00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
If it has high TWR and good lift as is typical for twin engine delta wing planes, it should be STOBAR capable too. F-18 is STOBAR capable as well.
My understanding is Dalian has more experience with nuclear propulsions or at least has closer relationships with research institutes responsible for nuclear propulsions.
I think the problem is the width of the aircraft or ability to fold the wings at the acceptable width to park on the elevators.
Assuming this is true, I wonder if the conventional CV-19 will be a significant iterative improvement (=technical advancement) over the Type-003 or simply a copy to boost numbers in a time of heightened tension (=war preparation), with the concurrent construction of two carriers being a reflection of China's overall economic and industrial growth rather than emergency funding in anticipation of war.
i.e., will CV-19 be a Type-003 or Type-004 (with CVN-20 being Type-005 in that case)?
Type-002 was an iterative (and industrially indigenous) improvement over the Type-001, while Type-003 was a generational jump over Type-002. Following that development logic, Type-004 should be a notably improved conventional CATOBAR, perhaps at 90,000 tons (from Type-003's 80,000 tons, coincidentally also mirroring the US' advancement from the 80,000 ton Kitty Hawk-class to 90,000 ton Enterprise-class). The then Type-005 would be a nuclear CATOBAR and the generational jump, estimated at 100,000 tons (or more, if those 150,000 ton rumours are to be revisited). While perhaps far-fetched, this doesn't seem out of line with how close the 5th-gen J-35 was revealed to the 6th-gen J-36.
We know China has a preference for incremental, careful advancement. To produce two carriers simultaneously doesn't confirm a shift in military/political stance more than it could just be a result of the total pie growing big enough that it would be wasteful not to advance faster. However, producing a copy of a matured platform would indeed suggest a shift in stance, moving from a focus on technical advancement ("reaching tomorrow") to materiel expansion ("winning today").
We can see that China's military expenditure hasn't grown proportionally relative to its economic output, even with ever increasing hostility from the Western bloc since at least 2017. A shift in stance from consistent advancement to materiel spam (in the form of an entire additional aircraft carrier of an established/mature Type outside of the predicted procurement plan) would be preceded by a large proportional increase in military funding, no? Unless they can fit an entire aircraft carrier in the unknown "black budget"...
what do you think the advancement will be if it is indeed a Type 004 CV?
I think you missed the following quote by Yankee:
Needless to say, similar to the preceding J-35 - The carrier-based J-XDS (let's just call it J-XDSH for sake of not typing out long-ish names) are actually going to be bigger (and heavier) than its land-based counterpart (i.e. J-XDS) simply due to the added requirements for carrier-based operations (maneuverability at lower speeds, hence necessitating larger wing area, etc).
In fact, the J-XDSH may actually be bigger than even the J-15T/D, although we won't find out the exact dimensions for quite some while.
In the meantime, Yankee stressed that said the J-XDSH will be "large-but-manageable", implying that dimension limits still very much applies, as per the bolded phrases above. Hence, it can be said that the J-36 from Chengdu AC isn't going to be viable for carrier-based operations, given how massive it is.
Last edited:
CV-18 Fujian is by no means a perfect design - In fact, still some distances away.
With the following assumptions:
1. CV-19 isn't a complete copy-&-paste of CV-18 Fujian,
2. CV-19 largely retains its size and dimension from CV-18 Fujian, and
3. CV-19 retains the same propulsion system (COSAS?) from CV-18 Fujian -
Some of the advancements should include the following (or perhaps a wishlist):
#1 - The forward section of the starboard-side flight deck should be extended further outwards to enable more parking spaces;
#2 - The launch position and jet blast deflector of the port-side EMCAT should be slanted towards starboard to avoid interfering with the angled landing strip;
#3 - The forward elevator deck should be moved further aft to avoid interfering with the starboard launch position and jet blast deflector;
#4 - There should be one additional port side elevator deck; and
#5 - The island superstructure should be moved slightly further aft (optional).
(Kindly ignore #6)
Of course, if the length of CV-19 can be extended, then #2, #3 and #5 should be relatively easier to solve (Kitty Hawk is about 11 meters longer than Fujian, for reference).
Last edited:
Backward-compatibility requirements will result in the J-XDSH being constrained in terms of physical size and weight, which will introduce all the related limitations onto its operational capabilities (particularly internal volume, which directly impacts computing systems, power generation, combat range, payload capacity etc).
This is something that the USN must deal with, considering that the USN is to operate significant portions of their Nimitz CVNs until the 2050s, with every Nimitz having a 50-year service life (CVN-77 George H.W. Bush was commissioned in 2009).
The PLAN, meanwhile, are still at the beginning stages of their carrier fleet expansion efforts. Hence, the PLAN is afforded the luxury of going big from the get-go. Very fortunate, I'd say.
Going back to the topic of discussion - The Fujian began construction in the mid-2010s, which means the overall design would've been finalized no latter than 2020 (i.e. when the ship modules start getting moved to the assembly area and drydock at Jiangnan). It is obvious that Fujian wasn't initially designed with J-XDSH operations in mind.
Meanwhile, it is very likely that both the CV-19 and CVN-20 started construction only within the last few years (2020-2023). This should mean that the general specifications of the J-XDS (and perhaps its carrier-based variant too) would've been made available to the planners and ship designers at PLAN institutions within that timeframe, if not today.
Therefore, personally, I do expect that the CV-19 should be able to operate the J-XDSH as well, albeit with some limitations (e.g. smaller numbers compared to CVN-20, for example).
Fujian, meanwhile, will have to wait unril her MLU before the necessary upgrade works for J-XDSH operations can be carried out on her. As for the STOBAR twins - I don't expect them to operate way beyond the 2050s, so having them operate J-35s until their retirement should be good enough. Less headaches for the PLAN too.
Last edited:
This is also the case to some degree for Ford. Indeed very fortunate for the PLA.