Ideal chinese carrier thread

[crobato]

True they can.

But please note, like radars, sonars are not made equal. Just because something has a sonar, don't expect to work like a massive flank sonar on a nuclear submarine. Sheer number of hydrophones count, sheer size of array (a bigger ear listens to more than a smaller ear), the amount of power being fed into the system to power the hundreds and hundreds of hydrophones, amplifiers, and not the least, the processing farm needed to process and identify, along with a massive signature database, all the sounds, isolate temperature, salinity, and acidity variations, compare the thousands of sounds heard to the thousands of sounds in the database. Every sub carries within them, what is practically an oceanographic sound laboratory. The question is whether your airborne asset is capable of not just carrying and powering sensors of this size and magnitude, but also has the enormous back end processing to match all the data inflow.

Also there are thermals and currents where temperature, salinity and acidity of the water changes, as well as schools of biologics (shrimps, squid, fish). These create layers that reflect sonar so something underneath the layer can hide from the pinging sonar on top. That's why you have to lower a sonar device underwater and listen depth by depth, at different levels. Even a helo has limited endurance hovering on top, as it listens to the sounds layer by layer. But a hunter killer sub on the other hand, can stay down deep indefinitely and patiently wait for its prey.

 

[Jeff Head]

The problem of ASW helos is that they use active sonars,which means they can be heard from afar, giving their general location well ahead of any sub so that the sub can take countermeasures. Long range low frequency passive sonars have to be huge and requires a lot of juice, which means they can only be fitted on ships and subs. Especially nuclear subs. You can't carry those around in a helo. Even if found, some of the newer subs are getting pretty good in countering active echoes, like in the way they are shaped, or with newer developments in the coating. Coatings around subs are not meant for quieting, they're meant for absorbing active sonars.

Helos can only use light torpedos. That's going to have limitations on depth. Even if they can physically reach that deep, they lack the speed and endurance of heavy torpedoes which can carry more battery power or fuel and can be encased with greater protection against deep water pressures. Furthermore, the heavy torpedo can also be wire guided, which means they can be commanded guided after launch by the ship or sub (well very few surface ships carry heavy torpedos anyway like the Udaloys). The light torpedo once it hits the surface, is pretty much on its own.

So Popeye is correct. Best counter to a sub is another sub.

Please note, my comments were based on the premise that the sub already had a good idea of where the sub was, either from its own bouys, or from other assets...and then began prosecuting that location. If there is a sub there, he's in deep kaka if two ASW helos are on him at that point.

Another critical note is that a large task force, transiting an area with multiple ASW helos and other assets patrolling, will clear the potential approach vectors for enemy subs (and with the US, they will use one or two fast attack subs to haunt those vectors as well). In the end, in the open sea, the enemy sub has to come to the task force to prosecute its targets...or at the very least know where the task force is if they want to use missiles...which will be effective against a well defended task force in my mind than torpedoes. It's just that you have to do a lot more to get in a position to fire a torpedo.

This is always an advantage to the defender because they will scour those areas of approa chand set their sonar bouys accordingly.

When a task force has to transit a choke point, the advantage shifts...but still the ASW assetts know that the enemy subs may well use those choke points and lie in wait so you can bet that the ASW assets of the task force will also focus there when the time comes.

In the end, strategies, feints, the technical capabilities of the equipment, the experience levels of those using that equipment, and the rules of engagement on both sides will all come together to effect the outcome.

 

[Mu Shu Tortilla]

The problem of ASW helos is that they use active sonars,which means they can be heard from afar, giving their general location well ahead of any sub so that the sub can take countermeasures. Long range low frequency passive sonars have to be huge and requires a lot of juice, which means they can only be fitted on ships and subs. Especially nuclear subs. You can't carry those around in a helo. Even if found, some of the newer subs are getting pretty good in countering active echoes, like in the way they are shaped, or with newer developments in the coating. Coatings around subs are not meant for quieting, they're meant for absorbing active sonars.

Helos can only use light torpedos. That's going to have limitations on depth. Even if they can physically reach that deep, they lack the speed and endurance of heavy torpedoes which can carry more battery power or fuel and can be encased with greater protection against deep water pressures. Furthermore, the heavy torpedo can also be wire guided, which means they can be commanded guided after launch by the ship or sub (well very few surface ships carry heavy torpedos anyway like the Udaloys). The light torpedo once it hits the surface, is pretty much on its own.

So Popeye is correct. Best counter to a sub is another sub.

Crobato, I'm an old H-3 driver. I know dipping sonar. You apparently know nothing. Ever flown an ASW exercise? Guess not. Even the old equipment in the SH-3 had a passive mode. But you didn't dip until you had a pretty good datum gained from your sonobuoy pattern. It takes some skill to fly a precise pattern over the ocean, carefully laying a pattern of sonobuoys in the water, while your SENSO listens carefully and watches his ( or her! ) waterfall display for interesting frequencies. After you have a good looking datum you or your partner, we worked in pairs, would put the dome in the water for a listen. You could get a bearing this way, and some sense of range from the intensity of the sound. Keep in mind these sonars only had a range of maybe 1 nm, newer sonars used in the MH-60 have far greater ranges ( actual figures are of course classified ) and a depth of some 1400 feet. You would dip several times, tag teaming the sub using passive means only ( though a good sub might hear your downwash on the surface, it would be very reluctant to put the pedal to the metal and run, they know that outrunning two helos is impossible and the resulting racket would draw in more helos like flies to a dung heap ) . So you patiently play the game until the crew thinks they are close enough to "go hammer" and light off the active sonar. Yes this gives the game away but by then it is too late for the sub. Now you have both bearing and range to your datum and your partner is on top streaming the MAD bird. If the MAD gives a positive indication it's topedos away. Btw, Mk-50 is fast enough and deep diving enough to take care of any Russian SSN, even an Akula. I'v been there son, you haven't. Two dipping sonar helos with crews who know their craft and that sub is gone.

 

[bd popeye]

ff

I'm an old H-3 driver.

What squadron? I was an ordie in HSL-31 over 30 years ago. And I was in HC-11 now HSC-21 from 83-85. I had changed my rate to PR by then.

Please answer by private message.ff

 

[crobato]

Crobato, I'm an old H-3 driver. I know dipping sonar. You apparently know nothing. Ever flown an ASW exercise? Guess not. Even the old equipment in the SH-3 had a passive mode. But you didn't dip until you had a pretty good datum gained from your sonobuoy pattern. It takes some skill to fly a precise pattern over the ocean, carefully laying a pattern of sonobuoys in the water, while your SENSO listens carefully and watches his ( or her! ) waterfall display for interesting frequencies. After you have a good looking datum you or your partner, we worked in pairs, would put the dome in the water for a listen. You could get a bearing this way, and some sense of range from the intensity of the sound. Keep in mind these sonars only had a range of maybe 1 nm, newer sonars used in the MH-60 have far greater ranges ( actual figures are of course classified ) and a depth of some 1400 feet. You would dip several times, tag teaming the sub using passive means only ( though a good sub might hear your downwash on the surface, it would be very reluctant to put the pedal to the metal and run, they know that outrunning two helos is impossible and the resulting racket would draw in more helos like flies to a dung heap ) . So you patiently play the game until the crew thinks they are close enough to "go hammer" and light off the active sonar. Yes this gives the game away but by then it is too late for the sub. Now you have both bearing and range to your datum and your partner is on top streaming the MAD bird. If the MAD gives a positive indication it's topedos away. Btw, Mk-50 is fast enough and deep diving enough to take care of any Russian SSN, even an Akula. I'v been there son, you haven't. Two dipping sonar helos with crews who know their craft and that sub is gone.

Wow, looks like a very old system.

You still have not laid out how your sonobuoys cope with

-changes in temperature, acidity and salinity that creates boundary layers that block off echoes or creates distortions on the echoes.
-working in an environment that has a lot of other background noise. Like having thousands of it.
-When the sub is more than quiet enough to match the background noise.

Your description of this

"while your SENSO listens carefully and watches his ( or her! ) waterfall display for interesting frequencies. "

Simply isn't enough anymore to cut it against modern quiet subs. Especially in a littoral environment.

The job is more like trying to catch and isolate the sounds of a Lexus in the middle of a New York traffic intersection. Figure out why modern subs like the Virginia carry data processing centers.

 

[SampanViking]

Well you know, if I was responsible for planning China's Power Projection and looking at Carrier solutions, I think I would really want to push the envelope to the maximum.

What seems to matter more than anything else for Power Projection is bases and the difference between even the largest Carrier (a ship that carries a limited range of specially adapted aircraft) and a Base (can land even the largest Land Based Aircraft) is immense, especilly as you put large Amphibeous forces on it as well.

My inclination would be to go the whole hog and design a mobile base that can Motor to the precise location you want it and then sit there for as long as you need it. I also reckon than this would better suit PLA Strategic Planning than simply replicating the USN CVBG model.

Large and very expensive, sure but far more effective in the long run and a leap into the future in line with leapfrogging devlopment, and achieving (the undefined) the goal of being "Mechanized and Modernised" as outlined in the PLA. 2008 review.

 

[planeman]

Ok, been doing some 3D modelling in Google Sketchup and could resist putting one of my concept carriers into a 1:1 model in Google Earth. Still unfinished with superstructure and trimmings to do.

Basically a multi-hull similar to the Australian Austal hulls, but with podded all-electric drive etc. Powerplants are gas turbines with exhausts between hulls (not yet added)

Subtle touch is LO storm shuttering on the lifts to reduce radar cross-section

View of inside shows Su-33 fighters (cos I already made that model) in the very spacious hanger. Note how they are not shown in max density layout. The concept is to have a comparatively larger hanger for a given airwing to minimise aircraft above deck for a given operational tempo, and ease handling. The brownish duct on the port side is the air intake for the engines.

Side-by-side comparison with Varyag. Similar dimensions although usable deck space on the concept design will be significantly greater.

Underside comparison (Varyag's underside not modelled). Shows much more slender hull of concept with two outriggers. Displacement is about half Varyag, about 30-40k tons. Compromise is unreplenished endurance and aviation fuel load.

 

[bd popeye]

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

 

[Pointblank]

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

Also add survivability to the list of problems; if a multi-hulled ship is hit in one of the outer hulls, it will really throw the stability of the ship off, and flight deck operations will be cancelled. The ship is essentially mission-killed until it can limp back to port. A large monohull is easier to to counter-balance so flight deck operations can resume somewhat.

 

[planeman]

Excellent drawings.

However you've really minimized space for the ;
1) crew
2) supplies
3) munitions
4) work spaces

...with that narrow hull. I've mentioned that to you previously.Your drawings are always excellent. But in this case not practical.

Do not let my comments stop you from finishing your excellent drawing.

ahah! You, dear sir, have the advantage of experience> But I have BSing and pretty pictures!

1) crew.
If you look closely you will see that the hanger stops some way behind the front end of the angled flight deck, and that the lage space ahead of it is available for crew and supplies.

2) supplies
crew and general supplies are fine I think, aviation fuel is limited, comparable to other 30-40k carriers so much less than Nimitz. But by the same token despite a design that maximises hanger and deck space, it's not intended to operate larger air wings - the trend I think is for ever smaller air wings. The days of Nimitz carrying 90 aircraft are a memory.

3) munitions
always a risk. Main magazine is below waterline in centre of ship with munitions lift on starboard side (not visible yet). Whilst more is better, modern weapons are used at a slower rate due to greater accuracy

4) work spaces
If you look in the rear port side of the hanger deck there is a relatively large engine maintenance workshop with plenty of room for engine testing (exhausting rearwards). Additionally there are workshops along the port side if you look carefully. There are also two single-story mezzanine decks 'hanging' from the ceiling of the hanger deck for crew readiness etc.