PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

2018 Chinese aircraft carrier and new Destroyer battles group imagine figures

Electromagnetic guns in front and behind of 180 guided missile destroyer, and two anti-submarine underwater robots.The apron can open, which has a lift catapult that can catapult UAV, when task is completed, UAV lands on the sea, taken back by helicopter.Vertical silo in the middle of 108 launchs anti-ship missiles and cruise missiles...

You don't get it do you? You cannot post links to your own forum in our forum. That's considered spam. Last chance.. Read the forum rules!

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/ann...ting-important-please-read-20.html#post105577


bd popeye

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Ok, been doing some 3D modelling in Google Sketchup and could resist putting one of my concept carriers into a 1:1 model in Google Earth. Still unfinished with superstructure and trimmings to do.

Basically a multi-hull similar to the Australian Austal hulls, but with podded all-electric drive etc. Powerplants are gas turbines with exhausts between hulls (not yet added)



Subtle touch is LO storm shuttering on the lifts to reduce radar cross-section




View of inside shows Su-33 fighters (cos I already made that model) in the very spacious hanger. Note how they are not shown in max density layout. The concept is to have a comparatively larger hanger for a given airwing to minimise aircraft above deck for a given operational tempo, and ease handling. The brownish duct on the port side is the air intake for the engines.


Side-by-side comparison with Varyag. Similar dimensions although usable deck space on the concept design will be significantly greater.


Underside comparison (Varyag's underside not modelled). Shows much more slender hull of concept with two outriggers. Displacement is about half Varyag, about 30-40k tons. Compromise is unreplenished endurance and aviation fuel load.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Ok, been doing some 3D modelling in Google Sketchup and could resist putting one of my concept carriers into a 1:1 model in Google Earth. Still unfinished with superstructure and trimmings to do.

Basically a multi-hull similar to the Australian Austal hulls, but with podded all-electric drive etc. Powerplants are gas turbines with exhausts between hulls (not yet added)



Subtle touch is LO storm shuttering on the lifts to reduce radar cross-section




View of inside shows Su-33 fighters (cos I already made that model) in the very spacious hanger. Note how they are not shown in max density layout. The concept is to have a comparatively larger hanger for a given airwing to minimise aircraft above deck for a given operational tempo, and ease handling. The brownish duct on the port side is the air intake for the engines.


Side-by-side comparison with Varyag. Similar dimensions although usable deck space on the concept design will be significantly greater.


Underside comparison (Varyag's underside not modelled). Shows much more slender hull of concept with two outriggers. Displacement is about half Varyag, about 30-40k tons. Compromise is unreplenished endurance and aviation fuel load.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Ok, been doing some 3D modelling in Google Sketchup and could resist putting one of my concept carriers into a 1:1 model in Google Earth. Still unfinished with superstructure and trimmings to do.

Basically a multi-hull similar to the Australian Austal hulls, but with podded all-electric drive etc. Powerplants are gas turbines with exhausts between hulls (not yet added)



Subtle touch is LO storm shuttering on the lifts to reduce radar cross-section




View of inside shows Su-33 fighters (cos I already made that model) in the very spacious hanger. Note how they are not shown in max density layout. The concept is to have a comparatively larger hanger for a given airwing to minimise aircraft above deck for a given operational tempo, and ease handling. The brownish duct on the port side is the air intake for the engines.


Side-by-side comparison with Varyag. Similar dimensions although usable deck space on the concept design will be significantly greater.


Underside comparison (Varyag's underside not modelled). Shows much more slender hull of concept with two outriggers. Displacement is about half Varyag, about 30-40k tons. Compromise is unreplenished endurance and aviation fuel load.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

bd popeye said:

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

Click to expand...

Also add survivability to the list of problems; if a multi-hulled ship is hit in one of the outer hulls, it will really throw the stability of the ship off, and flight deck operations will be cancelled. The ship is essentially mission-killed until it can limp back to port. A large monohull is easier to to counter-balance so flight deck operations can resume somewhat.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

bd popeye said:

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

Click to expand...

Also add survivability to the list of problems; if a multi-hulled ship is hit in one of the outer hulls, it will really throw the stability of the ship off, and flight deck operations will be cancelled. The ship is essentially mission-killed until it can limp back to port. A large monohull is easier to to counter-balance so flight deck operations can resume somewhat.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

bd popeye said:

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

Click to expand...

Also add survivability to the list of problems; if a multi-hulled ship is hit in one of the outer hulls, it will really throw the stability of the ship off, and flight deck operations will be cancelled. The ship is essentially mission-killed until it can limp back to port. A large monohull is easier to to counter-balance so flight deck operations can resume somewhat.