The PLAN LCAC Type 726 Yuyi Class

joshuatree

Captain
American LCAC
USMC_LCAC_offloading.jpg

Chinese LCAC
lcac3320july1.jpg


It seems either LCAC aren't meant to hover in under enemy fire. I don't see even one automated gun to lay any suppressive fire when offloading?
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
It seems either LCAC aren't meant to hover in under enemy fire. I don't see even one automated gun to lay any suppressive fire when offloading?
Well, I can't speak for the Chinese LCAC, but the 91 US Navy LCACs each have 2-4 gun mounts capable of mounting .50 cal machine guns; 40 mm grenade launchers; M60 machine guns or GAU-13 30mm gatling guns.

In a contested space they would be armed accordingly...but this is just immediate, close-in suppressive fire. They would depend more on vessels off shore and close air support from Marine or Naval aircraft.
 
Zubr is a special animal, however, the problem with Zubr is no LPD of reasonable size will ever fit this monster. Cause it was never meant to launch from a LPD, however given China's doctrine, it's a hard fit.

With the Zubr's supposed 300nm range it would be able to make round trips from China to the Paracel Islands.
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
I must say kind of surprised that China has started to build so fast, I would have thought they would give the first two units times to mature and use it for a while then put in a follow up order for the two built in China

If indeed the 3rd and 4th are being built it means China has already found a good use for them and if it works well they might even follow it up with more units, having 6, 8 or even 10 would be a powerful Sqaudron of LACC
 

MwRYum

Major
I must say kind of surprised that China has started to build so fast, I would have thought they would give the first two units times to mature and use it for a while then put in a follow up order for the two built in China

If indeed the 3rd and 4th are being built it means China has already found a good use for them and if it works well they might even follow it up with more units, having 6, 8 or even 10 would be a powerful Sqaudron of LACC

The Zubr is a matured design, so it's just a matter of importing the necessary production line to China, teach the contracted shipyard the know-how, and then proceed to make those two; or they building those two with components supplied by the original shipyard, and the Chinese only need to put it all together.
 

Gorthaur

New Member
The main question about building Zubr in China from blueprints is technology transfer of those big brute turbine engines. Everything else is basically already handled in LCAC. And China really needs more information about engines.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
It seems either LCAC aren't meant to hover in under enemy fire. I don't see even one automated gun to lay any suppressive fire when offloading?

Well LCACs are not really designed for head-on attacks against well defended enemy beaches, that's a niche only the Zubr could fill, which could be part of the reason why the PLA has decided to buy it.

Generally, LCACs are valuable because they open up all sorts of beaches and other landing zones that traditional landing craft could not use. That means the enemy would have a far far bigger stretch of seafront to guard, which is the whole point of LCACs as their primary operating tactic is to use their speed and flexibility to flank and surprise a defender and effect an unopposed landing where the enemy is not expecting and establish a defendable beachhead before the enemy could respond.

In the modern age, if an LCAC came up against armed opposition from a well trained and well equipped enemy defender, no amount of machine guns and grenade launchers will make a difference against incoming ATGMs or 120mm HEAT shells.

The only thing that might make a difference would be a full blooded CIWS, and I do admit to being able to picture a Phalanx or Type 730/AK630 on the American and Chinese LCACs opposite the cockpit. There is certainly space for a CIWS there, but I doubt if the structure is strong enough to withstand the force of the weapon firing, or if the LCAC itself is even big enough to handle the monstrous recoil without throwing off the aim. I mean, the thing floats on the water on top of a cushion of air, so there is hardly a great deal of traction to oppose the force of the weapon firing like a traditional ship which sits in the water.
 

no_name

Colonel
Wonder if those crafts wobble a lot more due to their size and speed. Maybe a missile based defense system is more suitable for them.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Generally, LCACs are valuable because they open up all sorts of beaches and other landing zones that traditional landing craft could not use. That means the enemy would have a far far bigger stretch of seafront to guard, which is the whole point of LCACs as their primary operating tactic is to use their speed and flexibility to flank and surprise a defender and effect an unopposed landing where the enemy is not expecting and establish a defendable beachhead before the enemy could respond.

In the modern age, if an LCAC came up against armed opposition from a well trained and well equipped enemy defender, no amount of machine guns and grenade launchers will make a difference against incoming ATGMs or 120mm HEAT shells.

The only thing that might make a difference would be a full blooded CIWS, and I do admit to being able to picture a Phalanx or Type 730/AK630 on the American and Chinese LCACs opposite the cockpit. I doubt if the structure is strong enough to withstand the force of the weapon firing, or if the LCAC itself is even big enough to handle the monstrous recoil.
I am sure that the LCAC would not structurally be able to handle a Phalanx type CIWS.

As you say, it's role allows it to avoid those type of engagements.

On any beach requiring it, the US would depend on surface fire support and close air support to address those defenses before any landing were attempted. But, with maneuver warfare, if they could, it is more likely that they would do as you say and effect a landing at a beachhead where those defenses were far weaker.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Wonder if those crafts wobble a lot more due to their size and speed. Maybe a missile based defense system is more suitable for them.

Aye, and SeaRam or FL3000 launcher would be perfectly suited to the LCACs, but adding one would massively increase the unit cost of them. In addition, while a gun based CIWS could also be used to lay down supporting fire for the troops and vehicles the LCAC is carrying, a missile based CIWS would be purely defensive.

It is worth noting that the Zubrs built in Ukraine are being delivered without the AK630 or all but the most basic navigational radar, and I would expect the insides to be similarly bare, and I think that's exactly how the PLA wanted them.

I expect the delivered Zubrs to disappear into a shipyard in China and spend a whole being fitting with Chinese sensors, weapons and any internal changes the PLAN may want.

It would be interesting to see what CIWS the PLAN go with on their Zubrs. The Type 730 (1030 would seem like a massive overkill, and probably better used elsewhere when things like the 052C and 054As are not yet getting them) and FL3000 are obvious choices. It would be interesting to see which, or what combination of the two the PLAN ultimately go for and how they are configured.

Personally, I think a pair of Type 730s would be a nice fit, maybe they can even go with the early LD2000 configuration with triple FL3000 missiles on each side of the gun in individual box launchers to get the best of both worlds.

I think in a way, the Zubrs would help to address a major weakness in the smaller LCACs, which is a serious lack in self defence capabilities and armour.

While any contested landing would of course have heavy CAS and probably also naval gunfire support from friendly warships, there is always a good chance that some enemy heavy weapons would survive to threaten the LCACs themselves, especially man portable stuff like ATGMs.

If an LCAC is unfortunate enough to be targeted by an ATGM, its only defence would be its speed and hoping that the operator would miss. That's not a very good defence strategy if you also me, and that's where the Zubrs would come in. For short range missions at least, the Zubrs can act as the vanguard of any LCAC attack. They will have the speed and flexibility to keep up with lighter LCACs and go wherever they can go, but also pack a pair of full blooded CIWS and armour plating to allow them to soak up, a lot of enemy firepower and screen the lightly armoured LCACs and still make it to the beach to deploy its own load of troopers and heavy armour.
 
Top