071 LPD thread

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Well, I don't think any of the PLAN's LSTs will be part of a true blue water capable ARG in the first place, however they still have a role in Taiwan and SCS contingencies.

And from what I understand, the main difference between an LPD and an LSD is that an LSD has a larger well deck than an LPD to carry more LCACs and LSDs also place less emphasis on an aviation complement.

As I illustrated in my last post, the 071 really combines a lot of the elements of both a LPD and an LSD. It has the large cargo capacity and aviation elements of an LPD, but also has a large well deck to carry 4 LCACs like an LSD.
Good post. The Type 071 is indeed an attempt to have both the larger well deck and a large aviation component for an LPD...but they give up storage space in making allowances for both. Then again, from the PLAN's perspective they may not see the need for as large a carry capacity for an individual LPD.


So I can foresee a future PLAN ARG comprised of two 071 LPDs and a 075 LHD, with one 071 LPD doing the job of carrying the AFVs, and the other doing the job of carrying more LCACs and the variety of cargo and logistics vehicles.
Two Type 071 LPDs and a single, larger PLAN LHD would indeed make for a strong PLAN Amphibious Ready group (ARG).

It's also worth noting that the PLAN may not want to deploy the same kind of mix of amphibious assault ships as the US, and they may not even want to deploy the same kind of capability as the USMC. After all, at present and I think in the forseeable future, the PLAMC is not expected to fight a land war for extended periods of time like USMC, but as rapid reaction coastal and island assault/capture troops, and with limited inland direct action backed up by conventional PLA ground forces dropped off by cargo ships once shore and ports are secured.
No doubt they will have differing operational philosophies and standards than the US Navy.

Personally I think the PLAN should also look to build some of those smaller mistral sized LHDs offered for export, in addition to the Wasp/America sized 075 LHDs. I expect the 075s won't be built in very large numbers, maybe 3 at most, but I'd like to see the PLAN have a more distributed at sea helicopter component. The export LHD displaces 22k tons, smaller than an 071, and carries only 16 or so medium sized helicopters (Z-18), but is also big enough to carry probably a pair of LCACs or equivalent landing craft, and likely has the space for the command/control capabilities...
Well, we will have to see on that.

If they want to go into the export market they may move down this path.

I personally doubt that they will themselves emply both the smaller LHA/D and a larger LHD. They will find the same thing that the US found out with the large LHD/As and the Carriers...the larger size optinimzes your capabilities. You get more bang for the buck.

But...perhaps their operational requirements will move them in this path.

We shall see.

Right now, the 4th LPD is big news and I am pretty sure now that they will end up with six of them.

Like the 2nd carrier...the PLAN building their first LHD is still simply out there. Much talked about, but not on the ways yet. Time will tell.
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
First we seen Type 071 LPD
Then we seen use of single LCAC
Few times we have seen 2 x LCAC
And this time we see both LCAC operating from 999
This is what I call programme development and progress
Next I hope we see more and next time they are loaded with equipment

798bcb1d1fc727c0a394c747ffb54c6e_zpsoen1b5e8.jpg


654fdb48b0fc8f4695cbeb50414233fd_zpsekfkynfi.jpg
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Found by hongjian over on cdf
From CSSC reporting on 071 LPD Changbai shan from last year -- we finally have "official" specs from the manufacturer.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


25,000 tons full displacement, 10,000 nmi range, top speed 25 knots, 210 m long, 28 m beam, 7 m draft, top speed of 25 knots.
Looks like the 29,000 tons from the portsmouth visit on the sign is indeed deep draft with ballast tanks fully loaded.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Yet announced
An empty displacement of 19000 t
A full displacement of up to 28000 t
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


But seems a big displacement cause San Antonio do 208 x 32 x 7 and do 25000 max or then do more ??
 
Last edited:

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Yet announced
An empty displacement of 19000 t
A full displacement of up to 28000 t
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


But seems a big displacement cause San Antonio do 208 x 32 x 7 and do 25000 max or then do more ??

As I posted above, the sign in portsmouth actually said the full displacement went up even higher to over 29,000 tons probably with ballast tanks all filled.

I suspect 25,000 tons full displacement is in relation to the ship's actual full displacement. Given the relative similarity in external dimensions to San Antonio and allowing for differing internal design priorities and arrangements in both ships, not to mention potential different loadout/complement, I'd say 25,000 tons is definitely very reasonable.

At the very least, it's long past time for the wikipedia article on 071 to be changed.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
As I posted above, the sign in portsmouth actually said the full displacement went up even higher to over 29,000 tons probably with ballast tanks all filled.

I suspect 25,000 tons full displacement is in relation to the ship's actual full displacement. Given the relative similarity in external dimensions to San Antonio and allowing for differing internal design priorities and arrangements in both ships, not to mention potential different loadout/complement, I'd say 25,000 tons is definitely very reasonable.

At the very least, it's long past time for the wikipedia article on 071 to be changed.
yes I agreed based on going over all the stuff on this.
 
Top