CV-16 Liaoning (001 carrier) Thread II ...News, Views and operations

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
@Intrepid I did check the thread and I don't see any post that dispute if the hanger is not extended I did find posting on Chinese forum ifeng google translated. Not sure how reliable it is But it can be done maybe if they did remove the weapon elevator.It is odd why they put the elevator next to jet deflector plate?. The beam is more or less the same so the only logical explanation for more room is to extend the hangar
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

001A hangar than the "Liaoning" ship increased by 10%

00c25c14-0448-40e1-9a38-c151bf69a89d_size117_w698_h347.jpg


The "Kuznetsov" aircraft carrier side of the line of sight diagram below shows the envisaged 001A aircraft carrier side of the line of sight diagram, 001A aircraft carrier after the removal of the aircraft carrier silo structure, like the former hangar can expand overall about 15 meters on the map an increase of about 10% hangar area. (Phoenix Military)

Russian aircraft carrier equipped with the most abhorrent feature is undoubtedly the "basalt" anti-ship missiles. The "Liaoning" ship although not equipped with this missile, but the original structure can not tilt the silo demolition,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
time can only do a closed process. And according to a wider spread of view, China "Liaoning" aircraft carrier ship on the basis of design, the missile silo structure should not be incorporated into the hangar , increase the number of aircraft carrier equipped with. But just look at schematic structure "Kuznetsov" class aircraft carrier will be found between the hangar and the missile silos there are a number of other compartments structure. But this does not mean that the missile silo structure will be retained in 001A aircraft carriers, China can eliminate missile silos by making structural adjustment, so compared to the hangar area "Liaoning" 001A ship can be increased by about 10%.

Under "Liaoning" ship's bow deck crew living quarters, the existing missile silos squeeze is actually the original structure of the crew living quarters, forcing the crew living quarters to occupy an area of the hangar. On 001A aircraft carriers, China may, after the removal of the missile silos, the original crew living quarters can be moved forward and the design is optimized, so that the whole hangar space can expand to bow direction. But subject to restrictions carrier volume and other aspects of deck strength,The hangar width 001A type aircraft carriers should be the same as "Liaoning" ship by similar (26 meters), and the length can be increased about 15 meters ( "basaltic" missile silo module length 30 meters wide and 8 meters high 8-9 meters), the hangar area can be increased from the "Liaoning" ship of about 3978 square meters to 4735 square meters, the area increased by about 10%. (Requires special attention, even if the missile silos are removed, hangar can not expand too much towards the bow, in addition to the difficulty of design, but also involves limiting the original structure, especially ammunition lifts.)
 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
@Intrepid I did check the thread and I don't see any post that dispute if the hanger is not extended I did find posting on Chinese forum ifeng google translated. Not sure how reliable it is But it can be done maybe if they did remove the weapon elevator.It is odd why they put the elevator next to jet deflector plate?. The beam is more or less the same so the only logical explanation for more room is to extend the hangar
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

001A hangar than the "Liaoning" ship increased by 10%

, the hangar area can be increased from the "Liaoning" ship of about 3978 square meters to 4735 square meters, the area increased by about 10%. (Requires special attention, even if the missile silos are removed, hangar can not expand too much towards the bow, in addition to the difficulty of design, but also involves limiting the original structure, especially ammunition lifts.)
Going from 3978 to 4735 is a lot more than a 10% increase.

It is almost 20%

4735 is 757 larger than 3978. 758 is 19% of 3978. So 19% larger by those numbers.
 

Intrepid

Major
Type_001A_hangar01.jpg
Type_001A_hangar02.jpg
Type_001A_hangar03.jpg
Type_001A_hangar04.jpg
Type_001A_hangar05.jpg

The hangar of Type_001A has the same forward end than the hangar of Liaoning.


And I don't know, why this discussion is in the Liaoning-thread and not in the Type_001A-thread. The building process is described in *this* thread, the forward end of the hangar needs more than 35 pages to read..
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Going from 3978 to 4735 is a lot more than a 10% increase.

It is almost 20%

4735 is 757 larger than 3978. 758 is 19% of 3978. So 19% larger by those numbers.
Yes but in this case the grapic is wrong :rolleyes: i hope the profile good Smileys perplexe.PNG wanna use for my wargame new counter :)

CH 001 - 001A comparaison.jpg
CH 001A CV 17 - Copie.png
CH Fleet Shandong.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top