How do you know that's the bow? Might be the stern.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
But why not placing them then directly in the correct distance to each other?
If somehow a repeat type 003 CV is produced and commissioned after the type 004 CVN it would still just be called type 003, just like type 052D are still called that despite some of them being made after type 055 first commissioned, etc. If instead it's a new design CV then yeah it would just be type 005 CV I guess.
The main benefit of a repeat type 003 would be that it would be ready sooner yes, but we shouldn't assume it would be rendered obsolete very quickly. Nobody really knows when the 6th gen fighters will be ready and what exactly they will look like. Further even when the 6th gen fighters become available, it probably wouldn't instantly render all 5th gen fighters obsolete. Most USN carriers (including the latest, Ford with EMALs) do not operate F-35s and nobody is suggesting all those carriers are instantly useless because 5th gen or bust. So future proofing needs to be balanced against other factors and even assuming everything goes to plan a repeat type 003 can have a long and useful career only operating 5th gen fighters.
While it is true that LHAs are getting bigger, I think you either overestimate how big they are getting or underestimate how big full on CV/CVN are. 075 is roughly 40,000 tons, 076 is roughly 50,000 tons, America class is roughly 50,000 tons as well. The type 003 is 80,000+ tons. Even given that displacement isn't a perfect measure it's clear the type 003 is much bigger, it's not a small gap that can be easily closed. I find it doubtful that a future 076A or 077 or whatever will be more than 60,000 tons at max.
Further I don't think anybody thinks the PLAN will keep building more type 003 into the 2030s or something. If the PLAN is building a repeat 003 they probably already started building modules or at worst will start within a year, not start it in 5-10 years. The next gen 076A or 077 or whatever is probably not going to be ready to begin construction until 2030 or later so the construction periods would not necessarily overlap.
Stern is always facing the lock gates/water for aircraft carriers. However for civilian vessels the stern is sometimes on the other end, so this casts doubt. Also I'm not too familiar with ship construction, why is the drydock broken into 3 separate sections.
Yeah I don't know about that. This nomenclature confusion is something I have questioned before, and wondered aloud whether it would be more appropriate to designate carriers specifically as "Projects" rather than "Types", i.e. each carrier is its own Project rather than a Type, which means it doesn't matter if the PLAN builds more CVs or more CVNs or whatever, and it also doesn't matter how much similarity a new carrier has with a previous carrier. Each new carrier would always just be "Project 004", "Project 005", etc. I could be smoking crack, but I seem to vaguely recall a photo of an official banner many years ago which in Chinese listed the 001 or (or 002?) as a "Project" rather than a "Type". I can't remember anymore.
Well I suppose once it's commissioned we'll get an official name and just use that. I think that's what happened previously where years ago what is currently called the type 003 (the one with 3 EMALs) was then called type 002 and the previous carriers were called type 001 and type 001A. Those were unofficial names though and when the 2nd carrier was commissioned it was officially stated to be a type 002 carrier so everybody swapped to the current naming scheme. So I suppose if the rumors of a 2nd type 003 being constructed are correct we'll know in a few years. If not then I guess it's a moot point.
Well, for what it's worth:
1. A civilian/commercial ship typically wouldn't take such a long time to lay the ship's keel - Especially not with Dalian, which isn't just the largest shipyard in China, but also one of the busiest shipyards in China.
Looking back at Copernicus - Using the same period of time for those meager few pieces of the ship's keel/bottom structures to be laid inside the drydock, a civilian/commercial ship would've had pretty much all of its keel + bottom sections of the hull assembled inside the same drydock.
2. The foundation stands/equipment placed inside the drydock indicates that the ship to be constructed and assembled is actually pretty large in size. That 28.67 meter-wide hull structure shown below is a good proof, which is even wider than the beam of the Kirov-class battlecruisers.
And given that Dalian has never built any LHDs, LPDs or any large-sized replenishment ships, I have reason to suspect (or believe) that this is in fact an aircraft carrier under construction.
(Also @Nx4eu for this one)
There's no rule which dictates that an aircraft carrier must have her bow pointed towards land and stern pointed towards the water when under construction and assembly inside a drydock.
Case-and-point: Here's CVN-79 John F. Kennedy during her launch ceremony. Notice where her bow and stern are pointed towards while she's still inside the drydock.
Because the individual hull module sections would need some spacing allowances to work with before they are ready to be connected together? This isn't an odd procedure.
Kindly refer to @David78's answer just above. 003 CV Fujian too went through the same process.
Those hull sections and modules can be lifted (using crane, #1), moved (using jacks/guided rails, #2), or floated (towed, #3) into their new positions inside the drydock.
Here's #2 (Braemar cruise ship):
And here's #3 (CVN-80 Enterprise):
In the meantime, @勤劳朴实罗素历 seems to indicate (albeit rather indirectly) that the aircraft carrier's construction and assembly works are underway as well.
Last edited:
