CV-17 Shandong - Type 002 Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions

[Roybot]

Interesting comparison ... and even better if directly put together !

View attachment 338468

So except for the superstructure no structural difference between Liaoning and Type 001a?

 

[lcloo]

So except for the superstructure no structural difference between Liaoning and Type 001a?

Same hull body, different bulbous bow, different radars and subcomponent , different compartment designs and possibility of different power plant.

Liaoning Is an experimental testbed and training ship for crew and pilots. 001A is combat missioned.

 

[星海军事]

Same hull body, different bulbous bow, different radars and subcomponent , different compartment designs and possibility of different power plant.

Liaoning Is an experimental testbed and training ship for crew and pilots. 001A is combat missioned.

Both carriers are for combat

 

[T-Rex]

I don't understand why the Chinese are still stuck with the skip jump design! It's an inferior design, it has too many drawbacks.

 

[yantong1980]

I don't understand why the Chinese are still stuck with the skip jump design! It's an inferior design, it has too many drawbacks.

Once step for next move, they already have experimental both steam and electromagnetic catapult. This is first step zone for 'made in China' AC's, just wait for the their next series.

 

[Beast]

I don't understand why the Chinese are still stuck with the skip jump design! It's an inferior design, it has too many drawbacks.

Not neccessary, it has no mechanism, meaning no additional space require below deck for catapult power plant. More precious space for storing fighter available.
No mechanism means less chances of breakdown. Easy to maintain and faster to launch fighter jet since it don't require to lock onto catapult.

 

[Djinn]

I don't understand why the Chinese are still stuck with the skip jump design! It's an inferior design, it has too many drawbacks.

Some extract which might interest you.
China has stepped up development of Catapult-Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery (CATOBAR) operations for its carriers, with the appearance of a Shenyang J-15 Flying Shark carrier-borne fighter with CATOBAR apparatus and continued construction of supporting land-based infrastructure.This new aircraft is likely to be the first of a small number of prototypes that will be used to test China’s CATOBAR infrastructure, which has been undergoing construction at Huangdicun Airbase in Liaoning Province since late 2014 or early 2015, according to satellite imagery. The airbase is also home to the People’s Liberation Army – Navy’s (PLAN) sole regiment of operational J-15s.

These show what appear to be two catapult tracks, each measuring around 140 meters (460 feet) long, being built at the north-eastern corner of the base, along with a number of support buildings, a new runway and taxiway leading to the area. The tracks appear to be for a steam catapult and an equivalent to the US Navy’s Electromagnetic Aircraft Launching System (EMALS).
You can read more at:
https://news.usni.org/2016/09/22/china-experimenting-catapult-launched-carrier-aircraft

 

[nang2]

I don't understand why the Chinese are still stuck with the skip jump design! It's an inferior design, it has too many drawbacks.

Baby steps, pal, baby steps.

 

[T-Rex]

Not neccessary, it has no mechanism, meaning no additional space require below deck for catapult power plant. More precious space for storing fighter available.
No mechanism means less chances of breakdown. Easy to maintain and faster to launch fighter jet since it don't require to lock onto catapult.

If we are talking of saving precious space why is it that this type of AC can carry only 15-20 fighter jets? The US carriers accommodate 70-80 aircraft, now isn't that a major drawback?

 

[Beast]

If we are talking of saving precious space why is it that this type of AC can carry only 15-20 fighter jets? The US carriers accommodate 70-80 aircraft, now isn't that a major drawback?

You must remember CV-16 Liaoning is based on old varyag design , large number of space below deck is not used for storing aircraft. And Chinese did not really major overhaul it.

Type001A will be a true carrier which design with maximizing space for aircraft storage. I am sure it can at least double the amount of aircraft carry compare to CV-16.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Not neccessary, it has no mechanism, meaning no additional space require below deck for catapult power plant. More precious space for storing fighter available.
No mechanism means less chances of breakdown. Easy to maintain and faster to launch fighter jet since it don't require to lock onto catapult.

ski jump can't allow that jet can take off with full weapon load lots of disadvantages as well
here it is
One major limitation of STOBAR configuration is that it only works with aircraft that have a high thrust to weight ratio such as Su-33 or MiG-29K and thus limits the kind of aircraft that can be operated from the carrier. In order to become airborne, the aircraft may be required to limit its weaponry and fuel package in order to reduce the launch weight of the aircraft.[1][5] Short take off using ski-jump leads to more stress on the airframes of the aircraft, thus limiting the ability to conduct sorties faster on STOBAR aircraft carrier.[6] STOBAR carriers must maintain a speed of 20kn-30kn in order to generate wind speed required on deck which is essential for conducting aircraft launch operations.[7]

 

[nang2]

ski jump can't allow that jet can take off with full weapon load lots of disadvantages as well
here it is
One major limitation of STOBAR configuration is that it only works with aircraft that have a high thrust to weight ratio such as Su-33 or MiG-29K and thus limits the kind of aircraft that can be operated from the carrier. In order to become airborne, the aircraft may be required to limit its weaponry and fuel package in order to reduce the launch weight of the aircraft.[1][5] Short take off using ski-jump leads to more stress on the airframes of the aircraft, thus limiting the ability to conduct sorties faster on STOBAR aircraft carrier.[6] STOBAR carriers must maintain a speed of 20kn-30kn in order to generate wind speed required on deck which is essential for conducting aircraft launch operations.[7]

disadvantage or not, depends on whom you are fighting against.

 

[Beast]

ski jump can't allow that jet can take off with full weapon load lots of disadvantages as well
here it is
One major limitation of STOBAR configuration is that it only works with aircraft that have a high thrust to weight ratio such as Su-33 or MiG-29K and thus limits the kind of aircraft that can be operated from the carrier. In order to become airborne, the aircraft may be required to limit its weaponry and fuel package in order to reduce the launch weight of the aircraft.[1][5] Short take off using ski-jump leads to more stress on the airframes of the aircraft, thus limiting the ability to conduct sorties faster on STOBAR aircraft carrier.[6] STOBAR carriers must maintain a speed of 20kn-30kn in order to generate wind speed required on deck which is essential for conducting aircraft launch operations.[7]

This asessment is based on old Su-33 which is heavier and lesser thrust. J-15 using 3D printing and newer metallurgy shelve more weight , more powerful engine and can launch with more load. As for AWACS, it is possible to launch from the aft launch pad.

As for carrier to maintain 20-30knots for launch is also a requirement for all carriers to generate enough headwind for lift.

 

[Deino]

This asessment is based on old Su-33 which is heavier and lesser thrust. J-15 using 3D printing and newer metallurgy shelve more weight , more powerful engine and can launch with more load. As for AWACS, it is possible to launch from the aft launch pad.

As for carrier to maintain 20-30knots for launch is also a requirement for all carriers to generate enough headwind for lift.

Again an unsubstantial claim: the J-15 might indeed be a bit lighter - similar to the weight differences between a Su-37SK/J-11 and a J-11B - but that can't be too much since the structure itself has to withstand the same structural loads.

Concerning the engine - our issue again - what kind of engines with more thrust is the J-15 using by Your claim ? All current operational ones use the standard AL-31F ... and as such the same as their Russian counterparts.

Deino

 

[lcloo]

If we are talking of saving precious space why is it that this type of AC can carry only 15-20 fighter jets? The US carriers accommodate 70-80 aircraft, now isn't that a major drawback?

First of all, we have to take into account size of Liaoning, against size of US carrier. US carrier is about 2 times that of Liaoning, thus US carrier's hangar space and top deck are far larger.

Liaoning is expected to carry from 30 to 40 aircraft of various mix of fighter jets and helicopters. And the 70-80 aircraft on US carriers is also a mixture of fixed wing and rotor wing aircraft.

Also J-15 is larger than F-18 Hornet. If Liaoning will to take FC-31 or J-10 or even Mig-29 size type of aircraft, surely she can carry more.

This is not a major drawback because it is like comparing a Mini Cooper against a Jaguar. Or as they said apple against orange. If you say disadvantage in size, yes. That I would agreed.