PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

damitch300 · May 14, 2016

That piece of ski jump section looks a lot like the first part forward of the side sponson.
You can clearly see that on top of this will be the rounded edge part and flight deck.
Kuzzy and liao has a straight up piece below it.
And only on one spot its quite heigh, thats at the sponson.

I provided a screenshot of an drawing.
Here you can see it above the 063. On the other side its the same so it does not matter i show starboard side haha

Deino · May 14, 2016

and the next module ...

nemo · May 14, 2016

Bltizo said:
Theoretically no -- a ship could definitely have a bow ski jump with waist catapults (which is what the Soviet Ulyanovsk would have had).

But practically, in the case of 001A, it probably won't have catapults.

Actually, a catapult can co-exist even with ski-ramp. The trick is the deceleration part of the catapult goes UNDER the ramp (the catapult does NOT curve at all). This means the detachment of the aircraft from catapult need to happen just before the ramp starts.

The advantage of this approach is that you can launch aircraft that can use ski-ramp even without working catapult. However, means the aircraft enter the ramp at higher speed, hence exerting more stress to the crew and aircraft. However, this is essentially equilvalent to ramp takeoff at the longer ramp launch location, so it's nothing the aircraft and crew cannot already handle.

delft · May 14, 2016

nemo said:
Actually, a catapult can co-exist even with ski-ramp. The trick is the deceleration part of the catapult goes UNDER the ramp (the catapult does NOT curve at all). This means the detachment of the aircraft from catapult need to happen just before the ramp starts.

The advantage of this approach is that you can launch aircraft that can use ski-ramp even without working catapult. However, means the aircraft enter the ramp at higher speed, hence exerting more stress to the crew and aircraft. However, this is essentially equilvalent to ramp takeoff at the longer ramp launch location, so it's nothing the aircraft and crew cannot already handle.

An EM cat consists of a shuttle, rails that guide the shuttle and electromagnets that accelerate the shuttle as well as electronic sensors and controls to make sure the aircraft reaches a safe end speed even in case of an engine failure. Just as with ordinary rail roads it is not difficult to design and manufacture the rails to follow a curved surface as for instance a ski ramp.
The safe end speed in case of engine failure is lower when the aircraft velocity has a vertical component - as when leaving a ski ramp - as it has then more time to accelerate in the air. Thus similar aircraft at the same take off weight and using cats with the same acceleration need a shorter cat when leaving over a ski ramp which leads to a saving in deck real estate which is especially valuable in smaller carriers.

nemo · May 14, 2016

delft said:
An EM cat consists of a shuttle, rails that guide the shuttle and electromagnets that accelerate the shuttle as well as electronic sensors and controls to make sure the aircraft reaches a safe end speed even in case of an engine failure. Just as with ordinary rail roads it is not difficult to design and manufacture the rails to follow a curved surface as for instance a ski ramp.
The safe end speed in case of engine failure is lower when the aircraft velocity has a vertical component - as when leaving a ski ramp - as it has then more time to accelerate in the air. Thus similar aircraft at the same take off weight and using cats with the same acceleration need a shorter cat when leaving over a ski ramp which leads to a saving in deck real estate which is especially valuable in smaller carriers.

Unnecessary complication. A curve put additional stress to the rail -- and shuttle also need to handle the curve. It's much simpler just keep it straight and let it go under the ramp.

delft · May 14, 2016

nemo said:
Unnecessary complication. A curve put additional stress to the rail -- and shuttle also need to handle the curve. It's much simpler just keep it straight and let it go under the ramp.

The speeds are lower than those of high speed railways and you can easily design and test rail and shuttle for the forces involved.

Blitzo · May 14, 2016

nemo said:
Actually, a catapult can co-exist even with ski-ramp. The trick is the deceleration part of the catapult goes UNDER the ramp (the catapult does NOT curve at all). This means the detachment of the aircraft from catapult need to happen just before the ramp starts.

The advantage of this approach is that you can launch aircraft that can use ski-ramp even without working catapult. However, means the aircraft enter the ramp at higher speed, hence exerting more stress to the crew and aircraft. However, this is essentially equilvalent to ramp takeoff at the longer ramp launch location, so it's nothing the aircraft and crew cannot already handle.

Theoretically it might be feasible to stick a catapult before a ski jump into a single launch apparatus... but that bitter discussion has been beaten to death on this forum, and the fact that no carrier proposal that I know of has ever seriously considered such a configuration makes me think it is reasonable to dismiss such a configuration as impractical.

So yes, theoretically it might be possible to stick a catapult before a catapult, but practically at this point it's probably not a feasible configuration that deserves to be taken seriously.

AssassinsMace · May 14, 2016

Can anyone tell it's following pretty much the Kuznetsov design. When I see the Liaoning/Varyag in drydock in pictures, this one looks a little bigger in comparison.

Blitzo · May 14, 2016

AssassinsMace said:
Can anyone tell it's following pretty much the Kuznetsov design. When I see the Liaoning/Varyag in drydock in pictures, this one looks a little bigger in comparison.

I wouldn't be surprised if it were a little bit bigger but it's probably still too early to tell at this stage, say if it were only 10% bigger (which tbh would probably be on the top end of any increase in dimensions vs Liaoning).

Personally I'm interested in what the island will look like. It probably will be the same one as on Liaoning, but I'm a little hopeful that the Navy saw it worthwhile to reduce the footprint a little.

Intrepid · May 14, 2016

Bltizo said:
Personally I'm interested in what the island will look like. It probably will be the same one as on Liaoning, but I'm a little hopeful that the Navy saw it worthwhile to reduce the footprint a little.

We saw already a new layout based on the existing housing at the electronics test facility.

PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

damitch300

Junior Member

Attachments

Deino

Lieutenant General

nemo

Junior Member

delft

Brigadier

nemo

Junior Member

delft

Brigadier

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

Intrepid

Major