CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
My point exactly it is all about electrical design, which in the commercial market it is still a work in progress. Personally when it comes to crictical infrastructure I will stick to a tried and tested product until the new tech. had been tested to death. But in China's case both system has not achieved operational maturity

Yes.

From China's perspective, both its steam and EM catapults are unproven.
 

KIENCHIN

Junior Member
Registered Member
Capacitors are solid state electronics, which are less complicated and prone to failure.

Plus my understanding is that EMALs uses spinning flywheels for energy storage rather than capacitors.
Don't know about the storage medium use on EMALS but large capacitors use for energy storage that are call upon to release massive amount of energy, even though solid device they maybe can fail in a dramatic way. I had one that blew up on commissioning and did not hurt anyone because it is install in a blast resistance cabinet.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Don't know about the storage medium use on EMALS but large capacitors use for energy storage that are call upon to release massive amount of energy, even though solid device they maybe can fail in a dramatic way. I had one that blew up on commissioning and did not hurt anyone because it is install in a blast resistance cabinet.

Yes, which is why they went with spinning flywheels for EMALs energy storage on the Ford-class carriers.
 
Top