I was going to ask the same questions. That deck layout is weird.
1- Angled deck is absolutely essential for safety if non-vertical landing aircraft are involved.
2- Similarly those elevator positions are horrendous. Hangar, especially on a LHD, doesn't extend below catapults or through most of the ship's length. Even CVs aren't like that. You don't need elevators that large either. The aft elevator would be unusable during landings and the front elevator would be unusable during take-offs. If you are handling non-vertical landing aircraft putting a large elevator to the stern is a bad idea.
The only credible thing here is the existence of two catapults. A single catapult design would need perfect reliability which is always a bad assumption to make.
The ship looks like WW2 carriers with this layout.
Look at how the Essex and Midway classes evolved through numerous modernizations.
View attachment 112169
View attachment 112168
Yes, it is indeed undesirable (and rightfully so).
However, consider this for the sake of comparison:
1. The width of the front end of the flight deck of Nimitz CVNs is only 24 meters at most, and
2. The separation between the two bow catapults at their midpoints on Nimitz CVNs is only around 18 meters.
If @伏尔戈星图's findings is anywhere close to the real stats, the width of the flight deck of the 076 LHD (including the bow end) is 45 meters. In other words, you can fit nearly 2 Nimitz's bows into it.
Therefore, assuming that the two bow catapults on the 076 is spaced wide enough, then technically speaking, fitting a deck elevator in between the two catapults is actually more than possible. The hangar deck in the bow section should also have enough space for planes and helicopters to park inside, even with the catapult machineries occupying the spaces on both sides of the hangar deck in the bow section.
For reference, CV-41 Midway after the SCB-110 upgrade:
View attachment 112185
Still, I believe it is much better if the deck elevator can be located at the port side edge, instead of right in between the bow catapults as per your explanation.
I'd like to remind people that we do not credibly know what the actual configuration of the 076's flight deck will be, so there's no reason to discuss the CGIs in much detail.
"The deck layout is weird" is technically correct, but instead it should be "the deck layout should be actively ignored" because the above indicators aren't credible enough to warrant this level of discussion.
Seriously, guys think about the fact that this forum is browsed by other people who don't know much about this topic and the cycle of tracking rumours and developments of new projects. They might walk away from reading the last few pages and think that the configuration depicted in the CGIs and in the drawings are confirmed or likely, whereas in reality they don't mean much.