With the shape and size of the new reactors they could be loaded and unloaded like VLS missiles.
Example: 8 SMRs, in an array like the UVLS, each providing 32MW.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
Example: 8 SMRs, in an array like the UVLS, each providing 32MW.
Yes
The full reactor swapping and long refueling time is contradictory factors as I have said. You can't have both.
The reason that you can do a full reactor swapping is because you can turn off your pump in primary cooling loop without a meltdown. You can do so because of high natural circulation. That is in turn because you have a much lower enriched fuel. That leads to the short refueling interval.
The issue remains. There's a reason that the US, pretty unequivocally the most experienced carrier users in the modern world, don't put VLS cells on their carriers. Sure it might look good on paper, but putting unnecessary and niche components like hot-swappable carrier nuclear cores that compromise the structural stability and complicate the entire design, construction, and maintenance process of your vessel is just not worth it. That, and the fact that nuclear reactors need to have safety checks ran before they're commissioned pretty much marginalizes any advantage you might otherwise have gained from being able to move the core into the ship more quickly.
The engine room is on the bottom deck of a carrier and there are 6 decks above it, if I am correct. How do you lift a nuclear reactor or two from the bottom deck when there are 6 decks above it? I never said this was going to be easy. I agree there is going to be a "cost" to pay to build a ship which will have "Fast Swap" capability.
but...
I believe the benefits still outweigh the costs. However this is all speculation.
the fact is...
We still do not know if the Type 004 is going to be conventional or nuclear powered?
Maybe taking them out the sides when in dry dock, however this would place a lot of structural strain on the hull. We do not know if Type 004 will be nuclear or just conventional, and there isn't that much hard evidence that type 004 will be nuclear powered just people throwing buzz words around for hype purposes or to compare China to the us or something like that. Nuclear propulsion is just risky in the way that it will bring many complications, especially as it would be China's first ever nuclear surface combat ship, let alone a carrier, may face many hiccups.
If China was trying to build out a carrier fleet, then going conventional might be the better option. I really don't think they are, though. If we could wave a wand and have it so that China has a 11-carrier strong fleet tomorrow with fully loaded planes, how much will this newly minted carrier fleet contribute to the actual fires generation in the Taiwan, Okinawa, or even Guam contingent? A single digit percent, maybe? Maybe very low double-digits in the case of Guam? The air and rocket power the mainland can generate simply eclipses anything a carrier fleet can provide, and it does it at an order of magnitude less cost and complexity.
The PLA is probably building out their carrier fleet for far out in the future. They know carrier doctrine is hard, both from research and from talking to US, British, and French airmen, and so they want to build this doctrinal skill base early. As such, a nuclear reactor makes sense to me. If a nuclear carrier doesn't work out for China, then they lose relatively little and they learn how to better build their next one. If it works, it really won't contribute to the most important conflict for China. Right now, China doesn't need to develop carrier capacity but carrier competence and replacing the propulsion system with nuclear just makes more sense than yet another conventional CATOBAR. I think the next platform will be nuclear. I think that even if the nuclear reactor testing becomes complicated, I find it more likely that the PRC would 'do nothing' for a few years in the carrier construction space than it is for them to invest money into constructing another carrier that doesn't fundamentally offer them any extra competence.
A 11 carrier conventional fleet can outright defeat anyone even in open Westpac due to higher readiness.
It's still a fraction of the firepower the PLARF and PLAAF can bring to bear, and much more expensive for it. There's little point, if the fight is over WESTPAC.
The Malacca Strait being the closest most obvious sea lane bottle neck.
I think the Brits have just signed or about to sign a free trade deal with Singapore (not sure if that includes rebuilding/extending the British naval base there)