Type 076 LHD/LHA discussion
- Thread starter banjex
- Start date
Basically he says that a VTOL aircraft does not need runways or catapults, and you can park it anywhere with a hard surface.
In that case probably Taiwan might need it more than China.
Though one of the main thing I don't like VTOL jets is that their performance is always a big drop compared to what you can do with a conventional flying jet design.
I love how they are building the ship and it's escorts at the same time in the same dock.High-resolution versions.
Based on the latest available photo of the 076 LHD, @horobeyo on Twitter has suggested that contrary to the currently widely-held view, the 076 LHD could be equipped with two EMCATs of different length - One long (port-side) and one short (starboard-side).
Roughly translated:
In the meantime, he also warned against the suggestion of normalizing the prospects of turning the 076 LHD into a lighting carrier:
Roughly translated:
Besides, Yankee & Co. (here's all three of Yankee, Shilao and Ayi) have also discussed and echoed similar ideas and prospects (having manned warplanes onboard the 076 LHD as backup, plus being able to act in concert with the proper CVs) in a recent 观察者军工组 podcast. Though, they did not mention anything about the length of EMCATs on the 076.
Link to said segment of podcast (on Bilibili):
Needless to say, these inferences directly clashed with @伏尔戈星图's inferences on Weibo (namely, two short EMCATs of equal length (max 40 meters) on the 076 LHD).
Hence, I think we need to wait for at least a couple more months before we can know whether @伏尔戈星图's or @horobeyo's (and the Yankee & Co.'s) inference is the valid and accurate one. In the meantime, I would suggest against any further escalatory speculations on the matter until evidences that we're looking for have become clearer.
Roughly translated:
In the meantime, he also warned against the suggestion of normalizing the prospects of turning the 076 LHD into a lighting carrier:
Roughly translated:
Besides, Yankee & Co. (here's all three of Yankee, Shilao and Ayi) have also discussed and echoed similar ideas and prospects (having manned warplanes onboard the 076 LHD as backup, plus being able to act in concert with the proper CVs) in a recent 观察者军工组 podcast. Though, they did not mention anything about the length of EMCATs on the 076.
Link to said segment of podcast (on Bilibili):
Needless to say, these inferences directly clashed with @伏尔戈星图's inferences on Weibo (namely, two short EMCATs of equal length (max 40 meters) on the 076 LHD).
Hence, I think we need to wait for at least a couple more months before we can know whether @伏尔戈星图's or @horobeyo's (and the Yankee & Co.'s) inference is the valid and accurate one. In the meantime, I would suggest against any further escalatory speculations on the matter until evidences that we're looking for have become clearer.
Last edited:
Hm, if the basic design purpose of 076 is to operate large UCAVs, then an arresting system might be needed. At least if by large UCAVs we're talking about aircraft weighing several tons empty. Combat missions and not so much width would likely dictate fighter-jet like wingspans. Which would, in turn, dictate fairly high approach speeds. X-47B, for example, was tested doing a 145 knot approach speed.
Arresting wires become a necessity at such speeds. And an angled deck also becomes somewhat more desirable, if such a class of aircraft is used.
That's not to say that the ship will indeed have an angled deck. It's more like - just what sort of UAVs and UCAVs is this thing supposed to use? Are we to see some completely new UAVs, tailored to size for the 076? Not too big, not too small... But likely visibly smaller than GJ-11?
Arresting wires become a necessity at such speeds. And an angled deck also becomes somewhat more desirable, if such a class of aircraft is used.
That's not to say that the ship will indeed have an angled deck. It's more like - just what sort of UAVs and UCAVs is this thing supposed to use? Are we to see some completely new UAVs, tailored to size for the 076? Not too big, not too small... But likely visibly smaller than GJ-11?
Hard to imagine a flattop with catapults but no arresting wires.
China has neither VTOL nor STOVL warplanes, therefore having an arresting gear system onboard the 076 LHD is an absolute certainty. I don't think there's any doubt about that.
Navalized variants of GJ-11, CH-6 and WL-2 are good candidates, as per @伏尔戈星图's past findings.
Last edited:
Sure, an arresting gear system is likely. But for it to be truly efficient, an angled deck is also required. I'd put the chances of an angled deck a bit over 50% at this point, but I won't be surprised if we end up seeing a straight deck in the end.
I guess there's still some possibility we'll see a Mojave-like drone, perhaps a bit more compact one. That one is credited with a minimum landing speed of just 45 knots. Which would allow for very short landing runs on a carrier ship moving at some 20+ knots. Theoretically even without an arresting system.
Then again, a Mojave like drone doesn't seem to be useful in a peer opponent fight...
I guess there's still some possibility we'll see a Mojave-like drone, perhaps a bit more compact one. That one is credited with a minimum landing speed of just 45 knots. Which would allow for very short landing runs on a carrier ship moving at some 20+ knots. Theoretically even without an arresting system.
Then again, a Mojave like drone doesn't seem to be useful in a peer opponent fight...
I am going to play the contrarian here. Depending on what they plan to operate and their envisioned tempo, they might not need an angled deck. If most of the launches and recoveries will be helos and high-endurance MALE-type drones, an angled deck might be of low significance.
Also adding on the fact where MALE/HALE-type UCAVs are expected to occupy greater portion of the overall fleet of warplanes deployed onboard the 076 LHD, when compared to proper CVs.
While manned warplanes (J-15, J-35, KJ-600) and larger, jet-powered UCAVs (GJ-11) often have endurance measured in single-digit hours, MALE/HALE-type UCAVs more often than not are able to stay in the air for 10+, if not 20+ hours. This means that they have comparably much less need to conduct landing-refuel-rearm-launch operations that are as frequent as their manned and larger, jet-powered unmanned counterparts.
Hence, the requirement for an angled deck on the LHD isn't exactly acute.
Furthermore, unlike actual proper CVs - The LHDs are typically cheaper and easier to build and operate, given how they are meant to be used more as a transport platform rather than a combat platform. Therefore, keeping the flight deck straight instead of angled would be more optimal for keeping in line with the characteristics underlined above.
Last edited: