00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[Tomboy]

Well specifically in the carriers case with decks that overhang over the entire Drydock, it’s mighty hard to retrieve equipment or move equipment into the drydock if the cranes can’t access it.

Theres also the block module construction method that I see China use over what the US uses where blocks are lowered seperated in the drydock and then merged together into one. One does need quite a lot of room to perform this procedure.
View attachment 164642
View attachment 164643

This was how Fujian's hull was pieced together.
While ford on the other hand is built in many much smaller pieces
View attachment 164644

DL uses tower construction method similar to US shipyards, your concerns are not really found in reality.

 

[Nx4eu]

DL uses tower construction method similar to US shipyards, your concerns are not really found in reality.

Well evidently this isn't very obvious as it's still using and moving large hull blocks together.


Unlike Ford which is nearly entirely built from the ground up, in one spot.

 

[Tomboy]

Well evidently this isn't very obvious as it's still using and moving large hull blocks together. View attachment 164645
View attachment 164646

Unlike Ford which is nearly entirely built from the ground up, in one spot.
View attachment 164647
View attachment 164648
View attachment 164649
View attachment 164650

That simply comes down on the exact method, however DL's technique is much closer to US shipyards than JN. There is no reason to believe 004 will be capped at under 330m.

 

[Tomboy]

Also, in 西葛西's latest stream, 约克 said that he expects "003A" to have a longer flight deck than Fujian due to some deck inefficiencies stemming from being designed originally for shorter steam catapults. No comment on whether it will reuse Fujian's island, but they are pretty adamant about the mockup being for the 004 CVN instead of "003A".

 

[henrik]

DL uses tower construction method similar to US shipyards, your concerns are not really found in reality.

Is the US using the older pre-WWII frame-first approach?

 

[00CuriousObserver]

Via SOYO:

It can be stated clearly that this is not a flight-deck model that HUST (Huazhong University of Science and Technology) put together on its own. In fact, HUST, the 701 Institute and the Navy have all taken part, and it can be viewed as a research outcome for next-generation carrier deck layout/flight-operations scheduling.

Thanks to the island being moved much further aft compared with the 003, the distance from the front edge of the island base to the outer overhang of the deck on this model exceeds 110 m, even greater than on a Nimitz (100–106 m), while the distance from the aft edge of the island base to the end of the flight deck has been reduced to under 86 m.

It is still impossible to say whether this model will actually be adopted, but shifting the island further aft is certain to be a key design feature of the next-generation carrier — something that can already be clearly seen from the refit of the carrier mock-up building.

 

[Alfa_Particle]

Via SOYO:



View attachment 164678

Still a bit too short IMO. Stretch the front a bit to a Nimitz-ish length would be perfect. Plus it looks stubby, short, and ugly otherwise /s

Here's what Soyo proposed which he said and I quote:

拉长，拉长到332米就啥事都解决了

(stretch it, stretch it to 332 m and everything would be solved)

尼米兹的甲板尺寸，某种程度上还真是一种最优解

(Nimitz's deck side, to an extent is indeed the optimal solution)

...that I HOPE will materialise someday:

Shove 4x QC500/CGT-60 with 10x Diesel motors with an IEP system and I'll be a VERY happy man. It'll be big enough for potential J-XD-S deployments, ergonomically ideal, and is just all-round much superior to the Type 003 without the staggering costs and maintenance hassles of the soon-to-be Type 004 while providing much greater flexibility.

 

[Tomboy]

I think it's reasonable to assume the next conventional carrier will likely be longer than Fujian.

 

[Tomboy]

Via SOYO:



View attachment 164678

Also, to note the island on this model has a total length of 42m. Does anyone know how long Fujian's island is?

 

[Cloud_Nine_]

Still a bit too short IMO. Stretch the front a bit to a Nimitz-ish length would be perfect. Plus it looks stubby, short, and ugly otherwise /s

Here's what Soyo proposed which he said and I quote:

(stretch it, stretch it to 332 m and everything would be solved)

(Nimitz's deck side, to an extent is indeed the optimal solution)

...that I HOPE will materialise someday:
View attachment 164679
Shove 4x QC500/CGT-60 with 10x Diesel motors with an IEP system and I'll be a VERY happy man. It'll be big enough for potential J-XD-S deployments, ergonomically ideal, and is just all-round much superior to the Type 003 without the staggering costs and maintenance hassles of the soon-to-be Type 004 while providing much greater flexibility.

You mean CGT-50? CGT-60F is a natural gas burning 70MW turbine, and technological pathfinder to the 300MW F-class heavy duty gas turbine.

50MW class GT is an interesting sweet spot since 4 of these can satisfy propulsion needs for a 100k ton CV. For reference Ford class has 208MW of propulsion power and a further 104MW of installed power. Currently the highest power diesel in use in PLAN is 054B's CS16V27, with 6.4 MW of power in generator mode. 104MW would require a pretty insane amount of diesel so an imaginary 4x50MW GT CV would probably require new diesels or small generator GTs.

Then there's the issue of propulsion. Either this notional system is mechanically driven (which would require a new gearbox), or electric motors drive which would also require 50MW motors or twin 25MW motors. Then still there's always the age old problem of air intake and exhaust for the GTs, range compared to a steam powered CV, operational costs, etc.

Certainly not saying all of this is impossible but that's a lot of hurdle to jump through. But hey, no one's ever done a 100k ton CV anyways. PLAN is already in uncharted waters and if switching CV to GT powered brings enough pros over its cons, I am sure they'll do it. None of the hurdles are actually technical difficulties either, its an engineering problem.