075 LHD thread
- Thread starter nosh
- Start date
No, that answer is incorrect, and the fact that other answers haven't gotten through to you is a reflection of the extent (or rather, limits) of your own understanding of military matters.
The idea that it is necessary for a LHD to have a STOVL jet or other fixed wing jet capability as a baseline expectation is entirely flawed.
There are multiple nations that operate LHDs without STOVL jets -- France with Mistral class, Australia with Canberra class, Korea with Dokdo.
They are amphibious assault ships whose primary purpose is employment of helicopters and welldeck based amphibious assault vehicles or landing craft of various types to project power towards land but can project general rotary air power in low threat environments at sea as well.
Yes, they can be used for other general purpose power projection as well, including employing any mix of helicopter types for various missions, but they are not dedicated ASW carriers and LHDs like 075 do not make for a good ASW centerpiece for a task force.
There are other ships like the Japanese Hyuga class which are more oriented as dedicated "ASW carriers" but the 075 class are not similar to those and risking them in a suboptimal role as "ASW centerpiece" is idiotic.
There maybe many nations who employ type 075 like ships with only helicopters. But maybe they are like battleships of WW2, totally useless in a real war.
Ukraine war has already shown how powerful air defense is in the modern battlefield. It is so powerful that even Russia with overwhelming number of supersonic fighter advantage is afraid to send fighters into contested air space covered by good and layered air defense systems. Even fast cruise missiles hugging the ground are frequently being shot down.
How can slow helicopters operate in this kind of tech environment against a contested beach landing? I think they will be pretty much useless in a ground assault unless Air Defense is completely neutralized beforehand.
So, it seems like if PLA's plan is to have 8 of these 40K ton ships, just for amphibious assault with helicopters, when such a mission could be suicide, seems obsolete and "stupid".
Using the huge flight deck of the 075 could be more useful for launching drones, rather than sending helicopters into suicide missions against strong Air defenses.
So, I don't think PLA is making these ships just for that role. Just like a Carrier can be used in many roles like Ship Air Defense, Anti-Ship, Land Strike, I think an LHD like the type 075 has to fulfill many roles.
it has to be useful especially in a naval warfare scenario against US, Japan coalition, if it has to justify its existence as capital ship named after a province. The only role I can see where a helicopter carrier is useful in a war against US is an anti-submarine role as part of a combined fleet that also has an aircraft carrier for fleet defense.
Last edited:
What makes you think LHDs in the modern era would be conducting a beach landing against an enemy where air superiority sea control, interdiction and out-maneuvring has not already been significantly achieved, where they would have to directly contest the beach themselves?
That is to say, why do you think LHDs would be intended to conduct a suicide mission, rather than a mission where:
A) the ability to project rotary air power from sea would be necessary, and
B) the ability to project amphibious ground power to the beach would be necessary, and
C) in a mission whereby preceding actions would enable the LHD and its deployed rotary air and amphibious ground power to be sufficiently survivable?
Even air superiority cannot guarantee that all air defenses have been destroyed. Air defense missile batteries can be turned off and hidden in order to avoid detection and destruction. MANPADs are of course also available even in complete air dominance scenario.
So, I don't see how this whole approach of using helicopters for landing troops in a ground deep inside enemy territory could be achieved.
This is an obsolete tactic that has outgrown its usefulness in the modern tech warfare era.
War will involve losses, and it is the effective application of combined arms, multi-domain capabilities that can allow you to achieve your mission. There are many types of platforms where the modern battlefield are lethal towards, but are also platforms where only they have the specific blend of characteristics to achieve a specific mission profile.
As it stands, LHDs (and LPDs) are the only ship type that can allow a navy to deploy rotary wing and amphibious ground capabilities against an enemy where you have yet to secure an airfield/airbase or port, at long distances from one's homeport, and they are unique in that aspect.
But you clearly are here looking for confirmation of your pre-existing opinion rather than asking a question to get answers for something which you had no already established view on.
Helicopters are the most active aircraft in Ukrainian war - flying a disproportional number of sorties for their numbers.
Precisely because they can fly literally below treetops (for example, a few weeks ago there was a video of Ukrainian mi-8s hiding from GMTI in road traffic. Between buses and passenger cars). Precisely because they're slow and maneuverable enough where necessary, yet also fast enough where it is needed.
And while the whole Kiev operation ultimately wasn't successful (Ukrainian defense buckled to behind the landing zone, but didn't collapse) - Hostomel has proven a nice example that a helicopter strike force can get deep into the (1)massive air defense bubble, (2)under constant manpad/flak barrage, without losing transport helicopters.
Launching drones for what exactly? The task isn't launch drones for the sake of launching drones, your task is to establish an exploitable beachhead.
Drones (helicopters, whatever) is means. It isn't a reply.
In the age of inaccurate muskets, Troops used to openly march on the battlefield and fight against enemies while standing. But as rifles and machine guns got developed, these tactics became obsolete and had to be abandoned. Now troops had to hide under cover and employ different tactics.
Yes, war will involve losses, but as technology advances, certain tactics and capabilities become too costly to have any usefulness.
LHD's can be used for Helicopter assaults, but again as I mentioned in my previous arguments. This is an obsolete tactic and probably has very limited cases where they can applied without disastrous and embarrassing losses. If the PLA for examples deploys 20 helicopters for a landing and 15 are destroyed before they could even land, that will be a disaster on the level of Vulhedar and will be widely reported and mocked in the media.
LHD's can also be used for amphibious assault with Boats and LCACs. But again, as I mentioned in my original post couple of pages back, Type 071 can do that. So, it doesn't justify the huge cost of a type-075.
The only thing that can justify the huge cost of the type 075, is if it can do multiple things which include both helicopter and amphibious landings, but also some more things like Anti-Submarine warfare for example.
What I have been looking for is, what roles other than landing can the type 075 play that can justify its huge cost and prestige of being equal to a carrier in terms being named with a province.
So far, Anti-submarine warfare is the only role I have seen mentioned. There are other roles it can play, if it had VTOL planes. But of course currently it does not.
There are no tree tops to hide in the sea. Its completely open, flat and sits low compared to land. So, its totally exposed. So, how would the same tactic of flying low work when those helicopter must fly from the sea into land?
071 does not have the ability to deploy rotary assets to the extent that 075 does.
If you see a value in 071, and you don't see a value in 075, then you are by extension essentially arguing that you believe employment of helicopters from sea against land is not valuable, which I think is a ridiculous proposition.
The vulnerability of helicopters to air defenses is obvious, which is why you require combined arms efforts, suppression and reconnaissance to minimize their exposure.
That does not make the deployment of helicopters from sea towards land obsolete anymore than fire and forget ATGMs have made tanks obsolete.
I see value in the 071 as a much cheaper platform to deploy troops and tanks via boats and LCAC. Not for helicopter assaults.
And I have been arguing that deploying Helicopters from the sea against land is obsolete. Because unlike land, where Helicopters can hide from Air Defenses using Trees and Hills, there is nowhere to hide in the sea. The Sea is flat, open and actually sit low compared to land. So, how can helicopters hide?
Helicopter flying from the sea can't hide, they can't fly fast and thus they are easy targets for Air Defense missiles to shoot down.
Tanks of course are still useful because they are operating on land and can hide inside terrain easily. Sea is a unique environment that makes hiding impossible. Unless you go underwater.