CV-16 Liaoning Thread II ...News, Views and operations

Discussion in 'Navy' started by Jeff Head, Aug 19, 2016.

  1. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    21,598
    Likes Received:
    26,822
    now noticed the tweet https://twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1143553592772530177
    East Pendulum
    @HenriKenhmann

    ·
    1h
    De plus en plus de sources parlent du porte-avions Liaoning et ses navires d'escorte qui s'étaient approchés de #Guam, et des chasseurs J-15 auraient décollé dans le coin. En attendant de confirmation formelle, le groupe aéronaval chinois a traversé le détroit de Taïwan le 25/06.
    Translated from French by
    More and more sources are talking about the Liaoning aircraft carrier and its escort ships that had approached #Guam , and J-15 fighters have taken off in the corner. Pending formal confirmation, the Chinese Carrier Group crossed the Taiwan Strait on 25/06.
    [​IMG]
    X
     
    Nill, Appix, jobjed and 2 others like this.
  2. Deino
    Offline

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,525
    Likes Received:
    23,880
    Allegedly a photo taken from late June this year, when the 'Liaoning' was at Sanya, Hainan Island.

    (Credit to 蓝鲨小队/@cjdby_net)

    PLN CV-16 Liaoning - 201906 June at Hainan part.JPG PLN CV-16 Liaoning - 201906 June at Hainan.jpg
     
  3. weig2000
    Offline

    weig2000 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2012
    Messages:
    669
    Likes Received:
    1,931
    After the US warships repeatedly pass nearby Chinese islands in SCS and Taiwan Strait, China is obviously responding in some way by sending Liaoning and its escorts beyond the first island chain and nearby Guam, and shooting six ASBMs into SCS.

    The US, of course, is doing FONA operations and indeed, passing international waters in many cases, while China is merely doing a routine training mission with Liaoning and conducting regular exercises in SCS. So it's all business as usual.
     
    Bltizo likes this.
  4. Josh Luo
    Offline

    Josh Luo Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2015
    Messages:
    825
    Likes Received:
    1,670
    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...r-has-big-problem-very-real-black-cloud-66977

    July 14, 2019 Topic: Security Blog Brand: The Buzz Tags: RussiaMilitaryTechnologyWorldAircraft Carrier
    Russia's Aircraft Carrier Has a Big Problem (As in a Very Real Black Cloud)
    Why exactly is the Kuznetsov so smoky?

    by Charlie Gao

    For most sailors who served on the Admiral Kuznetzov, Mazut is the stuff of legends. The ultra thick, tarry black substance that powers the ship is known for being rather toxic, sticky, and not easy to get out of clothes. But why did the Soviet navy keep powering its ships with Mazut? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the fuel? Why exactly is the Kuznetsov so smoky?

    Not all Russian ships run on Mazut. Of all the large ships the current Russian Navy operates, only the Sovremenny-class destroyers and the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier run on Mazut. Given the large profile the Admiral Kuznetsov on the global scene—being Russia's only aircraft carrier—naturally, some curiosity has arisen about what it runs on and why it produces so much smoke.

    Mazut is a heavy petrochemical fuel. While most sources refer it to being taken from the very bottom of a distillation stack, this is inaccurate as "mazut" is a blanket term for very-heavy oil products, including those that can be formed from blending heavier oils with some slightly lighter ones.


    In the West, Mazut would fall into the Bunker B and Bunker C fuel oil classifications, although the ISO 8217 standard has superseded these categories. Under the ISO 8217 standard, Mazut may be classified as RMG or RMK fuel.

    These thick, heavy fuels were, by and large, the standard for both military and commercial vessels up until the 1960s and 1970s. Their thick nature gave them a very high volume to energy ratio compared with lighter distillates. But to be burned, they often had to be preheated and pressurized in a complex series of boilers and pipes.


    Burning these fuels could also produce large amounts of sulfur, as such heavy minerals tended to settle to the bottom of a distillation stack. As a result, these fuels can be expensive to procure in nations with higher environmental standards as they must be distilled from crude with a low initial sulfur content or removed via a chemical process.

    For these reasons, Western navies began to transition to gas turbine propulsion in the 1960s and 1970s. Gas turbines use natural gas and distillate fuels, not heavy bunker fuels. Currently, all U.S. Navy ships use gas turbines for propulsion except those powered by nuclear power or the Freedom-class, which uses an electrical drive system.


    However, the Soviet Navy seemed hesitant to make such a complete shift to gas turbines. While the Slava-class cruisers laid down in the 1970s used gas turbines, the Sovremenny-class destroyers laid down in the same era still were designed with a Mazut-powered propulsion system, reportedly due to the inability of the Soviet industry to produce enough turbines at the time. The later Udaloy-class destroyers continued the trend of using gas turbines.

    The big question is why the Admiral Kuznetsov continued to use Mazut. Nuclear power was an option on the table, as the Kirov-class battlecruisers being designed around the same time used nuclear power plants—although the later Ulyanovsk-class of carriers planned to use nuclear power. One possible reason was that the class was partially based on the hull shape and layout of the earlier Kiev-class carriers, which ran on Mazut.


    While Mazut was definitely not an optimal fuel choice for the Admiral Kuznetsov, its long and troubled construction process only compounded the problems. A Russian news article describes the Kuznetsov as having a “weak heart” due to the poor standards of shipbuilding when it was being completed in the 1990s in the Nikolayev Black Sea Shipyard in Mykolaiv.

    Furthermore, Admiral Valentin Selivanov said, “From the very beginning, poor quality pipes were installed in her boilers.” The same admiral then went onto describe the Kuznetsov's 1990s sea trials. Due to the problems with the pipes, not all boilers could run at full capacity all the time, and they would often break down. Sometimes the ship was reduced to operating on one boiler, giving it a speed of around 4 knots. These same reliability problems lead to the Russian Navy sending tugs to accompany the Kuznetsov during its 2016 trip to the Syrian coast.


    Recommended: Forget the F-35: The Tempest Could Be the Future

    Recommended: Why No Commander Wants to Take On a Spike Missile


    Recommended: What Will the Sixth-Generation Jet Fighter Look Like?

    These engineering difficulties are also given as a potential reason for the Kuznetsov's super-smoky nature. Vice Admiral Pyotr Svyatashov explained, saying that because of improper calibration in the preheating or injection mechanisms, the Mazut injected into the combustion chamber might not have had time to combust fully—in other words, the partially burned products are causing the black smoke.


    This is supported by some other analysts, who say that the exhaust color can be widely classified into three colors—grey for oil, white for water, and black for fuel. Some blogshave gone into further analysis of the potential mechanical problems that may cause black smoke, albeit on the Sovremenny-class ships, which have suffered their own bouts of black smoke.

    However, some Russian military experts have attempted to downplay the problem entirely. Admiral Ivan Vasiliyev said on the show “Tsargrad” that the black smoke was a deliberate move to show the British that the Admiral Kuznetsov was there, as per “seaman’s tradition.”


    Charlie Gao studied political and computer science at Grinnell College and is a frequent commentator on defense and national-security issues.
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  5. Josh Luo
    Offline

    Josh Luo Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2015
    Messages:
    825
    Likes Received:
    1,670
    DOES CV-16 have the same problem, or the Liaoning simply uses slightly more advanced propulsion?
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  6. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,488
    Likes Received:
    25,789
    I don't think so I think the Chinese Power industry and Oil&Gas industry are much more developed than soviet union. They did mention they make 4000 technical changes in Liaoning when they refurbished it The boiler most likely get complete rebuild and retubing The long stagnant and exposed to weather must corrode it from outside

    Kutnetzov suffer from multiple boiler accident because the Soviet didn't use water treatment in their boiler feed water resulting in hot spot coupled with bad material is accident waiting to happened
    Not seeing smoke belching out from operational Liaoning stack except for start up So I think they are using distillate too instead of bunker C.
    Bunker C is what left after distillation qoey thick oil

    Well the proof is in the pudding Liaoning has been operating since 2012, 7 years with one refit NO ACCIDENT SO FAR!
    So stop insinuating that Liaoning is a trash because of Kutznetzov They look the same from outside but different inside Just like Soup up drag car

    China export and build power plant all over the world using domestic technology with no major catastrophe sofar
     
    #2116 Hendrik_2000, Jul 14, 2019 at 8:22 PM
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2019 at 8:40 PM
    mys_721tx, KIENCHIN, davidau and 3 others like this.
  7. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    2,881
    Liaoning would likely use the same fuel as the rest of the fleet, as the PLAN would have standardized this into their logistical infrastructure and into their tanker fleet. Not some thick tarry something that would produce black smoke. Even the Sovremennys in the PLAN don't spew thick black smoke and neither does any of the steam powered ships in the PLAN, like the 051, 051B and 051C.
     
    Sczepan likes this.
  8. Air Force Brat
    Offline

    Air Force Brat Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    8,479
    Likes Received:
    9,924
    He made no insinuation Hendrick, he asked a question, and Josh the Liaoning has been completely refit from the hull out, even the forward missile launchers were torn out and the hangar enlarged. So the Liaonings boilers have been updated, and the fuel system has been modernized and made much more efficient. The black smoke of the Admiral Kuz is simply because of a super rich mixture, likely because the fuel isn't properly pre-heated prior to ignition.

    The Chinese on the other hand seem to have a very efficient modern propulsion system, which burns very cleanly in comparison, that gives the Liaoning the speed and reliability it must have for safely launching the J-15's off the ramp and recovering them on deck. For every knot of speed the Liaoning makes, that's one kt slower the J-15 can land or take off. The airspeed is the same, but if your landing patch is making 20 knots, that's a 20 knot headwind.
     
    davidau likes this.
  9. Anlsvrthng
    Offline

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    241
    The Kuz and Lia boilers are the same, both of them been made in Ukraine.
    There was no update / modification on them by the Chinese shipyard .

    The smoke coming from the Kuz because the poor quality Ukrainian tubing failed and ( most probably) had to be blocked one by one as the leaked.
    That created an asymmetric airflow.

    Due to the above the Kuz had times when they had only two operating boiler from the ten.

    If any engineer try to use untreated, non distilled water in a ship boiler plant then that will fail in a matter of days, not a matter of years.
     
    Hyperwarp and Air Force Brat like this.
  10. Intrepid
    Offline

    Intrepid Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,579
    Likes Received:
    1,701
    Ten boilers? Really?
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.

Share This Page