Ideal chinese carrier thread

[bd popeye]

Very nice Golly... But,

Why did you put those VLS cells on the flight deck? That will be a hazzard to operations. They don't take away much deck space because your flight deck is huge. Nearly the size of a Forrestal class. And your CVW is of reasonable size.

I do not understand why your hangar is seemingly short to me. A CV-59 class hangar is about 230-240m in lenght.

All in all a great design!

 

[Obi Wan Russell]

Excellent design Golly, I'd only make one minor adjustment myself, the Waist Catapult needs to angled slightly to port so the aircraft clear the ship on launch. If an aircraft being catapulted loses power it might strike the side of the ship, or the aircraft might be run down by the carrier after it hits the sea. Not good for pilot morale. VLS in the flight deck is a peculiarly Russian idea which the Chinese may well copy so no objection there, and a relatively small hangar is again something the PLAN may unwittingly copy from Varyag. Of course we could offer our services to them as design consultants for a small fee...

 

[bd popeye]

Excellent design Golly, I'd only make one minor adjustment myself, the Waist Catapult needs to angled slightly to port so the aircraft clear the ship on launch. If an aircraft being catapulted loses power it might strike the side of the ship, or the aircraft might be run down by the carrier after it hits the sea. Not good for pilot morale. VLS in the flight deck is a peculiarly Russian idea which the Chinese may well copy so no objection there, and a relatively small hangar is again something the PLAN may unwittingly copy from Varyag. Of course we could offer our services to them as design consultants for a small fee...

I'd love to help the PLAN design a CV. I'd start off with an LPH first. Then a CV. What I'd really like to do in my dream world is train the sailors on the PLAN CV in safety, flight deck operations and ordance handling. In all honesty I could do that.

As for the cats'...I think they are ok. Even the waist one. Your suggestion is correct Jedi master.Accidents do happen. But if you check out this link

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Notice the placement of the #4 waist cat. It is parallel with the deck. In all the time I worked on the flight deck I only once did see a plane crash on launch. That was an Intruder shot off the STBD bow cat on the Nimitz.

Excellent drawing Golly.

 

[Obi Wan Russell]

I'd love to help the PLAN design a CV. I'd start off with an LPH first. Then a CV. What I'd really like to do in my dream world is train the sailors on the PLAN CV in safety, flight deck operations and ordance handling. In all honesty I could do that.

As for the cats'...I think they are ok. Even the waist one. Your suggestion is correct Jedi master.Accidents do happen. But if you check out this link

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Notice the placement of the #4 waist cat. It is parallel with the deck. In all the time I worked on the flight deck I only once did see a plane crash on launch. That was an Intruder shot off the STBD bow cat on the Nimitz.

Excellent drawing Golly.

I've noticed some people seem to think the concepts of a PLAN CV and a PLAN LPH are an 'either or' situation, when they are in fact complimentary. So, specs for a PLAN LPH? Or rather a class of LPHs to screen the CV fleet (let's not think in terms of one offs).:nono:

 

[Scratch]

To give another perspective of my design I decided to do a hand-made drawing.
Though I'm anything but good at it, you might get an idea.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Planeman, why not put a second elevator between the skyjumps, otherwhise aircraft would have to taxi all the way back to a single elevator if my eyes are working well). and your ship must either be very long or the flight deck is rather short, due to the long part forward of the flight deck.
And I think it's somewhat moot to put that much emphasise in making a CV stealthy.
But as you said, it's a what if and the imagination is nice.

Golly, nice story, close to a CATOBAR Kuznetsov from the looks.

 

[Gollevainen]

Thanks you for the compliments.

What comes to the hangar lenght, it's actually the maxium that it can physically be. In the bow it ends to where the bow catabults begins and in the stern it comes also as far as usually hangars does in other carrier designs. It's roughly the same as in the proposed CVF to UK (that ship being only slightly smaller than this one) so to me it doesen't sound too small. I you sure Poppy that you haven't done some metric-imperial conversion mistakes? Becouse 240 m sounds alot for 300 meter vessel...

 

[bd popeye]

I've noticed some people seem to think the concepts of a PLAN CV and a PLAN LPH are an 'either or' situation, when they are in fact complimentary. So, specs for a PLAN LPH? Or rather a class of LPHs to screen the CV fleet (let's not think in terms of one offs).:nono:

Let me explain. I agree with you. However>>>> I'm in favor of both. Why? Given the PLAN has no experience operating avation ships. And that little helo training ship does not count. I think it best, as I have stated many times, that the PLAN start with a LPH type ship. But if they are willing to dive head first into a CV..so be it. They really need to first learn how to operate an avation ship no matter the type.

I you sure Poppy that you haven't done some metric-imperial conversion mistakes? Becouse 240 m sounds alot for 300 meter vessel...

I use a metric conversion chart;

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[adeptitus]

I've noticed some people seem to think the concepts of a PLAN CV and a PLAN LPH are an 'either or' situation, when they are in fact complimentary. So, specs for a PLAN LPH? Or rather a class of LPHs to screen the CV fleet (let's not think in terms of one offs).:nono:

I'm in favor of LPH/LHD's. Start with the 071, then move toward something similar to the Korean LPX, then to USN style Tarwa or Wasp-class LHD.

But my vision differs from others. I see platforms like the Wasp-class LHD, or even something smaller (30,000 tones) to be sufficient in operating both manned helicopters and fixed-wing UAV's, which should be smaller than manned aircraft.

Instead of rows of Su-33's or navalized J-10's with bunch of top gun pilots in leather jackets, I envision rows of combat UAV's stored in TLC's ready for launch, and bunch of geeky "joystick jocks" sitting in front of computers in white dress shirts with nerdy glasses and pocket protectors.

 

[alwaysfresh]

Why not have both the landing and take-off strips with ski-jumps? And they would be interchangable.

Another neat feature is that the multihull design allows you to vent the engine gases between the hulls and so reduce superstructure and IR signiture.

The central superstructure also allows for better stealth especially from the forward quadrant. It also allows you to place a deep VLS in the front of the ship.

The Ship would be about 55,000t and carry 40 aircraft (70 max if UCAVs are used) so similar to the latest British designs. It would also have numerous CIWS and HQ-9 SAM (32 or 48) plus 16 YJ-62 missiles (under ski-jumps) and 8 SS-N-29 ASW missiles.

BTW, the rear facing lift at the back of the flight deck is designed to help lower the RCS from the sides as well.

I like your design. If I was going to say what a next generation aircraft carrier might look like I would pick your design, because it looks like a multi-role ship plus has two take-off and landing zones. I would like to see a helicopter pad at the back on a separate level. Now the ship acts with three separate roles.

 

[planeman]

a monohull version along a similar theme to my previous one. Both landing and take-off runs have ski-jumps which also house the cruise missile launchers (YJ-62 LACMs).