CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

Maikeru

Maikeru

Colonel
Registered Member
Interesting to speculate about how PLAN will approach the air groups for its CVs going forward. The USN concept of a more or less fixed air wing suits their pattern of long deployments far away from home, but PLAN might adopt a more flexible approach of using its CVs as essentially floating FOBs for mostly land-based airwings which deploy to the CVs as and when needed rather than staying aboard for a whole 6-9 month deployment.
 
M

Michaelsinodef

Captain
Registered Member
Maikeru said:
Interesting to speculate about how PLAN will approach the air groups for its CVs going forward. The USN concept of a more or less fixed air wing suits their pattern of long deployments far away from home, but PLAN might adopt a more flexible approach of using its CVs as essentially floating FOBs for mostly land-based airwings which deploy to the CVs as and when needed rather than staying aboard for a whole 6-9 month deployment.
Click to expand...
The chinese carriers don't do 6-12 months missions in the first place.

It's like, often 15-40 days adventure with some weeks of rest and maintenance between.
 
N

no_name

Colonel
Maikeru said:
Interesting to speculate about how PLAN will approach the air groups for its CVs going forward. The USN concept of a more or less fixed air wing suits their pattern of long deployments far away from home, but PLAN might adopt a more flexible approach of using its CVs as essentially floating FOBs for mostly land-based airwings which deploy to the CVs as and when needed rather than staying aboard for a whole 6-9 month deployment.
Click to expand...
Or to provide air cover for the 055's hypersonic missile platform :p
 
obj 705A

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
Maikeru said:
Interesting to speculate about how PLAN will approach the air groups for its CVs going forward. The USN concept of a more or less fixed air wing suits their pattern of long deployments far away from home, but PLAN might adopt a more flexible approach of using its CVs as essentially floating FOBs for mostly land-based airwings which deploy to the CVs as and when needed rather than staying aboard for a whole 6-9 month deployment.
Click to expand...
That sounds ridiculous. Regular AF landbased aircrafts are not suitable for CVs. They dont have landing gear nor a launch bar for the catapults. So no they won't operate landbased aircrafts off of CVs.

If you mean they would base the carrier compatabile aircraft on land rather than on the CVs that makes even less sense. A CV has a hangar and a flight deck. If you say the Chinese CVs may not even have aircrafts that implies the PLAN CV is either that impotent that it cant even permanently house an aircraft as long as it's at sea (which is ridiculous) or that they dont have enough trust in their own ship that they would rather base carrier fighters on land rather than on the CV itself and only move it to the CV for few days.
 
Maikeru

Maikeru

Colonel
Registered Member
obj 705A said:
That sounds ridiculous. Regular AF landbased aircrafts are not suitable for CVs. They dont have landing gear nor a launch bar for the catapults. So no they won't operate landbased aircrafts off of CVs.

If you mean they would base the carrier compatabile aircraft on land rather than on the CVs that makes even less sense. A CV has a hangar and a flight deck. If you say the Chinese CVs may not even have aircrafts that implies the PLAN CV is either that impotent that it cant even permanently house an aircraft as long as it's at sea (which is ridiculous) or that they dont have enough trust in their own ship that they would rather base carrier fighters on land rather than on the CV itself and only move it to the CV for few days.
Click to expand...
You have completely misunderstood my post.

What I am proposing is a rapidly deployable tailored air group rather that a more or less fixed USN-style air group.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top