SinoDefence Forum

Chinese Defense & Military Community

Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos

This is a discussion on Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos within the Navy forums, part of the China Defense & Military category; There was a couple of remarks about the scrapping of Varjak, even from me, but i think nobody claim this ...

Go Back   China Defence Today Forum > China Defense & Military > Navy

China Defence Today Forum


Navy Forum for China navy, chinese naval forces, PLAN weapons, ships, submarines and news

DefenceTalk Military Pictures






Reply
LinkBack (4) Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-02-2009   #1141
Junior Member
 
zaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sighetu Marmatiei, Transylvania
Posts: 575
zaky is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

There was a couple of remarks about the scrapping of Varjak, even from me, but i think nobody claim this seriously.
zaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2009   #1142
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 669
Sczepan is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi Wan Russell View Post
...

.... The pictures of the partially dismantled island show it ws pretty much a hollow shell anyway, not fitted out so it's just steel they have removed. It was easier to remove it in one large lump given the dock cranes as well, hence the intact top of the island on the quayside. I expect that piece to be broken up for scrap at some point.
...
mostly I agree, but I can't follwo you at this point.
There was a lot of time in the past, to cut this piece in small portions and scrap it. There was no need for safing scrap with this red primer. I'am pretty sure, they will replace this part sometimes in the future, within the next weeks. May be they added a secound bridge bevor ....
Sczepan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2009   #1143
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 245
joshuatree is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Head View Post
Every indication (including several of the pictures) is that the PLAN does not intend to use those large SSMs and has in fact closed them off. Whether or not they have removed the tubes and made space available below decks is yet to be seen...but given the amount of time they have had her in the yards, and if they in fact will not use those missile tubes, then I cannot imagine them letting that space go to waste.
I agree with this. Real estate is a precious commodity on a ship so just welding shut the tubes and leaving them makes no sense. If they are going through the hassle of even redesigning the bridge, removing the tubes is not that much more work in the grand scheme of things.
joshuatree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2009   #1144
Junior Member
 
Vlad Plasmius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 500
Vlad Plasmius is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

What about the SAM version of PL-12? They're supposedly developing a VLS system for it which would give a Chinese carrier an ESSM-type weapon only with fire-and-forget capability and probably a longer range.

That and the TY-90-equipped FL-3000N would leave a Chinese carrier with air defense capabilities comparable to a modern American carrier.
Vlad Plasmius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2009   #1145
Super Moderator
 
tphuang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,093
tphuang is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad Plasmius View Post
What about the SAM version of PL-12? They're supposedly developing a VLS system for it which would give a Chinese carrier an ESSM-type weapon only with fire-and-forget capability and probably a longer range.

That and the TY-90-equipped FL-3000N would leave a Chinese carrier with air defense capabilities comparable to a modern American carrier.
it looks like China is going with gun-based CIWS for the near future. There doesn't appear to be any plan for SAM version of PL-12.
tphuang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2009   #1146
Banned Idiot
 
Wolverine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 142
Wolverine is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by plawolf View Post
A carrier operating without decent escorts is a dead carrier in times of war.

HHQ9s are a long range missile, and if the carrier has to engage targets that far out with its own missiles, then the escorts are either seriously deficient or have seriously screwed up.

The soviets toyed with the carrier-cum-battlecruiser configuration and it was not particularly successful, and they themselves moved away towards full fledged conventional carriers.

It would make no sense for the PLAN to not heed the lessons of the past, especially considering the Varyag is not a particularly large carrier, and so does not have the luxury of space to waste. Even USN supercarriers are designed to use every last cubic metre of space as efficiently as possible and adding massive long range SAMs that require an even more massive radar system to use to its full capability is far from the optimum use of space for a carrier.

Even HQ16s would probably be excessive and wasteful, but would be a more likely possibility, especially if work is being done with quad packing since the only things a carrier should ever have to deal with might be the odd AShM that gets past the escorts. Everything beyond that is best left to the CAP and escorts.
Who said anything about operating without escorts? Battlecruiser carriers carry gigantic antiship missiles as part of their role/mission, of which the PLAN has none, and to which I did not refer. And you overstate the space and weight limitations of the Varyag. We are talking about using those mini-islands on the sides of the carrier which can easily be decked out with VLS modules and CIWS at the same time without sacrificing any space that aircraft would need to use. And several dozen tons worth of missiles in a ship which weighs in at over 60,000 tons is essentially a non-issue. The only reason Nimitz carriers don't have weapons like the VL ESSM is that they weren't designed with them in mind. The Gerald Ford carriers will all be carrying Mk 41 launchers loaded with these weapons in addition to RAM or SeaRAM. Even if not HQ-9's, one can definitely make a strong case for medium-range SAM's that are, as I said, capable antimissile missiles. And even HQ-9's, if they are good at sniping antiship missiles at long range, provides the PLAN an additional margin of safety in a battle group that would not even come close to the long-range air defense power of a USN carrier escort force armed with hundreds of SM-2MR/ER's.
Wolverine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2009   #1147
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 22
zoolander is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

any large VLS SAM is ridiculous. first off, it isn't needed nor practical. it would probably require pretty big redesign of the hull. it would take alot of space. the missile isn't just the opening on the deck but also the 20 or so deck room it occupies under the hull. and lastly. even if it is cold lauched, there is still a potential it would damage the planes on deck.

a more practical suggestion might be hq-7 with the CIWS
zoolander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2009   #1148
Banned Idiot
 
Wolverine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 142
Wolverine is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoolander View Post
any large VLS SAM is ridiculous. first off, it isn't needed nor practical. it would probably require pretty big redesign of the hull. it would take alot of space. the missile isn't just the opening on the deck but also the 20 or so deck room it occupies under the hull. and lastly. even if it is cold lauched, there is still a potential it would damage the planes on deck.

a more practical suggestion might be hq-7 with the CIWS
You don't know what you're talking about. A long range SAM would require NO redesign of the hull because they would be located along the periphery of the ship in VLS banks. And wherever did you get a number of "20 deck rooms"? Did you just randomly come up with that number? Did you even look at the pictures or understand where these missiles would be placed? Vertically launched missiles in the location they would most likely be have little to zero chance of damaging planes. The only effects they would have is the exhaust drifting over the flight deck and being inhaled by the deck crews, but that is of minor import compared to a potential explosion inside the carrier because a SAM failed to intercept an ASCM.
Wolverine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009   #1149
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Near a military installation
Posts: 352
Ambivalent is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine View Post
You don't know what you're talking about. A long range SAM would require NO redesign of the hull because they would be located along the periphery of the ship in VLS banks. And wherever did you get a number of "20 deck rooms"? Did you just randomly come up with that number? Did you even look at the pictures or understand where these missiles would be placed? Vertically launched missiles in the location they would most likely be have little to zero chance of damaging planes. The only effects they would have is the exhaust drifting over the flight deck and being inhaled by the deck crews, but that is of minor import compared to a potential explosion inside the carrier because a SAM failed to intercept an ASCM.
The trade off from the USN point of view has been to put area defense systems on escort ships and put point defense weapons on carriers. The Terrier missiles on Enterprise and the Kitty Hawks were all unshipped and replaced by Sea Sparrow and CIWS rather than be upgraded to Standard.
It's pretty simple. Anything that takes much space and weight away from flying aircraft is not carried on the CV. Missile systems like Aegis or S-300 are heavy and consume much space. Locating fire control radars on a carrier is a problem. There isn't enough room on already crowded superstructures to place these there, so they end up on the periphery of the ship, where their arcs of movement are severely restricted. Anything above the flight deck surface will get toasted by hot jet blastes. They would also be too close to personnel, creating a radiation hazard for the flight deck crew. Additionally, there is a large problem with EMI on the deck of a carrier. USN aircraft carry an awful lot of EMI shielding not found on USAF aircraft because the concentration of radars on naval vessels makes this necessary. They could be located on pylons above the flight deck, but that requires a sacrifice of precious flight deck space. Ain't happening.
I think you greatly underestimate the space, weight and stability affects of something like S-300 or Standard. A Standard SM-2 in its container/launcher is two and a half decks high. With the exhaust baffles one needs three decks. Consider the flight deck overhangs. The launch tubes would have to be outboard the flight deck edge on sponsons ( the big gun sponsons on the Forrestals were removed forward because they were a problem in heavy weather ), and this does indeed create a severe hazard for the flight deck from the blast and FOD as the missile rose above flight deck level, even if the carrier VLS vented exhaust down and out of the ship rather than up as in a destroyer or cruiser installation. There is no way the USN would give up valuable flight deck space to provide clearance for a VLS installation. There isn't enough room up there as it is. There never is actually. With high quality escorts there is no good reason to give up any flying capability on the carrier to carry area defense weapons. No extra combat capability for the strike group is gained.
Ambivalent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009   #1150
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Near a military installation
Posts: 352
Ambivalent is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoolander View Post
any large VLS SAM is ridiculous. first off, it isn't needed nor practical. it would probably require pretty big redesign of the hull. it would take alot of space. the missile isn't just the opening on the deck but also the 20 or so deck room it occupies under the hull. and lastly. even if it is cold lauched, there is still a potential it would damage the planes on deck.

a more practical suggestion might be hq-7 with the CIWS
A smart navy puts the big area defence weapons on the escorts. The raison de etre of a carrier is to launch and recover aircraft, fuel them and arm them as quickly and safely as possible. Anything that detracts from that is deleted. A carrier needs point defense weapons andECM/ESM to deal with leakers, but in the organization of a CSG, the first layer of air defence are the carrier's aircraft. It makes zero sense to give up space for aircraft to carry a big area defense missile system with all of it's associated fire control radars and computer systems. Put that on the escorts and maximize the abilities of the sole ship in the CSG that carriers the aircraft to launch and recover aircraft and to support the maximum number of these.
What gets past the carrier's fighters is dealt with by layers of missiles, beginning with SM-2, and by deception jamming. The job of coordinating that defense is not even performed by anyone on the carrier. The officer with that responsibility is on a CG. What gets through SM-2 is then engaged by ESSM from the carrier and from the DDG's and CG's. The Hummer acts as the link that coordinates the efforts of the fighters and various ships by providing all units in the fight the overhead picture.
Ambivalent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009   #1151
Super Moderator
 
tphuang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,093
tphuang is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

pictures of Varyag and especially more up close pictures of the island from recently.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Varyag-Sep4.jpg (41.8 KB, 95 views)
File Type: jpg Varyag-Sep4-2.jpg (141.6 KB, 84 views)
File Type: jpg Varyag-Island-Sep4.jpg (35.5 KB, 76 views)
File Type: jpg Varyag-Island-Sep4-2.jpg (33.0 KB, 80 views)
File Type: jpg Varyag-Island-Sep4-3.jpg (32.0 KB, 92 views)
tphuang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009   #1152
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,413
Pointblank is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Hmm... they appear to be cutting away a section of the island to install something... the cut areas look too clean if they were just planning on scrapping. They've stopped the dismantling right above the bridge too... I say they've finished the dismantling, and I am guessing they will cover that area over and maybe install something, perhaps a radar or if they actually move towards a functional carrier, perhaps a CIWS.
Pointblank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009   #1153
Junior Member
 
Vlad Plasmius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 500
Vlad Plasmius is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by tphuang View Post
it looks like China is going with gun-based CIWS for the near future. There doesn't appear to be any plan for SAM version of PL-12.
Well, according to someone editing Wikipedia there is:

Quote:
Like the AIM-120 AMRAAM, PL-12 is also used as SAM, and tests have already successfully completed as the possible replacement of LY-60, but such system has not entered service because China has already been developing the vertical launched version. The vertical launching system is developed by the Luoyang Optronic Technological Development Center in Henan, and the system is called CCL, short for Concentric Cylindrical Launcher, which is similar to American Mk 48 VLS in appearance, but due to the very limited information publicized, it is difficult to tell if the Chinese VLS is a "cold launch" system or a "hot launch" system like that of American Mk 48 VLS.
There needs to be some form of medium-range air defense for the carrier and having an active-guided system would provide far greater advantages than using an existing semi-active system.
Vlad Plasmius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009   #1154
Banned Idiot
 
Wolverine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 142
Wolverine is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalent View Post
It's pretty simple. Anything that takes much space and weight away from flying aircraft is not carried on the CV. Missile systems like Aegis or S-300 are heavy and consume much space.
What's "much"? Who gets to define "much"? You? A single 8-round revolver for the S-300 weighs maybe 20 tons including the missiles. Even 24 of those revolvers weighs in at 480 tons. That's 0.74% of the total weight of a fully loaded 65,000 ton carrier. Yeah that's much. And space is a non-issue. Those outboard islands can soak up three decks for the big missiles no problem. There is no need to widen them to provide safety for the crews because this is already not being done either for the Kuznetsov or the Gerald R Ford carriers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalent View Post
Locating fire control radars on a carrier is a problem. There isn't enough room on already crowded superstructures to place these there, so they end up on the periphery of the ship, where their arcs of movement are severely restricted. Anything above the flight deck surface will get toasted by hot jet blastes. They would also be too close to personnel, creating a radiation hazard for the flight deck crew. Additionally, there is a large problem with EMI on the deck of a carrier. USN aircraft carry an awful lot of EMI shielding not found on USAF aircraft because the concentration of radars on naval vessels makes this necessary. They could be located on pylons above the flight deck, but that requires a sacrifice of precious flight deck space. Ain't happening.
Have you looked at the superstructures of the Varyag or the Kuznetsov, even when decked out with various radars? This is a total non-issue. You're thinking of the Nimitz carriers with their diminutive islands and trying to apply that thinking to the Varyag. Look at a photo of the Varyag's island and compare that to the Nimitz and then tell me there's no space for FCR's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalent View Post
I think you greatly underestimate the space, weight and stability affects of something like S-300 or Standard. A Standard SM-2 in its container/launcher is two and a half decks high. With the exhaust baffles one needs three decks. Consider the flight deck overhangs. The launch tubes would have to be outboard the flight deck edge on sponsons ( the big gun sponsons on the Forrestals were removed forward because they were a problem in heavy weather ), and this does indeed create a severe hazard for the flight deck from the blast and FOD as the missile rose above flight deck level, even if the carrier VLS vented exhaust down and out of the ship rather than up as in a destroyer or cruiser installation. There is no way the USN would give up valuable flight deck space to provide clearance for a VLS installation. There isn't enough room up there as it is. There never is actually. With high quality escorts there is no good reason to give up any flying capability on the carrier to carry area defense weapons. No extra combat capability for the strike group is gained.
Your statements fail even on initial inspection because the Admiral Kuznetsov has VLS in exactly the positions the CGI of the Varyag places them, and it's been operating for almost two decades. Sorry, all those words, but real life says different. And please don't tell me that Russians value the lives of their crew less. In addition, pictures routinely show the USN placing ESSM inside Mk 41's in those islands for the Gerald Ford class, in addition to RAM launchers. If it was truly as hazardous as you try to portray, this wouldn't be happening. Oh, and the Ford is going to be mounting some big radars on its small island (aka VSR/MFR), just like you said they wouldn't.

The CVN 21

Finally, you fail to appreciate the differences between the USN and the PLAN as well as the Russian Navy. The USN as I mentioned already has massive air defense firepower in its Tico and AB escorts, an asset which both the other navies lack as their air defense escorts are paltry by comparison. A carrier whose role includes adding to the long range air defense of the group is not an unthinkable idea in a fleet with poorer escorts. Your error is that you are trying to apply the mission and the assets of the USN to invalidate the potential roles that a PLAN carrier may have.
Wolverine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009   #1155
Banned Idiot
 
Wolverine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 142
Wolverine is on a distinguished road
Re: Latest Varyag Info and Photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad Plasmius View Post
Well, according to someone editing Wikipedia there is:



There needs to be some form of medium-range air defense for the carrier and having an active-guided system would provide far greater advantages than using an existing semi-active system.
"Concentric cylindrical launcher" suggests hot launch as the gases are vented out of the cell itself rather than diverted to an external common vent as in the Mk 41.
Wolverine is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


LinkBacks (?)

LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/latest-plan-aircraft-carrier-info-photos-4714.html

Posted By For Type Date
Red Dawn: China Invades America, Chinese Reactions – chinaSMACK This thread Refback 06-10-2010 09:58 PM
PLAN Carrier Updates. - Page 7 - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums This thread Refback 05-28-2010 10:02 AM
PLAN Carrier Updates. - Page 7 - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums This thread Refback 05-22-2010 04:10 AM
Red Dawn: China Invades America, Chinese Reactions | chinaSMACK This thread Refback 12-12-2009 11:44 AM

Similar Threads

Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New J-10 Thread III crobato Air Force 1322 3 Days Ago 08:29 AM
JH-7/JH-7A Thread MIGleader Air Force 620 3 Weeks Ago 01:16 AM
Chinese Aviation Industry FriedRiceNSpice Air Force 66 12-07-2009 07:43 AM
Aircraft Carriers bd popeye World Armed Forces 597 04-21-2007 10:10 AM
Latest Varyag Pics Jeff Head Navy 691 09-17-2006 04:43 PM


vBulletin Tweet Poster

  0 
   

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
SinoDefenceForum.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13