Type 076 LHD/LHA discussion

ChineseToTheBone

New Member
Registered Member
I have read a few mentions of using electromagnetic arresting systems instead of hydraulic arresting systems. Does this provide similar benefits as electromagnetic catapults where stress on the airframe is reduced?

@Bltizo Also one last thing, since the tonnage of the LHD was increased to at least 50k tonnes from the previous 36k tonnes of the Type 075, and since the flight deck will be modified and will have arrestor wires and catapults, that means the price of this ship will increase significantly and it will be as costly as any other regular aircraft carrier in this tonnage range.

For a smaller cost, the Chinese could have built a proper smaller conventionally powered aircraft carrier the size of the Charles De Gaul so it can operate all kinds of aircrafts not just drones, this would have saved hundreds of millions of dollars, and if they want to transport soldiers this much they could use some of the money they saved to buy one or two Type 071 (a single type 071 costs 200$ million).

You are probably right about the electromagnetic catapult portion increasing the price, but surely the hull itself will not cost too much over the cost of a Type 075 landing helicopter dock. Tonnage for our warships is probably amongst the least expensive factors, given how air is free and steel is cheap for shipbuilders in China.

For example, it was rumoured that a single Type 075 landing helicopter dock costs roughly the same as just one Type 054A frigate. I am not sure on whether if any electronics or propulsion systems were included within its price, but that does go to show how inexpensive some larger warships can be when constructed by shipbuilders in China.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
@Bltizo ok just for the sake of argument let us assume it will not operate manned fighters for whatever reason, does China have a maneuverable unmanned fighter aircraft that can be as effective in A2A as an STOVL manned fighter?
After all Pop3 said it will solve the problem of not having STOVL by having catapults, STOVL fighters can do both land attack and A2A combat, so again the question is does China have a maneuverable unmanned fighter aircraft that can be as effective in A2A as an STOVL manned fighter? Because if China doesn't have something like that then that means even before this ship exists the Type 076 has already failed in completely circumventing the issue of not having STOVL for the LHDs.

I'm genuinely asking, I will be happy if China has such an amazing drone that is as capable in A2A combat as an STOVL fighter taking off of an LHD, because if China doesn't have that then the Type 076 is already a big overpriced flop because it can only target helpless land and sea targets (eg: Somali pirates) but can't match an STOVL fighter in A2A.

My answer is simple -- I believe that the 076's fixed wing complement will not be as capable as the USN LHDs in terms of A2A.

The 076's reason for having catapults and arresting gear is to make up for the fact that China doesn't have a high end STOVL manned fighter.
The catapults and arresting gear is to enable a fixed wing solution for this ship.
However -- and I can't emphasize this enough -- the primary role of this ship, the 076 is still amphibious assault.
It doesn't matter if the drones are much less capable than an F-35B in the A2A role because it can conduct as capable strike if not more capable strike missions than the F-35B.
The naval A2A role will be left to other friendly assets in the area like carriers where operating manned tactical fighters makes sense. 076's drones otoh will be supplementing the task force's strike capability.


I think the 076's UCAVs will -- by virtue of their design -- be capable of conducting strike missions against well defended targets against high technology foes, as well as conducting persistent ISR in high and medium intensity environments. Not against pirates and undefended targets, but rather against command centers, air bases, naval ports, all defended by IADS and CAPs, or secondarily against high technology naval targets and formations.
When the insiders have said that 076 will have a solution to make up for its lack of F-35Bs -- I interpret that to mean they will have a solution to give 076 fixed wing aviation capabilities relevant to its mission. But that doesn't literally mean giving it a manned fighter to match or exceed the F-35B.



=====


@Bltizo Also one last thing, since the tonnage of the LHD was increased to at least 50k tonnes from the previous 36k tonnes of the Type 075, and since the flight deck will be modified and will have arrestor wires and catapults, that means the price of this ship will increase significantly and it will be as costly as any other regular aircraft carrier in this tonnage range.
Now does it make any sense why the F would China build such an expensive ship while not giving it the capability to launch manned fighters?

For a smaller cost, the Chinese could have built a proper smaller conventionally powered aircraft carrier the size of the Charles De Gaul so it can operate all kinds of aircrafts not just drones, this would have saved hundreds of millions of dollars, and if they want to transport soldiers this much they could use some of the money they saved to buy one or two Type 071 (a single type 071 costs 200$ million).

If this giant expensive type 076 realy does turn out to have no manned fighters then it will be the biggest expensive flop in the history of Chinese shipbuilding.

Just to make it clear, I bet my left test*cle that the Type 076 will have manned fighters and will be more capable than the America-class in A2A since the J-35 will take off of it with their full load unlike the F-35.

Displacement doesn't translate automatically to cost. An 076 LHD design with a single catapult and arresting gear is going to cost less than an equivalent tonnage proper dedicated carrier with multiple catapults and a greater speed.
For modern ships, displacement is not the primary driver, but rather its subsystems are.
You are arguing that because 076 is bigger than 075 and has CATOBAR facilities therefore it must be expensive and equivalent in cost to a full sized carrier -- but I see it the other way around. I think the fact they were willing to build an LHD with CATOBAR facilities must mean that such a ship must be substantially cheaper than a proper carrier.


As for 076, your comparisons with the Charles De Gaulle is absolutely telling, because you are thinking about 076 as an aircraft carrier first rather than as an LHD first.

Everything that has been written so far has stated that 076 is primarily an amphibious assault ship.
Just because 076 may not normally operate manned fighter aircraft and not be capable in the A2A role doesn't change that. This is not forgetting of course that fielding a complement of fixed wing UCAVs would provide a much more attritible and potentially even stealthier and longer ranged strike capability than the F-35B as well.
I don't see how that is a flop.
Rather than seeing 076 as an enlarged 075 LHD with the ability to conduct stealthy long range fixed wing strike and ISR, you're comparing it with proper CATOBAR carriers or comparing it with the F-35Bs that the USN operates and expecting 076 to be able to match or exceed the USN's F-35B+LHD combination in every single domain.
Temper your expectations a little.

Finally, I want to again add that I am not saying 076 will be unable to launch or recover manned fighter aircraft.
However I am saying that I don't think 076 will operate with them routinely -- and 076s primary fixed wing complement will be UAVs instead.
 

visitor123

New Member
Registered Member
?
I think you have it backward. STOVL is a work around for not having CATOBAR. No one in their right mind settles for STOVL if they have CATOBAR.
Case in point, the USN is never going to buy the F35B. Even the F35C (or the entire F35 program, which was aerodynamically compromised because the requirement of STOVL for the B version) was forced on them in order to make the marine relevant.

It would be idiotic for the PLAN not to exploit this advantage over the USN. Forget about STOVL.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
?
I think you have it backward. STOVL is a work around for not having CATOBAR. No one in their right mind settles for STOVL if they have CATOBAR.
Case in point, the USN is never going to buy the F35B. Even the F35C (or the entire F35 program, which was aerodynamically compromised because the requirement of STOVL for the B version) was forced on them in order to make the marine relevant.

It would be idiotic for the PLAN not to exploit this advantage over the USN. Forget about STOVL.

I disagree.

Fixed wing STOVL provides additional capability to an LHD which, as an amphibious assault ship is configured primarily to operate helicopters as its overall airwing. A STOVL jet provides the LHD fixed wing combat air capabilities which it otherwise cannot have.

For the 076, it is primarily an LHD/amphibious assault ship first and foremost, but with a CATOBAR capability added on to provide it with fixed wing combat air capabilities to enable it to do its mission.


Asking the 076 to operate manned fighter aircraft as part of its normal complement while also operating as an amphibious assault ship is going to make it poor at both.

Instead of looking at the 076 and thinking "what's the most fixed wing capability we can stick onto 076 now that it has CATOBAR" -- a better question to ask is "what's the minimum fixed wing capability 076 needs to allow it to do its primary job while also maximizing said primary role".
 

azesus

Junior Member
Registered Member
076 is not for peer A2A but for unmanned strike craft like Dark Sword for situations when foreign corrupt dictators wants to shift blame and rob Chinese like during Suharto Indonesia reign
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
076 is not for peer A2A but for unmanned strike craft like Dark Sword for situations when foreign corrupt dictators wants to shift blame and rob Chinese like during Suharto Indonesia reign

Unmanned strike - yes
Dark Sword - probably not, it'll be a flying wing like a GJ-11 variant or a similar design most likely
Foreign corrupt dictators - not only them. Stealthy flying wing UCAVs are for high intensity air-naval conflicts, not for medium-low intensity conflicts. You use stealthy flying wing UCAVs to conduct strikes against well defended foes with advanced air defenses and combat air patrol.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
I disagree.

Fixed wing STOVL provides additional capability to an LHD which, as an amphibious assault ship is configured primarily to operate helicopters as its overall airwing. A STOVL jet provides the LHD fixed wing combat air capabilities which it otherwise cannot have.

For the 076, it is primarily an LHD/amphibious assault ship first and foremost, but with a CATOBAR capability added on to provide it with fixed wing combat air capabilities to enable it to do its mission.


Asking the 076 to operate manned fighter aircraft as part of its normal complement while also operating as an amphibious assault ship is going to make it poor at both.

Instead of looking at the 076 and thinking "what's the most fixed wing capability we can stick onto 076 now that it has CATOBAR" -- a better question to ask is "what's the minimum fixed wing capability 076 needs to allow it to do its primary job while also maximizing said primary role".


I do think CATOBAR is preferable to STOVL for any fixed wing carrier aircraft.

The biggest limitation for STOVL aircraft is payload, which directly translates into more fuel and weapons, and which has a huge impact on aircraft effectiveness.

---

In a high-intensity conflict, it just isn't credible for the Chinese military to be conducting amphibious assaults past the First Island Chain.
Given this situation, if you need fixed wing air support for an amphibious assault, you're far better off with aircraft operating from on the Chinese mainland. After all, an amphibious assault requires something close to air superiority.

The biggest thing that bugs me, is how the primary role of the ship is described as amphibious assault, because it just doesn't make sense to me.

The use cases for a Type-076 in an amphibious assault are severely limited in a high-intensity conflict.

As you say yourself, the Type-076 is overspecified for Taiwan.
I would say the same applies for the other realistic targets in the First Island Chain.
And where the full gamut of the Type-076s amphibious capabilities would be justified is when operating beyond the First Island Chain, but that is just not credible in a high-intensity conflict.

---

So you ask the question "what's the minimum fixed wing capability 076 needs to allow it to do its primary job while also maximizing said primary role".

My answer is that if the primary role of the Type-076 is amphibious assault, that limits the geography to the First Island Chain.
So ZERO fixed wing capability is required for this role, because fixed wing aircraft can be supplied from airbases located in mainland China.

---

Hence my view is that the Type-076 is actually being designed to be dual-purpose, with the drone carrier mission being more important than the amphibious mission.

Yes, it can be configured for an amphibious assault, but these occasions would be the exception in a campaign.
So the Type-076 would be operating as a drone carrier for most of the time, helping to extend control of the air to the Second Island Chain.

From a priority perspective, additional carriers to obtain control of the airspace to the Second Island Chain is far more important than additional amphibious assets.
 

visitor123

New Member
Registered Member
I disagree.

Fixed wing STOVL provides additional capability to an LHD which, as an amphibious assault ship is configured primarily to operate helicopters as its overall airwing. A STOVL jet provides the LHD fixed wing combat air capabilities which it otherwise cannot have.
But that is the American's problem. By the time the F35 program was being materialized they'd already had dozens of LHDs. They fell for the sunk cost fallacy: instead of making new ships they tried to make old ships more useful and hence STOVL.
Either that or they could not incorporate CATOBAR into small and cheap platforms like LHDs. Case in point: the QE. There is no reason other than technical deficiency to not equip a ship that big with CATOBAR. They don't because they can't.

China has 2 LHDs both of which are not even commissioned. There is no reason to spend more resources trying to make them more useful than their intended role.

Honestly, with EMALS the PLAN has leapfrogged the USN at least in the surface force. If the PLAN can have AWACS on demand cheaply for every small task force out there, the USN surface vessels have no choice but to hug their carriers to have any chance of survival.

Even for a navy as big as the USN, there is no way in hell they can keep up with 1 of their carrier for every 076.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I do think CATOBAR is preferable to STOVL for any fixed wing carrier aircraft.

The biggest limitation for STOVL aircraft is payload, which directly translates into more fuel and weapons, and which has a huge impact on aircraft effectiveness.

---

In a high-intensity conflict, it just isn't credible for the Chinese military to be conducting amphibious assaults past the First Island Chain.
Given this situation, if you need fixed wing air support for an amphibious assault, you're far better off with aircraft operating from on the Chinese mainland. After all, an amphibious assault requires something close to air superiority.

The biggest thing that bugs me, is how the primary role of the ship is described as amphibious assault, because it just doesn't make sense to me.

The use cases for a Type-076 in an amphibious assault are severely limited in a high-intensity conflict.

As you say yourself, the Type-076 is overspecified for Taiwan.
I would say the same applies for the other realistic targets in the First Island Chain.
And where the full gamut of the Type-076s amphibious capabilities would be justified is when operating beyond the First Island Chain, but that is just not credible in a high-intensity conflict.

There are quite a few islands in the western pacific where potential adversaries have rather extensive air bases and air-naval forces, which in a true high intensity conflict, the PLA would seek to not only wrest control of air and sea control in the western pacific but also seek to destroy and potentially occupy islands where the adversary has bases built up during the war.




---

So you ask the question "what's the minimum fixed wing capability 076 needs to allow it to do its primary job while also maximizing said primary role".

My answer is that if the primary role of the Type-076 is amphibious assault, that limits the geography to the First Island Chain.
So ZERO fixed wing capability is required for this role, because fixed wing aircraft can be supplied from airbases located in mainland China.

I agree with you -- I do not believe 076's fixed wing complement is necessarily intended to provide fixed wing air support for amphibious operations in the first island chain, but rather beyond the first island chain.
(Or at least, beyond 500-600km of the Chinese mainland)



---

Hence my view is that the Type-076 is actually being designed to be dual-purpose, with the drone carrier mission being more important than the amphibious mission.

Yes, it can be configured for an amphibious assault, but these occasions would be the exception in a campaign.
So the Type-076 would be operating as a drone carrier for most of the time, helping to extend control of the air to the Second Island Chain.

From a priority perspective, additional carriers to obtain control of the airspace to the Second Island Chain is far more important than additional amphibious assets.

This is where I diverge with you -- to put it bluntly, I think the 076 is intended to be capable of enabling and conducting amphibious operations in a high intensity conflict beyond the first island chain.

In that kind of mission profile, it goes without saying that the 076 will be well supported by a number of carriers, destroyers, submarines, and long range land based aircraft and missiles.
The goal of the 076's fixed wing complement would be to supplement the strike capability and ISR capability of the task force -- the primary purpose of the ship after is deliver troops and materiel onto enemy held islands after their defenses and command/control etc has been sufficiently degraded.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
But that is the American's problem. By the time the F35 program was being materialized they'd already had dozens of LHDs. They fell for the sunk cost fallacy: instead of making new ships they tried to make old ships more useful and hence STOVL.
Either that or they could not incorporate CATOBAR into small and cheap platforms like LHDs. Case in point: the QE. There is no reason other than technical deficiency to not equip a ship that big with CATOBAR. They don't because they can't.

China has 2 LHDs both of which are not even commissioned. There is no reason to spend more resources trying to make them more useful than their intended role.

Honestly, with EMALS the PLAN has leapfrogged the USN at least in the surface force. If the PLAN can have AWACS on demand cheaply for every small task force out there, the USN surface vessels have no choice but to hug their carriers to have any chance of survival.

Even for a navy as big as the USN, there is no way in hell they can keep up with 1 of their carrier for every 076.

None of that provides a valid argument for why we should expect the 076 to normally operate a manned fighter complement.

You're viewing the 076 as a conventional medium carrier as a way of balancing or outmatching the USN's carrier force -- rather than looking at the 076 primarily as an LHD first that has some additional fixed wing capabilities by virtue of having CATOBAR.

Expecting the 076 to operate with an airwing like a miniature CATOBAR carrier rather than having an amphibious assault airwing with some secondary fixed wing capabilities is counter to how this 076 ship has been described by the insiders and certainly counter to how Yankee has written about it.
 
Top