AFAIK, there is no difference in training of pilots in either using steam or electric catapult. The difference I see would be the guys that use and maintain the catapults.
CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
AFAIK, there is no difference in training of pilots in either using steam or electric catapult. The difference I see would be the guys that use and maintain the catapults.
I think every aircraft carrier should have the ability to ski jump launch airplanes, something similar to the QEs in conception. The ski jump is serve the same purpose as does the anti-aircraft, anti-infantry machine gun mounted on tanks, for emergency, extra cautionary purposes. If a tank with a powerful big cannon still needs a small machine gun, I see no reason why a flat-top doesn't need a ski jump.
Ski jump launching is less vulnerable to mechanic malfunctions as the catapults. Therefore, if you have one on your ship, you'll always have a workable launching system even when your dock suffers some damages.
I think it is possible to invent an adjustable dock for flap-top ships. With today's technologies, it shouldn't be very difficult to build a computer-controlled adjustable dock that can raise or lower part of it to certain degrees to form a curved platform, allowing a flat-top ship to ski jump launch airplanes. After China finishes the catch-ups in its naval technologies, it will play with new ideas. An adjustable dock may be just one of them.
one of a kind ship is a huge tactical and logistical problem for the navy.
Pair, on the other hand, is a workable entity.
It’s main shortcoming would be an inability to launch heavily loaded strike missions like a catapult equipped carrier can. If ski jump carrier is all you have, then your carrier force would be at a disadvantage fighting a catapult carrier force in blue water. But ski jump carrier does not suffer much if it is used as a CAP carrier operating lightly loaded fighters on combat air patrol missions over the fleet itself. So ski jump carriers can be an economic means to strengthen the defence of a multi-carrier task force that includes several catapult carriers.
So, the value of a ski carrier in Chinese hands as a component of a fleet that can fight a peer power would likely be very different from ski carriers in the Royal Navy or the Indian Navy.
The reason is intended eventual force composition. The QE class is the only British carrier class for the foreseeable future. So ski jump carrier is all she would have. India also seem to plan just a few carriers. She may built a catapult carrier or two, but given that carriers have to rotate through dock yards, ski jump carriers might be all she has available in time of emergency.
China clearly intends to build at least 4 larger catapult carriers. This allows the ski carriers to group up with catapult carriers into task forces that might consist of 2 catapult carriers, and 1 ski carrier. This would potentially allow the catapult carriers to offload major continuous fleet defense air operations such as combat air patrol and fleet defensive anti-submarine patrol to the ski carrier, allowing the catapult carriers to concentrate on strike missions and their fighter escorts. This potentially greatly simplify coordinate carrier air operation, because timing and rhythm of offensive air operation need not be disrupted by the need for the same carrier to continuous cycle defensive air assets like ASW helicopters and CAP fighters from its decks.
I think a closer reading of how the USN conducted its carrier operations against the Japanese using separate light carriers dedicated to defensive and fleet carriers to offensive air operation in the 1944 time frame would offer invaluable insight into how the Chinese could operate their ski carriers in coordination with catapult carriers.
I think this means that even though 002 is very close to be commissioned, China is taking the time and not rushing to commission it before the national day. The sea trial takes much longer than Liaoning, a surprise to me.
As to how many J-15 can be hosted on 002, this CCTV program reiterated 36, actually making it a talking point, saying it's much higher than Liaoning's 24. Considering that this statement is from an announcer, not an commentator, in such a high profile program and manner, to me this is as official as you can get.
Or maybe this is just for propoganda and 36 is just too good to be true?
I think if 016 is regarded as only suitable for 24 J-15s, the limiting factor would not be the size of the hull, hanger or flight deck. It probably had more to do with secondary capacities like fuel, ammunition, the number of ammunition elevators, etc. the 001 was originally built for soviet needs, which was not to operate the ship as a center piece of a carrier task group to fight other carrier task groups. Instead it was to provide fleet air defence while also act as a powerful surface combatant on par with a Kirov class CGN. So it would not be surprising if she had limitations and compromises that prevented her from effectively sustaining as many aircraft as she might otherwise do.
So when the Chinese built the 017, the intent appears to have been to configure her as pure aircraft carrier. Since the ship was built from search, she could dispense with the compromises 016 had and support as large a group as would be suitable for her size.
So when the Chinese built the 017, the intent appears to have been to configure her as pure aircraft carrier. Since the ship was built from search, she could dispense with the compromises 016 had and support as large a group as would be suitable for her size.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
36 x J15 on what the CV-17? No, big no
36 in time of war crossing all health and safety standards yes even 48, can you actually then sustain air opps ? No
24 it is
36 in time of war crossing all health and safety standards yes even 48, can you actually then sustain air opps ? No
24 it is
Intrepid
Major
If you always have half of your aircraft in the air, you can
Well we are not talking about 48, we are taking about whether it's 24,26,30 or 36.
I have the impression that those Soviet missile launchers were removed from Liaoning, but it was made into some living area because that area is badly located.
With 002, I'm sure they can do better than that, plus the new techs that can make things more efficient and smaller. Just that we don't know how far it can go.
Let's say it's 26 or 30, why does China need to inflate the number to 36? I don't see any value of doing this, even for propoganda. Commissioning it before the 70th anniversary would offer much bigger propaganda value, I would say.
I have the impression that those Soviet missile launchers were removed from Liaoning, but it was made into some living area because that area is badly located.
With 002, I'm sure they can do better than that, plus the new techs that can make things more efficient and smaller. Just that we don't know how far it can go.
Let's say it's 26 or 30, why does China need to inflate the number to 36? I don't see any value of doing this, even for propoganda. Commissioning it before the 70th anniversary would offer much bigger propaganda value, I would say.
- Status