The PLAN LCAC Type 726 Yuyi Class

Thanks Weig that explains that something I have wondered for a very long time

Good news that it's fixed maybe now we can start to see serious operations and a fully loaded lcac carrying men and equipment and also greater in numbers than the 5 already built

I was thinking is hovercraft still necessary to amphibious landing? 05 family (IFV version and light tank version) can provide direct fire support and send infantry to beach at the same time and they can swim from 071 or future LHD to beachhead by themselves with a acceptable speed (at least 25 kt I believe?). After beachhead is secured, 072 can send the big boys to dry land. So the offset compare to using hovercrafts in landing is you are not going to have real tank for the first wave, they cannot fire on the sea anyway, and a 05 is slower than a hovercraft?

IFV has short range and can not do a amphibious landing from over the horizon

To get troops and equipment on shore from a safe distance LCAC is the only answer

If you can load 3 x IFV on LCAC and 4 such LCAC that's 12 x IFV in a single landing that's a lot of power for a OTH amphibious assault

I think as a dedicated amphibious vehicle zbd-05 and ztd-05 can handle 50 km easily. The only problem would be they will likely be slower than a hovercraft. If the attack was carried by LCAC enemy would indeed get less time for reaction, but also put 3 IFV (or 4?) in one (also bigger) basket. If you replace all LCAC with IFV, you can potentially double the size of your force you can launch from one ship.

asif iqbal said:

IFV has short range and can not do a amphibious landing from over the horizon

To get troops and equipment on shore from a safe distance LCAC is the only answer

Click to expand...

Exactly.

The LCAC is about getting the forces ashore, while allowing the large deck Amphibs to be further off shore and safer.

Now, the LCAC is not necessarily the only answer. The US Navy uses its LCUs to do the same thing, and they are designed to fit into the well deck of a US LHD/LHA/LPD.LSD too.

They can carry more, but they are also slower.

Jeff Head said:

They have built four Type 071s and need four LCAC for each...and apparently they will be building at least two more Type 071s.

Click to expand...

They could probably want a few spares as well to cover for maintenance downtime and combat losses. So 5-6 for each LPD would seem more likely for me.

When the PLAN launch LHDs, they would probably want some '71s for them as well.

plawolf said:

They could probably want a few spares as well to cover for maintenance downtime and combat losses. So 5-6 for each LPD would seem more likely for me.

When the PLAN launch LHDs, they would probably want some '71s for them as well.

Click to expand...

I would think for a force of 6 LPDs that can hold four each, you would build a force of around 25 of them.

Many times they will not use all four and may go to sea with just 2, using the other space for IFVs, etc. Also, ships go through regular maintenance periods.

So a total of 25 for all six would be adequate since at any time a couple of LPDs will be getting ready for, in, or working up after maintenance.

Now, if they add LHD/LHAs that can hold four each and built say three of those...the number would go up.

In that event, with 3 of the large LHD/LHAs and six LPDs, then I can see needing a total force of 32 or so.

As an example, the US navy has 74 total LCACs in operation.

The US has eight Wasp Class LHDs, each can carry 3 LCAC
The US has ten San Antonio Class LPDs, each can carry 2 LCAC
The US has four Harpers Ferry class LSDs, each can carry 2 LCAC
The US gas eight Whidbey Island LSDs, each can carry 4 LCACs

If you add up all the possible LCACs, the US would need 84 LCAC. But the US maintains 74 vessels because of ships are in maintenance, and most ships do not operate a full load of LCACs.

I expect the same type of thing will hold true for the PLAN.

Well...almost another year has gone by and we still do not see any "new" 726s.

I actually wonder some times how many they actually have.

I am going to take on a project tomorrow to scour the net and find every single PLAN Type 726 LCAC I can find and their pennant numbers.

I bet there may not even a half dozen of them.

Jeff Head said:

Well...almost another year has gone by and we still do not see any "new" 726s.

I actually wonder some times how many they actually have.

I am going to take on a project tomorrow to scour the net and find every single PLAN Type 726 LCAC I can find and their pennant numbers.

I bet there may not even a half dozen of them.
.

Click to expand...

Don't know if that's due to budget squeeze or technical difficulty or "new and improved model" in the pipeline with better powerplant available, the LCAC scene is very quiet for the last 6 months at least. After all, a LCAC of that class is too big a hardware to hide.

MwRYum said:

Don't know if that's due to budget squeeze or technical difficulty or "new and improved model" in the pipeline with better powerplant available, the LCAC scene is very quiet for the last 6 months at least. After all, a LCAC of that class is too big a hardware to hide.

Click to expand...

My take is the PLAN had long second guessed their LCAC program's development/performance for the time/financial cost and had acquired their Zubrs as an alternative. The Zubrs can perform both long distance transporting and beach landing for likely missions within the first island chain, together with the likes of the 072s, while the 071s without LCACs get close offshore where their amphibious vehicles directly disembark and get to shore on their own power. There will be plenty of bombardment to soften up defenses prior to any landings anyways.