00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[BoraTas]

Is there any actual advantages of having 4 reactors? It'll definitely take up much more space than twin reactors, and modern reactor failure is basically unheard off.

I wouldn't be so sure about that one. In a ship with 4 screws there should be 4 steam turbines. Distributing the heat from 2 reactors to 4 turbines (with space between them) might be using a lot of space. There are other complications associated with these matters too. Raw weight and space aren't the only considerations and reactor cores themselves don't use a lot of space compared to the rest of the power plant. Submarine reactor cores are known to be shorter than humans.

Remind you, there are still a lot of auxiliary mechanisms there

I explained this in a previous post:

"Call me weird but I've always "wanted" the Chinese to build a carrier with 4 nuclear reactors.
why?
This would open the possibility to creating a nuclear powered version of the Type 055.
If a carrier has 4 reactors each rated at 75,000 hp then 2 reactors would provide the right amount of power for the Type 055.
The PLA navy can create a modular design where the exact same reactors are used for both their aircraft carriers and cruisers.
This would lower construction costs."

PLAN building a nuclear powered surface combatant remains unlikely.

 

[Tomboy]

I wouldn't be so sure about that one. In a ship with 4 screws there should be 4 steam turbines. Distributing the heat from 2 reactors to 4 turbines (with space between them) might be using a lot of space. There are other complications associated with these matters too. Raw weight and space aren't the only considerations and reactor cores themselves don't use a lot of space compared to the rest of the power plant. Submarine reactor cores are known to be shorter than humans.
View attachment 155074
Remind you, there are still a lot of auxiliary mechanisms there

You'll need twice the number of auxiliary mechanisms for 4 reactors, even if the core is smaller, it'll still take up more space just because of all the ancillary equipment needed, even if they could make it smaller it'll definitely still cost much more than dual reactors. If Type 004 is using IEPS(IMO, pretty likely), then you don't need 2 turbines per reactor you only need a single power turbine per reactor since there's no mechanical connection with the actual propeller shafts. China should have no issue developing a reactor that is both small enough to fit into Type 004's hull and also providing enough power with a dual reactor arrangement(Ford's current hotel load only uses half of what's available, Type 004 should have more installed power due to be being larger hence have an even larger margin even with dual reactors).

I'm going to put it this way - The first option most likely means that there won't be conventionally-powered CVs after this; whereas the second option could mean that China will also go the dual conventional-nuclear route for her future carrier fleet, similar to her subsurface fleet. So it all depends on what the PLAN higher ups are planning for.

Either way, all the above are just my own observation on the matter.

If they do decide to go this way, will JN's ship receive a new series of pennant number like the Type 076s that start with 5 while Type 075 starts with 3? IMO, having both your flagship nuclear carriers and lesser conventional carriers use the same series will start to get pretty confusing as both will likely be in serial production at the same time.

 

[Maikeru]

If indeed there is a follow on CV then I expect an improved Fujian class - quick and cheap to design, and the entire point of ongoing CV production would be to build up numbers quickly and cheaply. I don't see any advantages for PLAN in developing (at considerable cost) a completely new GT-powered conventional design when it has a CVN on the way and a viable CV design already in Fujian. Also steam propulsion is not obsolete - it's what powers both CVNs and SS(B)Ns, all that differs is the heat source to make the steam. So there's considerable benefits in training and logistics with COSAS.

In general terms, with carrier aviation you should go big or go home, and PLAN is clearly intending to go big, with its huge investments in EMCATS, J-15, J-15T, KJ-600, JL-15, etc. It doesn't make a lot of sense to just be introducing 1 carrier every 5 years or so if you consider RoI and the need to keep production lines going.

 

[sunnymaxi]

If indeed there is a follow on CV then I expect an improved Fujian class - quick and cheap to design, and the entire point of ongoing CV production would be to build up numbers quickly and cheaply. I don't see any advantages for PLAN in developing (at considerable cost) a completely new GT-powered conventional design when it has a CVN on the way and a viable CV design already in Fujian. Also steam propulsion is not obsolete - it's what powers both CVNs and SS(B)Ns, all that differs is the heat source to make the steam. So there's considerable benefits in training and logistics with COSAS.

In general terms, with carrier aviation you should go big or go home, and PLAN is clearly intending to go big, with its huge investments in EMCATS, J-15, J-15T, KJ-600, JL-15, etc. It doesn't make a lot of sense to just be introducing 1 carrier every 5 years or so if you consider RoI and the need to keep production lines going.

there is no solid reason not to purse dual AC construction strategy.. glad government has taken the right decision.

when you accounts 50+ percent global shipbuilding capacity and abundance of skilled workforce. go for it once you master the specific technology.

 

[Tomboy]

If indeed there is a follow on CV then I expect an improved Fujian class - quick and cheap to design, and the entire point of ongoing CV production would be to build up numbers quickly and cheaply. I don't see any advantages for PLAN in developing (at considerable cost) a completely new GT-powered conventional design when it has a CVN on the way and a viable CV design already in Fujian. Also steam propulsion is not obsolete - it's what powers both CVNs and SS(B)Ns, all that differs is the heat source to make the steam. So there's considerable benefits in training and logistics with COSAS.

In general terms, with carrier aviation you should go big or go home, and PLAN is clearly intending to go big, with its huge investments in EMCATS, J-15, J-15T, KJ-600, JL-15, etc. It doesn't make a lot of sense to just be introducing 1 carrier every 5 years or so if you consider RoI and the need to keep production lines going.

Fujian is and will always be a stop gap product, if PLAN is going to end up with a large number of these new conventional carrier in a hi-low config, they are going to want the most optimal design which are going to be IEP plus gas turbines with maximum upgradability. Steam power is not obsolete but with heavy oil fired boilers it is, not only is it maintaince heavy and also has extremely long cold startup time while turbine designs could reach full power in minutes of powering up. Fujian not using IEP also limits upgradability and most importantly efficiency. In fact gas turbine IEP offers to lower logistic burden, costs and construction time as the future fleet such as Type 055 replacement and next generation general destroyer will likely use the same turbines(QC500/400) and diesel generators while also burning the same fuel. On paper turbines and diesel could burn the same aviation fuel hence also allow you more optimization in fuel allocation and standerisation.

If they are truly going for a hi-low mix then JN's Type 005 and DL's Type 004 assuming they prove their design in sea trials would likely be the last generation of carriers designed in the near future. They'll likely mass produce Type 005 at JN(With part standerisarion with rest of the fleet ie. motors/powerplants could mean extremely fast construction period after the lead ship possibly down to 3.5-4 years from module fabrication to comissioning) with Type 004 being produced at DL concurrently albeit nuclear carriers will take much longer to build even after the lead ship streamlining the production cycle probs capped at 5.5-6 years minimum. IMO, its a smart strategy if PLAN wants to become the world's strongest navy even in terms of power projection without all those overseas bases, they could end up with 6-8 Type 004s and 10+ Type 005s for a total of 16-18 carriers. China, if they decide to even up their defense budget to 1.8 from the current 1.5 percent could definitely afford all these carriers assuming growth rate of the economy at 4.5-5 percent. Considering if they could afford 2 carriers at the same time right now, in 2030 assuming they upped their budget to 1.8 percent they'll have a relative increase in budget of 60 percent. Manpower isn't an issue either, 3 in service carriers right now and the 2 on its way would provide ample training and experience to large numbers of future carrier crews.



Edit: Considering Type 003's design was probably finalized in 2016 if not earlier, it's very likely that it was not designed with J-XDS or other future naval drones/aircraft in mind while also back then propulsion systems were still quite limited hence 003's relative conservative hull design. Now with advanced domestic turbines like QC500 and proven IEPS(on the 076), China could afford to go larger thus having more deck space and more importantly a much larger hanger space for more aircraft and potentially better deck layout.

 

[Maikeru]

GT powered CV is a complete redesign and requires 2 stacks (like 076 or QEC), reducing deck space. Fujian+ requires little additional design work and less trails time than a wholly new first of class. I don't rule out a new GT-powered design, perhaps based on 076, I just think an improved Fujian would be cheaper, quicker and in some ways better.

 

[Shimakazerun]

We "know" it was going to be conventical the whole time. When Yankee revealed it he said "one nuclear and one conventional"

While one of my friend working for CSSC toldme months ago.That the project of the sister ship of FUJIAN has been abandoned since 20th national congress of CPC. Due there's some major problem had found on Fujian. And there won't be conventional powered carrier any more.

 

[sunnymaxi]

While one of my friend working for CSSC toldme months ago.That the project of the sister ship of FUJIAN has been abandoned since 20th national congress of CPC. Due there's some major problem had found on Fujian. And there won't be conventional powered carrier any more.

20th national party congress held in October, 2022.. its been two and half years now

we would have already get the information if this was the case from our source like Guancha Trios , cute orca , soyo and others.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
003 Fujian started sea trials in May, 2024 so how on earth they have decided that ship has problem back in 2022.. zero logic

003 Fujian did 8 sea trials and successfully tested EMALS too and we didn't hear any major problem. and ship is about to enter in service

so i don't buy this information. unless some really trusted source confirm this..

 

[Tomboy]

GT powered CV is a complete redesign and requires 2 stacks (like 076 or QEC), reducing deck space. Fujian+ requires little additional design work and less trails time than a wholly new first of class. I don't rule out a new GT-powered design, perhaps based on 076, I just think an improved Fujian would be cheaper, quicker and in some ways better.

I agree that Fujian mod. would be cheaper and faster upfront but IMO in the long run a new design would be more effective and economical. Plus, if Type 005 is a bit larger than Type 003 while using a newer hull(Like the Type 004 due to more advanced propulsion systems avaliable) means more hanger space and probably more deckspace even if it has two islands. As for additional design work, SOYO noted that the tender were from atleast last year meaning the design would be done already anyways and this carrier's modules may already be under fabrication. JN had over 7 years to work on this new design(Type 003 was probably finalized in 2016) while also having experience from Type 076, its plenty time for a brand new design.


But its not impossible that Type 003A is going to be built instead, but IMO GT-IEPS is still the most optimal for hi-low.

 

[Shimakazerun]

20th national party congress held in October, 2022.. its been more than two years now

we would have already get the information if this was the case from our source like Guancha Trios , cute orca , soyo and others.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
003 Fujian started sea trials in May, 2024 so how on earth they have decided that ship has problem back in 2022.. zero logic

003 Fujian did 8 sea trials and successfully tested EMALS too and we didn't hear any major problem.

so i don't buy this information. unless some really trusted source confirm this..

Maybe an info don't need people to belive to be true. It's just an info. Time will prove it is true or false.
And, I'm not sure why you thought a problem must be found out by sea trails.
USS CB-4 to CB-6 was cancelled in june 1943 when US Navy finnally realized they are junks. Which is before CB-1 Alaska had been launched in April 1943.