PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

TerraN_EmpirE · Dec 12, 2013

So the Twin Carrier or as I like to think of it Gan Jiang/Mo Ye ( yes in Reference to the Sword makers) is still alive and well I see.
Catbar vs Stobar is still being fought over.

Here are my thoughts.
One) The Leiong and Kuznetsov are already differing greatly. When the Chinese took Delivery of the Varyang she was incomplete. and the Chinese have had to finish her build for them selves so in some ways every time we see Her leave port for Shakedowns and trials She is testing and proving Chinese technologies.
Two) no matter what The Chinese will need new power supply's for the new boats. if conventional or electric the boilers have to go. Gas turbines seem the better move. I don't see a sudden nuclear jump.
three) the decks over all lay and the hull shape will likely remain well the hanger will likely take elements not just from Leiong but likely from the Other carriers the Chinese have examined. as well as Chinese own unique elements
Three) new Island. the Chinese will likely take and extensively out fit with there own detection and command and Control assets.

If they do fallow a Twin carrier then we might see the PLAN outfitting one deck to trail CATBAR well the Other STOBAR with the ability to convert either to the other. this is a capability we have seen in the QE class. as the PLANAF has yet to display a cat in more then debated photos and As The J15 is based on the Russian SU33 which is not proven on a Cat. If they do decide to trial cat ops they would need aircraft suited to cats that would mean one of those ships would be a test articular for a set period until the Chinese decide on there final call. This would also require a run of J15's or alternative air frames suited for Catbars.

kwaigonegin · Dec 12, 2013

TerraN_EmpirE said:
So the Twin Carrier or as I like to think of it Gan Jiang/Mo Ye ( yes in Reference to the Sword makers) is still alive and well I see.
Catbar vs Stobar is still being fought over.

Here are my thoughts.
One) The Leiong and Kuznetsov are already differing greatly. When the Chinese took Delivery of the Varyang she was incomplete. and the Chinese have had to finish her build for them selves so in some ways every time we see Her leave port for Shakedowns and trials She is testing and proving Chinese technologies.
Two) no matter what The Chinese will need new power supply's for the new boats. if conventional or electric the boilers have to go. Gas turbines seem the better move. I don't see a sudden nuclear jump.
three) the decks over all lay and the hull shape will likely remain well the hanger will likely take elements not just from Leiong but likely from the Other carriers the Chinese have examined. as well as Chinese own unique elements
Three) new Island. the Chinese will likely take and extensively out fit with there own detection and command and Control assets.

If they do fallow a Twin carrier then we might see the PLAN outfitting one deck to trail CATBAR well the Other STOBAR with the ability to convert either to the other. this is a capability we have seen in the QE class. as the PLANAF has yet to display a cat in more then debated photos and As The J15 is based on the Russian SU33 which is not proven on a Cat. If they do decide to trial cat ops they would need aircraft suited to cats that would mean one of those ships would be a test articular for a set period until the Chinese decide on there final call. This would also require a run of J15's or alternative air frames suited for Catbars.

Good news is whatever these carrier variation will be one thing is for certain. The next couple of years should be more banner years for PLAN maybe even more so that the last two which in itself was quite incredible! We're talking new carriers, new destroyer maybe cruiser, maybe LHD or some other large hulls, possibly new class of SSN, induction of the J-15 into the fleet, basically the works!
I'll be looking forward to them for sure!

Air Force Brat · Dec 12, 2013

TerraN_EmpirE said:
So the Twin Carrier or as I like to think of it Gan Jiang/Mo Ye ( yes in Reference to the Sword makers) is still alive and well I see.
Catbar vs Stobar is still being fought over.

Here are my thoughts.
One) The Leiong and Kuznetsov are already differing greatly. When the Chinese took Delivery of the Varyang she was incomplete. and the Chinese have had to finish her build for them selves so in some ways every time we see Her leave port for Shakedowns and trials She is testing and proving Chinese technologies.
Two) no matter what The Chinese will need new power supply's for the new boats. if conventional or electric the boilers have to go. Gas turbines seem the better move. I don't see a sudden nuclear jump.
three) the decks over all lay and the hull shape will likely remain well the hanger will likely take elements not just from Leiong but likely from the Other carriers the Chinese have examined. as well as Chinese own unique elements
Three) new Island. the Chinese will likely take and extensively out fit with there own detection and command and Control assets.

If they do fallow a Twin carrier then we might see the PLAN outfitting one deck to trail CATBAR well the Other STOBAR with the ability to convert either to the other. this is a capability we have seen in the QE class. as the PLANAF has yet to display a cat in more then debated photos and As The J15 is based on the Russian SU33 which is not proven on a Cat. If they do decide to trial cat ops they would need aircraft suited to cats that would mean one of those ships would be a test articular for a set period until the Chinese decide on there final call. This would also require a run of J15's or alternative air frames suited for Catbars.

The J-15 is likely already cat ready as the nose gear looks like a telephone pole, likely just needs a draw bar. You wouldn't place that on the aircraft destined for the STOBAR carrier, because of the weight considerations, but, once you crank up the cats that will be a non-issue, as the J-15 will carry a load very well. I believe that the next two carriers will be Stobar with the provision for one or two waist cats, as some have stated, they may have a provision to allow the Ramp to be removed at the first major, when the cats would likely be installed. No doubt Deino is right and the report merely transposed the J-15 AND J-31, the J-31 looks to have an advantage at present as the fifth gen carrier bird, and yes there will be a 5th Gen, as soon as the F-35Bs and F-35Cs begin to be stood up, the need will be apparent. Yes the PLANAF is responding to the US pivot to the Pacific and ABE, and the ADIZ is a justification for a much more robust response as well as a Marker to any doubters about their intentions... NOTE Putin's response to Canada's stated intention to claim the North Pole, the only body cutting defense spending is our team??????? how bout that?????? brat

Jeff Head · Dec 13, 2013

TerraN_EmpirE said:
If they do fallow a Twin carrier then we might see the PLAN outfitting one deck to trail CATBAR well the Other STOBAR with the ability to convert either to the other. this is a capability we have seen in the QE class. as the PLANAF has yet to display a cat in more then debated photos and As The J15 is based on the Russian SU33 which is not proven on a Cat. If they do decide to trial cat ops they would need aircraft suited to cats that would mean one of those ships would be a test articular for a set period until the Chinese decide on there final call. This would also require a run of J15's or alternative air frames suited for Catbars.

I personally do not think either one of the two will have a cat when launched. Both will be a improved Liaoning design, but they will, in all likelihood, be the same.

At the best, I see them building the capability to later upgrade to cats, but launching them with a very similar operational routine as the Liaoning...with the types of improvements mentioned earlier.

Trying to do a STOBAR and a CATOBAR at once will enter risk into the equation that they do not have to take, and I think at this stage are unwilling to take.

As to the future beyond that, I predict that after the refit and refurbishment the Chinese did, that the Liaoning (short of any major intervening damage or problems not related to her refit and launch) is going to have a 30+ year service life with the PLAN. I expect to see her replacement building in the 2040 time frame.

The indigenous pair of STOBAR Carriers we are talking about will apparently be built between 2014 and 2018 and put in service in 2020-2021. They will serve probably 35-40 years. Meaning they will be replaced in the 2055-2060 time frame.

I expect the PLAN will build two more conventional carriers that are purpose built CATOBAR starting in 2024-2025 to put in service in the 2030-2031 time frame. That will leave them with the five I think they will want. When those two are in service, soon thereafter we will see the Liaoning replacement be designed and built (perhaps nuclear...who knows?) to come into service in the early 2040s.

But all of that is way out on the event horizon, and we shall all just have to wait and see how it actually turns out. I feel pretty confident at this point about the Liaoning and the two improved Liaoning...after that, it's all really conjecture and the confidence level steadily drops off with the years.

Blitzo · Dec 13, 2013

The idea of two carriers being built simultaneously still boggles my mind and I'm still far from convinced regarding its veracity.

I sincerely do hope 001As are designed to have removable ski jumps for catapults. If they develop EM catapults, and if the ship has IEPS from the start, then refitting EM cats will be far easier than refitting steam cats.

As for future carriers...

I assume the new 001As will feature a host of other small improvements to improve functioning such as a smaller island, a redesigned deck, larger hangar, etc. I'd also presume it to displace somewhat more than Liaoning's 65,000 tons, probably pushing over 70,000 tons at full.

If the 001As are eventually refit with catapults, and if they do displace upwards of 70,000 tons, I see the next logical benchmark to be a conventionally powered (IEPS), forrestal-kitty hawk sized carrier (let's call it 002).

There woudl be no reason to limit themselves to a smaller carrier displacing like the 001As, because by then the only major limitation will be the catapult technology. They would've (hopefully) already demonstrated a reliable capability to produce carriers, allowing them to make the next step to produce a true supercarrier.

We might get one or two 002s, and depending on whether the PLAN is satisfied with their carrier fleet (along with whether CV 16 needs replacement), a nuclear super carrier may arrive -- a "derivative" of 002 that would be somewhat larger, with an array of tiny improvements, but feature the same number of catapults, overall configuration, similar sized airwing, etc.

002 may be to a PLAN CVN what kittyhawk class was to the enterprise/nimitz classes.

If 001As cannot fit catapults, then 002 may end up being a similar displacement to 001A with the only major difference being that. From there they may be "delayed" a step or two behind my projection in the overall march to a full CVN capability.

But this of course is all fun fun speculation.

latenlazy · Dec 13, 2013

Jeff Head said:
I personally do not think either one of the two will have a cat when launched. Both will be a improved Liaoning design, but they will, in all likelihood, be the same.

At the best, I see them building the capability to later upgrade to cats, but launching them with a very similar operational routine as the Liaoning...with the types of improvements mentioned earlier.

Trying to do a STOBAR and a CATOBAR at once will enter risk into the equation that they do not have to take, and I think at this stage are unwilling to take.

Will carry over the discussion from the other thread here. I think that the PLAN being willing to build two hulls at once is either an indication of them being willing to take greater risks or their confidence in their abilities after their work on the Varyag, or both. Furthermore, it almost seems wastefully conservative if they take the risk of building two hulls at once and have them be identical when we know the goal is still to push their technological capabilities. Even if one isn't going to have a catapult, I'm almost willing to bet that one of the two will be taking greater risks with its design.

Blitzo · Dec 13, 2013

At the very least we should agree that retaining steam boilers in the new carriers is ridiculous.

The chinese shipbuilding has mastered gas turbines and fitting a few QC-280s together will easily propel a Liaoning+ sized carrier. We've heard them make a breakthrough in IEPS too, and it would be within the bounds of imagination for at least one if not both to feature such a propulsion driven by proven gas turbines.

You know, I find parallels between liaoning and the plan purchase of sovremennies.
The sovremenny was the most powerful destroyer that PLAN had at the time of its arrival. Observers could have been forgiven for thinking new PLAN destroyer designs may simply seek to emulate it. Clearly that wasn't what happened.

The PLAN knew what capabilities it wanted, they recognised the sovremremennies shortcomings, especially in propulsion and set about building ships that were much more modern and western than Russian.
I expect a similar case for carrier development. We may very well see similarities between liaoning and the first indigenous carriers in terms of ski jump, but I'd be surprised if there weren't major changes in hangar, elevator, island, deck space, propulsion. The fact is, the admiral kuznetsov class is hardly a competitive carrier design compared to western carriers and it gets many small things wrong. Part of it was soviet doctrine, part of it was probably soviet design

But the PLAN has had years if not decades to study the kind of flattop they want, and are probably the worlds biggest fan of the USN. I expect them to make the best of the ski jump configuration if that is what they end up fielding on their first indigenous carriers. It will be an interesting ship for sure.

delft · Dec 13, 2013

Scyth said:
I'm still not sure whether this report of building 2 (!) STOBAR carriers at the same time is accurate. There have been so many rumours that I won't get my popcorn ready unless I see some steel cut, or because we're talking about PLAN, a more vague, but more reliable statement.

In the article of WantChinaTimes there were some errors with regards to the J-15 and J-31 introduction date. One way or another, if you can't get these basic facts straight, you'll lose my sense of credibility really fast.

Awaiting further confirmation I'd like to ask: if true, why STOBAR carriers?

STOBAR
Assuming that previous calculations were right and that J-15s can take off from STOBAR with decent AtG loads, I can see that China opts for a relatively low risk option for having a carrier capable of conducting ground attacks. If the catapult technology turns out to be unreliable, you are just as or even more restricted compared to a STOBAR carrier because you don't have the ski-jump to help you (unless you design the bow long enough). Furthermore, the crew(s) is/ are already training with a STOBAR carrier so you could introduce those carriers to your fleets pretty fast.

With these carriers, you'd only sacrifice the capability of operating a E2 type of AEW aircraft (and C2 Greyhound type of aircraft), but given the lack of consistent proof that these aircrafts are under development then this wouldn't influence the decision very much

Also, it is likely that STOBAR carriers are relatively more susceptible to environmental conditions like windspeeds and ship movement so this may influence the take off restrictions of the J-15.

CATOBAR
Assuming that calculations are wrong, or restricted to certain conditions (if I remember correctly, Harriers didn't take off from the Invincible class if the movement of the ship was more than x degrees. I saw that on a documentary on Discovery channel (?), but couldn't find the episode anymore. If anyone know more about this, please post), why doesn't China go for CATOBAR? With catapults, you can launch heavier (loaded) aircraft and/ or depend less on environmental conditions. It's probably a little bit riskier as you need to also develop the knowledge of designing, working with and maintaining of such a catapult and so far there's no evidence that China is doing so (?)

A downside of CATOBAR would be that you'll need to train your crew to work with catapults. This would also mean that it has a negative impact on planning etc. as you can't cross-operate crews and carriers as efficiently. However, if China wants to go to CATOBAR one day, it'll need to incur this "cost" of inefficient planning sooner or later so why not now?

You do not sacrifice the capability to operate E-2 sized prop planes. Propellers give excellent thrust at low speed and the flying off speed of an E-2 like plane is lower than that of a fighter. If need be you can use the aft take off position. If you want to improve over the E-2 configuration you can use contra-props as in the An-70 and a connecting shaft between the engines as in the Be-30. Btw we have seen an aerodynamic test vehicle for the AEW aircraft based on the Y-7 which means that such an aircraft is now being developed and it will no doubt be deployed no later than the introduction of the new carriers.
If you use cats built into the ski ramp you can have a shorter take off length than when using either cats or a ramp alone. I expect that EM cats will not yet be ready when the ships are launched but their size will be known well enough to provide their supporting structure so providing them will cost a relatively short yard time.
There can I think be little doubt that the announcement of the development of the integrated power system is connected with the development of these carriers.

Scyth · Dec 13, 2013

delft said:
You do not sacrifice the capability to operate E-2 sized prop planes. Propellers give excellent thrust at low speed and the flying off speed of an E-2 like plane is lower than that of a fighter. If need be you can use the aft take off position. If you want to improve over the E-2 configuration you can use contra-props as in the An-70 and a connecting shaft between the engines as in the Be-30. Btw we have seen an aerodynamic test vehicle for the AEW aircraft based on the Y-7 which means that such an aircraft is now being developed and it will no doubt be deployed no later than the introduction of the new carriers.

After some searches, I'll concede in that E-2 type of Hawkeye could be used from a ski-jump. However, the development of such an aircraft is still unclear in my opinion. We've seen pictures of such an aircraft, but I'm not sure if it's a true development (I sure do hope so).

delft said:
If you use cats built into the ski ramp you can have a shorter take off length than when using either cats or a ramp alone. I expect that EM cats will not yet be ready when the ships are launched but their size will be known well enough to provide their supporting structure so providing them will cost a relatively short yard time.
There can I think be little doubt that the announcement of the development of the integrated power system is connected with the development of these carriers.

I don't think that catapults will be built into the ski-jump. At least not on the new carriers. Technically, it may be feasable, but for an aircraft carrier design, you usually choose either the ski-jump or the catapult. Having both is unnecessarily complicated. If you already got working catapult technology, I don't see the added value of a ski-jump.

Jeff Head · Dec 13, 2013

latenlazy said:
Will carry over the discussion from the other thread here. I think that the PLAN being willing to build two hulls at once is either an indication of them being willing to take greater risks or their confidence in their abilities after their work on the Varyag, or both.

I believe that if the turns out to be accurate and they build two hulls, it will be simiar to when they built the two Type 052B vessels, followed by the two Type 052C vessels. They are confidant enough with their design and their shipbuilding capability to do so. Not to mention being confidant enough to man both carriers in a fairly short time frame.

latenlazy said:
Furthermore, it almost seems wastefully conservative if they take the risk of building two hulls at once and have them be identical when we know the goal is still to push their technological capabilities. Even if one isn't going to have a catapult, I'm almost willing to bet that one of the two will be taking greater risks with its design.

It would not be wasteful at all. Two carriers of very similar design...that represent improvement over the Liaoning, but are basically very similar in overall operation...will provide the PLAN with several key benefits.

1) Similar platforms for each fleet.
2) Huge logistical savings in terms of spare parts, ammunition, etc. for all of the vessels.
3) Huge training savings in being able to train crews that can work on any of the three carriers.
4) A very solid foundation to perfect their operations and policies.

I believe these things are all very desirable for the PLAN and allow them the type of foundation that will make their future progress much more secure, and much less risky. It will also provide them with the largest and most capable carrier force in the world outside of the US Navy.

In that same time frame it is true that the Indian Navy intends to have three carriers...but they will all three be dissimilar and cause the Indian Navy to have a significant logistical issue and training issue that the Chinese will not have. In addition, each of the PLAN carriers will be able to carry more aircraft than the Indian carriers and those aircraft will have greater range and be able to carry more ordinance.

I think the PLAN is embarked on a very significant and well thought out strategy.

PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King

kwaigonegin

Colonel

Air Force Brat

Brigadier

Jeff Head

General

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

latenlazy

Brigadier

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

delft

Brigadier

Scyth

Junior Member

Jeff Head

General