PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

youngtomous said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It is a model Block.Showing to the BOSS that they have built AC ability .you can find many details in this Block. hanger, catapult and so on、、、、

View attachment 8101View attachment 8102View attachment 8103View attachment 8104

Click to expand...

right there they look like modules of a carrier or a very large LHD, doesnt look like a commerical tanker and it doesnt look like a cargo container ship nor a size for any DDG or Cruiser

i think we have Chinas first indigenous carrier under construction

Gentlemen.. lets keep the discussion about what these thumbnails maybe in the

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/plan-lhd-lph-lha-discussion-14-5644.html#post241556

..until the truth come out...Thank you all!

bd popeye super moderator

Blackstone said:

The Soviets tried mixed aircraft and missile Battlecruisers and it didn't do either role especially well. PLAN is better off using the Liaoning as a dedicated aircraft carrier, because there are plenty of well-armed PLAN ships and boats that can fling missiles, but no other ship in its current inventory can carry strike fighters. It's called comparative advantage.

Click to expand...

Moskva-class cruisers were relatively small dedicated ASW platforms and nothing more than that . They performed their intended function more or less successfully (ships of the class were not very seaworthy ) . Kiev-class had same basic role , to hunt NATO subs and to protect own submarine bastions . Yak-38s were not supposed to go head-to-head against US naval fighters (Soviets were well aware of their limitations) but to chase off patrol aircraft like P-3 Orion .Same was the role of heavy anti-ship missiles P-500 Bazalt - Kievs were not supposed to hunt American carriers as some believe but to keep them at healthy distance from subs they were protecting . Kuznetsov-class was followup on Kiev-class and with Su-33 Soviet fleet could go further into open sea . But again , basic function remained the same - not a power projecting tool but a defensive weapon .

PLAN emerging doctrine is completely different then Soviet one , because of different Geo-political situations of these respective countries . China does not intend to become open rival of United States and their allies - at least not for now . Instead , China strategy seems to be soft power , growing economy and science and spending on military enough not to be bullied by others , but not falling into overspending trap like Soviets (and recently US ). Therefore , in case of armed conflict China would try to keep it limited in space and time , before other major powers in international scene could interfere .

Translating that to carrier doctrine , China would need 2-3 medium-sized carriers (one task group is enough for Vietnam or Philippines , two would be needed for Japan or India ) .There is no need for bigger and more expensive ships yet (something around 60 000t would do ) but catapults and CATOBAR version of J-15 should be priority of PLAN . For a time being PLAN could do without EAW planes like E-2 Hawkeye , but that should be reconsidered in the future . Escort would wary from mission to mission , but should not be below 4 destroyers&frigates - cruiser-sized ships are not needed yet . It would be nice to have attack nuclear sub attached , but if this is not possible , sub screen could be formed from diesel-electric subs . In most missions such task force should be paired with Type 081 LHA and its escorts .China naval disputes mainly revolve around possession of certain islands , so landing troops after winning naval engagement would be natural .

thunderchief said:

sub screen could be formed from diesel-electric subs.

Click to expand...

Sorry, Thunder, SSKs are not normally proper or effective ASW escorts for any carrier task force. Too slow, and not enough staying power/suystainability.

thunderchief said:

In most missions such task force should be paired with Type 081 LHA and its escorts .China naval disputes mainly revolve around possession of certain islands , so landing troops after winning naval engagement would be natural .

Click to expand...

Actually, rarely.

Generally, it would be uncommon and not regular practice to have an Amphibious Task Force grouped with a Carreir Task Force. This may happen in exercises when practising amphibious operations of a large scale that require carrier aircraft support, or if there is an rare actual operation where that is required.

In the vast majority of cases, when facing small islands where the garrison is relatively small and the chance for there to be any airstrips on the island is also small, the amphibious group would handle the close air support and any anti-air capabilities itself. Either through STOVL aircraft from the LHD/LPH, or from helos on the LHD/LPH armed for either close support or anti-air...and of course the vessels in the task force.

Now, on those much less common occassions where there were expected to be heavy air support for the defenders of the island, either from other land masses or an aircraft carrier, then depending on the distance from the mainland a PLAN carrier might be used to address the opposition carrier, or to establish air superiority over the target island.

But the need for large CSG/ARG task force groupings is a relatively rare thing. Admittedly, nice to have whenever you need it though.

Jeff Head said:

Sorry, Thunder, SSKs are not normally proper or effective ASW escorts for any carrier task force. Too slow, and not enough staying power/suystainability.

Click to expand...

Not escort , screen ! SSKs would go ahead of main body and position themselves at estimated approach venues of enemy force . They could stay on patrol for months . Not as good as SSNs but they could be deadly in green and brown waters .

Jeff Head said:

Actually, rarely.

Generally, it would be uncommon and not regular practice to have an Amphibious Task Force grouped with a Carreir Task Force. This may happen in exercises when practising amphibious operations of a large scale that require carrier aircraft support, or if there is an rare actual operation where that is required.

Click to expand...

Actually frequent - in WW2 Again , try to move from Cold War paradigm to missions that PLAN could expect . It is more like British in Falklands then US vs USSR .

Jeff Head said:

In the vast majority of cases, when facing small islands where the garrison is relatively small and the chance for there to be any airstrips on the island is also small, the amphibious group would handle the close air support and any anti-air capabilities itself. Either through STOVL aircraft from the LHD/LPH, or from helos on the LHD/LPH armed for either close support or anti-air...and of course the vessels in the task force.

Click to expand...

PLAN would not have STOVL aircraft in near-to-mid future , maybe few attack helos on Type 081 . Probably not enough for dedicated air support .

thunderchief said:

Not escort , screen ! SSKs would go ahead of main body and position themselves at estimated approach venues of enemy force . They could stay on patrol for months . Not as good as SSNs but they could be deadly in green and brown waters .

Click to expand...

And those brown, littoral waters are precisely where the carriers will not go.

The SSKs will stick to the littorals and to the bottlenecks (straits, inlets, passages, etc.). They may also, if they have good intel, wait in the open waters for carriers and faster combat groups (like SAGs) and hit them as they pass if they are not located. The are fast enough to intercept and engage slower task forces like merchant convoys and the like. But they are not fast enough for a moving screen for a carrier operating in the blue water.

thunderchief said:

Actually frequent - in WW2 Again , try to move from Cold War paradigm to missions that PLAN could expect . It is more like British in Falklands then US vs USSR .

Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with a paradigm of WWII vs Cold War, Thunder. It has to do with the realities of operational constraints and considerations.

The Cold War ended 23+ years ago. The US has continued its amphibious operations in the new environment and large fleet carriers are not tasked with Amphibious assault groups frequently at all. As I said, it happens on occasion, and when needed it is good to have, but it is a very seldom thing.

And please do not try and teach or instruct me on World War II amphibious landings. My father was the commander of a Landing Craft Infantry in World War II, thunder. Very seldom did the large, fast carriers travel in formation or task groups with the landing groups. They were ranging far away from them in general. There were a few escort carriers they would task with the amphibs, and those were much more akin to the LHAs and LHDs of today, except today these large amphibs are as big or bigger than the large fast carriers back then and they disgorge landing craft from their well decks, and attack helos and aircraft from their decks.

In the Pacific, where my Dad spent the entire war landing Marines on occupied beaches, the times when he was in formation with and task grouped with the large carriers could be counted on one hand.

So, it is not likely that the PLAN will regularly or frequently task their carriers with their LHAs or LPHs. They will do so on occasion for show, for exercises to keep trained, and then, once in a blue moon when an actual combat operation calls for it.

For most of the islands in the China Sea that there will be contentions over, the large amphibs will be able to go that alone quite satisfactorily, just like the Type 071 exercised in the SCS a couple of months ago doing that very thing.

Remember, I am not saying it never happens. It does. And they will need to exercise to be ready should the need ever arise. It is just not frequent or the normal state of affairs.

I really feel there is a CV or LHA etc under construction....so post about that construction in this thread listed below! I moved 59 post to start that thread.

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/plan-carrier-construction-6516.html

bd popeye super moderator

Jeff Head said:

And those brown, littoral waters are precisely where the carriers will not go.

The SSKs will stick to the littorals and to the bottlenecks (straits, inlets, passages, etc.). They may also, if they have good intel, wait in the open waters for carriers and faster combat groups (like SAGs) and hit them as they pass if they are not located. The are fast enough to intercept and engage slower task forces like merchant convoys and the like. But they are not fast enough for a moving screen for a carrier operating in the blue water.

Click to expand...

First off all , I don't think China would want to engage in carrier vs carrier battle (like Coral Sea or Midway ) in near future . Exception could be eventual conflict with India , but even that would depend on time and place (not near to Indian bases and land based aviation ) . Instead , more likely opponents would be smaller navies and ground forces (Vietnam , Philippines , Malaysia ... ) . In such cases SSKs would not hunt carriers or even large and fast SAGs . Instead , their target would be smaller vessels trying to sneak up on Chinese carriers or other vessels .

Jeff Head said:

The Cold War ended 23+ years ago. The US has continued its amphibious operations in the new environment and large fleet carriers are not tasked with Amphibious assault groups frequently at all. As I said, it happens on occasion, and when needed it is good to have, but it is a very seldom thing.

Click to expand...

PLAN and USN have different capabilities and different missions . USN is a global power-projecting tool , "big stick" of American foreign policy . US doesn't have big unresolved territorial disputes . In most of the cases , USN doesn't need to occupy and hold territory . On the other hand , China would want to become regional maritime power . PLAN currently doesn't need to sail across the globe , but it could be tasked with capturing and holding certain disputed islands .

Jeff Head said:

And please do not try and teach or instruct me on World War II amphibious landings. My father was the commander of a Landing Craft Infantry in World War II, thunder. Very seldom did the large, fast carriers travel in formation or task groups with the landing groups. They were ranging far away from them in general. There were a few escort carriers they would task with the amphibs, and those were much more akin to the LHAs and LHDs of today, except today these large amphibs are as big or bigger than the large fast carriers back then and they disgorge landing craft from their well decks, and attack helos and aircraft from their decks.

Click to expand...

Although administratively not in same TF , US Marines in WW2 were never left without air cover from carriers (escort or fleet ) from 1942. onward . As I said before , China doesn't have VTOL aircraft (nor plans for it as far as we know) , so any significant air support would have to come from medium-sized fleet carriers .
Chinese situation is more akin to British in Falklands , and most likely they would have to insure close cooperation between amphibious landing group and carrier group .

Jeff Head said:

For most of the islands in the China Sea that there will be contentions over, the large amphibs will be able to go that alone quite satisfactorily, just like the Type 071 exercised in the SCS a couple of months ago doing that very thing.

Click to expand...

Type 071 is not even equipped with attack hellos . To let amphibious group based on them to operate in vicinity of enemy without air cover would be dangerous and quite unprofessional .

thunderchief said:

Instead , more likely opponents would be smaller navies and ground forces (Vietnam , Philippines , Malaysia ... ) . In such cases SSKs would not hunt carriers or even large and fast SAGs . Instead , their target would be smaller vessels.

Click to expand...

I agree that SSKs can do this, but only in the littorals or choke points for any kind of major surface combatant...unless, as I said, they have very good intel and can position themselves appropriately beforehand.

thunderchief said:

Although administratively not in same TF , US Marines in WW2 were never left without air cover from carriers (escort or fleet ) from 1942. onward.

Click to expand...

And as I said, from the experience of my own father who was involved in those US Navy task forces carrying US Marines in world War II from 1943 onward, it was almost always Jeep and Escort carriers providing them their cover...not the large fleet carriers which is what this discussion was about. I simply pointed out to you that most navies, including the one with the vast largest amount of experience in the matter, typically do not task Amphibious Assault ships with their major carriers.

It seldom happens.

One of the biggest reasons is that the Amphibs are relatively slow when compared to the large carriers and it places the carrier at a huge disadvantage to be tasked with those slower vessels and have to remain with them. The Chiense planners will understand this and ensure that their planning is such that they rarely have to do it. Instead, the fast carriers will range far and wide in the deep water and take care of the major opposition threats, their carriers and their major airfields.

thunderchief said:

Type 071 is not even equipped with attack hellos . To let amphibious group based on them to operate in vicinity of enemy without air cover would be dangerous and quite unprofessional .

Click to expand...

Actually, when the professional planners set up these operations, it is neither dangerous or unprofessional. The PLAN just did so for the exercises in the South China Sea. I expect to seldom see a PLAN major carrier task forced with their amphibs. As I said, they will train for it so they can do so if required, but it will not be what they normally or frequently do.

New footage of the Liaoning in operation I had never seen before

[video=youtube;pcT2JIo5oYk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcT2JIo5oYk[/video]