The PLAN LCAC Type 726 Yuyi Class
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
I thought, as they come out and we get good clear pics of them, we should odument the latest of the various Type 726 LCACs. The only two I have seen clearly are 3320 and 3321. I know there is another one (3322?) that is afloat, and that there are up to four we have seen in the yards.
But here are a couple of good pics of 3320 and 3321, an a pic of them landing together:
But here are a couple of good pics of 3320 and 3321, an a pic of them landing together:
Type 726 LCAC Pennant 3320
Type 726 LCAC Pennant 3321
Type 726 LCACs 3320 & 3322 together
Type 726 LCAC Pennant 3321
Type 726 LCACs 3320 & 3322 together
Last edited:
shen
Senior Member
As posted in the Type 71 thread, Type 726 ACV appears to have puffer ports for directional control. So Type 726 appears to use both puffer ports and controllable pitch propellers for low speed directional control. The air rudders come into play at higher speed. But as with all ACVs, a lot of training and experiences are required to tame this beast.
Circled part.
Clearer here.
Closed, but still clearly visible on the other side.
Compare to Zubr, which have them in front and back.
Circled part.
Clearer here.
Closed, but still clearly visible on the other side.
Compare to Zubr, which have them in front and back.
Last edited:
shen
Senior Member
Compare to American LCAC, Type 726 appears to have a larger compartment for transporting infantry. This probably reflect a difference in doctrine. No, you can't just tie them down on the cargo deck 
The LCAC replacement SSC will have a dedicated troop carrying module that can be transported on the cargo deck to carry a large number of infantry.
at about 3:00 mark in this documentary.
So how does this figure into the amphibious assault doctrine? The initial assault wave will be made of armored amphibious vehicles. PLAN will also use small assault boats to transport additional infantry. In the latest exercise, I see 15 AAV in one wave. AFAIK, the largest USMC AAV concentration in recent time was around 40 AAV for the feint in the first Gulf War. Again AFAIK, USMC doctrine relies on the LCAC for rapid buildup of reinforcements after the initial assault wave. USMC manual says one LCAC can be expected to make 3 ship to shore trips in one day under ideal conditions. LCAC is not part of the initial assault wave as it is a too big and valuable asset. PLAN on the other hand, as its objective are closer to home and still operate a large fleet of amphibious vessels that can land assets directly on the beach, seems to rely on their LST and LCM to land the reinforcements. Now of course Zubr will also play a part. Type 726 may also play a part in this, as it continues to mature and gain operational experience, but right now at least Type 726 seems to play the part of raiding and diversionary missions in zones where regular landing vessels can't reach.
The LCAC replacement SSC will have a dedicated troop carrying module that can be transported on the cargo deck to carry a large number of infantry.at about 3:00 mark in this documentary.
So how does this figure into the amphibious assault doctrine? The initial assault wave will be made of armored amphibious vehicles. PLAN will also use small assault boats to transport additional infantry. In the latest exercise, I see 15 AAV in one wave. AFAIK, the largest USMC AAV concentration in recent time was around 40 AAV for the feint in the first Gulf War. Again AFAIK, USMC doctrine relies on the LCAC for rapid buildup of reinforcements after the initial assault wave. USMC manual says one LCAC can be expected to make 3 ship to shore trips in one day under ideal conditions. LCAC is not part of the initial assault wave as it is a too big and valuable asset. PLAN on the other hand, as its objective are closer to home and still operate a large fleet of amphibious vessels that can land assets directly on the beach, seems to rely on their LST and LCM to land the reinforcements. Now of course Zubr will also play a part. Type 726 may also play a part in this, as it continues to mature and gain operational experience, but right now at least Type 726 seems to play the part of raiding and diversionary missions in zones where regular landing vessels can't reach.
Compare to American LCAC, Type 726 appears to have a larger compartment for transporting infantry. This probably reflect a difference in doctrine. No, you can't just tie them down on the cargo deck
at about 3:00 mark in this documentary.
Nice catch -- I've been wondering why the side structures in the LCAC were so much larger than that of the USN's LCAC, as it would impede the width available for vehicles. I thought it may have been due to greater size of the propulsion, but it may well also be due to greater enclosed cabin for transporting troops as well.
screenshots:
shen
Senior Member
yep, despite the superficial similarities between Type 726 and American LCAC, the actual arrangements are quite different. The pilot house on Type 726 is situation more forward for better visibility. The troop compartment seems to be in the forward part. Behind that, Type 726 has two QC-70 gas turbines with 7000hp each (at least on the initial 3320, followup units may be using more powerful gas turbines), lift fans behind that, gear boxes and propulsion fans. On the LCAC, the lift fans are forward of the gas turbines, with part of the air generated by the lift fans diverted to the directional bow thrusters.
Well, on the US LCAC, as you can see in this 1st picture, there is a compartment that troops can ride in on the right side forward, with two doors.
This compartment takes up the entire area on that side where you see the LCAC-59 marked in this second photo. As you can see, on the other side, there is a smaller area that can carry more troops behind the pilot house.
If they want to carry a lot of troops in compartments, they do not need to wait for the Ship to Shore Connector. They already have compartments for troops that can be stored (and taken down) right in the main vehicle area.
There are nicer ones (for humanitarian duties) like those filling up the entire area of this Japanese LCAC:
Finally, the US Navy LHDs and LPDs can also carry another landing craft, which also carriers vehicles and/or troops. They can carry a lot of troops at once and are designed to fit right into the well deck:
This compartment takes up the entire area on that side where you see the LCAC-59 marked in this second photo. As you can see, on the other side, there is a smaller area that can carry more troops behind the pilot house.
If they want to carry a lot of troops in compartments, they do not need to wait for the Ship to Shore Connector. They already have compartments for troops that can be stored (and taken down) right in the main vehicle area.
There are nicer ones (for humanitarian duties) like those filling up the entire area of this Japanese LCAC:
Finally, the US Navy LHDs and LPDs can also carry another landing craft, which also carriers vehicles and/or troops. They can carry a lot of troops at once and are designed to fit right into the well deck:
shen
Senior Member
well, let's not turn this into a PLAN vs USN who is better contest. The bigger integral troop transport capability of Type 276 (40 according to the video) probably reflect a difference in doctrine. LCAC has the integral ability to transport 24 troops according to this.
The commentator also said the raw power of the gas turbines on the original Type 276 is weaker. 14000 hp total according to Chinese wiki. That needs to be improved. But he also said Type 276 uses the available power more efficiently. That could refer to improved reduction gears and/or puffer port using up less power than directional thruster.
The commentator also said the raw power of the gas turbines on the original Type 276 is weaker. 14000 hp total according to Chinese wiki. That needs to be improved. But he also said Type 276 uses the available power more efficiently. That could refer to improved reduction gears and/or puffer port using up less power than directional thruster.
Uh...I hope you do not think that is what I was doing.
I posted some pictures of what the US Navy LCAC is doing in some areas for comparison and in answer to some direct comments about the US LCAC that needed clarifying.
That is what I was doing.