Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
556 with Taihang to boot wow! I say we will this striptease more and more
PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
- Status
I think the bridge superstructure is too forward in a way that you are not going to have two short take-off positions side by side safely, even if going by Mig-29 size. Room wise they could have one short take-off position up front while also retaining the two aft ones, but then with no jet-deflector I wonder if they can park ready planes in the aft take-off positions while the one in the front is launching with afterburner on. If they can't there won't be much savings operation wise and it's probably better off just to have the two long take-offs, given that long take-off positions can do what short ones can.
I don't understand why they don't install jet deflectors unless it is some underlying structure/complexity issue. Comparing to the stuff they managed to remove the deflectors should be small work. Those things better work with high reliability. For example, if the deflectors on Laioning's long take-off positions malfunction while in the up position, no plane will be able to land until it is fixed.
Last edited:
Intrepid
Major
I think, it is a question of deck length and mission profile. Even on Krusetnov we have seen the long take off position is the mostly used position. For example: if you are cruising near the costline with alternate airfields on land (training etc.) you can depart with half fuel. If you are out there in the middle of the ocean you will always take as much fuel as possible with you. That are one or two hours additional time you can wait in the air if someone has crashed and the crew has to clean the deck.
Pretty sure 556's nozzles are Al-31 -- black, rather than silver...
Gotta stretch the picture back to proper ratio to be sure.
EDIT: Pretty sure that's the AL-31 too.
Last edited:
When you compare the Liaoning with the Vikramaditya you have to take three things in to account.
1. The Liaoning is larger than the Vikramaditya 304m vs 283,5m long.
2. The Fulcrums has a higher stall speed than the Flankers 246 km/h vs. 240 km/h.
3. The Fulcrums are lighter then the Flankers loaded weight is 18550kg vs. 29940kg and maximum take off weight is 24500kg vs. 33000kg. It means that if you load a Fulcrum and a Flanker with the same amount of weight the Fulcrum would need a longer stretch of runway to go beyond its stall speed.
I don't know how much weapons and fuel the Fulcrums can carry if it takes off from the forward position of the Vikramaditya. I don't think it will be too much.
Intrepid
Major
Is there a forward position?
Equation
Lieutenant General
None marked.
...actually, if you look at the starboard launch track, in the middle of the island just before that track crosses into the landing area, there is a small marking across the launch track that could be a single, shorter launch position.
Last edited:
kwaigonegin
Colonel
None marked.
I never understood why the Russians made the entire island superstructure so close to the middle. They could easily designed the ship where the entire thing is 10-15 ft closer to the starboard. Not only will it give her more deck space but it will increase hanger/interior space as well. There are tons of pipes, vents etc that goes 'up' to the island from below.
- Status