Type 076 LHD/LHA discussion

crash8pilot

crash8pilot

Junior Member
Registered Member
daifo said:
Maybe... but I think it is prob on the bottom of the priority list. China still needs to get the capability to crank out it's current designs.
Click to expand...
On the contrary I really think tilt rotors ought to be on the forefront of priority.

The PLAN Marine Corps could really benefit from a tilt rotor to aid with amphibious landings as well as transporting heavy equipment, and more importantly to do so with speed (quicker than a helicopter). If disaster relief to allied countries in the South China Sea is a mission the PLA is looking to make advancements in, a tilt rotor would also massively help in delivering humanitarian aid. While Z-18s might be able to service the PLAN's carrier strike group and amphibious ready group logistical resupplying needs for the time being, a tilt rotor could really come into handy when our ships start operating further away from shore, and the Z-18 starts to struggle with range.

Considering how the PLA have been able to utilize the Y-8 as a platform to make advancements in ASW and EW capabilities, I'd be excited for what they'd be able to do if they were given a tilt rotor aircraft to work with, especially with the prospect of it launched from a LHD/LDA.
 
Last edited:
crash8pilot

crash8pilot

Junior Member
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
The propeller wash is even worse than on an helicopter.
Click to expand...
Hover and fast rope to mitigate the effects of prop wash? Not saying it's the perfect solution.... but certainly the range+speed+payload advantage over traditional rotor aircraft is a game changer, especially when it will allow our ships to launch rotary aircraft from a longer and safe standoff distance from anti-ship threats.

gelgoog said:
The problem with tilt rotors is they don't like landing on non-prepared pads.
Click to expand...
On a logistics resupply mission for carrier strike groups and amphibious ready groups, tilt rotors would be taking off and landing between a flight deck to a service port that has a helipad or runway anyway... Heck modern day naval helicopters are mostly designed to operate on prepared surfaces and smooth flight decks, or else they'd be given conventional landing gear setups that make it easier to land on sand, gravel, or grass.

gelgoog said:
That makes it a non-starter in a lot of situations.
Click to expand...
Watching our very own Jeff Head's YouTube videos and his in-depth explanation of the missions the Osprey is capable of really sold me on the idea that tilt rotor ought to be something the PLA should be looking into if it wants to be a true blue water navy.
 
Last edited:
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
I'm not saying it is useless. But most of the advantage of using an Osprey over, say, a Greyhound in carrier operations is the VTOL.
But unless you are thinking about using a flattop with a short runway, perhaps a 075, you would be better off with the Greyhound.
If you want to operate with land bases you better use a prepared pad. So yes, it can be useful. I could see if being useful in
Southeast Asia in particular as long you had a network of small prepared bases.
 
C

Canton_pop

Junior Member
Registered Member
daifo said:
VTOL was mostly pushed by the US Marines that wanted it's own "air force" to operate off its bases and helo carriers. Other countries without sufficient military industry see using VTOL as a better option then a fully develop stobar/catobar solution. The VTOL is only economically viable because the US Marines are buying a few hundred and it is being exported to allies. The Chinese can just build more catobar carrier or light carrier if it needs more naval air assets.
Click to expand...

VTOL IS IMPERATIVE FOR ANY COUNTRY, RUNWAY WILL BE ONE OF THE FIRST STRIKE TARGET IN ANY CONFRONTATION, PLANES WILL BE MORE OR LESS GROUNDED IF YOU DO NOT HAVE VTOL.
 
crash8pilot

crash8pilot

Junior Member
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
But unless you are thinking about using a flattop with a short runway, perhaps a 075, you would be better off with the Greyhound.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking the PLAN doesn't even have a Greyhound. Tilt rotors could also land on destroyers as well, whereas the Greyhound can't.

gelgoog said:
I could see if being useful in Southeast Asia in particular as long you had a network of small prepared bases.
Click to expand...
Perks of securing/building ports with allied countries in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Djibouti - they'll help with our logistical supply runs, we just need the right airframe to reach them, especially if we found ourselves further out at sea which a blue water navy is supposed to do... Might also explain why we're building islands in the South China Sea - a Y-9 or Y-20 could land with the fleet's supplies+cargo+parts, then a tilt rotor comes to pick it up and deliver it out at sea.

Atomicfrog said:
a lot harder on maintenance too...
Click to expand...
Gotta pay the price to get the benefit... and as it currently stands the Osprey has more range, speed, and capacity than any conventional rotor aircraft. The potential mission sets it could serve as well from ASW and EW (perhaps even AEW), search and rescue, humanitarian relief, logistical resupplying, inserting troops and heavy equipment... I'd say it'd be worthy of the investment, that's why the DoD bought in big time with the tilt rotor program. A certain level of economies of scale might also apply servicing a common airframe that execute different missions, versus servicing multiple different airframes that execute different missions.
 
Last edited:
A

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
crash8pilot said:
I'm thinking the PLAN doesn't even have a Greyhound. Tilt rotors could also land on destroyers as well, whereas the Greyhound can't.


Perks of securing/building ports with allied countries in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Djibouti - they'll help with our logistical supply runs, we just need the right airframe to reach them, especially if we found ourselves further out at sea which a blue water navy is supposed to do... Might also explain why we're building islands in the South China Sea - a Y-9 or Y-20 could land with the fleet's supplies+cargo+parts, then a tilt rotor comes to pick it up and deliver it out at sea.


Gotta pay the price to get the benefit... and as it currently stands the Osprey has more range, speed, and capacity than any conventional rotor aircraft. The potential mission sets it could serve as well from ASW and EW (perhaps even AEW), search and rescue, humanitarian relief, logistical resupplying, inserting troops and heavy equipment... I'd say it'd be worthy of the investment, that's why the DoD bought in big time with the tilt rotor program. A certain level of economies of scale might also apply servicing a common airframe that execute different missions, versus servicing multiple different airframes that execute different missions.
Click to expand...
Well if more than 40% of your fleet cannot fly because of maintenance... you forget capacity.
 
crash8pilot

crash8pilot

Junior Member
Registered Member
Atomicfrog said:
Well if more than 40% of your fleet cannot fly because of maintenance... you forget capacity.
Click to expand...
You’re basing this off the US’s history and track record of the Osprey. Even with that said, the Osprey program seems to have ironed out its kinks, with its readiness plans altered and maintenance streamlined. Despite the setbacks, DoD is still buying in big on the program because it is that much of a game changer on the battlefield. America sets the bar, and as part of the PLA’s modernization plans I think it might be worth looking into why DoD values the Osprey so much... Especially when we have our sights set on becoming a true blue water navy.

Bringing this back to the Sino side of things - I’m not saying Chinese ingenuity will do a better job than the good folks at Boeing and Bell, I’m saying we haven’t even tried. Perhaps what we come up with might be more efficient and cost effective than the Osprey? We’ve done a good job with the J-20 as China’s answer to the F-22 (the Mighty Dragon certainly costs less than the Raptor), I can’t see why we can’t do the same with tilt rotors.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top