CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

[Blitzo]

To begin, I'm going to clear up a few points that have previously been misinterpreted.

• Parts for 6 CVs including 001 and 002 have been ordered. This means CV #3, #4, #5, and #6.
• May eventually be expanded to eight total carriers, i.e. #7 and #8 as well.

Again, this is news from a reliable source but is not an insider, so take with a pinch of salt.

Now, regarding the 003's tonnage.

The general understanding is that, if there have been no significant improvements made to the PLAN's steam propulsion technology, then the 003's tonnage will inevitably not be too high, maybe 60,000 tons standard at most. There currently exists quite a large disparity between Chinese and American boilers, and if it remains unresolved, then the 002's tonnage could be severely limited if it wants to retain a reasonable speed. This is what speculation on fzgfzy's remarks have basically amounted to.

The 65,000-ton standard load Kitty Hawk's 8 boilers across 4 shafts gives it a total of 280,000 shp, or 35,000 shp per boiler, enabling a 32-knot top speed. On the other hand, the 002's 8 boilers, with a design derived from Kuznetsov's, only produces around 200,000 shp, or 25,000 per boiler. If the PLAN puts a 200,000 shp powerplant on a 65,000-ton standard load carrier, its speed would be mediocre, no matter how well they try to optimize the hull form. After all, the 55,000-ton standard 002 with an optimized hull form and 200,000 shp can just make 31 knots.

Simply put, if PLAN steam propulsion has not improved over the 002, then the 003 will not displace much more than 60,000 tons standard if the PLAN wants it to hit 30 knots.

What I'm more surprised at is that 003 will continue to use steam propulsion (turbines I assume) when it is expected to have EM catapults, which one would have assumed to mean IEPS. I wondered if it might have involved hooking up gas turbines with IEPS.

I assume that the delay in 003 construction a while back supposedly to make modifications for 003 did not involve major modification of the original propulsion intended for it then. I wonder how they are going to power the EM catapults.

 

[taxiya]

What I'm more surprised at is that 003 will continue to use steam propulsion (turbines I assume) when it is expected to have EM catapults, which one would have assumed to mean IEPS. I wondered if it might have involved hooking up gas turbines with IEPS.

I assume that the delay in 003 construction a while back supposedly to make modifications for 003 did not involve major modification of the original propulsion intended for it then. I wonder how they are going to power the EM catapults.

Did you just make connection between IEPS and Gas Turbine? IEPS can use both steam and Gas turbine. In case of CVN and Nuclear sub, steam turbine is the only option in IEPS.

Besides, EM cat does not have to use IEPS (which include other things than EM cat). So there is no connection between EM cat and IEPS either.

By this

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

? Ship borne steam turbine generator. It is rated at 20MW. It just need to share the steam from the existing boilers.

 

[taxiya]

So why not use gas turbine engines?

Because China is determined to go for CVN (in the long run) which use steam turbine. Building a on-off gas turbine CV is waste of money even if they can. Instead, building a conventional steam powered CV will assist the CVN by testing everything except the steam generator (including the reactor).

To be clear, nuclear power is JUST special type of STEAM turbine power. Nuclear reactor is just another kind of steam boiler. CVN is closer to Conventional steam powered CV in design than GT CV.

 

[Blitzo]

Did you just make connection between IEPS and Gas Turbine? IEPS can use both steam and Gas turbine. In case of CVN and Nuclear sub, steam turbine is the only option in IEPS.

Besides, EM cat does not have to use IEPS (which include other things than EM cat). So there is no connection between EM cat and IEPS either.

By this

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

? Ship borne steam turbine generator. It is rated at 20MW. It just need to share the steam from the existing boilers.

Yes, of course IEPS can use any type of powerplant.
The link, such as it is, was more in relation to the other major carrier class with IEPS in the world, ie the QE class, which uses gas turbines. I would've been... Unsurprised if such a powerplant was provided for 003 as well if it had gone the IEPS route.

 

[Mirabo]

Boiler is boiler There is no such thing as modern boiler design It is old technology anything modern must be the control and data acquisition thing or better material maybe modern burner design But the basic boiler design doe not change for a long time It is either A Frame or O frame I believe the Varyag design is O frame or tubular design
CV17 is the same size of Liaoning so it make perfect sense to just use the existing design why reinvent the wheel you can make improvement on the burner , burner control, fire management and data center

China DID make improvement on the boiler design you can compare the smoke from Kutznetzov vs Liaoning . Liaoning spew less of smoke compare to Kutnetzov It mean more efficient burning
So I don't understand what you mean by relic design?

Okay, but none of this addresses the point that while the USN has a powerplant capable of 35,000 shp per boiler, the PLAN does not. We can speculate if they could produce them, but there is no evidence to support the existence of any PLAN steam propulsion system on par with the USN's. Like I said, the acknowledgment of the PLAN's steam propulsion technology as lacking has been raised by big shrimps, and I fully support their analyses. Please stop detracting from the original discussion.

Don't shoot the messenger...

Thank you.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Okay, but none of this addresses the point that while the USN has a powerplant capable of 35,000 shp per boiler, the PLAN does not. We can speculate if they could produce them, but there is no evidence to support the existence of any PLAN steam propulsion system on par with the USN's. Like I said, the acknowledgment of the PLAN's steam propulsion technology as lacking has been raised by big shrimps, and I fully support their analyses. Please stop detracting from the original discussion.
Thank you.

Well because they don't 100,000 carrier to begin with So it logical that they don't design larger power plant than they need
Those shrimp does not know what they are talking

 

[Mirabo]

Well because they don't 100,000 carrier to begin with So it logical that they don't design larger power plant than they need
Those shrimp does not know what they are talking

Which confirms my point that the PLAN currently does not have a powerplant with boilers providing 35,000 shp per...

The PLAN doesn't have large powerplants because they don't have a 100,000-ton carrier. The PLAN can't have a big carrier because they don't have large powerplants.

Jesus Christ, why are we even having this discussion? Make your mind up...

 

[Orthan]

Which confirms my point that the PLAN currently does not have a powerplant with boilers providing 35,000 shp per...

If china hasnt develop a sufficient propulsion system to properly propel 003, then possibly 003 wont have 80000t, but rather something close to 002 displacement.

 

[Richard Santos]

To begin, I'm going to clear up a few points that have previously been misinterpreted.

• Parts for 6 CVs including 001 and 002 have been ordered. This means CV #3, #4, #5, and #6.
• May eventually be expanded to eight total carriers, i.e. #7 and #8 as well.

Again, this is news from a reliable source but is not an insider, so take with a pinch of salt.

Now, regarding the 003's tonnage.

The general understanding is that, if there have been no significant improvements made to the PLAN's steam propulsion technology, then the 003's tonnage will inevitably not be too high, maybe 60,000 tons standard at most. There currently exists quite a large disparity between Chinese and American boilers, and if it remains unresolved, then the 002's tonnage could be severely limited if it wants to retain a reasonable speed. This is what speculation on fzgfzy's remarks have basically amounted to.

The 65,000-ton standard load Kitty Hawk's 8 boilers across 4 shafts gives it a total of 280,000 shp, or 35,000 shp per boiler, enabling a 32-knot top speed. On the other hand, the 002's 8 boilers, with a design derived from Kuznetsov's, only produces around 200,000 shp, or 25,000 per boiler. If the PLAN puts a 200,000 shp powerplant on a 65,000-ton standard load carrier, its speed would be mediocre, no matter how well they try to optimize the hull form. After all, the 55,000-ton standard 002 with an optimized hull form and 200,000 shp can just make 31 knots.

Simply put, if PLAN steam propulsion has not improved over the 002, then the 003 will not displace much more than 60,000 tons standard if the PLAN wants it to hit 30 knots.

What is the basis for the assertion that an increase in power out put from 200000 shp to 280000 shp require improved “technology” as oppose to being something readily achievable with the same technology?

 

[Richard Santos]

So why not use gas turbine engines?

Because China hasn’t shown the ability to independently design and make large high powered marine gas turbines.