00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Building a completely new class of supersized carrier requiring brand new infrastructure seems extremely risky. Not only are you keeping an increased number of very expensive asset (J-XS) in a single basket, but also maintenance will be uniquely vulnerable to disruption due to the increased size and hence reduced number of drydocks that are appropriate.

A couple extra nuclear Fujians will do the job just fine, leaping straight to the biggest when the first CATOBAR carrier is still doing sea trials seems far too ambitious, to put it mildly.

My view is that they'll have to build additional maintenance drydocks anyway, so they can size for whatever carrier they settle on.

And a nuclear carrier will have to be a completely different design to the Fujian.
The Fujian was originally planned with steam catapults and is presumably an evolution of the Shandong which was STOBAR.

I think the size of the ship matters less than the maturity of the technologies that will be out in the ship.
 

bsdnf

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't think building a new dock is that much of an issue. first 076 was assembled in the Changxing Phase II new dock, which took less than two years to complete. 00X nuclear-powered supercarriers can build a new dock while building in sections. And the PLA will definitely more than one nuclear-powered supercarrier
 
Last edited:

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
According to a friend with access to much better images, this „appears to be an incomplete or partially covered J-15. In an HD image it looks like the outer bit of the right wing is exposed and it has the FLANKER style profile and wingtip rail.“

@huitong


in case you missed my reply above!

"According to a friend with access to much better images, this „appears to be an incomplete or partially covered J-15. In an HD image it looks like the outer bit of the right wing is exposed and it has the FLANKER style profile and wingtip rail.“"
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
View attachment 142891View attachment 142892

Made by someone. I'm not sure about the stern elevator and straight landing layout though, looks like one wide boy.

Whoever designed the flight deck of that aircraft carrier 3D model doesn't really have a good grasp on how and why CV(N)s are designed the way we see today, even for the relative basics.

There are very good reasons why the flight decks of CV(N)s are designed with the landing strips (angled or straight) running through the longitudinal axis of the warship. Doing like what the guy did with the 3D model above is literally asking for the port side flight deck segments to be snapped off in the long run - Or that the construction costs of the CV(N) stacking up unnecessarily.

The location of the elevator deck at the stern end of the ship (and right beside the stern end of the landing strip at that, lol) too is also hilarious. That's basically calling for improper structural loading concentrations at the portside stern region of the warship.
 
Last edited:

Andy1974

Senior Member
Registered Member
Whoever designed the flight deck of that aircraft carrier 3D model doesn't really have a good grasp on how and why CV(N)s are designed the way we see today, even for the relative basics.

There are very good reasons why the flight decks of CV(N)s are designed with the landing strips (angled or straight) running through the longitudinal axis of the warship. Doing like what the guy did with the 3D model above is literally asking for the port side flight deck segments to be snapped off in the long run - Or that the construction costs of the CV(N) stacking up unnecessarily.

The location of the elevator deck at the stern end of the ship (and right beside the stern end of the landing strip at that, lol) too is also hilarious. That's basically calling for improper structural loading concentrations at the portside stern region of the warship.
It would however allow aircraft with long/wide wings to land due to the huge space between the landing strip and the island. If the landing strip on the 076 works then this should work too.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
It would however allow aircraft with long/wide wings to land due to the huge space between the landing strip and the island. If the landing strip on the 076 works then this should work too.

No.

1000158349.png

The EMAGS cables that are to be installed onboard the 076 LHD in during the fitting out process will stretch across the entire width of the landing strip between the two rows of cable ports (bracketed in smaller-sized yellow boxes). That means the centerline of the landing strip actually runs closely along the longitudinal centerline of the LHD.

Also running along at just outside both edges of the landing strip are the foul lines (roughly indicated by the red lines), of which the aircrafts and helicopters inside and outside the landing strip must not cross when the landing strip is in use (i.e. during BAR operations). That means the wingspan of all fixed-wing aircrafts deployed on the LHD must not exceed the width between two foul lines of the landing strip.

This rule is the same for all CVs around the world.

Let's go back to that CG illustration:

1000158374.jpg

The most important question: Where is the port side portion of the EMAGS even going to be put at??

Having the landing strip located along the portside of the flight deck just to enable warplanes with a larger wingspan to land while avoiding the island superstructure also violates the rule of the foul lines as stated above, let alone significantly affecting flight deck operations and reducing the number of aircrafts and helicopters which can be parked on the flight deck.

Such a design is a no-go from the very beginning.
 
Last edited:

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
it will be quite Amazing really

by 2035 Chinese Naval aviation will be close to trumping the USN

I mean who would have thought that 10 years ago that in 25 years times Chinese Carrier fleet will be the most advanced in the World

either a CVN or CV+ EMALS will operate a 6th generation J36, J-XX, J35As and GJ-11J UCAVS

add to that KJ-600 AWACS and a Z8D and bunch of other aircraft

backed up by advanced surface and sub-surface combatants

another 10 years and I see the Chinese Navy leading the Seas
 
Last edited:
Top