Type 076 LHD/LHA discussion

dankris said:

So you mean like a carrier-lite with catapult/s instead of an LHA with STOVL plane? Sounds interesting. Who knows, maybe we'll get some AWACS UCAV with GJ-11-like UCAV adapted to cat and traps if your interpretation of this 076 is really a thing.

Click to expand...

I expect a flying wing UCAV to be developed for the CATOBAR carriers.
I can see the 076 using the very same aircraft.

======

daifo said:

Why not STOBAR j-31/35? Seems like the logical compliment for the J-15 on the STOBAR carriers too.

Click to expand...

Because to effectively operate a STOBAR fleet means you need a larger ship and you might as well just build another 002 carrier.
Moreover, the PLAN are moving away from ski jump as a launch mechanism, and they have EM cats in the pipe line. After CV-16 and CV-17 I do not expect any further STOBAR configuration carriers (or LHD/A) to be built.

Bltizo said:

It's described as "you will understand once you see it".
If we assume that it's not a half-measure like VLS for "strike + air defense, and if we are all in agreement that it's not a STOVL aircraft, then I can only assume it to be some kind of fixed wing conventional take off aircraft.
For a large LHD, the space available would likely be appropriate for large UCAVs.

For a large LHD, it wouldn't be impossible to install a single EM catapult and landing gear in a workable fashion...

Click to expand...

Continuing from the breaking news thread.

Lol this guy works fast.

That angle runway looks too short for landing and take off.

SteelBird said:

That angle runway looks too short for landing and take off.

Click to expand...

Depends on the aircraft -- after all, for this depiction it's not meant to be able to recover all sorts of aircraft (fighters, AEWC, UCAVs, COD) -- it's only meant to recover a specific category of UCAVs.
Potentially, depending on the UCAV they go for, they may not need a full sized carrier landing strip.


One other thing I would consider changing from the artist is that I think the entire "launch" section (including the jet blast deflector and full length of the catapult) can overlap partially with the landing strip, after all this thing shouldn't be intended to achieve the fixed wing launch tempo of a proper carrier and it definitely shouldn't need simultaneous recovery and take off capability (incidentally from what I've read, that is rarely done in other navies anyhow where instead flight ops are done in launch and recovery "cycles").

The depicted ship looks like it's 300m long, which is near CV-16/17 length and way too large.

Merging the launch section and the landing strip could shave off 30-40 meters in length.
Incidentally I would increase the beam/width by a bit however.


But of course all of this is speculation ++, and results merely from the recent posts about 076 being a project to expect some time in the future and that it will have a capability that is a surrogate for STOVL.

Arienai said:

POP3's original words says " 054B is close to start", I don't know why the tweet rephrase that to "054B will be built simultaneously".

I understand why this could be the case, maybe they want more operational ready frigates quickly as the 054B might need more time testing after been built.

I just want to clarify for anyone that can't speak Chinese that POP3 didn't say "simultaneously", at least not in this quote.

Click to expand...

My Mandarin isn't very good but it sound to me 054B and 076 will also quickly start soon.

Tam said:

My Mandarin isn't very good but it sound to me 054B and 076 will also quickly start soon.


View attachment 61907

Click to expand...

Do you have the link to the forum/thread Pop3 posted this in? Thanks.

Looks like a decent attempt, but the main issue is that the artist has restricted himself way too strictly in keeping the new design within the overall footprint of the existing design, whereas I think a LHD/Mini carrier with EMCATs would have a much more significantly changed footprint to make the most out of this new addition.

Most obviously, the angled deck would be properly extended so it’s not weirdly truncated as it is now, whereby nearly a full quarter of the length is unusable due to being cut off.

It would also not be unreasonable to extend out the front left side to link up to the extended angled deck, thereby creating enough real estate for twin forward cats by moving the existing one slightly to the right, closer to the bridge and angle both cats, just like carriers.

That would make these true pocket carriers with potentially the ability to recover and launch fixed wing manned fighters to add significant more capability and flexibility.

Bltizo said:

Continuing from the breaking news thread.

Lol this guy works fast.

View attachment 61904View attachment 61905

View attachment 61906

Click to expand...

Hi Bltizo

based on the picture above, it will be a light carrier instead of a LHD or LHA?

Bltizo said:

It's described as "you will understand once you see it".
If we assume that it's not a half-measure like VLS for "strike + air defense, and if we are all in agreement that it's not a STOVL aircraft, then I can only assume it to be some kind of fixed wing conventional take off aircraft.
For a large LHD, the space available would likely be appropriate for large UCAVs.

For a large LHD, it wouldn't be impossible to install a single EM catapult and landing gear in a workable fashion...

Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking when I saw this.

If they add a ski jump on the straight deck it's dangerous for pilots cause the planes are too fast when they miss all the wires and have to take back off. Unless they add an angled deck but that's too much work... And the ski jump makes the front of the deck unusable for normal LHD tasks.

EM catapult doesn't take that much space compare to steam catapult. As long as they have sufficient electricity supply on the 076 I feel like this could be a feasible solution. Adding a catapult still allows the deck to operate like a normal LHD when needed. It does cost extra but maybe they decide the value of having these little carriers outweigh the cost.

I guess this is still a much more economic solution compare to designing a brand new STOVL jet only to make dozens of them... Especially when they don't have a powerful enough engine like the F135.

Tam said:

My Mandarin isn't very good but it sound to me 054B and 076 will also quickly start soon.


View attachment 61907

Click to expand...

Yes. I just want to clarify he didn't say "simultaneously" in that quote. Whether "will start quickly" means they will be built simultaneously I left that for others to judge. I don't know cause I'm just interpreting words...