00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[tphuang]

We have seen times in the past where china waited several years for certain things to be ready(most famous of which was 052c) before starting mass production of the shipping class they really wanted. If nuclear carrier is something they really wanted and they are not in a rush to have more carriers in service before turn of the decade, I don't think it's unrealistic for us to have to wait until after 2025 before seeing modules of the first 004. I also don't think it's unrealistic for us to see another 003 before then.

 

[Blitzo]

POP3's statement is not black and white, and his track record not unblemished either. The forum reads too much into the statements that these "insiders" put out rather than treating them like guides as they should.

And even if we take POP3's words "四号舰”, this could refer to the fourth carrier overall or the fourth Chinese-built carrier or "carrier #4". We don't have further context.

So I think it's a bit premature to say anything until we have more concrete evidence.

In that case it's a matter of how we interpret "四号舰" -- but you can't simply write post #7256 without acknowledging what he had written as a major confounding factor for everything that we had been predicting in the last few years.

At the very least it requires us to tread carefully as to what "四号舰" means and to reassess what our expectations for the PLAN's future carrier procurement timeline will look like after the current 003 (and our existing expectations were not exactly firm to begin with, at that!)



However, as per the exchange posted in #7494, given pop3 mentioned the "fourth carrier" as being "nuclear" in relation to someone asking if the satellite image of 003 was "CV-19" (which would be the PLAN's overall fourth aircraft carrier, and which is how pop3 interpreted the question in his subsequent elaboration), I would wager that it is difficult to interpret "四号舰" as anything other than "PLAN's overall fourth carrier".
Now, of course we can still wonder about pop3's reliability, and we can also wonder if he had interpreted the question right, etc.

But I think the exchange as written and his subsequent posts from that exchange means we have to seriously consider the possibility that the "PLAN's overall fourth carrier" may indeed be nuclear, and to try to rationalize the possible timeline, consequences and rationale behind that.

 

[SinoSoldier]

We have seen times in the past where china waited several years for certain things to be ready(most famous of which was 052c) before starting mass production of the shipping class they really wanted. If nuclear carrier is something they really wanted and they are not in a rush to have more carriers in service before turn of the decade, I don't think it's unrealistic for us to have to wait until after 2025 before seeing modules of the first 004. I also don't think it's unrealistic for us to see another 003 before then.

CV/CVNs are far more complex, expensive, and time-consuming than DDGs, so in the context of China's geostrategic goals it might be unreasonable to take a 052C/D approach to their carrier projects. Of course, it is entirely possible that the next "003" might actually be a nuclear vessel, which would allow them to iron out bugs in their nuclear tech while skipping the time-consuming process of designing a new class.

In that case it's a matter of how we interpret "四号舰" -- but you can't simply write post #7256 without acknowledging what he had written as a major confounding factor for everything that we had been predicting in the last few years.

At the very least it requires us to tread carefully as to what "四号舰" means and to reassess what our expectations for the PLAN's future carrier procurement timeline will look like after the current 003 (and our existing expectations were not exactly firm to begin with, at that!)



However, as per the exchange posted in #7494, given pop3 mentioned the "fourth carrier" as being "nuclear" in relation to someone asking if the satellite image of 003 was "CV-19" (which would be the PLAN's overall fourth aircraft carrier, and which is how pop3 interpreted the question in his subsequent elaboration), I would wager that it is difficult to interpret "四号舰" as anything other than "PLAN's overall fourth carrier".
Now, of course we can still wonder about pop3's reliability, and we can also wonder if he had interpreted the question right, etc.

But I think the exchange as written and his subsequent posts from that exchange means we have to seriously consider the possibility that the "PLAN's overall fourth carrier" may indeed be nuclear, and to try to rationalize the possible timeline, consequences and rationale behind that.

Fair enough, so as with most "big shrimp predictions" it's a fool's errand to dwell on their cryptic statements and just wait until the first sat images appear.

If the 003 design is flexible enough to accommodate a reactor with some simple modifications, it is entirely possible for the PLAN to build "another 003" but still be able to get a jump on operating nuclear powered carriers.

 

[weig2000]

My bet is that two 003-class carriers will be built before the CVN would be launched. There are rumors that Dalian Shipyard is already beginning construction of another carrier which, if true, will almost definitely be a conventional vessel like the 003.

This would be the default expectation, up until this pop3 rumor about the 4th carrier being the nuclear-powered one. And like I said previously, I would have treated it as fanboy dream (these kinds of rumor do come up regularly in the Chinese military enthusiasts community) were if not from pop3. I still have my doubts about it.

IMO, China's carrier development program has got to be among the best planned and executed strategic defense programs so far. According to pop3, the plan called for one import conversion carrier (Varyag/Liaoning), two conventional steam-powered CATOBAR carriers, and then followed by nuclear-powered ones. A domestic STOBAR (Shandong) was added after Liaoning by the top leadership, reflecting the cautiousness of the leadership, which proved to be the right decision. The Chinese made a huge leap at their 2nd indigenous carrier, which turns out to be a 85000-ton EMALS CATOBAR, exceeding most people's expectation. Building at least two 003 class carriers would not only be sticking to the original plan, in fact surpassing it in essence.

At this point, it makes a lot of sense, from development, training and operational standpoints, to build at least two 003 class carriers as I expounded a while back in this thread. Any deteriorating geopolitical environment actually reinforces the arguments for building more 003 class carriers asap. As it stands, 003 is sufficiently powerful and advanced. Nuclear-powered is nice but not necessary at this point if it takes more time.

Now, if the next carrier will be a nuclear-powered one, it will be astonishing in at least two respects: 1) that China has again made rapid and huge strides in its carrier program, coming on the heel of 003 and 2) they would rather skip the second 003 class carrier, which has been the original plan and which also makes so much sense, despite of the deteriorating geopolitical environment not because of it.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

Some projects have been pleasant surprises, some projects have been disappointments. All of those pleasant surprises and disappointments however have been tracked with occasional updates of rumours and/or information on how a given project is progressing.

I'm definitely pleasantly surprised by this news, but "astonished" is a bridge too far. I was 50/50 on whether China would continue with conventional propulsion or switch to nuclear immediately, and I never thought that China was so far away from nuclear carrier propulsion given that it has a mature nuclear submarine program, a highly developed, world leading civilian reactor program, and is focused on developing nuclear powered carriers. I also never bought the "requirements" that a naval reactor would have to be installed on an icebreaker or fishing trawler or whatever else it was.

In the case of this rumour that the fourth carrier will be nuclear, we do not have any basis of information to project when it could emerge and pop3 has not given us any indication of it either.

I understand the need to be realistic, but I feel you're "pessimizing" this piece of news. We can of course question pop3's credibility and source for this information but if we accept that he's legit then we should accept it at face value, not try and concoct the most negative spin possible.

Personally, I have internalized that China is no longer a giant rice paddy populated by hayseeds wearing conical straw hats and riding bicycles, so I don't put nuclear aircraft carriers (or advanced nuclear submarines, stealth bombers, etc.) as beyond its capability. Some people still see China in that old light, so they think it's a minor miracle when China develops some piece of advanced technology. At some point the "miracles" have to be normalized.

For scenario 2: perhaps not only is Chinese nuclear propulsion technology less advanced than we believe, but perhaps the strategic environment of the mid to late 2020s is assessed as being so severe, and that pursuing a fourth 003 pattern carrier would not be the best decision to hedge against conflict (i.e.: that more mature and more distributed assets may be more valuable for that time period, versus an additional 003 carrier, as a fleet of four carriers of CV-16, CV-17 and two 003 CVs would be deemed an insufficiently capable force to deal with threats of that time period).

That's a reach grafted onto an already weak theory. If the Chinese leadership's view were so dire (and I wish it was), we would see very public indications of that: First and foremost, a vastly expanded military budget; a greatly accelerated expansion of the nuclear arsenal instead of the current languid one (for context, the US went from 300 to 18,500 in the decade from 1950 to 1960); an expansive propaganda push preparing the population for war. We see none of these things.

In addition to that, it's a reach to claim that China sees CATOBAR carriers as unsuited for a war against the US because... I guess they don't think they'll have crossed every t and dotted every i by then? I don't buy this at all.

That means at this stage, we should remain cautious, and to not write cheques that we may be unable to cash.

If we go through the history and look at the pessimists' and optimists' respective records, which one was more accurate? Underestimating China and its capabilities also counts as a bounced cheque.

The idea of China starting construction of a CVN in the next few years is not beyond the realm of possibility -- but it would be surprising, and we need rumours to seriously entertain it, given how soon that will be creeping on us.

I've come to really appreciate the wisdom of China's strategy of just keeping its mouth shut. The most natural thing for people to do - even people who spent decades observing its military progress and don't have the racist biases so common among its enemies - is to doubt it. Even though China has disproved all doubts time and again.

I'd like you to do a little thought experiment: Suppose the US announced tomorrow (or there was a leak from a credible insider) that it was going to build and field ten more carriers. Would you treat that news with the same skepticism you treat this or would you just take it at face value?

 

[SinoSoldier]

This would be the default expectation, up until this pop3 rumor about the 4th carrier being the nuclear-powered one. And like I said previously, I would have treated it as fanboy dream (these kinds of rumor do come up regularly in the Chinese military enthusiasts community) were if not from pop3. I still have my doubts about it.

IMO, China's carrier development program has got to be among the best planned and executed strategic defense programs so far. According to pop3, the plan called for one import conversion carrier (Varyag/Liaoning), two conventional steam-powered CATOBAR carriers, and then followed by nuclear-powered ones. A domestic STOBAR (Shandong) was added after Liaoning by the top leadership, reflecting the cautiousness of the leadership, which proved to be the right decision. The Chinese made a huge leap at their 2nd indigenous carrier, which turns out to be a 85000-ton EMALS CATOBAR, exceeding most people's expectation. Building at least two 003 class carriers would not only be sticking to the original plan, in fact surpassing it in essence.

At this point, it makes a lot of sense, from development, training and operational standpoints, to build at least two 003 class carriers as I expounded a while back in this thread. Any deteriorating geopolitical environment actually reinforces the arguments for building more 003 class carriers asap. As it stands, 003 is sufficiently powerful and advanced. Nuclear-powered is nice but not necessary at this point if it takes more time.

Now, if the next carrier will be a nuclear-powered one, it will be astonishing in at least two respects: 1) that China has again made rapid and huge strides in its carrier program, coming on the heel of 003 and 2) they would rather skip the second 003 class carrier, which has been the original plan and which also makes so much sense, despite of the deteriorating geopolitical environment not because of it.

Depends on how far along the CVN is. If I'm not mistaken POP3's recent comments are that the CVN is still in its design stage, which would mean that such a ship wouldn't materialize until well into the late 2020s.

If that turns out to be true, and that is a massive "if", then perhaps we can interpret it as the PLAN being wary of building carriers in general or that the conventional vessels are unfit for their job.

Unless 003 #2 is a CVN, which I admit is actually quite an arousing idea.

 

[Richard Santos]

The gap between the first sortie by the first American nuclear powered submarine and the start of construction of the major American nuclear surface ship was 2 years. The gap to the start of construction of the first nuclear carrier Enterprise was 3 years. The gap to the start of the construction of the first two reactor nuclear carrier Nimitz was 13 years.

When the Nimitz started construction, the US has built and operated 15 large commercial nuclear reactors that were more powerful than any onboard ships

By my count the time elapsed since the first sortie of the first Chinese nuclear powered submarine is 48 years.

Currently the Chinese have built and operated 53 commercial nuclear reactors more powerful than any onboard any ships.

What is the reason for believing the Chinese would be taking larger technical risks by starting the construction of the power plant for a nuclear powered aircraft carrier right now than the Americans were at the start of the construction of the power plants for the Enterprise or Nimitz?

 

[Blitzo]

I'm definitely pleasantly surprised by this news, but "astonished" is a bridge too far. I was 50/50 on whether China would continue with conventional propulsion or switch to nuclear immediately, and I never thought that China was so far away from nuclear carrier propulsion given that it has a mature nuclear submarine program, a highly developed, world leading civilian reactor program, and is focused on developing nuclear powered carriers. I also never bought the "requirements" that a naval reactor would have to be installed on an icebreaker or fishing trawler or whatever else it was.

Well you are the one that said that "astonishing" is just "typical," I'm just using the same choice of words used previously.

Whatever. My point is that the idea of the fourth carrier being nuclear overall is a surprise and unexpected.

I understand the need to be realistic, but I feel you're "pessimizing" this piece of news. We can of course question pop3's credibility and source for this information but if we accept that he's legit then we should accept it at face value, not try and concoct the most negative spin possible.

Personally, I have internalized that China is no longer a giant rice paddy populated by hayseeds wearing conical straw hats and riding bicycles, so I don't put nuclear aircraft carriers (or advanced nuclear submarines, stealth bombers, etc.) as beyond its capability. Some people still see China in that old light, so they think it's a minor miracle when China develops some piece of advanced technology. At some point the "miracles" have to be normalized.

There are also domains of technology, subsystems and end products that we have yet to see "miracles" in.

A few of these include:
High performance and competitive turbofans.
Competitive nuclear submarines.
And yes, nuclear propulsion appropriate for aircraft carriers.

Yes, we are likely to see them emerge in time.

But however you cut the mustard, the idea of the fourth carrier being nuclear is a surprise.
If the fourth nuclear carrier does begin construction in the next few years, yes that would very much be a significant pleasant surprise.
Not beyond the scope of possibility -- that is to say, the likelihood of it happening is above zero. But it is not something we can simply look at now, shrug off and say "that sounds obvious".

That's a reach grafted onto an already weak theory. If the Chinese leadership's view were so dire (and I wish it was), we would see very public indications of that: First and foremost, a vastly expanded military budget; a greatly accelerated expansion of the nuclear arsenal instead of the current languid one (for context, the US went from 300 to 18,500 in the decade from 1950 to 1960); an expansive propaganda push preparing the population for war. We see none of these things.

In addition to that, it's a reach to claim that China sees CATOBAR carriers as unsuited for a war against the US because... I guess they don't think they'll have crossed every t and dotted every i by then? I don't buy this at all.

I never stated that China sees CATOBAR carriers as unsuited for a war against the US.
In fact, I've been one of the longstanding proponents for the need for a large and competitive CATOBAR fleet as a method of waging high intensity air-naval-missile warfare in the pacific.

What I said was that China may not see having four CATOBAR carriers with their expected level of capability, maturity and readiness in the mid/late 2020s as the best use of resources to hedge against a marginally higher possibility of conflict against the US in the mid/late 2020s.

If we go through the history and look at the pessimists' and optimists' respective records, which one was more accurate? Underestimating China and its capabilities also counts as a bounced cheque.

I've come to really appreciate the wisdom of China's strategy of just keeping its mouth shut. The most natural thing for people to do - even people who spent decades observing its military progress and don't have the racist biases so common among its enemies - is to doubt it. Even though China has disproved all doubts time and again.

I'm not sure how this applies to what I am saying.
If this is a matter of assessing the past track records of people trying to track PLA projects, are you trying to insinuate that I am a "pessimist" or that I have "underestimated" the PLA's progress in developing new projects, weapons and capabilities?
Or that perhaps I have a historical track record of poorly predicting PLA developments in a manner that was ultimately demonstrated that they are actually much more ahead and capable than I had predicted?

Because otherwise, I have no clue why you keep addressing "pessimists" and "optimists" -- doing so, implies that you are relating those people's predictions to my position that I am holding now.

I'd like you to do a little thought experiment: Suppose the US announced tomorrow (or there was a leak from a credible insider) that it was going to build and field ten more carriers. Would you treat that news with the same skepticism you treat this or would you just take it at face value?

Yes, I would be quite skeptical of the USN's ability to carry out such a shipbuilding and procurement and manning plan (dependent on timespan of course). However I don't want to get into counterfactual hypotheticals too much.

 

[SinoSoldier]

The gap between the first sortie by the first American nuclear powered submarine and the start of construction of the major American nuclear surface ship was 2 years. The gap to the start of construction of the first nuclear carrier Enterprise was 3 years. The gap to the start of the construction of the first two reactor nuclear carrier Nimitz was 13 years.

When the Nimitz started construction, the US has built and operated 15 large commercial nuclear reactors that were more powerful than any onboard ships

By my count the time elapsed since the first sortie of the first Chinese nuclear powered submarine is 48 years.

Currently the Chinese have built and operated 53 commercial nuclear reactors more powerful than any onboard any ships.

What is the reason for believing the Chinese would taking larger technical risks by starting the construction of the power plant for a nuclear powered aircraft carrier right now than the Americans were at the start of the construction of the power plants for the Enterprise or Nimitz?

I would imagine that shipborne reactors require a different level of R&D and technical skillset to build than a civilian land-based reactors. Also it should be noted that the reactors aboard early Chinese SSN/SSBNs were known to leak radiation.

 

[Richard Santos]

I would imagine that shipborne reactors require a different level of R&D and technical skillset to build than a civilian land-based reactors. Also it should be noted that the reactors aboard early Chinese SSN/SSBNs were known to leak radiation.

Nonetheless, PLAN’s overall level of marine nuclear power plant design and operating experience is certainly significantly higher now than what the USN possessed when the latter began construction of the first nuclear powered cruiser, the Long Beach, and the first nuclear powered carrier, the Enterprise, in 1957 and 1958. Neither of these two ships were known to have suffered any reactor mishaps and experienced serious operation defects.