You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Type 076 LHD/LHA discussion
- Thread starter banjex
- Start date
hope for JL-10/L-15 Falcon Supersonic Training And Light Attack Aircraft
Why? There are no currently plans for the 076 LHD to operate manned fighters (J-15s and J-35s), only UAVs and UCAVs. That means no need for carrier-variant of the JL-10 to be fielded by the LHD.
Why? There are no currently plans for the 076 LHD to operate manned fighters (J-15s and J-35s), only UAVs and UCAVs. That means no need for carrier-variant of the JL-10 to be fielded by the LHD.
If we see an angled deck, I would not discount manned fighters (especially the J-35.)
Lightweight EM catapult plus convention carrier fighter on LHD/As might explain why China had seemingly not bothered with a VTOL project even as the F-35B is proliferating around China not only on US LHAs but those new lightweight carriers from Japan and Korea as well.
If we see an angled deck, I would not discount manned fighters (especially the J-35.)
Lightweight EM catapult plus convention carrier fighter on LHD/As might explain why China had seemingly not bothered with a VTOL project even as the F-35B is proliferating around China not only on US LHAs but those new lightweight carriers from Japan and Korea as well.
That catapult on 076 LHD is becoming a necessity for China.
If we see an angled deck, I would not discount manned fighters (especially the J-35.)
If the information available so far is accurate, the catapults slated for the 076 LHD are expected to be only 40 meters long at most. In fact, those catapults could be the shortest ever designed and made, up to this point.
In the meantime, the Rafale-M of the French Navy, with an MTOW of ~24.5 tons, requires a 75 meter-long C-13-3 catapult to be launched from the Charles de Gaulle - And that's with a higher G-force (4-5 G's) compared to the F/A-18s and F-35Cs when being launched from American CATOBAR supercarriers with longer catapults (C-13-1/2 at 93/94 meters long with 3-4 G's).
Imagine how much the acceleration is required (and thus, the resulting G-force) to push the J-35 (which has an MTOW in the high-20s of tons, if not in the low 30s of tons) into takeoff speed using a much shorter catapult.
Lightweight EM catapult plus convention carrier fighter on LHD/As might explain why China had seemingly not bothered with a VTOL project even as the F-35B is proliferating around China not only on US LHAs but those new lightweight carriers from Japan and Korea as well.
Pop3 seems to indicate otherwise (though we may have to wait for quite a long time before we can see the results):
PLA Navy news, pics and videos
Prospects for the development of the PLA surface fleet by 2035 The naval forces should receive a fourth aircraft carrier Type 004 and Type 076 Nice CGI and all, but this should be posted in the Fanart, PS and CG Thread instead. There are several ships in this CG table that are fictional in...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
Last edited:
1. for training purposes in preparation for J-15 and other fighter aircraft (Relief and support of the large carriers)Why? ...
2. to relieve these fighter aircraft of ground combat tasks
If the information available so far is accurate, the catapults slated for the 076 LHD are expected to be only 40 meters long at most. In fact, those catapults could be the shortest ever designed and made, up to this point.
In the meantime, the Rafale-M of the French Navy, with an MTOW of ~24.5 tons, requires a 75 meter-long C-13-3 catapult to be launched from the Charles de Gaulle - And that's with a higher G-force (4-5 G's) compared to the F/A-18s and F-35Cs when being launched from American CATOBAR supercarriers with longer catapults (C-13-1/2 at 93/94 meters long with 3-4 G's).
Imagine how much the acceleration is required (and thus, the resulting G-force) to push the J-35 (which has an MTOW in the high-20s of tons, if not in the low 30s of tons) into takeoff speed using a much shorter catapult.
Pop3 seems to indicate otherwise (though we may have to wait for quite a long time before we can see the results):
PLA Navy news, pics and videos
Prospects for the development of the PLA surface fleet by 2035 The naval forces should receive a fourth aircraft carrier Type 004 and Type 076 Nice CGI and all, but this should be posted in the Fanart, PS and CG Thread instead. There are several ships in this CG table that are fictional in...www.sinodefenceforum.com
Good post. We'll need to wait and see. Without an angled deck then the manned aircraft speculation is moot.
If there is an angled deck then there exists the possibility of manned fighters including the J-35. Size of the J-15 leaves that low on possibility.
So then we can speculate more on the J-35 scenario. The catapult could be longer. The J-35 could be lighter then we thought. Or work with reduced load (I see J-35 from LHD/A as CAP or interception not strike) of ordnance and fuel as SOP.
Conversely, we could go all drone for fixed-wing AC and have an UCAV to replace the possible J-35 role.
Good post. We'll need to wait and see. Without an angled deck then the manned aircraft speculation is moot.
If there is an angled deck then there exists the possibility of manned fighters including the J-35. Size of the J-15 leaves that low on possibility.
So then we can speculate more on the J-35 scenario. The catapult could be longer. The J-35 could be lighter then we thought. Or work with reduced load (I see J-35 from LHD/A as CAP or interception not strike) of ordnance and fuel as SOP.
Conversely, we could go all drone for fixed-wing AC and have an UCAV to replace the possible J-35 role.
Right, I also do not see any type of fixed wing manned platform being likely.
But if anything manned does make it onto 076, it would likely have the sole role of flying CAP, making the ship and the task force a group for sea control purposes, rather than strike. In that case, the fuel (only really a couple hundred KM range is required in the most common cases for sea control), and the weapons load (just AA missiles), should be much lighter than the full load of something like Rafale on the Charles de Gaulle. Still unlikely, but should be possible.
If the information available so far is accurate, the catapults slated for the 076 LHD are expected to be only 40 meters long at most. In fact, those catapults could be the shortest ever designed and made, up to this point.
In the meantime, the Rafale-M of the French Navy, with an MTOW of ~24.5 tons, requires a 75 meter-long C-13-3 catapult to be launched from the Charles de Gaulle - And that's with a higher G-force (4-5 G's) compared to the F/A-18s and F-35Cs when being launched from American CATOBAR supercarriers with longer catapults (C-13-1/2 at 93/94 meters long with 3-4 G's).
Imagine how much the acceleration is required (and thus, the resulting G-force) to push the J-35 (which has an MTOW in the high-20s of tons, if not in the low 30s of tons) into takeoff speed using a much shorter catapult.
Slight quibble here. The length of catapult required is more a function of the minimum take off speed of the platform being launched.
If 4G is your max sustained acceleration you're capable of taking on the launched aircraft, then a 40m cat will accelerate any platform up to about 200kmph within that 40m distance . Meaning any aircraft with a takeoff speed <200kmph (not taking into account headwind) can be launched on a 40m cat if it can handle 4G sustained acceleration. (4G over 80m works out to about 290kmph which roughly tallies with what we know for the F-18)
Mass only comes into the picture when you talk about the power capability of said catapult. What is the max weight the catapult can accelerate at 4G? If the catapult is underpowered (compared to the aircraft being slung), then you will need lower acceleration and longer cat length. If power is not a problem, then any take off weight can be launched at 4G over 40m (reaching a end speed of <200kmph).
1. for training purposes in preparation for J-15 and other fighter aircraft (Relief and support of the large carriers)
Training will be conducted onboard the larger CVs, apart from land-based training.
Once Fujian enters service with the PLAN, China will have 3 CVs, which should mean that at least one CV will be available at any time. Until China embarks on a massive CV-building spree (i.e. Jiangnan and Dalian building 2 CVs each simultaneously or something), one CV is going to be sufficient for carrier-based trainings.
Besides, nobody conducts carrier-based trainings on JL-10Js throughout the year - Only certain times of the year, which is based on the training plans formulated by the PLANNAU, batch-by-batch.
Furthermore, carrier-based trainings involve not just takeoffs and landings, but also (and equally as important) deck operations. Given how LHDs (including the 076) have vastly different deck layouts and arrangements than CVs, I highly doubt the effectiveness of such training arrangements.
2. to relieve these fighter aircraft of ground combat tasks
The tasks of ground attack against enemy shore positions will be conducted by UCAVs (likely to be WL-2, CH-6 and GJ-11) based onboard the LHD.
Good post. We'll need to wait and see. Without an angled deck then the manned aircraft speculation is moot.
If there is an angled deck then there exists the possibility of manned fighters including the J-35. Size of the J-15 leaves that low on possibility.
So then we can speculate more on the J-35 scenario. The catapult could be longer. The J-35 could be lighter then we thought. Or work with reduced load (I see J-35 from LHD/A as CAP or interception not strike) of ordnance and fuel as SOP.
Conversely, we could go all drone for fixed-wing AC and have an UCAV to replace the possible J-35 role.
Based on the current observation, angled deck on the 076 LHD looks to be rather unlikely.
In the meantime, the J-35 is essentially a twin-engine medium-weight 5th-gen carrier-based fighter. If measures have to be taken by reducing the payload and fuel capacities just so that the J-35 can be launched using the shorter catapults on the 076 LHDs - The weight savings will very likely come at huge costs to the required performance of the J-35, such that the PLAN might as well resort to using UCAVs for executing the same missions.
Besides, the PLAN LHDs are only expected to operate mostly within 1000 kilometers of the home shores, as China is not expected to conduct amphibious assault operations anywhere beyond the 1IC for the foreseeable future. That also means any amphibious assault operations conducted by the PLAN can be supported and covered under the readily-available umbrella of the PLAAF and PLANAF warplanes from land bases on the homeland, hence the need for PLAN LHDs to field fighters for interception will be less pronounced than their USMC counterparts.