PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Possible images of the nuclear reactors for China's future CVN.

View attachment 8126
View attachment 8127
Those have already been debunked on another thread here at SD by Engineer as steam generators for civilian nuclear reactors. They are not nuclear reactors themselves. But they are steam generators used by civilian nuclear reactors.

Having worked for a number of years in the nuclear power industry here in the US, I can definitely tell you that those are not reactors themselves, and they do look similar to the steam generation vessels used for civilian reactors, those those used in the PRC are sure to be somewhat different.
 

delft

Brigadier
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

The very presence of a catapult would make a ski ramp redundant. The whole point of a ski ramp is to allow takeoffs without catapults. The whole point of catapults is to allow takeoffs on a flat deck. The two are mutually exclusive.

Here is another thing. A bigger carrier is more efficient, because the ship can carry more aircraft per ton of displacement. Keep in mind that a small carrier and a large carrier requires the similar amount of crew. A larger ship is also more fuel efficient per tonnage. So in the long one, having a large carrier is less costly than two small carriers. This is why size of oil tankers become bigger and bigger over the years.

There is another benefit to a bigger ship, and that is the bigger deck offers by a larger ship. This will provide plenty of space to park aircraft after a surge. This is important because when 40 aircraft are coming in for landings after a huge battle, there will be no time turn them around or move them into the hangar. The only thing left to do is to shove them to the front part of the deck to clear up the aft section for landings. Building a ski ramp when there is no need would be the same as dropping a heavy object onto your own foot.
Most of your arguments are quite correct. But every engineering effort involves many compromises. When the cats are incorporated into a ski ramp both are smaller than they otherwise would be and so win area to spot aircraft. This might allow a reduction in the size of the flight deck crew and time spend in respotting aircraft. There are many other factors in organizing the operation of an aircraft carrier and while imitating US practice is a cheap way of getting started it might not be the best way forward.
 

franco-russe

Senior Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

It would be very silly to put a catapult beside a ski-jump.

The compromise selected for ULYANOVSK (Pr. 11437) was to retain the ski-jump and to install two catapults in the angled deck. The PLAN might choose a similar scheme for the CV 002, since it would enable them to operate both J-15 and the prospective carrier aircraft.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

It would be very silly to put a catapult beside a ski-jump.

The compromise selected for ULYANOVSK (Pr. 11437) was to retain the ski-jump and to install two catapults in the angled deck. The PLAN might choose a similar scheme for the CV 002, since it would enable them to operate both J-15 and the prospective carrier aircraft.
I believe building a Liaoning type carrier based on the Varyag, but with the Ulyanovsk arrangement could be a very distinct possibility...either coming right out with it in CV 002, or providing for it in that design for later installation if the catapults are not ready immediately.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: Aircraft Carriers II

What's the specs on the 26DDH?
Their Naval Research and Development Institute in Japan has put forward the proposal. Here is a write up regarding the new carrier from a 21C forum which announces and discussing those projects:

Japan's Technical Research and Development Institute said:
26DDH Aircraft Carrier

26DDH is a new major Japanese destroyer program. The 26DDH is being designed with its primary function to provide long-range air-defense, with secondary roles, providing anti-surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare, and serving as a command and control vessel. This vessel is designed with lessons and technologies derived from other recent destroyer programs (the Atago class, the Hyuga class, the Akizuki class and the Izumo Class) while also representing a doctrinal shift in Japanese maritime defense thinking. This shift will blend the technologies already implemented in other new Japanese military ship designs in a unique way, allowing the ships to fulfill their missions. As such, these vessels will not be comparable to any other JMSDF class in service today. One way of explaining their primary function is to compare them to historical precedents. If existing Japanese helicopter destroyers like the Hyuga and Izumo classes would be compared to the escort carriers during World War II, then these new vessels would be comparable to the Sea Control ship proposed in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s by the US Navy.

Accordingly, the ship’s primary mission is to harness its survivability, range, and the power of naval aviation in order to defend Japanese territory and sea lanes. As such, each ship will be designed to carry one squadron of aircraft for fleet and air defense, one squadron of aircraft for anti-submarine warfare, and one squadron of aircraft for long-range sensing. These three squadrons will make up the primary weapons system of the ship. The three aviation squadrons will provide four salient capabilities for the fleet; fleet/air defense, anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, and recon/search functions. The 26DDH will focus on the deployment of fixed-wing aviation, with emphasis on extended range over existing JMSDF capabilities and all-weather operations. This air wing will be comprised of twelve (12) F-35B attack/fighter aircraft, eight (8) V-22 Osprey aircraft, and four (4) SH-60K helicopters. The Ospreys will provide enhanced cargo, ASW, ASuW, and AEW&C capabilities for the fleet.

In terms of the ship design itself, the 26DDH will be 3,000 tons smaller than the preceding Izumo-class, but they will have a larger air-wing. This will be accomplished by eliminating provisions for troop transport, or other cargo transport beyond what is required for the stated missions of the ship. Improved automation will also reduce the crew of the ship substantially. Despite its smaller size, the 26DDH will be longer than the Izumo-class to improve the ease of short-takeoff operations, thereby also increasing the range and weapons capacity of the aircraft deployed on-board. The 26DDH will also have a larger self defense capability than the other JMSDF vessels of the Izumo and Hyuga classes. This will consist of adding peripheral VLS (Mk 57) cells for an area defense capability as a compliment to the area defense capabilities of its AEGIS and/or Akizuki escorts. These VLS cells will carry both Standard and ESSM missiles. In addition, the vessels will carry two 21 cell RAM missile launchers, and two 20mm Phalanx CIWS.

The first ship is expected to be ordered in 2014, and commissioned in 2018. The cost of each ship will be $1.5 Billion. Two ships of the class are proposed to be included in each of the JMSDF destroyer flotillas. If this holds true, then it will mean that the production run of the 26DDH vessels will be significantly larger than those of the Hyuga and Izumo classes which produced two vessels each, and would produce a total of eight of these vessels

Specifications:

Displacement: 24,000t (full)
Length: 260m (825 ft)
Beam: 35m (123 ft)
Draft: 7.5m (25 ft)
Propulsion: COGAG, two shafts
Speed: 32kt
Range: 15,000km at 15 knots
Crew: 800
Sensors:
- ATECS OYQ-11 CDS Battle Management System
- FCS-3A Anti-air Warfare System
- OPS-50 Surface Search Radar
- OQQ-22 Integrated Hull Sonar
- OQR-3 Towed Array
Aircraft:
- 12 x F-35B attack/fighter Aircraft
- 08 x HV-22 Osprey Aircraft
- 04 x SH-60K Helicopters
Armament:
- 2 x Sea RAM (21 missiles each for a total of 42)
- 2 x 20mm Phalanx
- 8 x Mk 57 4-cell modules (32 cells)

IMHO, in essence, it is a special version of the Izumo class that is designed to be air-defense centric. ut, right now it is simply a proposal and the vessels have not been approved. If we see them on the 2014 Japanese spending plan, we will know they have accepted it. In addition, to date there is no funding for a F-35B purchase which would be necessary to get the fixed-wing, air-defense component of this design. We will have to see that too and that would be BIG news.
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
Re: Aircraft Carriers II

Thanks! I think the procurement of the 26DDH will depend on what comes out of China over the next months and years

If we see multiple LHD and carrier construction from Chinese shipyards not doubt JMSDF will request these "light carriers"

There is no way Japan will or can afford to fall behind, they will require a deterrence of some sort otherwise
 

shen

Senior Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

in that case, that would fit with the revised construction plan posted in rolking in the other thread.

"New 2 steps:
1. Build skid + catapult coventional-powered Liaoning-plus.
2. build nuclear-powered CATOBAR Nimitz-sized carriers.

So one less step to their goal of CVN."

carrier number 1, Liaoning, gain basic carrier operation experience.
carrier number 2, build one from the scratch, learn catapult operation
carrier number 3, the logical next step is to move to nuclear propulsion. Which is not an area China doesn't have any experience in. PLAN has operate nuclear submarines for decades. Many nuclear surface ships have reactor adapted from submarine nuclear reactor. The De Gaulle uses the same reactor as French nuclear subs.
 

kroko

Senior Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

I wonder why no addicional aerial photos have been posted of the ship in the shipyard. If they did managed to take one photo during flyby, why cant they take another photo? it could answer if what we are seeing in that photo are "shadows" or not.
 
Top