i agree bro, 004 will be the sister ship of Fujian 003 why rush? quicker to build, cost less. when time is right then build 005 with nuclear and bigger tonnage
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
Bullshit. Why does "Xi Jingping" let nuclear submarines be built then? Not to mention that all Chinese civilian nuclear power plants built thus far are located close to the shore. This way they do not need to build cooling towers which makes the power plants cheaper and faster to build.
Apologies for the typo.
I'd also point out that I wrote "I heard rumors". There is no need for such a personally aggressive tone in your response.
In any case, submarines are somewhat different to surface vessels because debris dispersal in a submarine's destruction is not the same as debris dispersal in a surface vessel's destruction, and also due to differences in convection of particulate debris at depth and at surface.
Civilian nuclear power plants being destroyed would open a can of worms that are wholly unrelated to a carrier being sunk. I don't think nuclear contamination of the oceans would be the primary concern once it is all said and done if that happens.
In summary, the examples provided do not fully translate to a destruction of a nuclear-powered surface vessel close to shore.
. Xi Jinping is, shockingly, not from New Zealand.
Modern nuclear reactors are far safer than the first generation of marine reactor. Also an aircraft carrier reactor disaster is always less damaging than a submarine disaster simply because carriers are way more massive and can contain the effects via sheer bulk. Why do people lie to try to push strange narratives?
When someone wants to believe a rumor, they don't call it a rumor, they call it a fact. I call it here a rumor.
I mention it to bring attention to the fact that there is a legitimate risk of loss of capital ships in most of the potential use cases for the PLAN. With this legitimate risk of loss, there comes risk management.
In this case, the risk management is to not stick a nuclear reactor onboard a carrier when a conventional propulsion system will do just fine.
Why are you posting a rumor that anybody who is not staggeringly ignorant would dismiss as clearly untrue? Nuclear reactors can be made to fail safely, even when damaged. And compared to spilling thousands of liters of heavy fuel near the Chinese coastline, nuclear reactors are harmless in comparison. Water is in fact an excellent radiation blocker, and compared to a fuel spill, a nuclear reactor that is designed well will sink to the bottom of the sea and do far less damage.