asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
You write as much as you like
Unless I see a loaded LCAC entering and leaving a well deck it’s a non story
Unless I see a loaded LCAC entering and leaving a well deck it’s a non story
The PLAN LCAC Type 726 Yuyi Class
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Some people are impatient and want to see PLAN exercise like the American marine
Forgetting that only now it is officially enter the PLAN service
The development of Yuyi experience delay of 10 years due to problem with Ukrainian GT UGT 6000 and has to wait until domestic version GT QC 70 reached its maturity
The first four of the Type 726 class , with Ukrainian gas turbines UGT-6000 ДМ71 (*), were produced at the same shipyard six years ago.
These 150-ton air-cushion landing craft, which are designed to fit on the Chinese AM Navy's Type 071 amphibious vessel , allegedly encountered a number of technical problems that temporarily halted production, forcing the four Type 071 displacing more than 20,000 tonnes to limit their projection capabilities to only amphibious IFVs and helicopters, not tanks.
The Ukrainian gas turbine UGT-6000 equips the first Chinese Type 726 (Source: UkrOboronProm)
The most common rumors were the concern to replace Ukrainian turbines with native ones, and also a problem with the steering system. But according to a source who works at the shipyard in question, the problems were rather the low frequency vibration and also the loud noise.
It is not long that is the normal time to developed weapon system from scratch I recall the same time span when they RE Torpedo MK 48 aka Yu 6. The same time span when they first develop the doppler radar according to the video
Development of Yu-6 begun in 1995, which took an entire decade to complete when the torpedo was finally ready in 2005. One of the difficulties encountered was that the Yu-6 torpedo had greater operating depth than all previous Chinese torpedoes. A brand new alloy was required to cast the outer casing of the Yu-6 torpedo; under the leadership of Ding Wenjiang (丁文江), professor of material science at , the problem was solved when ZLJD-1S alloy was successfully developed and used to cast the casing for Yu-6 torpedo. He Yuyao (贺昱曜) was in charge of developing the power module for the newly developed computer of the Yu-6 torpedo, which took three years, from 1999 to 2001.
So what we have seen sofar is builder trial and acceptance test by the PLAN So They have not even figure out SOP for Yuyi or formal exercise with it So wait
Forgetting that only now it is officially enter the PLAN service
The development of Yuyi experience delay of 10 years due to problem with Ukrainian GT UGT 6000 and has to wait until domestic version GT QC 70 reached its maturity
The first four of the Type 726 class , with Ukrainian gas turbines UGT-6000 ДМ71 (*), were produced at the same shipyard six years ago.
These 150-ton air-cushion landing craft, which are designed to fit on the Chinese AM Navy's Type 071 amphibious vessel , allegedly encountered a number of technical problems that temporarily halted production, forcing the four Type 071 displacing more than 20,000 tonnes to limit their projection capabilities to only amphibious IFVs and helicopters, not tanks.
The Ukrainian gas turbine UGT-6000 equips the first Chinese Type 726 (Source: UkrOboronProm)
The most common rumors were the concern to replace Ukrainian turbines with native ones, and also a problem with the steering system. But according to a source who works at the shipyard in question, the problems were rather the low frequency vibration and also the loud noise.
It is not long that is the normal time to developed weapon system from scratch I recall the same time span when they RE Torpedo MK 48 aka Yu 6. The same time span when they first develop the doppler radar according to the video
Development of Yu-6 begun in 1995, which took an entire decade to complete when the torpedo was finally ready in 2005. One of the difficulties encountered was that the Yu-6 torpedo had greater operating depth than all previous Chinese torpedoes. A brand new alloy was required to cast the outer casing of the Yu-6 torpedo; under the leadership of Ding Wenjiang (丁文江), professor of material science at , the problem was solved when ZLJD-1S alloy was successfully developed and used to cast the casing for Yu-6 torpedo. He Yuyao (贺昱曜) was in charge of developing the power module for the newly developed computer of the Yu-6 torpedo, which took three years, from 1999 to 2001.
So what we have seen sofar is builder trial and acceptance test by the PLAN So They have not even figure out SOP for Yuyi or formal exercise with it So wait
Whether it's the LCAC's service delay, the Z-10 losing bid in Pakistan, the Su-35 purchase... China clearly continues to have an engine bottleneck across many platforms and it pays a price for it even as it tries to overcome.
This is not really true. The Z-10 losing the bid may be due to other external factors such as its ability to cope with the harsh desert climate. But while the engine may be slightly under-powered, there are still 200 in PLA use, showing that the Z-10 was still a satisfactory chopper overall. And regarding the Su-35 purchase, various posters here have already explained in depth the multiple reasons for the Chinese purchase (calling it an engine problem is oversimplifying it). And yes, engines have traditionally been a weak spot in the Chinese aviation sector. But we have seen China steadily overcome this barrier not just in recent years but in recent months. The two J-20 prototypes with WS-10X engines, the J-10B with WS-10 TVC variant, and how the WS-20 is nearly ready for incorporation with the Y-20 is a clear sign of China's large progress. And with the WS-15 on the horizon in the next few years, it can be said that the "bottleneck" will eventually be overcome. I'm not sure what you mean by the "price" the PLA pays ... if that price is temporarily importing Russian engines, I don't see it as a large drawback.
By "price" I mean the operator having to live with reduced performance, the most obvious example being the Z-10 in service with the PLA. The model in service may not perform "satisfactorily" per se, the PLA may have deemed having some semblance of the capability better than having none at all. I suspect the status of the LCAC is along those lines as well.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Honestly these LCAC are mainly for preparing tactics and strategy
Because we have never seen them in a serious amphibious assault lifting heavy equipment with LPD
PLAN has never had the experience so they are basically they using these units empty without payload to develop operating manuals in the hope one day they will have a working unit
It’s been over a decade, it doesn’t take that long unless there is a serious flaw in the system and design
No one is being impatient 10 years is 10 years
Someone show me a photo of Type 727 with a packed load entering and leaving well deck
Until then talk is cheap
Because we have never seen them in a serious amphibious assault lifting heavy equipment with LPD
PLAN has never had the experience so they are basically they using these units empty without payload to develop operating manuals in the hope one day they will have a working unit
It’s been over a decade, it doesn’t take that long unless there is a serious flaw in the system and design
No one is being impatient 10 years is 10 years
Someone show me a photo of Type 727 with a packed load entering and leaving well deck
Until then talk is cheap
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
If that is the case they are not wasting their money by building additional 8 LCAC The problem has been resolved the LCAC with Ukrainian engine never entered service It is scrapped!
vesicles
Colonel
Well, 10 years is a long time. If the PLAN doesn’t like it, they will either scrap it and design another one or stop using the current ones. It would be a terrible waste of time and resources if they keep practicing it using something they don’t like. They can do that for a little while, but won’t keep doing that for 10 years. And they would not keep building new units. That’s just simply stupid.
Even if they hate it and they are stuck with it for the time being, they might as well want to put some cargo on it when they do practice with it. They can train their personnel how to load and unload, etc.
They are not doing any of it. For 10 years?! Why?! My guess is that they only allow those empty units be photographed. Most likely, they don’t want people to know exactly how much cargo they can haul and what their true amphiban assault capability is.
We all know that, as soon as they put something on it, military fans like us will do all kinds measurements and find out exactly how much each unit can haul. With the number of units they have known, it would not be difficult to deduce their amphibian landing capability is. I guess they don’t want people to know that at the moment.
Why? To hide weaknesses, to confuse potential opponents? This would be my guess...
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
I am sorry I meant they are wasting their money by building additional 8 LCAC
