PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Re: My trip to the US Navy Reserve Fleet in Bremerton, WA

It means that they are no longer front-line or primary units, but remain in commission just in case they are needed. This was done with some of the older vessels after WWII. Sometimes they stay in port mostly, while other times they put to see with regular navy crews. Current practice i to have them in the NRF. Such ships have a core crew consisting of regular navy personnel, and the rest of the crew are reservists which train aboard the vessels, and if fully activated, the reserve crews aboard at the time would be the ones which would be activated and made a part of the ships crew for the duration of its service. Their deployments tend to be more limited.

Re: My trip to the US Navy Reserve Fleet in Bremerton, WA

bigstick61 said:

It means that they are no longer front-line or primary units, but remain in commission just in case they are needed. This was done with some of the older vessels after WWII. Sometimes they stay in port mostly, while other times they put to see with regular navy crews. Current practice i to have them in the NRF. Such ships have a core crew consisting of regular navy personnel, and the rest of the crew are reservists which train aboard the vessels, and if fully activated, the reserve crews aboard at the time would be the ones which would be activated and made a part of the ships crew for the duration of its service. Their deployments tend to be more limited.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanation. It seems to be a sensible approach with ships that are surplus to normal peacetime requirements but which may be needed to support surge operations short of full scale war, when the whole of the reserve fleet (what's left of it) would most likely be activated.

Cheers

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

Gollevainen said:

Well i've heard that those RATO things are not quite popular onboard carriers...something to do whit the highly flamamble rocket fuels...mayby Popeye could tell more...

I once had this crazy tough that if Y-7/hawkeye size plane fitted whit similar type of engine aragment like in An-72 Coaler to provide STOL capapility?

[qimg]http://www.scramble.nl/mil/2/russia/gfx/photos/orbat-cau-an72.jpg[/qimg]

Or what the hell...how about his one? THe Planned AWACS version of it called An-71 Madcap
[qimg]http://www.spyflight.co.uk/images/jpgs/an-72/an-71_03.jpg[/qimg]
[qimg]http://www.aviation.ru/An/An-71.jpg[/qimg]

Click to expand...

Jak-44 was designed to launch from Kuznetsov, so no catapult, no rocket burster, Madcap was thought too big for carrier ops.

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

Jeff Head said:

I believe if the Varyag carries any AWAC capability, it will either be a helo based platform, or perhaps some kind of VTOL platform.

The US would do well, and has studied, creating an AWAC version of the V-22 Opsprey. They would work well on the Amphibious ships in conjunction with the F-35 JSF.

I do not believe any aircraft as big as the one pictured by popeye will be suitable for the ski jump at all. Too heavy and not enough speed, particularly without very strong catapaults.

Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

The Osprey needs major improvements and major changes if it is to be used as a naval AWACS.

The Osprey is still an unstable design for windy weather. It is still being worked on to land and take off in windy weather. This is bad for sea warfare.

The Osprey needs rotating wings instead of folding wings to efficiently fit on US aircraft carriers. The rotating wing will get in the way of the AWACS huge radar, unless the Osprey has a major redesign.

However, if the US Navy can do this to the Osprey or to a AWACS with Osprey capabilities, then this naval AWACS would have awesome naval capabilities.

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

i think for china to safe money they should turned old model bomber airplanes into AWACS

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

Jak-44 was designed to launch from Kuznetsov, so no catapult, no rocket burster, Madcap was thought too big for carrier ops.

Click to expand...

Nope. Perhaps the orginal design of the Kuznetsov when it still had catabults instead of Ski-jumps, a Yak-44 (or the plane that envolved to such) could have been fielded. But when the catabults were taken from the design, it ment that the AEW ability dropped considerably. Yak-44 was later adopted to serve onboard Ulyanovsk which featured catabults in the angled deck just for this reason.

Anyway, its not wise to dig threads that have been burried for three years...

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

Infra_Man99 said:

The Osprey needs major improvements and major changes if it is to be used as a naval AWACS.

The Osprey is still an unstable design for windy weather. It is still being worked on to land and take off in windy weather. This is bad for sea warfare.

The Osprey needs rotating wings instead of folding wings to efficiently fit on US aircraft carriers. The rotating wing will get in the way of the AWACS huge radar, unless the Osprey has a major redesign.

However, if the US Navy can do this to the Osprey or to a AWACS with Osprey capabilities, then this naval AWACS would have awesome naval capabilities.

Click to expand...

Ospreys have been deployed to Iraq. The Osprey has been certified to operate off of LHA/LHDs for over three years now. If you have ever been on a flight deck ..trust me it is windy.

The V-22 folds up nicely thank you. Slightly smaller than a folded CH-53.

Jeff Head has a link to an AEW version of the Osprey.

Lights on the flight deck of the multipurpose amphibious assault ship USS Wasp (LHD 1) illuminate a MV-22 Osprey attached to Marine Medium Tilt-rotor Squadron (VMM) 263 as it transits the Straits of Tiran.

Click to expand...

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

I don't think we will see any AWACS based on the V-22 look like the E-2 or E-3 with the large dome on top. The recent trend, as shown in the Boeing Wedgetail and Erickson Erieye, is a beam on top of the airplane as the technology has advanced to a point where the electronics have shrunk, and there is less of a need for a mechanically scanned array.

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

I am notorious in amazing ideas:
what do you think about a derivate of this plane?

The famous DO-31 is a VSTOL transport plane (for sure could use sky ramp to), developed from german Dornier-company.
(see: + )

Only two birds was build as I know. One of them is to visit in the "Deutsches Museum", near munich, the other was visible at the company area in "Oberpaffenhofen". Last week I was there and missed this plane.


In 2001 Wu Bangguo visited the factory and in 2003 the chinese D’Long International Strategic Investment and XAC (Xian Aircraft Manufactoring Corp) captured the Dornier company including the Dornier 728-programe - why not taking blue prints of this plane to?
Spannweite 18,0 m wiggspan /
Startmasse 21 000 kg (bei Senkrechtstart) take of wight (VTO)
Höchstgeschwindigkeit 710 km/h in 2500 m speed max/
Reichweite 1800 km range
Antrieb 2 x Bristol-Siddeley Pegasus (Hub- und Marschtriebwerke) normal engines
8 x Rolls-Royce RB 162 (Hubtriebwerke) VTOL engines
Schub 2 x 68,0 kN thrust normal engines
8 x 19,6 kN thrust VTOL engines

Re: AWACS for future chinese carrier

bd popeye said:

Ospreys have been deployed to Iraq. The Osprey has been certified to operate off of LHA/LHDs for over three years now. If you have ever been on a flight deck ..trust me it is windy.

The V-22 folds up nicely thank you. Slightly smaller than a folded CH-53.

Jeff Head has a link to an AEW version of the Osprey.

[qimg]http://www.dezh.de/imghosting/bd9e0f495367cd50227f4ee1f70e3349.jpg[/qimg]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The Osprey has a long history of being more unstable in windy conditions for VTOL than helicopters. It is well-documented that the US marines are not 100% behind it until the Osprey continues to improve. I believe the US will make the Osprey a reliable design but at a high cost.

If you look closely, you'll notice that the Osprey rotates its wings to make it space efficient. It also folds its propellers, but the main space saving feature is the rotating wings. The Osprey does NOT fold its wings.

The Osprey can use more compact AEW technology to greatly minimize making major redesigns to the Osprey, but the Osprey will be at a disadvantage against a AEW plane with a large radar housed in a radome assuming everything is equal.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Osprey because it could possibly seamlessly combine VTOL of helicopters and flight of planes, but it is a very complex technology that still needs more improvements and more money, especially if it is going to be used for AEW.

I think it is obvious China is going to go for a conventional layout (folding wings, but NO rotatingwings) for their naval AWACS plane for the better value. Only much later on will China adopt Osprey's helicopter-plane features.