Welcome to DefenceTalk.com Forum!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

PRC Peoples Liberation Army Navy

Discussion in 'Navy & Maritime' started by Wall83, Dec 5, 2010.

Share This Page

  1. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,212
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    I admit I don't know the actual capability of a HVP shell be it powder or EM launched. In the case of railgun launch, is there some kind of control of the shell? In a AA/anti- missile application, the incredible velocity of the projectile combined with state of the art radar should offer an enhanced defensive option. What kind of control Is possible with a Railgun projectile? Are there guidance technologies that could survive the enormous g-forces involved with these HVP, certainly this info is not in the public domain
    .
     
  2. barney41

    barney41 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2014
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Manila
    IIRC there is a CSBA report that mentions the HVP will be command-guided and support some maneuver capability and some sort of proximity sensor.
     
  3. Milne Bay

    Milne Bay Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2010
    Messages:
    435
    Likes Received:
    20
    I think that this is a wish at the moment and has not been able to be accomplished yet.
    Of course, if it comes to fruition it will change the usefulness of the weapon, but as it stands, I don't think that railguns are capable of hitting a moving target
    MB
     
  4. barney41

    barney41 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2014
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Manila
    HVP is set to be turned over to the Army and Navy by year;s end. The Services will assume responsibility to transitioning the HVP into a working system including a variety of warheads to be fired from Navy deck guns and Army howitzers.



    $86,000 + 5,600 MPH = Hyper Velocity Missile Defense

    CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: The Pentagon’s Strategic Capabilities Office will test-fire a radical new missile defense system in less than a year.The Hyper Velocity Projectile, a supersonic artillery round, is fired from ordinary cannon at 5,600 miles per hour(??? this is railgun speed; cannon HVP round will max out at Mach 3) and can kill incoming threats for a mere $86,000 a shot...

    So when will the Army and Navy actually get Hyper Velocity Projectiles? Both services are already working with SCO to plan a handover of the program, Sabio said. His role is just to prove the key technology works: specifically, to demonstrate that an HVP can maneuver close enough to “an inbound, maneuvering threat” that it could have destroyed it if fitted with the proper warhead. Sabio’s not developing that warhead.

    “We are building out the full fire control loop including the sensors, the coms links, the projectile, the launchers (i.e.) the guns,” he said. “The command and control…. I leave that to my independent transition partners, Navy and Army.”

    And by when will the demonstration happen? “Well,” said Sabio, “my program ends less than a year from now.”



    963SHARES
     
  5. weaponwh

    weaponwh Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2016
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    ohio
    look like their 2nd carrier start sea trails now.

     
  6. StobieWan

    StobieWan Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,044
    Likes Received:
    70
    I saw that earlier - from what I can read, it's conventional steam turbine powered - really surprised it's not using GT's for propulsion (for the usual reasons, rapid start and acceleration) Steam takes a while to bring up to full power, plus is usually man power intensive.
     
  7. oldsig127

    oldsig127 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2014
    Messages:
    418
    Likes Received:
    75
    Location:
    Brisbane
    True, but nuclear or oil fired steam also provide for steam catapults, and GT doesn't. Maybe the Chinese are wary of EMALS style technology? It's widely reported - not necessarily accurately - that the QE class were meant at one point to use EMALS but the cost and uncertainty broughtthe change to ramps and F-35B so there'd be precedent

    oldsig
     
  8. Ananda

    Ananda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    1,700
    Likes Received:
    36
    Chinese doing it step by step. Type 001A as this carrier known there, is modified design of type 001 (Liaoning) with bigger room in hanggar deck for more Aircraft (8 more according to Chinese media and forum). Thus they will use similar type of propulsions, with much improved sensors and electronics. Whether after this (type 002 and 003) they will jump to nuclear or other kind of propulsions remain to be seen. One thing, they have technology to go to nuclear, but Chinese seems so far like to go on step by step progresive development.
     
  9. spoz

    spoz Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    46
    Location:
    Osborne, SA
    The Chinese aren’t using cats, same approach as the Russians, CTOL aircraft off a ski jump
     
  10. Todjaeger

    Todjaeger Potstirrer

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    307
    Location:
    not in New England anymore...
    I had been under the impression that the Russians, like the Indians, operate STOBAR as opposed to CATOBAR aircraft, neither of which are quite the same as CTOL.
     
  11. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,212
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Is China currently manufacturing GTs that are large enough to power an aircraft carrier? While being a better choice, GTs have to be reliable and durable too, things that lag in Russian/ Chinese turbines. However China is pouring large sums of money into this technology so carrier four or five will likely have turbine power.
     
  12. swerve

    swerve Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    6,847
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Reading, Berkshire
    The QE class was originally planned to be STOVL, so the ramps & F-35B were in the plans from the start. EMALS was not ready or sure to be ready, so wasn't seriously considered, at least not as part of the original fit-out. It was announced that they could be converted in future if wished, but no design work was done to facilitate future conversion. The only real provision was that they're big enough.

    In 2010 a new minister of defence (Liam Fox - a total tosser) decided to have QE completed with EMALS, having accepted the 'could be converted' at face value & brushed off attempts to explain what it really meant, but after a lot of money working out how much work (e.g. ripping out a lot which had already been built) & time it'd take, & what it'd cost (all that work, & at least twice as much for the EMALS kit as his personally selected pro-EMALS political advisers claimed, IIRC) the idea was dropped & the original plans were reinstated in 2011. Still cost well over £100 million in work & delays. We'd ordered EMALS, & I'm not sure what that cost. The USN took over the order, so picked up most of the tab, but we may still have had to pay something.
     
    oldsig127 likes this.
  13. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,212
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    IIRC, the F-35B versus F-35C debate was part of the problem too. Once the F-35B started to shine, EMALS, expensive and unproven, and the delays with the C version also helped end further CATOBAR considerations.
     
  14. KiwiRob

    KiwiRob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Messages:
    841
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    Norway
    Type 002 is already been laid down at Jiangnan shipyard, she's not nuclear powered, but she will use a Chinese version of EMALS, she will be quite different from Type 001A and a fair bit larger.

    Type 003 and 004 are the full fat nuclear powered carriers equal to the Fords.
     
  15. Ananda

    Ananda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    1,700
    Likes Received:
    36
    Hmm..got conflicting info on what Type 002 propulsions will be. Some speculated in Chinese forums it will be still using proven steam turbines like Type 001A, and the catapults will also be steam ones..

    Other already speculated that Chinese will jump to Emals, however the propulsions will used Ukraine Gas Turbines since steam turbines being considered not generating enough power to operated their Emals version effectively.

    I do have reservation on last one..since I do not know Ukraine have Large Enough Gas Turbines to operate 70,000-75,000 tons Carrier (as Type 002 reported will be on that range). Personally until more clear info coming out, I do tend to believe Type 002 still used steam turbines with steam catapults. The Chinese do have both Steam and Emals catapults prototypes and research.

    After that then 'potentially' they will go to Nuclear and Emals, since Chinese do have more matured Nuclear propulsions Tech relative to their Gas Turbines. Unless they make more progress on large GT, seems more convenience for them to go Nuclear rather than GT.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2018
  16. ngatimozart

    ngatimozart Super Moderator Staff Member Verified Defense Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    385
    Location:
    In the rum store
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2018
  17. ngatimozart

    ngatimozart Super Moderator Staff Member Verified Defense Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    385
    Location:
    In the rum store
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2018
  18. Stampede

    Stampede Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2015
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    31
    Location:
    Melbourne
    As suggested in the article- What does China need such ships for and what are her intentions.
    ngatimozart as you suggest in the opening post the PLAN have gone from a brown water, to green, and now a Blue water force.
    At the end of the day I guess this is change on a big scale achieved on a relatively short time table.
    The thing about this large beasty is that it also accompanied by a growing force of modern escorts and supply vessels, impressive in capability, size and numbers.

    The Chinese Communist party is unambiguous in developing the PLAN as a political tool of power projection for when soft power does not get its way.
    This carrier program will no doubt see a 5th and 6th planned carrier for the PLAN with complimentary escorts, and this will bring significant change in the military balance for the oceans we share in the South Pacific, happening as early as the late 2020's or early 2030's.
    Suggest the development of their LHD and LSD force is also an area to watch out for in the above time table.

    In a decades time what would Australian and New Zealand make of a visiting PLAN battle group harboured in a small Pacific Island neighbour port.



    Yes the PLAN need their own thread on DT.

    Yes the ADF may want to up the order of P8's to 15 now.
    Take the option of another two MRTTs for a force of nine, now,
    Commit to 7 not 6 MQ-4C Tritons now.

    Interesting times.
    Regards S
     
  19. Feanor

    Feanor Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    15,214
    Likes Received:
    52
    Location:
    Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
    I'm not sure that the PLAN is as big of a threat as it is sometimes made out to be. Their experience in nuke subs is lacking, and their AShMs are often based on foreign export designs. The speed with which they have built their grand fleet is impressive, but their relative lack of experience of operating such a navy is a huge weakness. I think it will take considerably longer for the PLAN to build up the operating experience and add some those truly advanced capabilities to their otherwise impressive-looking force.

    As far as their intentions go, it's unlikely they will be able to truly challenge the USN any time soon, and any major war between them and any of their powerful neighbors (Japan, South Korea or Taiwan), however unlikely this scenario is, would ultimately draw in the USA. It's far likelier that they will be used to support Chinese pretensions in Africa, and participate in the support of friendly regimes against relatively weak opponents, much like the role of the Russian VMF in the operation in Syria.
     
  20. Ananda

    Ananda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    1,700
    Likes Received:
    36
    Any of you gents have info on how many Type 52 and Type 55 destroyers PLAN will have in their planning.

    Don't really got solid info on that from Chinese forums. The Chinese forumers tend to inflate the numbers to 30 Type 55 and 60 type 52.