China's Type 076 Assault Carrier - A unique capability
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 фев 2025
- Intel Assessment on the world’s largest amphibious assault ship - what capability does it bring, & how might it be used?
Keywords: PLA, China, Chinese, PLAN, Navy, Type 076, assault, amphibious, carrier, EMCAT, J-35, unique, Type 075, USS Wasp, USS America, Trieste, HMS Queen Elizabeth
Sources: PLA website
Italian Navy
U.S. Department of Defense
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you. Nice presentation.
Thank you. Glad you liked it.
Thanks for this insight. When I look at it I see the two island system and lifts designed to quickly turn around fix wing aircraft.
Airframe lands by arresting cables, unhooks, and is brought down by the aft lift into the hanger to be processed. Once completed and ready it is brought up by the starboard lift, gets hooked up, blast shield raises, and its in the air. Looks deigned like a production line in a way. Just an opinion.
Glad you liked it.
I think it’s more logical for starboard elevator to bring aircraft down, and port elevator to bring aircraft up. This way, aircraft that landed would just roll forward and turn to the right, while the aircraft brought up would turn left and line up behind the blast deflector. Neither flow would have to cross the flight line, and have much less requirement for clear deck area for maneuvering.
@@xuansu9036 I am not knowledgeable of Navy vessels and that makes complete sense as well. Thanks for the response
Are there any chinese fixed wing aircraft that can take off from this carrier? I'm not aware of any.
@davidgreenwood6029 most likely the GJ-11 UCAV.
Thx mate another great briefing
Thanks, much appreciated.
My guess is this probably also serves as a version of lightning carriers like the America class or kaga carrier of japan. Chinese carrier jets are larger in size while the carriers are smaller than the US counter parts. The 076 should serves as a platform for additional airwings for the carriers to close the gap in numbers. And it doubles as an emergency landing platform for the air war in the open ocean. Otherwise there would be no reason to install the very space consuming 100 meter class catapult, a 50 meter one should be more than enough for any naval drones if this was only meant to be a drone/landing assault ship.
Love your videos btw, Keep up the good work!
Thank you, much appreciated.
@ don’t mean to rush you, but I really look forward to the PLA heavy combined arms brigade briefing, cheers!
@Jiaqi-p5b Doing the Zhuhai Airshow now.
@ yay！
Perhaps ships like this for global security would be deemed as less invasive than a full-out carrier, AKA USA. Some drones, helicopters, and minimal amounts of STOVL fixed wings would appear non- threatening but have enough force powers to safeguard merchant routes and peace stability.
Always seemed strange to me to sacrifice so much in r&d and capability to have a stovl aircraft, rather than just give amphibious ships wires and catapults.
Means you can operate more capable aircraft, and the only thing you lose is simultaneous launch recovery ops.
Also catapulats and wires are a lot easier and cheaper (probably) than stovl aircraft.
Agreed, although that's not to say STOVL aircraft don't have their uses.
@ it’s true. Although I don’t know of any F35-B operators buying them for the other use cases of stovl. (Highways/“underprepared” runways) I might have to go through all the operators and see what the B is being used for, and maybe I will stand corrected.
Ultimately doesn’t change the point that the excess mass should be on the ship and not the plane.
The B does get ALOT of cool points however, and if the market is buying it, then it should be sold.
@@Strategy_AnalysisThe biggest benefit of the F35B is that it provides another option for countries without electromagnetic catapult technology, because they do not have aircraft carriers, only amphibious landing ships
@@mwxfl-q9hsteam catapults are a thing and plenty strong for launching f35b
Particularly considering the STOVL has very little interchangeable parts with the non STOVL version. All kinds of complications of having to making sure the deck can handle exhaust, entirely different airframes and flight control systems. Not to mention catapult and arresting recovery supports full payload. In theory, such arrange can allow shipborne fixed wing AEWCS platforms. That's a huge leap forward. Apart from small sortie rates, there are no disadvantages. And looks like they can mass produce electromagnetic catapults too. To me , it suggests the technological prowess of the West would often aim to solve a problem disregarding the actual cost. Look at the littoral ship programs, it is all exciting that all electric propulsion systems, water jet, 70 knots speed.
Taking such risks would be incredibly expensive. Looking at PLA's procurement programs, they does not take risks AT ALL. They always try to solve a problem with mature technologies and look at US programs very carefully and only commit once proven feasibility.
I'm really interested in seeing how the Chinese military evolves over the years
Give it a few years we all might get a good look.😂🚀
Fuck China
Carrier 004 #19 conventional powered carrier half build in shed
likely delay seeable 2027+
Carrier 005 #20 onwards will be nuclear-powered
Thorium nuclear-powered not Uranium
Thorium prototype Design likely completed
Currently likely under development & testing
Rough estimate be seeable ~2032+
Carrier 006 will be sister carrier to 005 #20
@james_l4337 thanks for the info
Good info mate
Thanks, much appreciated.
I think J35 may be deployed on 076. But the number will not be large, which involves the deck scheduling issue. Since China currently does not have vertical take-off and landing technology, it may deploy about 6 aircraft. As an escort fleet, the main aircraft should still be GJ11. If J35 cannot be deployed, there is no need to develop this weapon, or 1-2 short catapults will be enough.
Largely agree with your comments. Thanks.
I read that the J35 carrier fighters will be deployed with the PLAN type 03 and type 04 carriers.
@@amunra5330 No doubt that this will eventuate.
Can the j35 actually take off from this carrier? If so, news to me.
J35/FC-31 certainly can take off with the 076 LHD EMALS however, makes no sense to have them on this LHD, which takes up rooms, emergency engines for J35.
Mostly only for Helicopters (video) & attack drones, & in special cases allow J35 to touch down & launch again
IMHO
So it's for a *landing plateform, refuel, restock for piloted planes while drones be one of main focus* other then Helicopters
This is all very interesting, and seems reasonable with the open info we have.
But why do you think the PLAN will use LCACs instead of sending the amphibious machines directly? LCACs are much faster, true, but also much larger, more visible targets, and take more space so fewer machines can be carried and deployed.
My point is that if PRC has air superiority, the swimming Type 05s will not be easily discovered, and the lower speed will not give the defenders time to prepare. But the larger number, combined with their very low profile when swimming, and ability to fire while swimming, will pack a bugger punch.
Thanks for the comment. The short answer is that by using the LCACs, the LHA can stand off further, improving its defence against land-based threats.
@@Strategy_Analysis Thanks for the answer. I couldn't find the sea range of Type 05 anywhere.
However, its land range is given at 500km, its max land speed is 65km/h, so about 7.5 hours of driving. Its sea speed is around 30km/h, but horsepower is tripled, so presumably fuel consumption is tripled as well. Endurance on water would be down to 2.5 hours of swimming. This should mean 75km water range, right?
I admit my calculations are making a lot of assumptions. I swear, I'm not trying to be obtuse, I am genuinely interested in the topic, and not knowledgeable enough. These are honest questions, not criticisms for your content.
I don't know if the land range is calculated when outside carrying fuel containers and filling the internal tanks midway - and if the internal tanks can be refueled while swimming.
I don't know if carrying max fuel means carrying less supplies.
I don't know if the operation requires fuel for return to ship, and how much would be reserved for shore operations.
These are all factors which would make LCACs preferable, as they would put machines on shore fully fueled. But the type 71s and 75s can carry up to 4 Type 726 LCACs, so 8 Type 05s per ship, which feels too few for an invasion. Unless, of course, Wiki info is wrong, and I would welcome a correction.
Chinese military forums consider that this ship may be equipped with large UAV.
@@horuscheng3476 could well be, but think about wingspans and how that might influence the positioning of the arresting wires.
Type 075 40000t-45000t
Not 45,000 tons. It is smaller than the America class, so it cannot be that big. Probably 38,000-40,000 tons
this milestone marks the beginning of the end of the Western hegemony, imperialism & colonialism
Type 076 50000t
Agree
That's the usual estimate, some estimate 55k tons
But... Who knows
Supposedly 075 LHD ~40k ton?
And likely PLAN if announce tons likely down play this to say 45 to 48k tons
The thing to keep in mind with the rapid build up of Chinese naval assets, is that the equipment is only one part of a complex web of interactions needed to maintain a functional military capability
The training, tactics, logistics, and operational experience of operation such complex. integrated warfare systems takes...decades to perfect.
That's not to say the Chinese won't get there, and that the threat of these can be dismissed, merely to take the full story into perspective.
Absolutely correct, takes time to become proficient with new equipment, and how it fits into operational concept.
This is certainly interesting. Do you think they would develop (if they already havent) an E2C Hawkey AEWACS equivalent for their carrier and Landing Assault Ships ?
No，but i think j35 will
If the catapult on the Type 076 is as capable as those on the Fujian aircraft carrier, then it should be able to launch China's version of the E-2D Hawkeye, the KJ-600 which is in flight testing. Whether it is able to land on the Type 076 is another matter (how wide is the runway?). If not, the PLA could always use the Z-18J AEW helicopter which is in service.
their E2C equivalent is already operational. just not deployed.
@@Strategy_Analysis I see, thnx
Eurasian Naval Insight channel gives a better presentation of this new ship. Look it up.
Eurasian Naval Insight has some good info, but isn't really impartial.