CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

[Mirabo]

The No#4 commercial dock maybe be long enough to accommodate two carrier at the same time, but using one long drydock for two ships makes impossible to lift super modules to the internal ship, or launch it. without finishing the external one.

Untrue, if the external construction is watertight then it can be floated out to temporarily make way for the internal vessel, even if it is still unready for a full launch.

How do you think they will move the modules to the drydock in the first place?

The same way the 071 #8 in HDZH was launched despite sharing a drydock with an incomplete 075.

 

[Sczepan]

...

The other option should be to create in the current basin drydock, open into the basin.

thats what i suspect - following the rail tracks, maybe a swimming dock will be stationed there

 

[zgx09t]

those are two dredging ships?? I must say I don't understand why couldn't build an ebbankment holding the ocean, then dig a huge hole in the ground. then when all is dug out, gradually let in the water and demolish the embankment. sounds easier than dredging the sea floor.

 

[Anlsvrthng]

It lasts ten years to build a carrier. And from this ten years, the carrier spents two years in drydock. The two years before the modules are createtd and the two years thereafter a carrier is fittet out. Two years at the beginning components for the modules are fabricated and two years after fitting out the carrier will be finalized.

With only one drydock it is possible to build five carriers at the same time.

If you calculate it with lead time then the USA build three carrier at the same time.

Untrue, if the external construction is watertight then it can be floated out to temporarily make way for the internal vessel, even if it is still unready for a full launch.

How do you think they will move the modules to the drydock in the first place?

The same way the 071 #8 in HDZH was launched despite sharing a drydock with an incomplete 075.

If money and time doesn't matter anything is possible.

But I presume the PLAN wants the most carrier from X amount of money, not X carrier from all available money.

Juggling with partly finished structures to make them watertight and stable enough for float out to be able to assembly the other unit sure recipe for slow, expansive and later delivery.

All production element has to be just as complex as required to deliver good quality , later on as the experience gathered the complexity can be increased.

 

[plawolf]

In addition to the technical challenges and risks already highlighted, another significant factor would be capacity.

China built up fearsome dredging capabilities to support its SCS island building. Now that island building is largely complete, there is a significant amount of spare dredging capacity available. That would significantly reduce the costs to use the dredgers, giving an obvious economic incentive.

 

[Intrepid]

If you calculate it with lead time then the USA build three carrier at the same time./QUOTE]
Yes, exactly.

USA has one production road, China may have two soon, if Shanghai and Dalian are independent.

 

[by78]

Dredging work is really picking up... Another view of the basin being worked on.

(1620 x 1080)

 

[asif iqbal]

no doubt but there seems to be a theme here with Chinese navy

aircraft carrier without aircraft, LPD without LCAC and LHD without any rotary wing

why even bother if you are going to do half the job? a very disturbing and concerning trend

the people involved need to think long and hard on what exactly they are doing

 

[vesicles]

no doubt but there seems to be a theme here with Chinese navy

aircraft carrier without aircraft, LPD without LCAC and LHD without any rotary wing

why even bother if you are going to do half the job? a very disturbing and concerning trend

the people involved need to think long and hard on what exactly they are doing

They might have a perfectly good reason / logic for doing this kind of things. It’s just not yet apparent to amateurs like us.

These projects usually cost billions of $$$ and take decades to finish. It would be hard to believe that they would routinely mismanage their projects in such catastrophic scale, especially when these are matters of national security in literal terms.

Also, the Chinese seem to have a good reputation for being methodical. They usually take things slowly and make sure they do it properly. Mismanaging things in such huge scale would be out of character for them.

If it happens once in a while, then that might mean that someone has made a terrible mistake and would’ve been punished severely and accordingly. We all know how disciplined the PLA is... or what kind of dictatorship they have (depending on how you look at things). And if this kind of things happens again and again with a lot of their high-profile projects, you better believe this is happening for a reason. The upper echelon must be ok with it, which means this is not a mistake and is all intentional.

The planners must have thought long and hard and decided that this would be the best way. And they have also managed to convince the big bosses that this would be the best way to do things. We may disagree with their rationale, but we should never blame them for making rash decisions or making careless mistakes.

 

[gelgoog]

The Z-10 and Z-20 are available. With minor modifications I am certain those can be used.
It is only a matter of time until naval versions of both are made for the LHDs.

With regards to the aircraft I think the main impediment was the engine but now that an engine in the proper weight category is supposedly available the fighter should turn up eventually. I think even more urgent than the next generation naval fighter would be a trainer aircraft which can conduct hook landings and catapult takeoff.