PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

If you install 4 Cats like the USN does, what must happen to make it inpossible to operate the carrier?
Sure - if you have only one you could run into troubles...
But the french and brazils don't care about that even with 2 cats!
Did you ever here about ah CATOBAR carrier unable to launch any aircraft becaus a breakdown of ALL his cats?

With the ramp an two cats it is only possible to launch heavy load aircrafts from 2 starting positions - with real CATOBAR you have 4! You can bring up your strike-fighters faster then a STOBAR - even if one of your cats is out of order! ^^

So i realy can't se any reason to place a ramp at the bow instead of additional cats.
The only reason for a ramp is if you don't have cats. But if you have it?

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Xian said:

If you install 4 Cats like the USN does, what must happen to make it inpossible to operate the carrier?
Sure - if you have only one you could run into troubles...
But the french and brazils don't care about that even with 2 cats!
Did you ever here about ah CATOBAR carrier unable to launch any aircraft becaus a breakdown of ALL his cats?

With the ramp an two cats it is only possible to launch heavy load aircrafts from 2 starting positions - with real CATOBAR you have 4! You can bring up your strike-fighters faster then a STOBAR - even if one of your cats is out of order! ^^

So i realy can't se any reason to place a ramp at the bow instead of additional cats.
The only reason for a ramp is if you don't have cats. But if you have it?

Click to expand...

With ramp, fighter jet can still launch into skies abet with lesser payload but with air defense in mind. Small payload with air to air defense missile carry and 3/4 fuel is enough to be launch with ramp. So catapult breaks down. Ramp wouldn't.

You have to think about maintenance.. there's no need to maintain a ramp, so you have less maintenance to do with only 2 catapult to worry about. And not all mission required heavy load. I can bet its faster to send jet using ramp up the skies than catapult.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

The biggest difference in maintenance is cats or no cats...
But 2 or 4 cats? i think it is not that great issue....

Once again - sure, the aircrafts can take off from the ramp with less payload... BUT they ONLY can take off with low payload!
The ramp is a limitation for air-ops... thats a fact!
And 4 cats can launch aircrafts faster then 2 cats and 1 ramp becaus both, the two cats at the angled deck end up at the same point and the two "runways" over the ramp ends up at the same point of the deck.
So the sequence how fast the jets can take off from the ramp will be lower than the sequence with 2 completely indipendent cats - they bouth can launch aircrafts within seconds and have not to care about the fact that both will end up at the same point of the deck! On a ramp you have to wait a bit until the first jet is far away anough to launch the next one safely because it will end up direct behind the first (aerodynamic interferences!).
With cats you don't have that problem...

So, a ramp makes no sense to me in case that cats are available...
The fact that no navy with cats is using ramps parallel to cats also shows that i am not completely wrong i think!

To make it clear: I do not say that STOBAR is bullsh**!
A Carrier like Liaoning makes sense.... if you have no cats or you dont want cats because of maintenance and additional space and infrastructure needed for the operation of cats, then you can use a STOBAR configuration... with limitations for sure, but it works and is a good and cheap alternative to cats.
But if you already use cats on your carrier, so you have to maintain cats on that ship, you need all the systems araound the cat and you need the space on your ship for the hole system, why limitate your carrier with a ramp instead of 2 additional cats? That doesn't make sense to me...

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Xian said:

Why is that such an issue?
I understand that it is to difficult do rebuild a STOBAR Carrier to a CATOBAR Carrier...
But what is the issue to REDESIGN a STOBAR to a CATOBAR before construction begins?
It is work... sure... but is it such an issue that they go fore a concept without any operational aspects and only because the bow needs no redesign?

Click to expand...

It's not an issue of technology or even training. It is simply planning. I do not believe the next carrier will have a flat deck because I do not think that PLAN intends to redesign the basic hull of Kunetsov (Liaoning) class so the ramp stays. PLAN is looking decades into the future.. They are not only looking at just 'Liaoning # 2' they are looking at carrier #3 which most likely WILL be a CATOBAR.

Why go totally crazy on #2 when you know by #3 you'll have a full deck CATOBAR? and by #5 most likely a 100K ton CVN?
I am 99.9% sure PLAN planners are looking at carrier # 2, 3, 4, maybe 5 even now.

Unlike most nations, the PLAN of the future will not be limited to a single or even dual carriers and have to make do with what they can.. China and PLAN's ambitious expansion allows them the luxury to have a mixed of both STOBAR and CATOBAR as they progressively 'graduate' into a CV and then a CVN. No need to rush into things now and put everything into one basket at such an early stage.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

so, when PLAN is heading for CATOBAR - why should they introduce STOBAR carriers?
Sure, Liaoning is a special case - it was available and the hull was finished. Its good anough to train crews in carrier ops...
But if the cats are available for the second carrier, why should they stay at STOBAR?

I think it depends on how soon cats will be available...
I am sure work on cats is in progress and the PLAN knows how soon they will be available.
If they will be available in the next few years i dont think that they will start the construction if a STOBAR carrier!
Only if they see no possibility that cats are available within the next years they will build a second STOBAR...

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Lion said:

Plus ramp has no mechanism, it will not break down or not working unlike catapult. If neccessary just to send fighter jet up with air defense load, I think the ramp will do the job easily.

Click to expand...

Don't forget ski ramps reduce valuable deck space for aircrafts, so it doesn't make sense to have both cats and ramp.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Plus ramp has no mechanism, it will not break down or not working unlike catapult

Click to expand...

Yes a ski ramp cannot break down.

I spent 6 of my 20 USN years at sea aboard carriers.. I never served abroad any ship that could not launch aircraft due to catapult malfunction. Period. I've witnessed thousands of "Cat Shots". never seen a failure.

And you cannot launch a fully laden aircraft with a ski ramp. No you cannot.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Xian said:

so, when PLAN is heading for CATOBAR - why should they introduce STOBAR carriers?

Sure, Liaoning is a special case - it was available and the hull was finished. Its good anough to train crews in carrier ops...
But if the cats are available for the second carrier, why should they stay at STOBAR?

I think it depends on how soon cats will be available...

I am sure work on cats is in progress and the PLAN knows how soon they will be available.

If they will be available in the next few years i dont think that they will start the construction if a STOBAR carrier!
Only if they see no possibility that cats are available within the next years they will build a second STOBAR...

Click to expand...

My own personal opinion is that the PLAN is not ready to go cats in the time frame they are planning their 2nd carrier.

They definitely want to go to catapults and intend to go there. But there may be trade offs with their schedule and planning for naval aviation introduction that they are also not willing to make at this time in order to wait.

But, they have a STOBAR carrier now and are developing doctrine and policy associated with it. If they are not prepared to go CATS now, they will most probably do the following:

- Build their next carrier as an improved Varyag/Liaoning design. A design that from the outset will have probably a larger hanger and improve the number of aircraft they can maintain and shelter there, could very possibly have a smaller island and improve the number of aircraft they can spot on the deck, and may provide for a pair of waste cats (but not install them) when their cat systems is ready.

By doing this they will accomplish several very positive things right now.

1) They will introduce their own indegenous carrier sooner and get that experience under their belt.

2) They will have a second carrier where their maintenance and training is maximized with the Liaoning and improve the total cost of ownership over 30-40 years for both carriers and that will translate into a lot of money.

3) They will be able to continue to develop and produce J-15s without any significant structural change to the front gear to allow for CAT launch, and therefore minimize any schedule impact to current J-15 build schedules.

3) They will be able (if they so desire) to design in a provision for catapault evolution into this 2nd carrier so that at a later date they can install those cats either to test them and improve them for their enventual CATOBAR carrier, or, should they go ahead and produce a CATOBAR carrier first, be in a position to bring their second carrier up to catapault operation and proficiency through its next major refit.

All of these are very positive things.

If the catapaults are absolutely ready now and they are sure of it, they may elect to go there now...but I do not think they are ready now. And even if they were, they may well elect to not go there yet and get these positive benefits for the time being by making it a hybrid.

But if they are not ready for prime time catapult installation now...and I do not believe they are (that the PLAN is confortable with going into live production with their cat technology at this point)...then this path for an improved Liaoning STOBAR design provides the PLAN with a very cost effective path to continue their carrier and naval aviation development without waiting several more years for a complete CATOBAR carrier design.

My guess is that within two years we will know definitively which way the PLAN is moving.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

I love the name "cats and traps"

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Xian said:

so, when PLAN is heading for CATOBAR - why should they introduce STOBAR carriers?
Sure, Liaoning is a special case - it was available and the hull was finished. Its good anough to train crews in carrier ops...
But if the cats are available for the second carrier, why should they stay at STOBAR?

I think it depends on how soon cats will be available...
I am sure work on cats is in progress and the PLAN knows how soon they will be available.
If they will be available in the next few years i dont think that they will start the construction if a STOBAR carrier!
Only if they see no possibility that cats are available within the next years they will build a second STOBAR...

Click to expand...

I think you missed the entire point of my post.. Like I said before, I believe it has more to so with planning than with technological abilities or lack thereof. PLAN can have catapults up the wazoo since last year and I believe their next carrier still WON'T be a CATOBAR.

Like many here, I believe that PLAN's planning involves building a STOBAR all on their own first before building a CATOBAR and I also strongly believe that this STOBAR of theirs will be very similar to Liaoning with slight modifications to the interior, sensors, wiring, plumbing etc BUT no major redesign of the hull itself. It MAY have waist cats but extremely doubtful they will have cats on the bow for the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post.