(Type 076) what kind of air wing will it use?

[obj 705A]

by the way does any one know what is the max take off weight of this GJ-11 that everybody is talking about?
at first I thought it was something small like the American Sentinel but apparently it's much bigger than the Sentinel, after some Googling I didn't find any 100% reliable source but the estimates of the max take off weight I saw range from 16k to 20k tonnes.
by the way apparently the take off weight of the Hawkeye AWAC is 23,850 kg!

Weight: Max. gross, take-off: 53,000 lbs (23,850 kg) 40,200 lbs basic (18,090 kg).

https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=1100&tid=700&ct=1

 

[waja2000]

can carry 4-6 unit J-31

 

[obj 705A]

one of the retarded predictions that I saw on CJDBY was that the catapults of the Type 076 might be limited to launching no more than 15 tonnes and that is why it won't be capable of launching manned fighters, ofcourse that idea is totally stupid because it's possible that the max take off weight of GJ-11 drone is slightly higher so that means even this drone wouldn't be able take off if fully loaded with fuel and weapons, however just for the sake of arguement let us assume it is true that the catapults are castrated and limited to 15 tonnes, why the f*** would that prevent manned fighters from taking off? there are fighters that are much lighter than 15 tonnes.

one example of that is the FC-1 otherwise known as the JF-17, the max take off weight of the JF-17 is 12,700 kg so it's significantly lighter than a GJ-11, China could easly modify & navalize the JF-17 with folding wings and all the other body reinforcments and equipment required for CATOBAR, and if for whatever reason the PLAN is allergic to having single engined aircraft abord a ship, they could always modify the design and replace the single engine with two smaller ones in addition to any other changes required, all of this would cost peanuts and nowadays for China developing a 4th gen fighter is as normal and easy as breathing air, since the max take off weight of the JF-17 is significantly less than that of the GJ-11 that means the designers will have alot of room to maneuvre when modifying the design.

ofcourse just to be clear that doesn't mean I would believe even for a second that the Type 076 is gonna have navalized JF-17 (whether single engined or a new double engined variant) because I'm 100% sure it's gonna operate the J-35, the one and only reason why I went along with this stupid theory that the Type 076 will have castrated catapults and arresting wires limited to handling no more than 15 tonnes was to prove that even much below 15 tonnes there are capable manned fighters.

 

[Deino]

one of the retarded predictions that I saw on CJDBY was ....

Calm down imedeatly with such a behaviour! Take this as a warning.

I find your attitude as pure arrogance to call any other opinion that does not fit yours as retarded.
Even more you are so much vehemently defending an opinion that is as much speculative as any other's. So far there is not even a ship nor an airwing and you call others retarded only since they are more realistic, reasonable and carefully with their statements.

 

[waja2000]

one of the retarded predictions that I saw on CJDBY was that the catapults of the Type 076 might be limited to launching no more than 15 tonnes and that is why it won't be capable of launching manned fighters, ofcourse that idea is totally stupid because it's possible that the max take off weight of GJ-11 drone is slightly higher so that means even this drone wouldn't be able take off if fully loaded with fuel and weapons, however just for the sake of arguement let us assume it is true that the catapults are castrated and limited to 15 tonnes, why the f*** would that prevent manned fighters from taking off? there are fighters that are much lighter than 15 tonnes.

one example of that is the FC-1 otherwise known as the JF-17, the max take off weight of the JF-17 is 12,700 kg so it's significantly lighter than a GJ-11, China could easly modify & navalize the JF-17 with folding wings and all the other body reinforcments and equipment required for CATOBAR, and if for whatever reason the PLAN is allergic to having single engined aircraft abord a ship, they could always modify the design and replace the single engine with two smaller ones in addition to any other changes required, all of this would cost peanuts and nowadays for China developing a 4th gen fighter is as normal and easy as breathing air, since the max take off weight of the JF-17 is significantly less than that of the GJ-11 that means the designers will have alot of room to maneuvre when modifying the design.

ofcourse just to be clear that doesn't mean I would believe even for a second that the Type 076 is gonna have navalized JF-17 (whether single engined or a new double engined variant) because I'm 100% sure it's gonna operate the J-35, the one and only reason why I went along with this stupid theory that the Type 076 will have castrated catapults and arresting wires limited to handling no more than 15 tonnes was to prove that even much below 15 tonnes there are capable manned fighters.

Well there is have news said China CAIG is in develop single engine version of 5th Gen fighter, if true possible can use in PLAN.

 

[Figaro]

one of the retarded predictions that I saw on CJDBY was that the catapults of the Type 076 might be limited to launching no more than 15 tonnes and that is why it won't be capable of launching manned fighters, ofcourse that idea is totally stupid because it's possible that the max take off weight of GJ-11 drone is slightly higher so that means even this drone wouldn't be able take off if fully loaded with fuel and weapons, however just for the sake of arguement let us assume it is true that the catapults are castrated and limited to 15 tonnes, why the f*** would that prevent manned fighters from taking off? there are fighters that are much lighter than 15 tonnes.

one example of that is the FC-1 otherwise known as the JF-17, the max take off weight of the JF-17 is 12,700 kg so it's significantly lighter than a GJ-11, China could easly modify & navalize the JF-17 with folding wings and all the other body reinforcments and equipment required for CATOBAR, and if for whatever reason the PLAN is allergic to having single engined aircraft abord a ship, they could always modify the design and replace the single engine with two smaller ones in addition to any other changes required, all of this would cost peanuts and nowadays for China developing a 4th gen fighter is as normal and easy as breathing air, since the max take off weight of the JF-17 is significantly less than that of the GJ-11 that means the designers will have alot of room to maneuvre when modifying the design.

ofcourse just to be clear that doesn't mean I would believe even for a second that the Type 076 is gonna have navalized JF-17 (whether single engined or a new double engined variant) because I'm 100% sure it's gonna operate the J-35, the one and only reason why I went along with this stupid theory that the Type 076 will have castrated catapults and arresting wires limited to handling no more than 15 tonnes was to prove that even much below 15 tonnes there are capable manned fighters.

CJBDY is full of idiots ... what would you expect. I only use them for the air force forum, which is only slightly better. Mainly do it to get the most up to date rumors or pictures. I don't even read the individual opinions/analyses.

Well there is have news said China CAIG is in develop single engine version of 5th Gen fighter, if true possible can use in PLAN.

Allegedly the single engine stealth fighter is going to be based on the J-10.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

There's something I don't think anyone here has considered. I don't think the issue is with launching the aircraft, I don't imagine the 076's catapult would be too weak to launch them. The issue is with recovering the aircraft - the the landing deck is too small to safely decelerate a full-sized fighter. You'll notice that the F-35 which operates from American LHDs is a STOVL - short take-off and vertical landing.

The 076 would provide a PLAN CBG with a powerful fixed-wing, stealth strike capability. The air combat can be handled by aircraft operating from the 003+.

 

[obj 705A]

There's something I don't think anyone here has considered. I don't think the issue is with launching the aircraft, I don't imagine the 076's catapult would be too weak to launch them. The issue is with recovering the aircraft - the the landing deck is too small to safely decelerate a full-sized fighter. You'll notice that the F-35 which operates from American LHDs is a STOVL - short take-off and vertical landing.

The 076 would provide a PLAN CBG with a powerful fixed-wing, stealth strike capability. The air combat can be handled by aircraft operating from the 003+.

depending on the design of the ship, the length of the runway is by far the least important factor in determining the max weight of any kind of aircraft that lands on it, I did some quick measurements of the length of the landing runway of some CVs just for reference, that of the Charles De Gaulle is around 200 meters, that of the Gerald Ford is around 230 meters.
if the Type 076 follows this design:-

then it's landing runway length would be even greater than that of Gerald Ford! because it would be using the entire length of the ship , for sure this ship is longer than the America class (America class length is 257 meters), obviously with this design you would have to kiss the idea of simultaneos launch and recovery good by.

however if it uses an angled deck design with minimal to barely visible overhangs and if simultaneous launch & recovery is a requirement then indeed there would be a limitation on the max weight of aircrafts that can land on it (for reference Gerlad Ford can do that, how ever Charles De Gaul can't do simultaneous launch and recovery because it has no launching position + catapult that is completely outside the landing runway even though it has an angled flight deck).

regarding the maximum width of the aircrafts that can land on the runway, the GJ-11 drone has almost the same width as a Flanker just a little less (14 meters vs 14.7 meters respectively) and obviously the J-35 has a much smaller wingspan.

 

[obj 705A]

so any way now that I have talked about the landing runway I would like to talk about the catapult, in this design with the runway that is as long as the entire length of the ship:-

the length of the catapult in this design is about one third the length of the ship as we can see from the CGI, since this ship will be probably 260 meters long, that means the catapult in this design is 86 meters long. in comparison, the length of the Steam CATs of the Charles de Gaulle is 80 meters, so they both have around the same length, the de Gaulle was able to launch up to 27 tonnes in the air! EMALS has 30% more launch energy than a steam CAT that is equal in length, so assuming the Chinese EMALs recieves enough electricity for it to reach full potential, it would have no problem doing what the old steam CATs of the de Gaulle can do.

Edit: also correct me if I'm mistaken but I think Admiral Ma Weiming did say that China has solved the issue of power supply to EMALS even without the need for nuclear power.