00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[TK3600]

TBH just go with nuclear next. Forget about conventional. A nuclear powerplant is really nothing new and not even that hard compared to other tech China has. By the time 003 is ready say 2023 they can start designing the ship. Yes, it will be a bit slow to get ready, but it is not like China has so much J-31 and need a carrier right now. You can always have more carrier plane than you can hold as spare somewhere. When the nuclear 004 is ready they can start pumping out 2 ships at once.

 

[AETHER]

CVN nuclear reactor is underway!

 

[Blitzo]

CVN nuclear reactor is underway!


View attachment 89074

Is the interpretation that it is for a carrier, based on the assumption of what "HM" means?

 

[AETHER]

Is the interpretation that it is for a carrier, based on the assumption of what "HM" means?

Yes. HangMu >Aircraft carrier

 

[Lime]

Except ”HangMu“, I think there is no other explanation of the abbreviation ”HM“, which is the pinyin of “aircraft carrier”.

 

[Blitzo]

Yes. HangMu >Aircraft carrier

That's what I thought.

Well 东方电气武汉核设备有限公司 is definitely a real company.... Though this statement seems a bit almost too good to be true for us to have any news about the 004's nuclear propulsion in an ostensibly official manner.

I suppose if this statement is true, the other question is whether it is intended for the propulsion of the actual first hull/ship, or an initial land based testbed.

 

[Lethe]

TBH just go with nuclear next. Forget about conventional. A nuclear powerplant is really nothing new and not even that hard compared to other tech China has. By the time 003 is ready say 2023 they can start designing the ship.

If you start designing the ship in 2023 then it won't enter service for another decade. Advocating for a decade-long pause in PLAN's carrier inventory in an increasingly sensitive strategic environment seems unwise.

I have previously suggested that I think PLAN should run off an additional three 003-type carriers at rapid (~3yr) cadence to achieve a credible 6-carrier force by 2035 at relatively low cost. If that were actually going to occur then pre-production work for carrier #4 would already be underway and certain long-lead items for carriers #5 and #6 might have been ordered (or at least "flagged") too. This is merely to illustrate my sense of the timelines involved, what PLAN actually chooses to do is obviously its own affair.

 

[TK3600]

If you start designing the ship in 2023 then it won't enter service for another decade. Advocating for a decade-long pause in PLAN's carrier inventory in an increasingly sensitive strategic environment seems unwise.

I have previously suggested that I think PLAN should run off an additional three 003-type carriers at rapid (~3yr) cadence to achieve a credible 6-carrier force by 2035 at relatively low cost. If that were actually going to occur then pre-production work for carrier #4 would already be underway and certain long-lead items for carriers #5 and #6 might have been ordered (or at least "flagged") too. This is merely to illustrate my sense of the timelines involved, what PLAN actually chooses to do is obviously its own affair.

Oh please a decade? They have all parts and previous experience making a carrier. Where did 1 decade came from? 002 first domestic carrier?

 

[Blitzo]

Oh please a decade? They have all parts and previous experience making a carrier. Where did 1 decade came from? 002 first domestic carrier?

If you are going from starting from the design stage of a new carrier, then yes, it will likely take a year for the new carrier to enter service.

Think about it -- from cutting steel to service (inclusive of module fabrication, assembly, launch, fitting out, yard sea trials, navy trials), that part would at least take some 6-7 years if not more.

In terms of designing a new carrier and the requisite subsystem development, adding on another 3-4 years at the front prior to steel cutting, is pretty reasonable, especially if it's clean sheet.


From my view, I believe the design work for the CVN and subsystem development for the CVN likely should have been underway if not mostly complete for a few years now, and is/was likely only waiting for a few key subsystems to mature and have further risk reduction (nuclear propulsion specifically).

 

[luosifen]

If you are going from starting from the design stage of a new carrier, then yes, it will likely take a year for the new carrier to enter service.

Think about it -- from cutting steel to service (inclusive of module fabrication, assembly, launch, fitting out, yard sea trials, navy trials), that part would at least take some 6-7 years if not more.

In terms of designing a new carrier and the requisite subsystem development, adding on another 3-4 years at the front prior to steel cutting, is pretty reasonable, especially if it's clean sheet.


From my view, I believe the design work for the CVN and subsystem development for the CVN likely should have been underway if not mostly complete for a few years now, and is/was likely only waiting for a few key subsystems to mature and have further risk reduction (nuclear propulsion specifically).

With how modular shipbuilding is these days wouldn't they only need to design the reactor sections and import the 003 schematic for the rest of the carrier to save on time? If they needed to further modify from there the 003 design is there as a baseline so you don't have to start from scratch.