China's V/STOL studies, concepts & considerations

I am struggling to find why China would pursue a VTOL when they already have a solution to install catapults on its LHDs. This seems like a superior solution to the VTOL aircraft approach anyway. Moreover, the whole LHD also acting as a light carrier is kinda getting obsolete as a concept in near peer fight.

China already has 2 5th gen and also 2 6th gen planes in pipeline. I don't see how a completely new vtol plane fits there. The only proper usecase I can think of is the original use case harrier was designed for, which is to use it in the air force as a hidden plane hiding in cities and not requiring runways. but considering china's dominance in its backyard, the likelyhood that China will lose all its runways to enemy strike is slim.

overall, maybe a vanity project that "ticks the boxes". Why should US be the only one with VTOL could be the logic here.

Ironhide said:

Patent Tsinghua

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

RVABI? Is this some sort of VCE too along with having a shaft-driven lift fan?

tamsen_ikard said:

I am struggling to find why China would pursue a VTOL when they already have a solution to install catapults on its LHDs.

Click to expand...

Your argument is solid; the more obvious answer is it isn't so much about LHDs.
Also, catapults don't really help with landing, which is far more troublesome than take off.

tamsen_ikard said:

This seems like a superior solution to the VTOL aircraft approach anyway.

Click to expand...

tamsen_ikard said:

oreover, the whole LHD also acting as a light carrier is kinda getting obsolete as a concept in near peer fight.

Click to expand...

But China installs catapults on LHDs, which are superior solution and obsolete concept? ;-)

tamsen_ikard said:

but considering china's dominance in its backyard, the likelyhood that China will lose all its runways to enemy strike is slim.

Click to expand...

Amphibious forces aren't for landing in Fujian.
What about other backyards?

Gloire_bb said:

Your argument is solid; the more obvious answer is it isn't so much about LHDs.
Also, catapults don't really help with landing, which is far more troublesome than take off.


But China installs catapults on LHDs, which are superior solution and obsolete concept? ;-)

Amphibious forces aren't for landing in Fujian.
What about other backyards?

Click to expand...

Any country China is likely to face (IE Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Australia) will have enough air power that a singular LHD is not going to cut it. If China wants to do an amphibious landing, it will need a massive naval force consisting of 1-2 proper carrier for air power, a big fleet of LHD-LPD-LST, several destroyers for fleet defense and on.

So, why build an LHD with VTOL if you can build another carrier. Baby carriers with limited use VTOL planes are just not that useful in an actual war.

tamsen_ikard said:

I am struggling to find why China would pursue a VTOL when they already have a solution to install catapults on its LHDs. This seems like a superior solution to the VTOL aircraft approach anyway. Moreover, the whole LHD also acting as a light carrier is kinda getting obsolete as a concept in near peer fight.

China already has 2 5th gen and also 2 6th gen planes in pipeline. I don't see how a completely new vtol plane fits there. The only proper usecase I can think of is the original use case harrier was designed for, which is to use it in the air force as a hidden plane hiding in cities and not requiring runways. but considering china's dominance in its backyard, the likelyhood that China will lose all its runways to enemy strike is slim.

overall, maybe a vanity project that "ticks the boxes". Why should US be the only one with VTOL could be the logic here.

Click to expand...

I agree. The F-35B is a good indicator of what a Chinese VSTOL plane would look like, and it's so limited that I can't imagine the PLAN wanting to operate something like that. The main reason I see Chinese developers wanting to explore the technology is on the off chance that if the Americans come up with some awesome VSTOL plane, the Chinese wouldn't have so much to catch up on. Another possibility is that China is simply exploring all American white papers that show the slightest promise and VSTOL technology is just one of these. In both cases, I can't see China ever getting beyond the tech demonstrator stage.

tamsen_ikard said:

Any country China is likely to face (IE Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Australia) will have enough air power that a singular LHD is not going to cut it.

Click to expand...

Single LHD is never cutting it in high profile landing, it's 1 battalion more or less by itself. Smaller garrisons are a fair game, though, and most countries don't maintain huge coastal forces everywhere.

There are countries like Philippines and Vietnam. Then, Japan and Australia are big. And while Korea is not, let's not forget that both Korea and even China were subjected to famous naval invasions in the past.

tamsen_ikard said:

If China wants to do an amphibious landing, it will need a massive naval force consisting of 1-2 proper carrier for air power, a big fleet of LHD-LPD-LST, several destroyers for fleet defense and on.

Click to expand...

If only there was a force, capable of just that

tamsen_ikard said:

So, why build an LHD with VTOL if you can build another carrier. Baby carriers with limited use VTOL planes are just not that useful in an actual war.

Click to expand...

To deploy fighters forward at a first opportunity, and let the fleet away from being tied down to invasion beech as soon as possible.

Let's not forget that baby carriers and LHDs, as well as their entire doctrine, is a product of the actual war, as it comes down from Taffy groups (famous mostly for Samar) and USMC tendencies to forward deploy air power even when it's in artillery range.
That was WW2. I.e. the largest war yet.