No need to send subs over. Just rig a few bulk carriers to sink in the canal.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
With the current development in mind:
To be on the safer side, I'd say it depends on whether the CV-19 is a one-off ship, meant to be a (half-)sister ship of Fujian (i.e. the PLAN will go for the full CVN-lineup route after CV-19); or whether the PLAN decides to go for a dual conventional-nuclear route for their future carrier fleet.
If the former route is true, then I'm not really expecting significant departures from Fujian regarding the CV-19's propulsion system beyond necessary improvements on whatever shortcomings they discover on Fujian's COSAS propulsion system. The other modifications and improvements to be anticipated on the CV-19 over Fujian have been explained before.
But if the latter route is true - Then the 076 LHD and Queen Elizabeth CV can be referenced. However, it also depends on how big, how heavy and what roles does the PLAN want their conventionally-powered CV to have in their fleets, of course.
China now has the CGT30-M and CGT40-M gas turbine engines, both of which should be ready for warship-based applications in the coming years (particularly for the future major surface combatants). There's also the 7MW-class and ~10MW-class marine diesel engines that are already in use (054B FFG) and soon to be ready for use (076 LHD?).
Personally, though - Instead of a 90000-ton to 100000-ton supercarrier, I'd prefer a medium-sized CV (let's just call it CVM) that has the full-load displacement roughly in the ballpark of the 076 LHD (~40000 tons). The CVM should be complementary to the larger, supercarrier-sized CVNs, and be more focused in the U(C)AV department. In this context, the CVM should be focusing more in the reconnaissance, early-warning and ASW roles, plus supporting the supercarrier CVNs in high-intensity combat against the main echelons of the enemy naval/land-based forces (i.e. something akin to the light/escort CVs of WW2).
For such case, a twin island design, an angled flight deck, two slightly-shorter EMCATs, an EMAGS and two elevator decks should be good to go for the CVM, as well as a COG(L)AG propulsion system with 2x CGT40-M + 2x CGT25/30-M gas turbine engines should be sufficient for the CVM with a top speed of ~30 knots.
(The proposed propulsion system takes reference from the Izumo DDHs, of course)
But then, again - I'm not working for the PLAN. Only the PLAN knows best on what they really want.
Last edited:
I think the reason for 076 to have a longer EMCAT is because the ship’s top speed is much lower, can’t provide the planes with enough deck winds. Thus longer EMCAT is need to provide greater acceleration to the planes.
Isn't the EMCAT on the 076 LHD the same model and same length as those on Fujian?
That 130-meter measurement is bogus, either way.
As for the "slightly shorter EMCATs" suggestion (I'd put it at ~90-100 meters) for the hypothetical CVM - It mainly stems from the main requirements that the CVM is to be primarily fielded with U(C)AVs (which are lighter than manned warplanes), the size limitations of the CVM's flight deck, and that the French CDG CVN's comparatively shorter catapults than their American CVN counterparts as an example.
It should be noted that the "1.5x size 1.8x effectiveness 1.2x cost" claim isn't from Yankee himself, but rather a claim that he was quoting.
He said: “之前有个说法” "There was a previous saying."
Revised prediction if China shift to two ships per batch today.
2025: 3 carriers.
2028: 4
2029: 5
2032: 7
2035: 9
Assuming 3 years a ship normally(see Nimitz class). Extend to 4 for first CVN due to new ship type. Restore to 3 after first CVN.
The timeline does not include sea trials. It is assumed next batch starts right after ship is done fitting. PLAN's sea trial is less about trial, more about crew training. The trial for the previous ship will happen concurrently with next batch being laid down. With that in mind, expect an additional year after new ship completed, to finish training. So 9 ships fully ready is 2036, not 2035.
Due to advantage of 6th gen, I think Chinese carrier fleet can keep up with USN as early as 2030. The time 5 carriers are fully operational and 6th gen fighter is adopted ahead of US. By 2033 Chinese carriers would have an advantage.
lcloo
Captain
CV16 was a find of the century for PLAN to avoid re-inventing wheels for building an aircraft carrier. They had learn much about the ship design from acquiring this ex-Soviet ship.
CV17 was said to be urgent requirement to acquire a second CV ASAP, and was not part of the original long term PLAN carrier planning, thus it has to be built based on CV16's design to shorten building time.
CV18 was to be steam cat carrier but was delayed to redesign for EMALS cat. This ship being the first cat capable carrier has to be evalute during its service for further improvement. It may be view as type 054, if there has been much technology advance, the next ship will be like type 054A, i.e. similat hull size if next propulsion system remains the same but with a lot of improvement, or a bigger hull otherwise.
CV19 may be similar to CV18 (as CV17 is to CV16), i.e. a cousin ship rather than a sister ship, or a new class with bigger displacement (100K to 150K tons) if new propulsion (nuclear powered?) is available.
Major factors that affect how the next ship will be looking like is availablity and maturity of new advance technology, especially the propulsion system and power plant. Therefore CV19 need not be another CV18.
CV17 was said to be urgent requirement to acquire a second CV ASAP, and was not part of the original long term PLAN carrier planning, thus it has to be built based on CV16's design to shorten building time.
CV18 was to be steam cat carrier but was delayed to redesign for EMALS cat. This ship being the first cat capable carrier has to be evalute during its service for further improvement. It may be view as type 054, if there has been much technology advance, the next ship will be like type 054A, i.e. similat hull size if next propulsion system remains the same but with a lot of improvement, or a bigger hull otherwise.
CV19 may be similar to CV18 (as CV17 is to CV16), i.e. a cousin ship rather than a sister ship, or a new class with bigger displacement (100K to 150K tons) if new propulsion (nuclear powered?) is available.
Major factors that affect how the next ship will be looking like is availablity and maturity of new advance technology, especially the propulsion system and power plant. Therefore CV19 need not be another CV18.
Last edited:
Oh, didn’t know that.
I think 40k tons is too small to carry a significant air wing; it would be more in the Wasp class range (40k tons for 26 aircraft) rather than a Kitty Hawk or QE class (80k tons for 40-70 aircraft). It is pretty easy to get up to 60-70k tons, which is also what the STOBAR carriers have. Type 076 is already almost 50k tons, while Fujian and QE classes are both 80k tons. Greater displacement also means more fuel storage for the planes.
Yes, that's what I meant. The hypothetical CVM in the 40000-50000 tons of displacement range is never meant to have an equivalent combat capability as supercarriers that are in the 90000-110000 tons of displacement range.
I don't envision the CVMs to go head-to-head/lead-the-charge against the main echelons of the enemy naval and land-based forces.
Last edited: