Type 076 LHD/LHA discussion

Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
I was going to ask the same questions. That deck layout is weird.

1- Angled deck is absolutely essential for safety if non-vertical landing aircraft are involved.
2- Similarly those elevator positions are horrendous. Hangar, especially on a LHD, doesn't extend below catapults or through most of the ship's length. Even CVs aren't like that. You don't need elevators that large either. The aft elevator would be unusable during landings and the front elevator would be unusable during take-offs. If you are handling non-vertical landing aircraft putting a large elevator to the stern is a bad idea.

The only credible thing here is the existence of two catapults. A single catapult design would need perfect reliability which is always a bad assumption to make.
The ship looks like WW2 carriers with this layout.

Look at how the Essex and Midway classes evolved through numerous modernizations.
View attachment 112169

View attachment 112168
Click to expand...

ACuriousPLAFan said:
Yes, it is indeed undesirable (and rightfully so).

However, consider this for the sake of comparison:
1. The width of the front end of the flight deck of Nimitz CVNs is only 24 meters at most, and
2. The separation between the two bow catapults at their midpoints on Nimitz CVNs is only around 18 meters.

If @伏尔戈星图's findings is anywhere close to the real stats, the width of the flight deck of the 076 LHD (including the bow end) is 45 meters. In other words, you can fit nearly 2 Nimitz's bows into it.

Therefore, assuming that the two bow catapults on the 076 is spaced wide enough, then technically speaking, fitting a deck elevator in between the two catapults is actually more than possible. The hangar deck in the bow section should also have enough space for planes and helicopters to park inside, even with the catapult machineries occupying the spaces on both sides of the hangar deck in the bow section.

For reference, CV-41 Midway after the SCB-110 upgrade:
View attachment 112185

Still, I believe it is much better if the deck elevator can be located at the port side edge, instead of right in between the bow catapults as per your explanation.
Click to expand...

I'd like to remind people that we do not credibly know what the actual configuration of the 076's flight deck will be, so there's no reason to discuss the CGIs in much detail.

"The deck layout is weird" is technically correct, but instead it should be "the deck layout should be actively ignored" because the above indicators aren't credible enough to warrant this level of discussion.



Seriously, guys think about the fact that this forum is browsed by other people who don't know much about this topic and the cycle of tracking rumours and developments of new projects. They might walk away from reading the last few pages and think that the configuration depicted in the CGIs and in the drawings are confirmed or likely, whereas in reality they don't mean much.
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
Blitzo said:
I'd like to remind people that we do not credibly know what the actual configuration of the 076's flight deck will be, so there's no reason to discuss the CGIs in much detail.

"The deck layout is weird" is technically correct, but instead it should be "the deck layout should be actively ignored" because the above indicators aren't credible enough to warrant this level of discussion.



Seriously, guys think about the fact that this forum is browsed by other people who don't know much about this topic and the cycle of tracking rumours and developments of new projects. They might walk away from reading the last few pages and think that the configuration depicted in the CGIs and in the drawings are confirmed or likely, whereas in reality they don't mean much.
Click to expand...
Understood. Note added.
 
by78

by78

General
This might be related to the rumored 076.

A procurement document for a "hangar door used to protect UAVs from the elements such as salt water and wind". The document calls for equipment manufacturers to register their interest and submit their qualifications for review. Specific requirements for the door will be provided only after passing the review. The description could be interpreted to imply that the hangar is a dedicated UAV hangar.

用于保护机库内的无人机不受海浪、海风的侵蚀。具体技木要求资格检查通过后提供...
Click to expand...



52921449759_8673dc2a3e_h.jpg
52921742245_a35266e881_o.jpg
 
by78

by78

General
(Continued from above...)

Two more procurement documents.

The first document is for light-weight composite armor covering a surface area of approximately 1955 square meters at a price no higher than RMB 31.0845 million. The second document is for flight deck mooring system for helicopters.

52921449794_27e01fb3c5_h.jpg

52921672830_7081fc3654_h.jpg
 
Helius

Helius

Senior Member
Registered Member
daifo said:
Don't remember seeing this version of "fan art" with angle deck posted here yet

View attachment 113384
Click to expand...
--->
ACuriousPLAFan said:
CGI-generated new illustrations of another possible configuration for the upcoming 076 LHD, this time with an angled deck instead of a straight deck found on all LHDs so far. Posted by @小西造车 on Weibo, which is also the same guy as @西葛西造舰 on Youtube.

View attachment 107039
View attachment 107040
View attachment 107041
View attachment 107042
Click to expand...

IMO that's not a very "realistic" design. It's basically a 075 hull form with added catapult and landing strip, but both elements are simply way too short to launch and land aircraft respectively, esp. for manned fixed-wing like the J-35.

191652-68a3c8be29b3e729804697f9ccfcd09d.jpg
FV0tvOMUsAEk6d2.jpg

That artist had since revised his design to a more plausible rendition which reflected more on the actual scale of a catapult + angled deck configuration and by slapping them onto an LHD hull form (which the 075 is wholly inadequate to accommodate to begin with), what it might potentially entail in terms of size just to make it at least look functional, which would be a major step up to say the least, and it wouldn't look anything like an LHD but more like an actual CV (as would be the case) -

ACuriousPLAFan said:
Well, from the same @小西造车 on Weibo/@西葛西造舰 on Youtube guy, here's another version of the 076, but this time with 2 EMALS catapults instead of one:

View attachment 107163
View attachment 107164
View attachment 107165
View attachment 107166

But this time, he made the 076 into a pure medium/UCAV carrier with no well deck... :(

It would be better to combine his 1st and 2nd designs into one, if we can go into the 50-55 thousand-ton displacement range with the 076. Also, 076 is still an LHD, not a CV afterall.

To put it simply: Angled deck (with the front end of landing deck well-clear of the fore deck, please) + 2x EMALS + arresting gear + 2 deck-side elevators + well deck + normal propeller shafts + smaller island.
Click to expand...
 
by78

by78

General
Too many fan made CGs are being shared lately. They are usually frowned up here because, in majority of cases, they aren't worth the time and the effort to critique them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H2O
Helius

Helius

Senior Member
Registered Member
by78 said:
Too many fan made CGs are being shared lately. They are usually frowned up here because, in majority of cases, they aren't worth the time and the effort to critique them.
Click to expand...
Well speaking for myself, it's less about critiquing any particular CG per se but more about using it as an example to illustrate what is and isn't plausible with a prospective catapult and angled deck equipped Type 076 in the face of lack of physical or photographic information which may give us any hint as to what the ship may potentially look like, hence my inclusion of actual photographs to illustrate my point as opposed to "sharing fan made CGs".

So until such information becomes available, CG or no, any discussion is inherently speculative.
 
A

Andy1974

Senior Member
Registered Member
Is there any hints that 076 is to carry manned fighters? As far as I read, this is a drone carrier and the catapult won’t be able to launch something as heavy as a J-35.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top