Rumoured Type 076 LHD/LHA discussion

Andy1974 said:

Is there any hints that 076 is to carry manned fighters? As far as I read, this is a drone carrier and the catapult won’t be able to launch something as heavy as a J-35.

Click to expand...

IMO, unlikely to carry any manned fighter jets. It is likely to be an amphibious assault/support ship carrying recon/ground attack drones/suicide drones and manned helicopters, and it should have well deck for LCAC/swimming tanks. It would not be a light aircraft carrier,

J35 should be operating on a real aircraft carrier, not on an amphibious warfare ship. We cannot use USN's USS America and F-35 as anology for the rumoured type 076.

Helius said:

Well speaking for myself, it's less about critiquing any particular CG per se but more about using it as an example to illustrate what is and isn't plausible with a prospective catapult and angled deck equipped Type 076 in the face of lack of physical or photographic information which may give us any hint as to what the ship may potentially look like, hence my inclusion of actual photographs to illustrate my point as opposed to "sharing fan made CGs".

So until such information becomes available, CG or no, any discussion is inherently speculative.

Click to expand...

There are a handful (maybe two or three) of good artists who release CGs based on credible rumors and photographic imagery. The rest produce artworks that are too far out, too amateurish, all without a rudimentary grasp of basic operational requirements or of what is realistic. My objection is that far too many CGs of the latter camp are being shared lackadaisically to shoot the breeze. This is hardly conducive to substantive discussions and maintaining the quality of the forum.

by78 said:

There are a handful (maybe two or three) of good artists who release CGs based on credible rumors and photographic imagery. The rest produce artworks that are too far out, too amateurish, all without a rudimentary grasp of basic operational requirements or of what is realistic. My objection is that far too many CGs of the latter camp are being shared lackadaisically to shoot the breeze. This is hardly conducive to substantive discussions and maintaining the quality of the forum.

Click to expand...

That's fair. Still, like I said, I care less about the quality of the CG or diagram or any artwork for that matter, than what the poster seeks to convey by sharing such artwork in the first place. If these are posted purely for the sake of it, or as you so eloquently put it, "lackadaisically to shoot the breeze", sure, I don't see any reason on my part to respond to such postings. It's only logical.

You think too many low effort graphics being posted risk cluttering the board and diminishing the quality thereof, I get it. Me though, as I said in the beginning, I can only speak for myself of what I deem worthy of my own time to comment on any given topic, regardless of whether it was initiated by a CG being posted or not.

I could have a thought on the Type 076 regarding such and such. As graphically-challenged as I am, I could draw a crude doodle on MS Paint to express my thought and risk degrading the quality of the forum by certain people's standards; or I could put into so many words to describe something that a picture which so happens to be drawn by someone else can describe just as well if not better, and still risk degrading the quality of the forum by certain people's standards.

Either way, if the intention of the posting is to advance the discussion in a substantive way, that's something of a judgment call on my part whether that's the case (just like when I post something it's up to other members to determine if it's "conducive to substantive discussions") when I decide whether to respond to it or not, and when I do I don't make it a point to distinguish whether that posting came in the form of words or graphics, amateurish or not.

But that's just me, and I would reckon if someone comes on here and makes worded comments "that are too far out, too amateurish, all without a rudimentary grasp of basic operational requirements or of what is realistic", you'd likewise admonish them for doing so, probably.

ACuriousPLAFan said:

If the stats given by him are anywhere close to actual, that means outside of proper CVs, the 076 would be the largest flatdeck in the world. 076's alleged overall length of 253 meters is slightly shorter than America's 257 meters, but having an alleged beam of 45 meters could be a first for all non-proper CV flatdecks in the world.

Judging by the specs, the 076's full displacement would probably reach 50 thousand tons or more - Again, outside of proper CVs, the 076 would be the heaviest flatdeck in the world.

However, how did he arrive at the conclusion that the 076 will have 2 EMALS catapult launchers? Alongside the respective locations of those catapults and deck elevators?
View attachment 112110

Besides:
1. Where's the angled deck for landing operations with arresting gears? and
2. Where (and how many) are the planes and helicopters can park on the flight deck?

Click to expand...

I cannot see it having a rear deck elevator like the type 075 if UAC/UCAV need to land with arresting cable at the rear or even without. Any mishaps would lead to catastrophic damage to the elevator and probably the hangar below.


An UCAV arriving to low would bang directly in the Helicopter hangar deck...

A credible that a new module has been spotted at Hudong that could to be a new Type 075 (although he can't rule out it being a Type 076). He claims the mast is different.

by78 said:

A credible

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

that a new module has been spotted at Hudong that could to be a new Type 075 (although he can't rule out it being a Type 076). He claims the mast is different.

Click to expand...

As for the mast, he is talking about the 054B.

Kalec said:

I always take his research with a grain of salt, allegedly 076 has a dimension of 252.3m x 45m x 12.8m, two catapults, two elevators and two islands.
Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The diagram is notional only and public journal is unlikely to have an accurate figure on dimension for confidentiality purpose.
View attachment 112085

View attachment 112084

Click to expand...

Continued.

@伏尔戈星图 claimed that he managed to find out the length of the EMALS for the 076 LHD (shown by the red bars):


Other than him stipulating that the 076 LHD is very likely to have 2 EMALS onboard - Based on some very rough "measurestimation" of laying a ruler on the screen and compare - Assuming that the previous information on the overall dimension of the 076 LHD is close to factual (i.e. 252.3 meters long x 45 meters wide), the EMALS on the 076 is likely to have a length of just ~40-45 meters.

For comparison, the EMALS on Fujian is ~110 meters long. Assuming that the claim is anywhere close, then the EMALS on the 076 will not launch anything that is significantly greater in size and weight than the GJ-11 UCAV.

(Can be disappointing, I know)

(Disclaimer: He claimed to be very sure of the purported length of the EMALS on the 076. However, since @伏尔戈星图 is the guy that we're talking about, the usual caveats apply, i.e. take his claims with a generous pinch of salt.)

Isn't that what we were expecting though? U(C)AVs only, not manned fighters and certainly not KJ600? The bulk of the air group will be helicopters anyway. The main role is amphibious assault, after all.

Maikeru said:

Isn't that what we were expecting though? U(C)AVs only, not manned fighters and certainly not KJ600? The bulk of the air group will be helicopters anyway. The main role is amphibious assault, after all.

Click to expand...

Indeed.

Though, I don't really expect the 076s to exact-only focus on amphibious assaults either.

Maikeru said:

Isn't that what we were expecting though? U(C)AVs only, not manned fighters and certainly not KJ600? The bulk of the air group will be helicopters anyway. The main role is amphibious assault, after all.

Click to expand...

Exactly, it's not a aircraft carrier, a cruiser or even a submarine...it will be a new type of amphibious assault ship. I don't know why so many people are jumping into the do all, hat trick, jack of all trade, supawondership wagon.

Way better to have a dedicated ship for each purpose that is doing the job than something trying to do to much and unable to deliver full capabilities. Aircraft on carrier, helicopter on amphibious assault. Catapult for some UAV will be nice for recon and support like illuminating target for long range atgm fired from Z-10.