00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[tphuang]

View attachment 166260
A new hi-res satellite image (posted by

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)

so 2 reactors inside contained areas of 14m x 16m.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

ford class has 2 Bechtel A1B reactor.

The A4W is ~550 MWth and the A1B is ~700 MWth. The A4W is about 15 feet in diameter and about 20 feet long. The A1B reactor is roughly the same diameter but a bit longer (I don’t know the precise numbers and don’t care enough to look them up). The A4W is a Westinghouse design while the A1B is a Bechtel design.

This is what I found online regarding its size and power generation.
That 14m x16m probably is large enough for that and all the containment/safety related stuff.
I would imagine steam engine and generators would be in between those 2 reactors?

This would actually be significantly larger than ACP100 that they are building right now on land, which generates 385MWth/125MWe.

 

[mack8]

What is the beam of the ship based on the photos? I know it's been discussed before but iirc that was before clear hull modules had been placed.

The measurements in the images above say around 43 meters.

 

[Deino]

The measurements in the images above say around 43 meters.

Has anyone measured how long this all could be in the end? My concern is still that the part under the waterline will be wider than the Fujian but I'm not sure about length!

 

[tphuang]

Has anyone measured how long this all could be in the end? My concern is still that the part under the waterline will be wider than the Fujian but I'm not sure about length!

well if we use Ford class as proxy.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

41m waterline and 78m on flight deck

Seems like 80m flight deck and 43m waterline is reasonable estimate. Would be a little wider than Fujian.

 

[Rank Amateur]

It's obviously a through-deck container ship (this is sarcasm btw).

Yes, instead of docking to unload containers, they can just use the catapults to launch them into port.

It pretty much confirms what was already clear for months. Whatever doubts there were, those very clear satellite images make it next to impossible for it to be anything else. We're looking at the historic first Chinese CVN.

Apologies for stating the obvious, but this is the latest reminder that China's carrier progress has been remarkable:

September 2012, commissioning of CV-16 Liaoning, indigenously refurbished conventional STOBAR
December 2019, commissioning of CV-17 Shandong, indigenously built conventional STOBAR
November 2025, commissioning of CV-18 Fujian, conventional CATOBAR with EMcats (skipping steam cats)
December 2025, clear images confirming ongoing construction of CVN-XX, nuclear CATOBAR with EMcats (presumably)

 

[Aspide]

so 2 reactors inside contained areas of 14m x 16m.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

ford class has 2 Bechtel A1B reactor.


This is what I found online regarding its size and power generation.
That 14m x16m probably is large enough for that and all the containment/safety related stuff.
I would imagine steam engine and generators would be in between those 2 reactors?

This would actually be significantly larger than ACP100 that they are building right now on land, which generates 385MWth/125MWe.

Russian RITM-400 reactor on "Leader" icebreaker is 315 MW(t) and 50-60 MW(e) and is about 8x9x17m, KN-3 on Kirov class is similarly rated. French K22 is rated at 220 MW(t) and 40 MW(e). UK hasn't got nuclear powered surface ships, their PWR-2/3 is around 100-120 MW(t) and 20-25 MW(e).
ACP100 sounds incredibly effective, generating roughly half of A1B thermal output, but providing same 125 MW of electrical power.

 

[tphuang]

Russian RITM-400 reactor on "Leader" icebreaker is 315 MW(t) and 50-60 MW(e) and is about 8x9x17m, KN-3 on Kirov class is similarly rated. French K22 is rated at 220 MW(t) and 40 MW(e). UK hasn't got nuclear powered surface ships, their PWR-2/3 is around 100-120 MW(t) and 20-25 MW(e).
ACP100 sounds incredibly effective, generating roughly half of A1B thermal output, but providing same 125 MW of electrical power.

Keep in mind that Ford is a decade old design. PLAN would expect a platform that has the same thermal output (for speed purposes) and higher electrical power.