASW.

 

[tphuang]

If you are carrying a lot of ASW helicopters and you are operating those ASW helicopters from 075 in a theater of war as you have described in your last few pages of proposals for using 075s, then you are operating your 075 as a ASW platform by definition.

I'll rephase my argument using your words -- "075 is a great platform, which can carry a lot of helicopters of various roles, ASW helicopters, but it should not be used in a manner where it carries a lot of ASW helicopters to conduct the ASW mission, unless significant extenuating circumstances forces it to be used in that manner (namely if the opposing submarine threat is so great, and if the 075s are not required to be used in their amphibious assault role in the future)".

Unfortunately, that extenuating circumstance is also a very likely circumstance. That's why it's worth mentioning especially.

A port during time of war will have extended land based air power and air defenses as part of its own defensive screen -- but more importantly it will also be defended by the "large fleet" that is deployed out at sea which would function as the outermost layer of defense.

Based on the maritime geography of China, the western pacific, and the location of various opfor capabilities, yes being in certain ports would absolutely be safer than being out at sea.

I can buy that argument, but it's worth pointing out that being at port (especially one with ESF) does have it's won set of risks. It would also be in a fixed location (making it a juicy target). And long range attack at a ESF naval base could theoretically come in from a direction that bypasses a large fleet stationed in Philippine Sea.

If we compare this to a large swath of water in Philippine sea where you'd need to find it first (which isn't trivial) and it would be a secondary target after the aircraft carrier and large replenishment ships even assuming that a submarine could penetrate the outer ring of defense.

Depending on the conflict and the stage of the conflict, it would be far more logical -- if not necessary and vital -- to preserve your 075s in port where they can be defended by land based friendly aircraft, air defenses, than sending them out at sea to "contribute" to a stage of the conflict where their presence is not absolutely essential.


The problem is that you are seeing 075s during a stage of conflict (prior to the amphibious assault stage) as if they are a net gain in capability for a conflict by sending them out into battle --- whereas in reality if they are sent out into battle they are a liability because 075s are so important to the amphibious assault stage of the conflict that they will require substantial naval escorts to make them sufficiently survivable.

By sending 075s into battle, you either:
1: risk losing your precious, vital 075 that you need to keep alive until the amphibious assault phase of the conflict
2: risk compromising your naval task force's mission by dedicating so many escorts to preserve your 075s

That is why I've repeatedly said that the only way it makes sense to send 075s into battle for the ASW mission (or indeed, as part of any sort of naval task force prior to the amphibious assault phase of the conflict), is if you are forced to throw all of your capabilities and the kitchen sink at the enemy because they are just so capable, and if you do not plan to do an amphibious assault operation in the near future anyway in which case the primary and unique 075 capability is not that important and you have greater freedom to risk your 075s for other missions.

Whatever they will put in the water East of Taiwan would need to keep Guam out of commission and blockade oil/natural gas coming to Taiwan and Japan. They will be facing whatever remains of 7th fleet and JSDF after initial attack + possible long range USAF bombers coming after them. Worry about amphibious operations once you get past this critical initial phase.

I believe the more large capable ships you have in a fleet, the more collective air defense and sensors you have and the harder it is to penetrate.

I think this is something which your previous posts had not described.

The issue I had with your previous posts is that you made it sound like it would be normal or natural to use 075s or 076s in the ASW mission.

Whereas what you're really describing here, is stating that you think the ASW threat that the PLAN faces would be so severe that they are forced to throw everything they have at it (even suboptimal platforms), and also arguing that you don't think 075s are essential to an amphibious assault operation (thus willing to risk a loss of a 075).

In other words, you are describing a situation where you believe the PLAN are being forced to use 075s in the ASW role because they have no other choice.
If that's the case, then I have no disagreement with you.

Shilao has repeatedly talked about Falkland war scenario where the British were forced to piece together all the Sea Harriers it had (including from training units and other non-regular squadron) to have enough Harriers in flying condition to fully field 2 carriers. In war, you are most likely going to be forced to use suboptimal setups.

We've only talked about ASW here, because that's the initial topic. In reality, they may see the biggest need in having as many SAR helicopters around as possible because they anticipate losing several 054As/052Ds or even 055s in a brutal conflict. They might find the need to have additional AEW helicopters. That's for PLAN to assess. For me, it would be silly for PLAN to not train for these scenarios.

 

[BoraTas]

oh, that's nice of you. If I disagree with you, I'm rejecting to understand, like I'm stupid, rather than I just disagree with you.

If PLAN loses a 075, it will still be able to conduct amphibious assaults with other 075s, 071s. It has 8 071s! If we are talking about Taiwan, 072s and RoRo ships are all going to be used.

If PLAN loses a carrier, it will have no way of maintaining presence in that very important area East of Taiwan. So yeah, I consider losing a carrier to be a bigger loss than a 075. I would want them to be able to keep that carrier safe and control the area East of Taiwan with all possible naval assets.


You said "Where are CSGs with 075s in it? Let's look beyond China. Which country does it?"

Clearly, America and France do operate LHDs alongside a CSG. And if LHD operate along side a CSG, then they will be asked to help CSGs in the areas that they can. Different military have different needs. USN does not have a shortage of quality SSNs, so it doesn't need LHA/LHDs to assist with ASW.

In PLAN's case, ASW is one such need. There are also other roles that it will be asked to do that's not amphibious assaults.

A military (like PLAN) with likely air/surface superiority facing opposing underwater superiority is not normal. Until 095s are built in large numbers, China does not have normal circumstances around its possible missions. If PLAN has something even on the level of late LA class, it would not need to resort to flooding nearby sea with as many MPAs and ASW helicopters as possible.


Have a little respect and not call me "this guy".

Land airfields and Ashm do not protected 075s from long range missiles

I didn't want to be rude. I didn't mean you were stupid. I just think you are rejecting the primary argument against 075 being used for ASW and pressing on your first argument. I am sorry if I offended you.

 

[by78]

31 and 32 at base.