Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Flyingdutchman
    Flyingdutchman

    Posts : 535
    Points : 551
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:01 pm

    Lineup of 36 aircraft on China's Liaoning carrier revealed

    China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, can carry four Z-18J airborne early warning (AEW) helicopters, six Z-18F anti-submarine helicopters, two Z-9C rescue helicopters, and 24 J-15 shipborne fighter jets, the Chinese-language Shanghai Morning Post reported on Aug. 28.

    Cao Weidong, senior colonel and researcher at the People's Liberation Army Naval Research Institute, said the aircraft carrier could gain the upper hand in any potential battle for air or sea supremacy. The lineup may differ for various missions, however. The full lineup of 36 aircraft shows that the "PLA Navy's era of aircraft" has arrived, the report said.

    On the tail of the Z-18F helicopter is the image of a sea eagle sprawling its talons, which suggests that the aircraft's mission is to seek out and attack enemy submarines, according to the paper. Cao said it is common practice to mark aircraft with physically tough and fierce animals to "show the spirit of bravery of the pilot and the craft itself."

    The helicopter has a shipborne sea search radar that enables 360-degree detection and is equipped with dipping sonar and the report speculated that it can carry 32 sonobuoys.

    China is faced with a grave threat from the US, which owns the most advanced nuclear submarines, as well as Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force, the report said. Countries operating in the South China Sea, particularly those engaged in territorial disputes with China, have also been strengthening their naval forces, putting pressure on China, said the report.

    The Z-9C helicopter's ZLC-1 radar can detect up to a range of 150 meters, while the Z-18F helicopter is equipped with four 7K anti-submarine torpedoes and four YJ-91 missiles.

    "In offshore combat, we are mainly faced with challenges to defensive military operations," said Cao. "We need to power up anti-submarine capability to prevent offshore detection from potential opponents and to prevent a mine blockade."


    I think we can expect atleast 36 aircraft on the indigenous one Very Happy

    Somewhere i read it was to be 50 j-15s and a bunch of helis but i think that is too way to much and that that won't fit.
    Cyberspec
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 2712
    Points : 2867
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:14 am

    China may be starting work on VSTOL fighter

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force P1634391

    http://www.janes.com/article/50630/china-may-be-starting-work-on-vstol-fighter


    ---

    Arrow China's first runway in Spratlys under construction
    http://www.janes.com/article/50714/china-s-first-runway-in-spratlys-under-construction
    avatar
    type055

    Posts : 101
    Points : 106
    Join date : 2014-09-03

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  type055 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 2:40 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:China may be starting work on VSTOL fighter

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force P1634391

    http://www.janes.com/article/50630/china-may-be-starting-work-on-vstol-fighter

    just advanced research long time to mature
    ---

    Arrow China's first runway in Spratlys under construction
    http://www.janes.com/article/50714/china-s-first-runway-in-spratlys-under-construction
    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2269
    Points : 2360
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  higurashihougi on Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:08 pm

    @Type055:

    Nah, VSTOL is a very complicated thing and I believe it is risky trying to create one.

    I think China should stick on the J-11 type of navy aircraft. It is good and effective enough.
    avatar
    type055

    Posts : 101
    Points : 106
    Join date : 2014-09-03

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  type055 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:17 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:@Type055:

    Nah, VSTOL is a very complicated thing and I believe it is risky trying to create one.

    I think China should stick on the J-11 type of navy aircraft. It is good and effective enough.

    China has a need to build VSTOL, China will build amphibious assault ships in near future,(in 1 or 2 year)

    in the long run, coz VSTOL need long time , maybe at that time China's military presence will not only in Asia.

    makeing plan for future is necessary
    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2269
    Points : 2360
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  higurashihougi on Fri May 01, 2015 12:34 pm

    type055 wrote:
    higurashihougi wrote:@Type055:

    Nah, VSTOL is a very complicated thing and I believe it is risky trying to create one.

    I think China should stick on the J-11 type of navy aircraft. It is good and effective enough.

    China has a need to build VSTOL, China will build  amphibious assault ships in near future,(in 1 or 2 year)

    in the long run,  coz VSTOL need long time , maybe at that time China's military presence will not only in Asia.

    makeing plan for future is necessary

    China's Liaoning has a ski jump, and future carriers of China may have both ski jump and magnetic ejector. These two are more than enough for conventional navy aircraft like J-11, Su-33 or MiG-29K. No need for VSTOL.

    My thesis is this: instead of making a lot of complicated VSTOL for carriers, making some carrier with ski jump and ejector for conventional aircrafts is more effective.

    But then in the future will may see China's VSTOL in many circumstance.

    sepheronx wrote:Any info on the J-11D radar? Track, scan, ect? Find it funny they get it on an Su-27 aircraft while Russia has not, even though they had AESA tech for a long time, then opted for Hybrid.....

    Or may be a J-xx with 10 metre L-band radar like T-50 ? Who knows.
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3640
    Points : 3724
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  medo on Fri May 01, 2015 6:04 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:@Type055:

    Nah, VSTOL is a very complicated thing and I believe it is risky trying to create one.

    I think China should stick on the J-11 type of navy aircraft. It is good and effective enough.

    Maybe Russia and China could together reactivate Yak-141 VTOL fighter. If Russia and China will build some Mistral type ships, they could place 6 to 8 Yak-141 multirole fighters there together with helicopters for air protection and support for marines, while classical carriers will use MiG-29K/KUB or J-15 fighters. I think India is also looking for similar ships, so there is a market for Yak-141 and this plane had flying prototypes, so they only have to modernize it and bring into production.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22076
    Points : 22620
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Sat May 02, 2015 12:55 pm

    My advice would be if you are developing EM cats then I would not bother with a VSTOL aircraft... it is simply not worth the lack of performance and high costs.

    VSTOL aircraft are useful when you want small cheap ships... but to be honest you get 90% of a Sea Harrier when you put an AESA on a Ka-52 and arm it with R-77s.
    OK that is an exaggeration but the Harier is to a MiG-29K or F-18 what the Ka-52N is to the Harrier... sure they can operate from corvette sized ships but they lack speed and endurance...
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3640
    Points : 3724
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  medo on Sat May 02, 2015 8:05 pm

    Yak-141 was not a Harrier. It have quite a decent speed of 1800 km/h and range of 2100 km according to wiki. With a modernization with newer engines and using higher share of composites, its performances could be even better, so near MiG-29 and for sure on level of Tejas, JF-17 or FA-50. At the fall of USSR the project was canceled as it didn't have sense in that time, but now it is different. China plan to build 6 big landing ships and station VSTOL aircraft there. Russia also plan to build similar ships to Mistral and could station them there, India also plan to buy such ships, so there is quite a good potential for their export. Also Thailand have its carrier without planes and Harriers are no more in production. If Angola go ahead and actually buy Spanish carrier PdA, they will need VTOL planes too. China will also use them on small artificial islands, where they could not build airfields, but only helipads. With Yak-141 they don't need to develop something from the beginning, but only to reactivate the project.
    nemrod
    nemrod

    Posts : 828
    Points : 1326
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  nemrod on Sun May 03, 2015 12:37 am

    VSTOL is not yet a mature technology. Indeed, you could produce fighters like Harrier, Yak-141, but they are far to be Typhoon, or a Mig-35. Nevertheless, it is interresting to have technology demonstrator, in order to update your technologies. It is reasonable to think that VSTOL will be ready around 50 years. About the ships futures, sincerly I have strong doubts about their survivabilities after 2020. Once the Brahmos II, and other chinese, japanese, korean, and western implementations, the Aircraft-carriers will be useless. Furthermore, if you include cruise missiles inside fighter-bombers the fate is done for all ships. The future would be a flying aircraft carrier. But, this fiction will be ready in 100 years.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22076
    Points : 22620
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Sun May 03, 2015 1:20 am

    The Yak-141 got to the test flight stage but no where near the operational stage...

    It was slower than the MiG-29K, had less range, vastly less payload... anything you could do to the Yak-141 you could do to the MiG-29K and it would always be simpler and better...

    the Yak-141 has pipes all through it taking high pressure air from the engines to the nose, the tail and the wing tips as little puffer jets to stabilise the aircraft in the hover. It also carries two jet engines for take off and landing that are dead weight for the entire flight.

    In terms of VSTOL aircraft it was very interesting, but as a practical weapon it was expensive for what it was, high maintainence, and fragile... even in testing a Yak-141 lost power on landing and landed hard and a main wheel collapsed and ruptured a fuel tank spewing burning fuel all over the deck...

    Loss of power during landing is a common event for VSTOL aircraft as hot exhaust air coming up off the deck gets sucked into the air intake and suddenly and without warning the engine loses thrust because hot air is already hot and jet engines get thrust by heating cold air and making it expand rapidly.

    Once the Brahmos II, and other chinese, japanese, korean, and western implementations, the Aircraft-carriers will be useless.

    Actually I would say the opposite... once Mach 7 missiles are operational then a group of ships will need long range vision and long range reach that aircraft provide to defend themselves.
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3640
    Points : 3724
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  medo on Sun May 03, 2015 10:43 am

    I think you miss the point. Yak-141 VSTOL fighter is not meant to replace MiG-29K or any other carrier fighter. MiG-29K or J-15 will still operate from classical carriers and do their duties. in this case Yak-141 will operate from big LHDs and give support and protection to marines in their operations in similar way as Harriers on the Wasp ships do.


    GarryB wrote:The Yak-141 got to the test flight stage but no where near the operational stage...

    True, but they could reactivate the program and continue to the operational stage. This could save them many years comparing with the development from the beginning. They had two flying prototypes and they could reactivate one prototype into flying condition and start tests with it. Than they could produce new prototypes with new equipment, radar and other gear, so they could test in combat level. In the time those ships will be build, they could develop Yak-141 to operational fighter. Don't forget, majority of them will go for export and China will most probably be the main user.
    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2269
    Points : 2360
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  higurashihougi on Tue May 05, 2015 5:40 am

    medo wrote:I think you miss the point. Yak-141 VSTOL fighter is not meant to replace MiG-29K or any other carrier fighter. MiG-29K or J-15 will still operate from classical carriers and do their duties. in this case Yak-141 will operate from big LHDs and give support and protection to marines in their operations in similar way as Harriers on the Wasp ships do.

    Can we use Ka-52 instead ?
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5252
    Points : 5455
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Werewolf on Tue May 05, 2015 6:30 am

    higurashihougi wrote:
    medo wrote:I think you miss the point. Yak-141 VSTOL fighter is not meant to replace MiG-29K or any other carrier fighter. MiG-29K or J-15 will still operate from classical carriers and do their duties. in this case Yak-141 will operate from big LHDs and give support and protection to marines in their operations in similar way as Harriers on the Wasp ships do.

    Can we use Ka-52 instead ?

    KA-52 has only 480km range with limited weapon payload and speed it does not cover the job of YaK-141 nor of MiG-29K. The job of Ka-52 is similiar to same of AH-1J/Z to provide air assistance to marines landing on shore and to destroy enemy positions and targets endangering the landing procedure. It also can support nearby vessels with Anti Ship Missiles, it is vastly superior to YaK-141 and MiG-29K in CAS role but lacks in everything else of Antiship/ASM/HARM/Air assault and patroling duties.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22076
    Points : 22620
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Tue May 05, 2015 2:32 pm

    The Ka-52 will have an AESA radar and should therefore be compatible with a wide range of Russian and Soviet AAMs including R-77 and R-73. It should also be compatible with most types of anti ship and anti radiation missile including Kh-35 and Kh-31.

    It would be no slouch in the air to air role.

    At the end of the day the Yak-141 would probably be rather better than a Ka-52, but the Yak-141 would be enormously expensive in comparison and operating a fighter from a helicopter carrier would make the helicopter carrier less effective... as to carry Yak-141s you would have to off load helicopters to carry the jets.

    Makes rather better sense to have some fixed wing carriers... and put MiG-29ks on them initially and later naval PAK FAs... it is just cheaper and you get a much better plane too
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3640
    Points : 3724
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  medo on Tue May 05, 2015 4:21 pm

    I doubt Russia will export Ka-52K to China, also China want to have VSTOL planes on their LHDs. Russia could restart Yak-141 project and develop a fully operational VSTOL fighter and save the years of development for China and others. If China is willing to pay operational costs of those fighters on their LHDs, than why not. China is also building small artificial islands, which are too small for classical airfields, but could place smaller helipads from where VTOL fighters could operate. Same could be true for smaller Russian Arctic islands or even Kuriles. Yak-141 could have good export potential. Thailand have a carrier, but they don't have planes for them as they retire their Harrier fleet. Spain retired their Principe de Asturias carrier and Angola is interested to buy it, but Spain will use their Harriers on their new Juan Carlos ship, so Angola or any other buyer will need planes for the carrier. Maybe even Italy will soon retire and sell their Giuseppe Garibaldi carrier as they have new Cavour carrier in their Navy. Yak-141 have good export potential as only other VTOL fighter option is super expensive F-35.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5252
    Points : 5455
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Werewolf on Tue May 05, 2015 7:02 pm

    medo wrote:I doubt Russia will export Ka-52K to China, also China want to have VSTOL planes on their LHDs. Russia could restart Yak-141 project and develop a fully operational VSTOL fighter and save the years of development for China and others. If China is willing to pay operational costs of those fighters on their LHDs, than why not. China is also building small artificial islands, which are too small for classical airfields, but could place smaller helipads from where VTOL fighters could operate. Same could be true for smaller Russian Arctic islands or even Kuriles. Yak-141 could have good export potential. Thailand have a carrier, but they don't have planes for them as they retire their Harrier fleet. Spain retired their Principe de Asturias carrier and Angola is interested to buy it, but Spain will use their Harriers on their new Juan Carlos ship, so Angola or any other buyer will need planes for the carrier. Maybe even Italy will soon retire and sell their Giuseppe Garibaldi carrier as they have new Cavour carrier in their Navy. Yak-141 have good export potential as only other VTOL fighter option is super expensive F-35.

    I doubt it right now. Russia is negotiating on selling S-400 to China and the Ka-52 is no strategic weapon so if they sell S-400 they will most probably sell Ka-52K when China pays...sad thing that russia sells latest tech.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22076
    Points : 22620
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 06, 2015 12:56 am

    Income from sales pays for next gen research and further development...

    I would say that the Ka-52 would be vastly superior to any model Yak-38 and should not be dismissed so easily.

    Of course it is not the ideal air defence aircraft as it is slow and not able to operate at extreme altitudes but it is a lot better than nothing.

    I have tried to think of an on land comparison, but it really doesn't work... having land forces with no air support makes them very vulnerable. Having some rotary wing air support improves their performance with higher mobility than just artillery.

    Adding a Yak-141 however is not comparable to adding Frogfoot aircraft because unlike the Freestyle the Frogfoot is fundamentally cheap and simple and robust and very useful for the job despite being subsonic.

    I think having the Yak-141 as a CAP aircraft would be like trying to use the Su-39 (ie Su-25TM) as an air control fighter... a compromised design that would not be better than a basic MiG-29 or Su-27 in the air to air role.

    Personally I think they should just put helicopters on their helicopter carriers and build bigger carriers for air defence with fixed wing fighters and cats for AEW and AWACS types to maximise vision and reach.

    Note with EM catapults it is actually possible they might be able to launch MiG-29 like aircraft from a 20,000 ton carrier... they might need EM cats to get airborne with a normal load and heavy load, but they will be rather better than any VSTOL fixed wing alternatives IMHO.

    The Chinese are not stupid... they will have done the maths... if they think they can do it... best of luck to them, but I think it is a technology dead end.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty New material and coating to make Chinese submarines

    Post  max steel on Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:13 pm

    New material and coating to make Chinese submarines including nuclear submarines undetectable

    China has been suffering poor technologies for submarines for a long period, especially for its nuclear submarines, which feature big noise. But in recent years, China has made great progress in development of conventional submarines, and developed AIP technology.

    Chinese military media unveiled today that Chinese scientists have taken the lead in developing two kinds of materials, one can help Chinese submarines to avoid track of underwater sonar system, the one is just like “invisible cloak” in “Harry Potter”, which will enable submarines to “vanish completely”.

    The first kind of material can change sound waves of submarines, such as pulse released by antisubmarine ships; therefore, the sonar operators would judge the submarine as a whale, a group of fishes, or even a friendly submarine.

    Chinese researchers unveiled that such material for Chinese submarines is a kind of photonic crystal, which has been developed to control, guide and change sound waves in air, liquid or solid.

    Physical features of photonic crystal could be fixed and thus enemies might find its acoustic law. But Chinese scientists solved that problem; their photonic crystal can have various sound features, just like a sound “chameleon”.


    The other kind of material is like invisible cloak, which is still a prototype for submarine. The coating can currently make an object with the size of a smart phone undiscoverable via sonar, even when it releases low frequency sound waves.

    Prof. Wu from Xi’an Jiaotong University, the leader of the team said, “At present, no submarine can avoid low frequency track, but our research will change the hide and seek game under the sea.” “Chinese military hope their submarine cannot be seen, instead of being masked.”

    Besides, according to National Interest, Type 039A and 636 Kilo-class submarines are so quiet that they are hard to detect in South China Sea. American report from Land said Chinese submarines are becoming quieter and are equipped with more advanced weapons, with greatly improved capabilities of discovering and attacking surface ships.

    The report also said Chinese submarines are able to launch long-range supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles like YJ-18, which can be fatal for US naval vessels.

    Aviation Week and Space Technology reported that Yalong Bay at the southernmost end of Hainan Island might be the largest submarine base in the world. The Chinese submarine base in Yalong Bay is deep in the mountains, and even U.S. satellites or P-8A anti-submarine aircraft cannot shoot a photo of it.

    The website thinks Chinese submarine owns potential strategic impact, especially when Chinese Navy takes offshore actions with SSBNs (Nuclear Ballistic-missile Submarine).

    The latest report indicates that UK is to export LR-7 deep submergence rescue vehicle, which will be very useful in possible accidents of Chinese nuclear submarines and conventional submarines, but this action has irritated U.S., according to Chinese media.
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13782
    Points : 14275
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty PLA Navy and Naval Air Force b

    Post  George1 on Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:41 pm

    Roll-out of the first prototype of the Chinese amphibian AG600

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force 3369829_original

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2032178.html
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13782
    Points : 14275
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  George1 on Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:41 pm

    China is experiencing difficulty with the completion of Ukrainian small landing craft "Zubr"

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force 3391685_original

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2046119.html
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13782
    Points : 14275
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  George1 on Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:46 pm

    Why the US Navy Should Fear China's New 093B Nuclear Attack Submarine

    Is China’s new Type 093B nuclear-powered attack submarine on par with the U.S. Navy’s Improved Los Angeles-class boats?

    At least some U.S. naval analysts believe so and contend that the introduction of the new People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) submarines is an indication of just how quickly Beijing is catching up to the West.

    “The 93B is not to be confused with the 93. It is a transition platform between the 93 and the forthcoming 95,” said Jerry Hendrix, director of the Defense Strategies and Assessments Program at the Center for a New American Security—who is also a former U.S. Navy Captain. “It is quieter and it has a new assortment of weapons to include cruise missiles and a vertical launch capability. The 93B is analogous to our LA improved in quietness and their appearance demonstrates that China is learning quickly about how to build a modern fast attack boat.”

    Other sources were not convinced that Beijing could have made such enormous technological strides so quickly—but they noted that the topic of Chinese undersea warfare capability is very classified. Open source analysis is often extremely difficult, if not impossible. “Regarding the question on the Type 093B, I really don’t know, anything is possible I suppose, but I doubt it,” said retired Rear Adm. Mike McDevitt, now an analyst at CNA’s Center for Naval Analyses. “I have no doubt that the PLAN has ambitions to at least achieve that level of capability and quietness.”

    Though the Seawolf and Virginia-classes have surpassed the Improved Los Angeles-class as the premier U.S. Navy attack submarines, such older vessels will remain the mainstay of the service’s undersea fleet for many years to come. If the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s newest boats are able to match the capabilities of the U.S. Navy’s shrinking undersea fleet, Washington could be in serious trouble. Indeed, the U.S. Navy already anticipated that it could be facing-off against a Chinese submarine fleet that is nearly twice its size, but not as technically capable.

    The U.S. Navy—which has roughly 52 attack submarines—is on track to have 41 attack boats by 2029. The Chinese, meanwhile would have “at least 70, and they’re building,” Vice Adm. Joseph Mulloy, the service’s deputy chief of naval operations for integration of capabilities and resources told the House Armed Services Committee’s seapower and projection forces subcommittee on February 25. “You get back into the whole quality versus quantity issue, but at the same time the Russians are also building...and they build much higher-end submarines.”

    In a 2016 report to Congress, the Pentagon noted that Beijing continues to upgrade and expand its submarine fleet: “China continues to improve its SSN force, and four additional SHANG-class SSN (Type 093) will eventually join the two already in service. The SHANG SSN will replace the aging HAN class SSN (Type 091). These improved SHANG SSNs feature a vertical launch system (VLS) and may be able to fire the YJ-18 advanced anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM). Over the next decade, China may construct a new Type 095 nuclear-powered, guided missile attack submarine (SSGN), which not only would improve the PLAN’s anti-surface warfare capability but might also provide it with a more clandestine land-attack option.”

    The problem, however, is if Hendrix’s assessment is correct and future Chinese submarines are only slightly less capable than the Virginia or Seawolf-class vessels, the Navy could be in trouble. The technological edge the U.S. Navy—which is already woefully short on attack boats—is counting on might not be sufficient to counter Chinese numerical superiority. However, the service is continuing to improve the performance capabilities of its submarines on a continual basis. Nonetheless, one former U.S. Navy undersea warfare officer suggested that the service would come to regret having truncated the high-performance submarine-hunting Seawolf-class at three boats and focusing instead on the more multi-role Virginia-class.

    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/why-the-us-navy-should-fear-chinas-new-093b-nuclear-attack-16741
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13782
    Points : 14275
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  George1 on Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:55 pm

    China Launches Yet Another ‘Carrier Killer’ Destroyer

    The new class of destroyers will be larger than expected.

    The Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Company, traditionally China’s largest shipbuilder, has launched its second Type 052D Luyang III-class destroyer—dubbed “Chinese Aegis”—on August 3 in Dalian in Northeast China, IHS Jane’s Defense Weekly reports. It is only the second vessel of its type built at the Dalian New Shipyard. The first Type 052D Luyang III-class destroyer is currently being fitted, with a third ship to be launched in the immediate future.

    Other vessels of the class have been built by the Jiangnan Shipyard, located on Changxing Island in Shanghai. The shipyard has built eight Type 052D Luyang III-class destroyers so far and launched its ninth vessel this July. At least four more are planned, indicating that the number will go beyond the initial number of 12 Luyang III-class vessels before shifting production to the newer Type 055D multi-role cruisers.

    As I reported elsewhere (See: “China Commissions Fourth ‘Carrier Killer Destroyer’”), the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) South Sea Fleet commissioned the Type 052D Luyang III-class destroyer Yangsha in mid-July. The ship is likely operating out of Yalong Bay naval base on Hainan Island. A video of a large-scale PLAN naval exercise held in the East China Sea in the beginning of August showed a Type 052D Luyang III-class destroyer cruising alongside other surface warships.
    Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

    The Type 052D destroyer class neatly fits into the PLAN’s overall anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategy and has purportedly been specifically designed to repel attacks by enemy aircraft carrier strike groups, submarines, and anti-ship missiles.

    “While the ship’s powerful Type 346A radars provides for an air defense role, the 052D’s modular vertical launch systems also gives it powerful land attack and anti-submarine capabilities. In addition, the Type 0346A radar and other sensors give the 052D vast intelligence gathering capabilities, which is vital for anti-access/area denial operations,” a Popular Science article explained.

    Type 052D Luyang III-class destroyer is equipped with 64 vertical launch cells, each capable of carrying one to four missiles. The ship carries one of the PLAN’s deadliest anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCM), the vertically-launched YJ-18 ASCM. Next to its YJ-18 arsenal, Type 052D guided-missile destroyers are also equipped with modern HQ-9 surface-to-air-missiles.

    The new destroyer class is also part of fulfilling China’s aspiration to build a “blue water” navy, i.e. fielding “far seas” capable warships by providing air cover outside of shore-based air defense systems. Type 052D Luyang III-class destroyers and similar ships “will likely provide increased weapons stores and overall flexibility as surface action groups venture more frequently into blue water in the coming years,” the Pentagon’s 2015 Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) report on China’s naval power noted.

    http://thediplomat.com/2016/08/china-launches-yet-another-carrier-killer-destroyer/
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13782
    Points : 14275
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  George1 on Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:57 pm

    China decommissions another Type 051 destroyer

    On 08 September, the People Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) decommissioned one of its remaining Type 051 destroyers, the Nanchang (China Military).

    Although it is not clear if the Nanchang was in the fact final Type 051 in service with the PLAN, it was one of China’s oldest remaining surface warships. The Type 051 – or Jinan-class (designated Luda by NATO) – was China’s first modern warship designed, developed and built domestically.

    Notes, Comments & Analysis:

    The Jinan, the first Type 051, entered service with the PLAN in December 1971. Since then, it was joined by 17 sister-ships, which were produced until 1990. Although the design has a displacement of 3,670 tons (full load), it was a capable offensive system, one comprised of 16 C-802 anti-ship missiles (AShM), two twin 100mm guns, as well as sound anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities (via two triple ASW torpedo tubes). Alongside the Type 053-series of frigates, the Type 051 served as the backbone of the PLAN.

    Since the late 2000s, the PLAN has been phasing its Type 051s with the Type 051C, Type 052B, Type 052C, and Type 052D series of destroyers. The Type 052D, in particular, is a representation of how far the PLAN, the Chinese shipbuilding industry, and general defence industry have come over the past 40 years.

    In fact, the Type 052D represents a conceptual shift in the PLAN just as much as it does a technological upgrade. Whereas the Type 051 was clearly developed with design inspiration and lessons drawn from Soviet Navy warships, the PLAN’s new destroyers mirror their Western counterparts. This is evident from the layout of the PLAN’s new destroyers, which have been designed on reduced radar cross-section (RCS) principles as well as built to make efficient use of vertical launch systems (VLS) as a means to deploy surface-to-air missiles (SAM) as well as ASW and, in time, AShM.

    Along with modern phased-array based sensors (including active electronically scanned array radars), the Type 052D is (along with a number of other ships, such as the Type 054) is helping China built qualitatively sound capabilities for its naval theatre.

    http://quwa.org/2016/09/11/china-decommissions-another-type-051-destroyer/
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13782
    Points : 14275
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  George1 on Mon Sep 26, 2016 4:06 pm

    Five Ships of the Chinese Navy You Really Ought to Know About

    The Chinese navy isn’t just an aircraft carrier and submarines—here are five other warships you’ll be seeing a lot of
    PLAN warships.

    The Chinese navy has undergone an unprecedented buildup over the last decade. It has deployed an aircraft carrier, launched and recovered airplanes from a carrier flight deck, sent new nuclear submarines to sea and even changed its name from the unwieldy “People’s Liberation Army Navy” to simply, well, the “Chinese navy.”

    The refurbished carrier Lioaning and the new submarines garner the most attention, but the Chinese navy—now arguably the world’s second most powerful after the U.S. Navy—has made equally important advances with other types of warships. New destroyers, corvettes, troop carriers, hospital ships and even spy ships round out a big and versatile fleet.

    Type 056 corvette

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force 1*Y-ALyv7vERG7PtOYmNy3Aw

    During the Cold War, Nikita Krushchev famously bragged that nuclear missiles were rolling off Soviet assembly lines “like sausages.” China may be restrained in producing nuclear missiles, but it sure is making Type 056 corvettes like sausages, with at least 20 under construction since 2012.

    The Type 056s are classified in the West as corvettes—small ships useful for patrolling territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zones. If China decides to start sending non-Coast Guard ships into the disputed Senkaku Islands area, the Type 056s will likely be the first ships sent in.

    The Type 056s have a good mix of self-defense weapons, plus powerful anti-ship and anti-submarine capabilities. The ships mount a 76-millimeter main gun up front for blasting ships and aircraft plus two 30-millimeter rapid-fire guns.

    For missile defense, the Type 056s are equipped with a FL-3000N Flying Leopard missile system similar to the American Rolling Airframe Missile. Each launcher includes eight Flying Leopards.

    Each Type 056 packs a formidable offensive punch in the form of four YJ-83 Eagle Strike anti-ship missiles. These munitions can attack targets more than 124 miles away with a 350-pound high explosive warhead. In the terminal phase, moments before impacting the target, the missile flies 15 feet above the wavetops at twice the speed of sound, making it difficult for defenders to shoot it down.

    Capable of hunting submarines, the Type 056s are fitted with a helipad and hangar for one Z-9 helicopter plus six anti-submarine torpedoes mounted on the deck.

    Type 052D destroyer

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force 172kunming-commission-18

    The Type 052D series of destroyers resembles the U.S. Arleigh Burke-class both externally and in mission. Like the Burkes, the 052Ds have distinctive large, flat-faced radars just under the bridge—and are designed to provide air defense to naval battle groups, particularly carrier battle groups. Beijing has built four Type 052Ds, so far.

    The Type 052Ds are equipped two banks of 32 missile silos each, located for and aft. These primarily carry HQ-9 Red Banner air-defense missiles but some analysts, including author Eric Wertheim of Combat Ships of the World, speculate the silos could also pack land-attack cruise missiles similar to the American Tomahawk.

    The HQ-9 is a derivative of the Russian S-300, similar to the American Patriot missile. With a range of 124 miles, it intercepts its target at speeds of up to Mach 4. The HQ-9 is capable of hitting low-flying aircraft and missiles all the way up to some ballistic missiles. The Red Banner packs an unusually heavy warhead of 400 pounds.

    Other than the Red Banner missiles, ship armament consists of eight Eagle Strike missiles, one 100-millimeter dual-purpose gun, two close-in weapon systems and six anti-submarine torpedoes.

    The new destroyers have a helipad and hangar to accommodate one medium-sized helicopter.

    Type 071 amphibious landing dock

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force 1*pxbfSbMXB3PKCJFFN8DAsQ

    Analysts used to deride Chinese plans to invade Taiwan as “the million-man swim,” due to the Chinese navy’s lack of amphibious lift. But lately China has been building a flotilla of amphibious ships, the backbone of which is the new Type 071 amphibious transport dock.

    The Hudong-Zhonghua Shipyard of Shanghai has completed three Type 071s, with another three apparently planned.

    The Type 071 class can carry up to a battalion of marine infantry, roughly 400 to 800 troops, and has two vehicle decks capable of storing up to 18 armored vehicles. The dock ships can get troops and vehicles to shore by helicopter and landing craft. They have a flight deck capable of simultaneously operating two Z-8 troop-carrying helicopters, and can store another four in a large hangar.

    The ships also have a very large well deck—think of it as a hangar for landing craft that can be flooded with seawater—that can store and launch amphibious vehicles, rigid hulled inflatable boats and four transport hovercraft similar to the American LCAC.

    The ships each have limited self-defense protection in the form of a single 76-millimeter gun and four 30-millimeter close-in weapon systems. As defenses go, that’s not much, and the Type 071s will rely on other ships in a naval battlegroup to defend them.

    Appropriately, the new dock ships based with China’s South Seas Fleet, where they can threaten Taiwan. They have also been sent to the Horn of Africa to serve in China’s anti-piracy force.

    ‘Dongdiao’-class missile surveillance and intelligence ship

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force 1*TfIvsLugw3_A3ncjZ_G5SQ

    The two ships of the Dongdiao class are easily recognizable by their three spherical radar domes, making them look like they are hauling giant soccer balls.

    Built by the Quixin Shipyards of Shanghai, the Dongdiao ships are designed to observe missile tests at sea. The spherical domes cover a variety of sensors, particularly tracking radars and optical tracking systems. The ships also feature recovery cranes for scooping up spent missiles from the ocean.

    The Dongdiaos have been described as “spy ships,” due to their secondary role observing naval activities of other nations. The class is what is known as an ELINT, or electronic intelligence, collection platform. The ships feature a variety of antennas for sucking in electronic signals from the air. The signals can then be returned to China for analysis.

    The lead ship in class was last seen around Hawaii during the 2012 multinational Rim of the Pacific war game, where it was likely observing the exercise and collecting intelligence. Last fall, a rumor originating in the Hong Kong press announced that one of the ships had returned to the Hawaiian coast, but the rumor proved false.

    Armament on the Dongdiao class is minor, amounting to a single manually-operated 37-millimeter cannon, two dual 25-millimeter cannons and a triple anti-submarine torpedo mount.

    Type 920 hospital ship

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force 1*dnWpKgPHWTswlptUmaG9_Q

    The single Type 920 is a second-generation hospital ship built for China by the Guangzhou Shipyards. Launched in 2007, the ship has a crew of 200 and can carry an additional 400 medical personnel. The ship’s wartime name is Daishandao and in peacetime is known as Peace Ark.

    Like the hospital ships of the American Mercy class, the Peace Ark is a full-fledged floating hospital with eight operating rooms, 20 intensive care units and the ability to conduct 40 major surgeries per day. The ship has a helicopter landing pad and six small boats to ferry patients, supplies and personnel between the ship and shore.

    Foreign analysts originally suspected Peace Ark was meant to support an invasion of Taiwan. Regardless, the hospital vessel has sailed on numerous “soft power” humanitarian missions, showing Chinese goodwill by providing free medical services in poor countries around the world.

    The ship traveled to Africa, the Indian Ocean and South Asia in 2010, rendering medical treatment in Djibouti, Tanzania, Kenya, the Seychelles and Bangladesh. Peace Ark sailed on a similar mission to the Caribbean and Central America in 2011.

    Last month, the Chinese government was heavily criticized for not sending Peace Ark to The Philippines in the aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan. The government later relented and the ship belatedly deployed to provide medical care to typhoon survivors.

    Sponsored content

    PLA Navy and Naval Air Force Empty Re: PLA Navy and Naval Air Force

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:29 pm