CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations

[Blitzo]

Well, just to be a pedantic sod, but you can indeed have a ski jump and a catapult on the same carrier, just not both at the same position.

It would certainly be possible, even desireable for the PLAN to have waist catapults and a bow ski jump on the same carrier.

China has already invested in 20+ J15As, and will probably get many more to form the Liaoning's air wing. That is no small investment.

They are also working on a catapult capable J15B.

A waist cat mod could very easily give the Liaoning the full benefit of cat assisted launches for strike loads and especially fixed wing carrier AWACS, while retaining the ski jump allows them to continue to use the non-cat capable J15As.

Once all the J15As are retired, they could do a major mid life upgrade to remove the ski jump and put in bow cats, but that's at least 15-20 years down the line.

Just regarding nomenclature, I think the non catapult compatible J-15s are just called "J-15s" whereas the upgraded catapult compatible J-15s are currently being called J-15A (or J-15T).

In either case, I wouldn't be surprised if production of vanilla J-15s ends within a year or so, replaced in production solely by the the upgraded and catapult compatible J-15A being standard (likely with J-15AS as well), to be the common aircraft aboard both STOBAR and CATOBAR carriers, while vanilla J-15s gradually become relegated to second line duties as more J-15As enter service (though this will be quite a few years away).
So I imagine J-15As will eventually operate from both STOBAR and CATOBAR carriers (very important for operational flexibility IMO) and it also streamlines production to a single standard -- there is no necessary obligation for them to keep operating a STOBAR carrier or anything to keep their current vanilla J-15s relevant, because any catapult J-15A should be able to operate from a STOBAR carrier just as competently.


Refitting Liaoning (and 001A, which is always part of the conversation) with waist cats is always going to be a persistent possibility, but I personally think the complexity and cost of such a modification may not be worth it, especially in Liaoning's case if the ship wasn't designed with a waist cat refit in mind. If 001A was designed and built with a waist cat refit in mind potentially, with the underdeck spaces and configuration arranged with minimal internal reconstruction needed then a waist cat refit might be more possible.

 

[Obi Wan Russell]

I never said you couldn't have them on the same carrier, the plans for the aborted Soviet Carrier Ulyanovsk clearly show a ski jump bow and two steam cats on the waist; my point was that you don't put a short cat firing into a ramp. People keep coming up with this idea and all it proves is they don't understand how either a catapult or a Ramp work. I think it is entirely possible Carrier 17 or later carriers could have Cats in the waist location. Steam Catapults are relatively simple technology and China has had an example to study and copy/emulate since the mid 80s as we all know. I'd have thought they would go with steam cats initially just to get experience with cats at sea. Let the Americans work out any bugs in the EMCAT technology and move over to them later.

 

[Iron Man]

While steam cats don't have the finesse to be used on curved ramps, I'm willing to bet EM cats could easily be adapted to be installed on curved surfaces and ramp up acceleration smoothly over the length of the curve so that the plane isn't nosediving into the ramp. That said, I highly doubt the PLAN has any such plans in mind for any of its carriers.

 

[siegecrossbow]

While steam cats don't have the finesse to be used on curved ramps, I'm willing to bet EM cats could easily be adapted to be installed on curved surfaces and ramp up acceleration smoothly over the length of the curve so that the plane isn't nosediving into the ramp. That said, I highly doubt the PLAN has any such plans in mind for any of its carriers.

Why even have a ramp if you've got catapults? Seems redundant to me.

 

[Iron Man]

To launch even heavier loads than can be achieved with just an EM cat alone, or if the EM cat is not sufficiently powered to begin with. But like I said, I think it is highly unlikely that this combination is part of the master plan.

 

[Jeff Head]

To launch even heavier loads than can be achieved with just an EM cat alone, or if the EM cat is not sufficiently powered to begin with. But like I said, I think it is highly unlikely that this combination is part of the master plan.

A properly designed EM ramp is programable so you can dial up the force you need for the aircraft and weight.

I do not expect ever to see a Ski-jump with any sort of catapult leading up into and along it.

 

[Jeff Head]

Refitting Liaoning (and 001A, which is always part of the conversation) with waist cats is always going to be a persistent possibility, but I personally think the complexity and cost of such a modification may not be worth it, especially in Liaoning's case if the ship wasn't designed with a waist cat refit in mind. If 001A was designed and built with a waist cat refit in mind potentially, with the underdeck spaces and configuration arranged with minimal internal reconstruction needed then a waist cat refit might be more possible.

I agree.

I personally think that CV-16 and CV-17, the two STOBAR carriers, will remain STOBAR. There will be plenty of opportunity to use them in less vulnerable conditions (ie. whenever they are not apt to engage a US carrier), show the flag missions, and any number of other missions that they can fulfill quite readily without having to commit a full CATOBAR CV.

Ultimately, when they reach the end of their service life, they will be replaced by CVNs at that point in all likelihood.

But...time will tell.

 

[Jeff Head]

I never said you couldn't have them on the same carrier, the plans for the aborted Soviet Carrier Ulyanovsk clearly show a ski jump bow and two steam cats on the waist; my point was that you don't put a short cat firing into a ramp. People keep coming up with this idea and all it proves is they don't understand how either a catapult or a Ramp work. I think it is entirely possible Carrier 17 or later carriers could have Cats in the waist location. Steam Catapults are relatively simple technology and China has had an example to study and copy/emulate since the mid 80s as we all know. I'd have thought they would go with steam cats initially just to get experience with cats at sea. Let the Americans work out any bugs in the EMCAT technology and move over to them later.

Amen, Obi Wan.

Another one that gets me are these super fanboy designs that show the Ski-Ramp on the angled deck.

Errr...excuse me? Where do they think bolters have to go?

That would amount to wreckless endangerment of any situation where the pilot missed the wire and had to bolt IMHO.

 

[kwaigonegin]

Ramps and cats don't mix! Lol it would simply be too much of an engineering challenge to precisely work a catapult over a curve incline launching aircrafts of different power and weight class.
Could it be done? Sure but why? The ROI not to mention so many moving parts and maintenance is not worth any perceived benefits!

 

[Iron Man]

Ramps and cats don't mix! Lol it would simply be too much of an engineering challenge to precisely work a catapult over a curve incline launching aircrafts of different power and weight class.
Could it be done? Sure but why? The ROI not to mention so many moving parts and maintenance is not worth any perceived benefits!

About as much of an engineering challenge as it was to design a maglev train that isn't an exact straight shot from one station to the next. Did you think those train tracks were all straight or something? Look, I'm not saying that EM cat + ski ramp is going to happen. In fact I've already said twice I seriously doubt this would ever be considered. My point wasn't whether it's going to happen, but whether it is more feasible than a steam cat + ski ramp combo. Clearly it is.