The Fujian ship is the first catapult aircraft carrier of the Chinese Navy, so the Fujian ship has attracted much attention since its construction began. However, the position of Fujian electromagnetic catapult is a bit awkward. The No. 2 catapult goes too deep into the landing runway and cannot be used when the carrier-based aircraft lands. However, this is true for all aircraft carriers in the world. It is inevitable that the No. 2 catapult interferes with the landing. Ford also has the No. 2 catapult interfering with the landing. Is there a problem? Most of the No. 3 catapults that overlap with the landing deck will have a greater impact on the landing of the carrier-based aircraft when releasing the carrier-based aircraft. However, none of the catapults located on the angled deck will not interfere with the ship. The plane takes off and lands, so it doesn't matter.
However, the Fujian ship's No. 1 catapult was too far to the right, causing the front elevator to stop operating when the carrier-based aircraft was released from the No. 1 takeoff point. It can be said that this is very embarrassing. After all, let alone the US aircraft carrier, even the Liaoning ship has a take-off point that does not interfere with the dispatch and recovery of carrier-based aircraft...
The reason for this embarrassment is not only because of the electromagnetic The catapult is longer than the steam catapult , which causes the flame deflector to move back, which is also a very important reason to make room for the hangar.
1143.5 The location of the ammunition elevator limits the hangar space, resulting in a hangar length of only 153 meters.
The predecessor of the Liaoning ship is the Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier cruiser No. 2. The Shandong ship is the Chinese Navy's Liaoning ship. The domestic aircraft carrier designed after the modification, due to our lack of experience in using aircraft carriers, the Shandong ship also inherited many of the stubborn illnesses that the Liaoning ship had in the womb. The most typical example is the ammunition elevator located between the No. 1 and No. 2 take-off points.
1143 Internal structure comparison chart
Kiev-class aircraft-carrying cruiser is 273 meters long, 31 meters wide at the waterline, 130 meters long, 22.5 meters wide, and 6.6 meters high; the Kuznetsov/Liaoning ship is 305 meters long and 305 meters wide. 35 meters, the hangar is 153 meters high, 26 meters wide and 7.2 meters high.
1143.5 type is 32 meters longer than the 1143 type, but the hangar is only 23 meters longer. The reason why the length of the hangar is less than the length of the deck is not because the built-in P-700 granite anti-ship missile ammunition magazine occupies the hangar space. After all, although the Kiev-class does not have built-in granite, it does have basalt ammunition depot , and SA-N-3 anti-aircraft missile ammunition depot. The length occupied by these two ammunition depots is not much shorter than the length required by the granite launch unit. ...
What limits the length of Kuznetsov's hangar are the four ammunition elevators located on the central axis. These four ammunition elevators make it impossible for Kuznetsov to expand the hangar space forward. However, the Soviets did not think the problem was big, so the same design appeared not only on 1143.5 but also on 1160, 1150, 1153, and 1143.7. It can be said that all Soviet aircraft-carrying cruisers have to face the problem of ammunition elevators in front of the hangar, and they cannot escape. After all, the Soviet aircraft carrier is called an aircraft-carrying cruiser, and a group of anti-ship missiles must be arranged in the space in front. If you dare to have any objections, the serial aircraft cruiser will be cut off for you.
This shortcoming was nothing in the Soviet Union, but it is very embarrassing here because the ammunition elevator group is too long! The total length of these four ammunition elevators is close to 16 meters, and the total width is close to 7 meters... If these four ammunition elevators are moved, the hangar can be extended by about 20 meters (there are various servos in the shaft of the ammunition elevators) (not just a lift) can increase the available expansion width by about 20 meters, and the total area of the hangar can be increased by 300 square meters, thus allowing 2 or even 3 more fighter jets to be parked! This will free up parking space for the carrier-based early warning aircraft without reducing the number of fighter jets.
The problem is that when Varyag was towed to China, the completion rate was already about 60%. The hole for the ammunition elevator had already been dug, so it couldn't be filled in, right? Therefore, the Liaoning ship inherited the forward ammunition elevator group of the Kuznetsov exactly as it was.In addition, there is no place to learn the experience of using aircraft carriers, and the dispatching experience of other countries can only be partially learned. Therefore, we can only explore the experience of using aircraft carriers step by step, first solving the problems of whether or not, and then solving the problems of good and bad.
The early status of the Liaoning ship in service. As can be seen from the picture, there is no white line mark on the front ammunition elevator, and it is obviously not enabled.
Due to lack of experience, the front ammunition elevator group was not enabled two years ago when the Liaoning ship first entered service. It took several years to accumulate a lot of dispatching experience before the front ammunition elevator group was officially launched.
The front ammunition elevator is outlined with a white line, and it has obviously been enabled. Of course, designers in our country also know that this Soviet design has some serious problems. The problem is that the Shandong ship is a test ship, and the Shandong ship is the largest. The task is not to improve combat effectiveness, but to open up the aircraft carrier construction system. Moving the ammunition elevator to the right requires significant adjustments to the design of the bow cabin, which takes a lot of time, and what we are short of is time. Therefore, the Shandong ship still retains the design of the Kurdish ship with a front ammunition elevator group between the two take-off points.
However, there are differences in the positioning of aircraft carriers between the Chinese Navy and the Soviet Navy . The core anti-ship capabilities of the Soviet aircraft carrier rely on the anti-ship missiles on the aircraft carrier. The carrier-based aircraft can perform air defense tasks and mount some small and medium-sized missiles. Anti-ship missiles are enough. The Chinese aircraft carrier and anti-ships can only rely on anti-ship missiles launched by carrier-based aircraft. This basic demand also leads to the need for the Shandong ship to have the ability to carry heavy anti-ship missiles.
The ammunition elevator of the Liaoning ship is plugged into the YJ-12, a 7-meter-long airborne anti-ship missile. It is too big and the ammunition elevator cannot fit in. In order to avoid this embarrassment on domestic aircraft carriers, the number of forward ammunition elevators on the Shandong ship has been reduced from four to two. However, the length of the forward ammunition elevator on the Shandong ship may be More than 10 meters!
The problem is that the ammunition elevators are still blocking the hangar, so when the Chinese designers designed the Fujian ship, they finally took action on the dead front ammunition elevator group , moving the front ammunition elevator group from the front of the hangar. The front has been moved to the right front, and the hangar of the Fujian ship can be extended forward by 10 to 20 meters, freeing up space for parking two to three J-15 fighter jets.
Pay attention to the two black blocks on the No. 1 elevator Fujian
After the ammunition elevator moves to the right, because the ammunition elevator and the catapult are contradictory to each other, and even if there is no contradiction, you still have to leave room for the ammunition elevator to work, right? So the catapult has to move to the right simultaneously. For this reason the catapult was pushed to the edge of the deck.
If the catapult is not replaced, the position of the Fujian ship's take-off point is almost like this
In fact, based on the position of the ammunition elevator, it can also be judged that if the Fujian ship did not stop work midway and replace the electromagnetic catapult, the two front ammunition elevators will be at the rear. The trailing edge of the ammunition elevator should be the trailing edge (reference 1143.5)/front edge (reference 1143.7) of the steam ejection version of the Fujian ship's flame deflector. The No. 1 take-off point will certainly not interfere with the operation of the front lift.
But the disadvantages of replacing the electromagnetic catapult are not worth mentioning compared with the advantages of replacing the electromagnetic catapult! It is true that it is a bit embarrassing that the front elevator cannot be used when operating at the No. 1 takeoff point, but the electromagnetic catapult can allow the Fujian ship to have the ability to launch carrier-based aircraft ranging from 40 tons to 1 ton, so it is definitely a replacement. If you don’t change it properly, please bear with it for a while when takes off and interferes with scheduling.
PANG
This shortcoming will definitely be changed in my country's next-level aircraft carrier. As for whether the next aircraft carrier will change it, it is really hard to answer. After all, for an aircraft carrier with a full row of less than 100,000 tons, the longer electromagnetic catapult will affect the ship. It can be said that carrier aircraft scheduling is inevitable...
France's 75,000-ton PANG plan, the 75,000-ton PA-2 plan, and the Queen with catapults, Neva Design Bureau's Vara plan, these catapults They are all next to the elevator...
If only 003 is like this, forget it. It may really be because the catapult is too long and there is interference between the No. 1 takeoff point and the front elevator, but the British, French and Russian electric bomb aircraft carrier plans , the same design elements appear, it can only be said that the mutual interference between the catapult and the elevator may be minimal.
