Should china have a Amphibious helocarrier??

lazzydigger said:

I want to discuss the need and possibility of chinese navy to build something similar. Not to show case french army... shall we move it back to chinese navy or leave it here?

Click to expand...

1)
Chinese amphibious fleet ned air-superiority in landing operations, also to attack the enemy army; this only could be made by WZ (attack helos) and ground attack planes;
the amphibious fleet is defenceless, when the enemy use ground-attack fighters and/or attack-helos, so the fleet need to be protecded - min. by own (friendly) attack helos, which can fight
- air to air and
- air to ground

so min. attack-helos ar needed - now, pretty soon, urgent - as soon as possible and the helos, which could be transported by LSTs and LPDs first ar need to transport - not to fight;

as soon as possible means:
whenever China have there own attack-helos, they should use them to protect the amphibious fleet

in beaching operations a big ground-attack capacitiy and also air-to-air capacity (to fight against enemy-choppers like Cobra or Apache) additional is need urgly;

without wing planes - who had to use aircraft-carriers (minim. dimensions like the Varjag) - only helos could be used to do this job (and they ar better in helo dogfight), Helos have VSTOL and could start by small carriers; so lets additional to amphibious fleet use small helo carriers with arround 15- to 16.000 ts
Length 630 feet - 190 m
Beam arround 80 feet - 24 m
Draught 25 feet - 7,5 m
Flight Deck length 690 feet - 200 m
2 Lifts and Hangar down of Flight Deck
-> would be very useful ...

Yust for telling a number:
additional to 10 - 20 Large Landing Ships

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

one Helo-Carrier
each of these Helo Carriers carriing

3 Mi-28 HAVOC or WZ-10 when ready
10 Hind
some Z-8A army to support transport helos of landing ships...
and 2-3 small ground attack planes, if a catapult could be installed at the flight deck


2)
"out of aerea" the PLAN need to use helo-carriers to transport attack helos to the battle-field;
("out of aerea" to me means by attack-helos a distance of more than 150 km to next home airfield, if the helos should have enough time in the operational aerea
- the maximum speed of WZ-9 = 315km/h, this means 1/2 hour to run when they are needed
- the maxim. range of WZ 11 = 600 km, by a distance of 150 km half of the flight time is on the way in the operational aerea and back)
So in a landing-operation the helo carrier should stay up and down between 50 km and 150 km near the battle-field.

My 5 cents:
Attack Helos und Helo Carriers should be the next step in chinese amphibious fleet

Click to expand...

3)
Chinese shipbuilders only studied Melbourne, Kiew-/Minsk and the Varjag-Class, so they could copy this kind of ships;
Melbourne was finally broken up at the northern Chinese port of Dalian, but apparently not before close study by PLAN.
On 13 January 2001, the online Australian magazine of Melbourne "The Age.com.au" indicated that China has been using the flight deck of the former Australian aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne to train its pilots ahead of the launch of its first locally-made aircraft carrier.
Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Hangar of that ship was height: 17 'ft (5,18 Meter)
the Elevator was 13,7 m x 10,4 m
(diametral lengh = 17 m by forming a "x")
the catapult launched planes in a weight of < 12.000 kg, which is usable by chinese trainers like
- the JL-9, also known as FTC-2000 Mountain Eagle (ShanYing), an tandem two-seat, single-engine advanced jet training aircraft which is capable of carrying 2,000kg weapon payloads such as short-range air-to-air missiles and rocket launders and bombs. Fixed weapon includes a 23mm cannon
- L-15 advanced lead-in-fighter-trainer, max take-off 9,500kg, The aircraft also has six (four under-wing and two wingtip) pylons to carry various air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons. If necessary, it can serve for lightweight attack role with little, if any, modification.

4) cralw, walk, run,
the Melbourne Class (or better a derivat of this ship) is
- small enough to start experience without wast of money if the first trainee-ship is useless
- small enough to build 3 or 4 of them, which made an powerful amphibious support fleet- and it's not the big problem, if one of these carriers will be missed in action
- big enough to transport and use a number of attack helos and ground attack planes,
- big enough to be used by JL-9/FTC-2000 ADVANCED JET TRAINER to trainee carrier-pilots and to carry air-to-air and ground attack weapons to perform certain combat missions.
- big enough to start test program (touch and go) by using Jets like the J 10 or FC 1

Click to expand...

MIGleader said:

the chinese can still build a light carrier similar to melborne. but why would you want to train wit catapults if you are going to use the ski-jump in real combat?

Click to expand...

MIGleader said:

the chinese can still build a light carrier similar to melborne. but why would you want to train wit catapults if you are going to use the ski-jump in real combat?

Click to expand...

As for the Korean one, the picture, why is there a CIWS in the front?

Click to expand...