Didn't one of the big shrimps say it will be 071A,
They can still launch amphibs and without the Type 726 even though is a disadvantage would mean the dpace allocated wpuld be able to hold more amphibians.
071 LPD thread
- Thread starter sumdud
- Start date
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Then that defeats the whole purpose of amphibious ready group
LCAC is fundamental to over the horizon landing, the speed the range and time the LCAC provides is crucial in a amphibious landing
These "swarm" Type attacks with only swimming amphibious vehicles is a poor mans navy and China is not a poor country
If you want lift and speed, surprise and range then you need a long range helicopter and LCAC
Having a LPD that can carry 4 x LCAC but then not actually carrying them defeats the whole purpose
Even more, having 5 x LPD and only 5 x LCAC in total is even further discrepancy
What's worse is that Type 726 has been around since 2009 no further developments
I think PLAN would rather have their LPDs waiting for LCAC than the other way around. Even with just 5 LCAC, they can still carry out training all the LPD staffers, albeit less efficiently.
I think there is a good case to argue whether over the horizon amphibious assault against a beach under contested conditions by an advanced foe is realistic in this day and age, and how important in terms of funding priorities it is compared to other components needed in an amphibious assault, namely air assault, air power, naval power, and missile/artillery power.
If we look at the Chinese military's priorities, I think they are rightly investing more in the other components first (especially air power, naval power and missile/artillery power) which are probably more prerequisite important capabilities in this day and age for conducting a successful amphibious assault, than over the horizon LCACs.
And let's remember that in the foreseeable future, China's only interests in conducting true large scale amphibious assaults would be in a Taiwan contingency anyway, where launching LCACs from LPDs from over the horizon I think are of questionable efficacy compared to the heap of other more conventional sealift capabilities the military would field.
The Type 726 ACV is a single-row hovercraft with limited carrying capacity. It does not need to carry amphibious IFVs, which means it would be limited to carrying one MBT or maybe six or seven HMMWVs (or maybe just four), or an assortment of support vehicles in single file stowage. Meanwhile it is likely that all of the 071's IFVs are amphibious and they will deploy out the side ramps and start swimming rather than utilize the 726 for transport to shore. All this means that the vast majority of offensive capability will be deployed as amphibs rather than be transported ashore by 726s regardless of how many 726s are tucked into a 071. Unless and until they can make a variant of the 726 that is double-row (or even triple-row like the LCAC), it will be of limited usefulness in the initial stages of a beach assault.
Well said Iron Man, you took the words right out of my mouth except you had argued the case much better then I could.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
2 things
First If you are going to assault a beech then you need the element of surprise, even if it is lightly defended
To have surpirse you need speed
Second The other thing you will need is out flanking manoeuvres to get the action on multiple fronts to split the enemy defences
First one is achieved by LCAC the second objective is using a medium to heavy helo which is fast
You cannot half do this job otherwise there is too many moving parts and the invasion force will suffer
China has built LPD, they have installed 4 x LCAC capacity they also have Type 726 a reasonable design so all indications are they are planning on building a ARG
Otherwise they could have split the LCAC to only 2 units like USN
So this tells me speed and lift is the core here, the helo deck is large the hanger is large can lift 4 x Z8 again this tells me over the horizon, speed and lift
But then to build and not carry the features is VERY confusing no amount of varying strategy can explain this nor can funding and priority listings
Because the pecking order can't be a decade long it can't be so far down that 10 years later we are still waiting for a loaded LCAC inside a Type 071 LPD
Can someone or has some one got any photos of a loaded LCAC inside the Type 071 LPD well deck ?? Have we ever seen such a photo? Please someone share
First If you are going to assault a beech then you need the element of surprise, even if it is lightly defended
To have surpirse you need speed
Second The other thing you will need is out flanking manoeuvres to get the action on multiple fronts to split the enemy defences
First one is achieved by LCAC the second objective is using a medium to heavy helo which is fast
You cannot half do this job otherwise there is too many moving parts and the invasion force will suffer
China has built LPD, they have installed 4 x LCAC capacity they also have Type 726 a reasonable design so all indications are they are planning on building a ARG
Otherwise they could have split the LCAC to only 2 units like USN
So this tells me speed and lift is the core here, the helo deck is large the hanger is large can lift 4 x Z8 again this tells me over the horizon, speed and lift
But then to build and not carry the features is VERY confusing no amount of varying strategy can explain this nor can funding and priority listings
Because the pecking order can't be a decade long it can't be so far down that 10 years later we are still waiting for a loaded LCAC inside a Type 071 LPD
Can someone or has some one got any photos of a loaded LCAC inside the Type 071 LPD well deck ?? Have we ever seen such a photo? Please someone share
The PLAN can use a few LHD/LHAs for CAS etc. in terms of top priority development for amphibious operations. LCACs are low priority for reasons others have already stated and I will add especially since engine development appears to be the bottleneck.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
The limited width of the ramp is a design flaw IMHO. It should at least be the same width if not wider than the actual opening like USN LCACs.
IMHO, it is more than onvious that the PLAN built the Type 071 with 726 in mind. I expect we will see the PLAN im[prove/perfect the 726 and have them in operation for all six of their LPDs ultimately.
Probably rarely using four per ship, but certainly having enough apacity for three per ship if needed.
I also have to believe that the 726 has far greater range and speed than any IFV. Therefore, launching one 726 with ssay four IFVs from a much further distance and being able to get their quicker, will be a better solution in the long term for the PLAN and the LPDs.
This is all still realtively new for the PLAN.
Let's give them the time.
It is clear they are going to have six Type 071 LPDs. At some point I expect to see a PLAN LACAC that will approriately compliment those LPDs.