The PLAN LCAC Type 726 Yuyi Class
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Hendrik_2000 and Iron Man, cease the back and forth.
You both have made your points and that is fine, but SD is not meant to be a forum for arguments, back and forth, between members that go on and on and derail a thread.
Any more of that will be deleted out of hand. If that does not stop it, then there will be suspensions.
DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
You both have made your points and that is fine, but SD is not meant to be a forum for arguments, back and forth, between members that go on and on and derail a thread.
Any more of that will be deleted out of hand. If that does not stop it, then there will be suspensions.
DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
To be clear, it was not the gas turbine, that made the problem. The gas turbines from ukraine are a well established fine working product. Thats why china imported them, instead of using own non reliable gts. Don't you think, when they have a good product that they would spend the money in home marked? It is still not clear if the QC 70 is fine now and if the last 4 units have the QC70. I've just heard rumors and claims that they are in use with the 726A. But is there proof that the WS-10 is matured now in, serial production and in permanent use? So that we can derive that a reliable navalized version is available too? I have my doubts, but I am open minded for opposite arguments.
The main problem of the 726 was the thrust impeller system, the connecting transmission and gearbox. Having bad problems with resonance frequencies. The whole construction had to be redesigned, at least the production process of the rotor of the impeller was reviewed by AVIC. That's what I understand on that issue so far.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
I'm still trying to figure out how the 726 steers and pivots properly w/o the forward rotating nozzles. It appears to be fixed on the 726 unlike USN LCACs.
Can someone explain to me?
Can someone explain to me?
They're called "puff ports". Not as precise as rotating nozzles, but also less complicated and less expensive.
Here is an open puff port:
Here is a closed puff port:
The same puff ports are also present in the back as well.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Something is wrong in the design a flaw which doesn't allow the LCAC to manoeuvre in and out of the Type 071 LPD while being fully loaded
My guess the rotating thrusters
PLAN just raised another marine brigade to total 3
With 6,000 men each unit that's 18,000 marines
To sea lift a single brigade PLAN needs a hell of a lot more LHA, LPD and working LCAC
If you can't sea lift marines what is the point ?
Chinese amphibious programme is far too slower than its carrier programme
They need to speed it up
My guess the rotating thrusters
PLAN just raised another marine brigade to total 3
With 6,000 men each unit that's 18,000 marines
To sea lift a single brigade PLAN needs a hell of a lot more LHA, LPD and working LCAC
If you can't sea lift marines what is the point ?
Chinese amphibious programme is far too slower than its carrier programme
They need to speed it up
China also has a lot of LSTs (various forms of 072.., 073.., 074) - if the goal is to land them on Taiwan instead of somewhere on the other side of the world, you don't need bigger vessels.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Taking care of Taiwan is the job of the PLA and second artillery corps not the marines
Marines need global lift 072 lst won't cut it