PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

Bltzio, no disrespect intended, but on one hand you indicate that from your perspective there Is no need to discuss this any further because you believe that it is so far fetched that it is basically irrelevant.

Then, when II point out that that is fine, but and that there may be others of us who want to continue to discuss it, you reply back indicating you are willing to talk to me about why I believe it has relevance, and then regurgitate all the reasons you feel it does not.

Sorry, that is confusing to me...and ultimately pointless if your initial statements were serious.

I get how you feel...and that is fine. I have no problem with you feeling that way.

I do not intend to get into a drawn out back and forth just finding different was to explain them to you, who clearly feel it has no relevance in any case. Such a discussion itself, would by default ultimately also have no relevance.

The Chinese shipyard built a demonstration module. It was built for a reason. It is clearly not a fixed wing aircraft carrier hanger. But there was some specification it was built to. I believe that the demonstration, which we know is not to scale, could be used to demonstrate a capability for the yard to build hanger facilities for an LPH, LHA, LHD etc. I believe that if it were built to scale, it would be wide enough, and potentially high enough, to accommodate helicopters, UAVs, and other equipment that could be operated off of an LHA.

You feel it does not...and that is fine. I am not ready to say it is not.

I do not think it is something that should be somehow disallowed, looked down upon, sought to nit pick, etc...just because there are some who feel it it not relevant to them.

it is fine for some to feel that way...but it is not fine to try and squelch the discussion of others just because of that.

I will discuss the possibility with individuals who share the belief that is could represent that. I am also going to copy the posts (later when I get home), that are trending towards LHA/LHD discussion, to the LHD/HA thread.

To be continued there...further discussion of it here (the possibility of an LHA/LHD) would be off topic..

Jeff, in my previous post where I said "we can practically write it off as nonexistent for the purposes of discussion," what I meant was that based on the evidence and information which we have, the likelihood of JN building an LHA or LHD, and the likelihood that this specific module is related to any LHA or LHD, is so small that it can basically be considered nonexistent in the context of discussing the module at JN and/or the possibility of JN building an LHA or LHD overall.

In other words, I feel like the evidence and logic which supports the notion that JN's module is intended to be related to an LHA or LHD is so small that it shouldn't be taken seriously. However, if new evidence or rumours comes to light suggesting otherwise, then I'd be the first to acknowledge it.
I am not against suggesting the module at JN "could possibly be related" to any LHA or LHD -- IF it is also acknowledged that the possibility for such a prospect is a very small one based on current evidence, and that the evidence for such a possibility is far smaller compared to the evidence for it being related to a carrier (as well as the substantial lack of evidence suggesting JN is meant to build an LHA or LHD).

Putting it another way -- I'm not meaning to "squelch" the discussion of various possibilities, but I think it is also important for us to acknowledge the vast disparities in likelihood of various different possibilities, on the basis of rumours, evidence and logic.

Jeff Head said:

Very, very unlikely. The hanger will stay the same width and height throughout. Once the hull narrows to a point that makes it too narrow to put the hanger there...the hanger itself would have ended.

Now, they do need shop areas near the hangers for testing and maintenance. Those might be placed in narrower areas, but the hanger itself is very unlikely to get narrower.
.

Click to expand...

Could you elaborate a bit more on the likelihood of a constant hangar width? The sketches of the Nimitz class hangar that I've seen indicate that it's oval in shape, with truncated edges on the longer axis.

Based on this, for example, one could even go as far to claim that it is the deckspace around the hangar that should remain of constant width.

That thing could simply be a building in the rough shape of a carrier module without being specifically accurate in dimensions. The interesting things would probably be showcased inside to selected guests.

Could you elaborate a bit more on the likelihood of a constant hangar width? The sketches of the Nimitz class hangar that I've seen indicate that it's oval in shape, with truncated edges on the longer axis.

Click to expand...

As someone that actually served aboard Nimitz in '91 I can say that the hangar looks like a warehouse. And the overall shape when aboard this enormous ship is virtually indistinguishable. Oval shape? I think not..but with an over head view one can see the shape of the hull slightly taking over the shape of the hangar as you looks toward the forward portion of the hangar... But when you are standing or walking in that hangar no way it looks oval...big wearhouse.... that's what I REMEMBER seeing.



I don't get why you fellows are discussing this...I really don't

Jeff Head said:

Excellent...this was exactly the type of thing I was looking at too...and the type of discussion I hoped would ensue.

For two reasons.

1) Because it is in fact interesting to see how the module, which was IMHO clearly built to show the PLAN that they could do what the PLAN wanted, differs from what is being built on the carrier.

2) To get us away from the ongoing, repetitive argument/discussion about who was potentially insulting/disparaging who and why.

Hehehe.

Anyhow, great comments wolf, and for what it is worth, I agree.

The module was most probably directed at some different requirement for the PLAn and not the carrier itself.

Which raises all sorts of interesting conjecture.

Click to expand...

Jeff, I think you just opened another can of worms?

Nothing much changes on the hull, the hoist cables have been removed from 2nd block of the hangar.

The module A at the background could be ready to be hoisted for assembly very soon, note the top deck is completed. This does not looked like part of aircraft hangar, also note the bulkhead.

Jeff Head said:

Now, they do need shop areas near the hangers for testing and maintenance. Those might be placed in narrower areas,......

Click to expand...

The narrower areas (towards the bow of the carrier) is what I'm referring to all along.

It's more a semantics then. The higher deck next to the hanger can be considered not part of the hangar if so desired both in name and in purpose i.e. it can be used for any other purpose not related to maintenance at all, like shopping area, office space etc. On the other hand, it can be used for something to do with maintenance, like what you suggested, i.e. shop areas for testing and maintenance etc.

test bd said:

As someone that actually served aboard Nimitz in '91 I can say that the hangar looks like a warehouse. And the overall shape when aboard this enormous ship is virtually indistinguishable. Oval shape? I think not...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Yet, from the illustration that you posted it is quite clear that the hangar on the Nimitz has a non-constant width, and for more than half of its length its shape roughly follows that of the hull.

I did some digging, and found the sketch that I had in mind. Source:
Darwin, Robert L., et al. Aircraft carrier flight and hangar deck fire protection: history and current status. No. NAWCWD-TP-8516. NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER WEAPONS DIV CHINA LAKE CA, 2005.


Thus, it might be interesting to observe how (and if) the hangar tapers on this mystery ship - it could give us an indication on how closely it will resemble the Kuznetzov class (where the hangar seems to be of constant width).

Thank you Max Demian. and I stated;

Oval shape? I think not..but with an over head view one can see the shape of the hull slightly taking over the shape of the hangar as you looks toward the forward portion of the hangar

Click to expand...

and..

As someone that actually served aboard Nimitz in '91 I can say that the hangar looks like a warehouse. And the overall shape when aboard this enormous ship is virtually indistinguishable. Oval shape? I think not...

Click to expand...

Enough stated...I'm done.