In the 1930's a few aircraft carriers were built that tried to save the time and effort of getting aircraft topside by launching them from the hangar deck. This was before the angled deck was invented so it seemed a good way to launch and recover aircraft at the same time. The first problem was that the air flow in that region was too disturbed. The second that under heavy weather the hangar could be filled with water which would have been awkward in many respects. Using it for jet aircraft would give even more trouble.
Ask anything Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Lethe
Captain
I have been wondering about the potential utility of light ASW Helicopter Carriers for China going forward.
In the long-term, ASW will have to become a top priority for the Chinese Navy in order to ensure continued access to SCS in the face of possible blockade attempts by nations operating large numbers of advanced submarines.
The first question is whether a dedicated ASW platform in the vein of the Japanese Hyuga/Izumo types, or the Soviet Moskva type, makes sense in this environment, or whether their tasks can be performed almost as well from aircraft carrier and LHD platforms, plus traditional escorts. Or could we see something in between, such as an 055-type hull with extended aviation facilities, akin to the Spruance-derived concepts that the US looked at?
The second question, if a dedicated carrier-type like the Japanese Hyuga/Izumo designs is seen as the way forward, how far do you go with such a design? For example, you could add a single EM cat and arrestor gear to facilitate the operation of UAVs themselves operating in a surveillance/ASW role. And if you go that far, you could size the vessel such that it could serve as an emergency "second deck" for carrier-based aircraft, e.g. able to recover e.g. a J-15 with no payload, and preferably to launch it again with 50% fuel and no payload. You would have a whole range of options ranging from a Hyuga-type vessel to a 40,000 ton light carrier.
In the long-term, ASW will have to become a top priority for the Chinese Navy in order to ensure continued access to SCS in the face of possible blockade attempts by nations operating large numbers of advanced submarines.
The first question is whether a dedicated ASW platform in the vein of the Japanese Hyuga/Izumo types, or the Soviet Moskva type, makes sense in this environment, or whether their tasks can be performed almost as well from aircraft carrier and LHD platforms, plus traditional escorts. Or could we see something in between, such as an 055-type hull with extended aviation facilities, akin to the Spruance-derived concepts that the US looked at?
The second question, if a dedicated carrier-type like the Japanese Hyuga/Izumo designs is seen as the way forward, how far do you go with such a design? For example, you could add a single EM cat and arrestor gear to facilitate the operation of UAVs themselves operating in a surveillance/ASW role. And if you go that far, you could size the vessel such that it could serve as an emergency "second deck" for carrier-based aircraft, e.g. able to recover e.g. a J-15 with no payload, and preferably to launch it again with 50% fuel and no payload. You would have a whole range of options ranging from a Hyuga-type vessel to a 40,000 ton light carrier.
I don't see why a Type 075 could not be repurposed for an ASW mission by merely adjusting its helicopter complement and swapping some crew. Maybe its ACVs could even string a TAS line off their rear loading ramps into the water.
Adding arrestor gear as a backup on a hypothetical ASW carrier not meant to normally operate conventional takeoff fighters would almost certainly be a waste of both money and space. And for safety reasons you can't just have one wire, you would need the full 3 or 4 wires and all of the associated underdeck machinery and the operating/maintenance crew. Not to mention there is danger to the flight deck crew by the mere presence of the wires. You also couldn't use this area of the deck for anything else. And since there is no angled deck, if you do decide to land a J-15 on this hypothetical ship, most of the flight deck has to be cleared of people, vehicles, and helicopters along the entire length of the ship in case the J-15 misses the wires and has to take off for another attempt. All for something that would probably never be used. I think preparations should be made to accommodate a STOVL fighter like applying heat-resistant paints to the flight deck of the Type 075 (or a dedicated ASW carrier), but there is no good reason to plan for a potential STOBAR/CATOBAR fighter landing.
Adding arrestor gear as a backup on a hypothetical ASW carrier not meant to normally operate conventional takeoff fighters would almost certainly be a waste of both money and space. And for safety reasons you can't just have one wire, you would need the full 3 or 4 wires and all of the associated underdeck machinery and the operating/maintenance crew. Not to mention there is danger to the flight deck crew by the mere presence of the wires. You also couldn't use this area of the deck for anything else. And since there is no angled deck, if you do decide to land a J-15 on this hypothetical ship, most of the flight deck has to be cleared of people, vehicles, and helicopters along the entire length of the ship in case the J-15 misses the wires and has to take off for another attempt. All for something that would probably never be used. I think preparations should be made to accommodate a STOVL fighter like applying heat-resistant paints to the flight deck of the Type 075 (or a dedicated ASW carrier), but there is no good reason to plan for a potential STOBAR/CATOBAR fighter landing.
To receive guests?
I didn't think of that, but certainly it's a possibility. I was actually thinking of China's indigenous STOVL fighter project.
I do not see a reason to believe that project exists.I didn't think of that, but certainly it's a possibility. I was actually thinking of China's indigenous STOVL fighter project.
We shall see.I do not see a reason to believe that project exists.
I've proposed the idea that that structure is a mock up exclusive only structure that will not be present on the real ship, due to a number of my own suspicions but mostly based on the presence of white paint on the aft mast and the mock up's underlying foundation, where I think the white paint is meant to be indicative of structures on the mockup which are not fully representative of the real thing. My idea is that part of the amidships deck will be fully smooth without the step-structure.
Many others believe that the step-structure (and the rest of the white paint structures) will be on the real ship, and the structure has been suggested as a platform for antennae or satcom domes, or any number of other plausible uses that one can imagine.
We'll know what the ship's really like in a few months I suspect.
This is my thought also. Seems unneccessary to have such a structure.
They can put most of those on other parts of the ship don't you agree?