PLAN Fleet supply vessels

Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Franklin said:
The Type 901 AOR is another step towards building a carrier battle group. China's existing AOR's of 20000+ tons are too small for that task. You would need to take two of them along for a carrier battle group.
Click to expand...

Depends on the sortie rate, the duration of the intended mission, number of escorts, and whether there are any support bases that would allow for rapid replenishment of the 903As or carrier directly.

France only has four Durance class AORs, each of which are actually smaller than the 903s, and they are able to maintain a decent carrier capability. Of course they also have foreign bases to replenish from and also possible allied replenishment ships.

I think if the Chinese Navy was willing to let some requirements slide, they could use a single 903A to support a CSG if the CSG was only one carrier and three escorts or so, and if they did not expect a very high sortie rate, and if they had a base nearby to reliably replenish from.

But for a true high tier CSG with a high sortie rate super carrier and multiple destroyers and frigates as escorts then a larger replenishment ship is indeed needed. Also, 901 class is an AOE and will be able to keep up (expected to do 25 knots at least) with a CSG, whereas standard AORs are limited typically to around 20 knots.
 
F

Franklin

Captain
Bltizo said:
Depends on the sortie rate, the duration of the intended mission, number of escorts, and whether there are any support bases that would allow for rapid replenishment of the 903As or carrier directly.

France only has four Durance class AORs, each of which are actually smaller than the 903s, and they are able to maintain a decent carrier capability. Of course they also have foreign bases to replenish from and also possible allied replenishment ships.

I think if the Chinese Navy was willing to let some requirements slide, they could use a single 903A to support a CSG if the CSG was only one carrier and three escorts or so, and if they did not expect a very high sortie rate, and if they had a base nearby to reliably replenish from.

But for a true high tier CSG with a high sortie rate super carrier and multiple destroyers and frigates as escorts then a larger replenishment ship is indeed needed. Also, 901 class is an AOE and will be able to keep up (expected to do 25 knots at least) with a CSG, whereas standard AORs are limited typically to around 20 knots.
Click to expand...
I think China's carrier ambitions are closer to the US than France.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
asif iqbal said:
Check this out not sure if it's real but if so it's hell of a tanker

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

That CGI is one in a series, all of which can be found here:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


It goes without saying that the ship in those CGIs is a fanmade vision of what 901 would have looked like (from over a year ago).... the real 901 looks quite different to it, and is somewhat smaller (likely 48,000 tons rather than 55,000 tons)...

And of course there's no reason to take that CGI seriously.
 
S

schenkus

Junior Member
Registered Member
asif iqbal said:
Check this out not sure if it's real but if so it's hell of a tanker

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

Is refueling more than 3 ships (one on each side and one astern) at a time like in these pictures actually done ? It just seems unsafe.

This gets me thinking about refueling more than one ship at once during wartime: would this be considered a big risk because a big part of your task force is "out of action" or is this considered better than refueling one ship at a time ?

How long does it actually take to refuel a ship the size of a 052d ? Or an aircraft carrier the size of the Liaoning ?
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
schenkus said:
Is refueling more than 3 ships (one on each side and one astern) at a time like in these pictures actually done ? It just seems unsafe.

This gets me thinking about refueling more than one ship at once during wartime: would this be considered a big risk because a big part of your task force is "out of action" or is this considered better than refueling one ship at a time ?

How long does it actually take to refuel a ship the size of a 052d ? Or an aircraft carrier the size of the Liaoning ?
Click to expand...
Normally you will see one ship being replenished like this:

RAS-1-01.jpg

Or...two ships being replenished at once like this:

RAS-2-01.jpg

I have never seen more than two major vessels undergoing a RAS or UNREP at once.

I have seen as many as five lined up, but only two were being replenished and the others were either on a photo op (most likely) or waiting on station for their turn. Here's a couple of photos of five ships in the 1960s:

RAS-5-01.jpg

RAS-5-02.jpg

But note from the pics that only two were actually hooked up and being replenished at one time.

I believe trying to RAS two large ships in line like shown in the diagram on each side of the vessel (in other words four ships being RAS'd at once) above is, at least to me, fanboy stuff. Too dangerous and too many chances for very major problems.
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Bltizo said:
France only has four Durance class AORs, each of which are actually smaller than the 903s, and they are able to maintain a decent carrier capability. Of course they also have foreign bases to replenish from and also possible allied replenishment ships.
Click to expand...

We have now only 3 last summer Meuse retired each do 18000 t max, i add about FLOTLOG program/Logistic Fleet initialy planned 4 but now 3 project BRAVE or other initialy about 30000 t but now planned ~ 25000 t.

Then in fact your generous for tonnage :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top