It is simply a catastrophe...
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Why? Only since China's carrier project is more and as expected by all reliable followers an evolutionary process than a revolution?
There is no need to be bigger, larger, heavier than or like US vessels since the PLAN has different aims, and most of all not to please any high hopes of fan boys in forums, who wish the jump immediately to a Ford-class carrier.
Yeah, in fact I am looking forward to a revolutionary progress rather than a slow evolution.
As an amateur aircraft carrier enthusiast, I have always begrudge the US super aircraft carrier.
When the fleet is galloping on the ocean, it looks pretty COOL right?
But everything seems tooooooooooooooooooooo early，the ruthless reality shattered my dreams....
PS：It’s just my personal thoughts, if digress, I’m very sorry about that.
The Ford class carrier from 2017 has only 3 elevators. The airwing typically quoted for the Chinese carrier is less than 2/3 the size of of those on the Ford, so having only 2 elevators does not seem to put it at any additional disadvantage.Thanks your link！
It was unexpected that the China's third aircraft carrier had only two elevators and three catapults, you know,even CV-63 Kitty Hawk which built in 1960s still have four lifts and four catapults (Although Ford class proved that the three elevators are a more reasonable combination)..
So, I can’t understand what PLAN is planning....
There main reason early US super carriers had 4 elevators Is that was an inherited layout based on early expectation that angle deck carriers can land aircraft on the angle deck and striking them down into the hanger continuously, while simultaneously lifting up from hanger and launching aircraft over the bow continuously At a high tempo. Having space for 4 elevators, and thus able to conduct sustained simultaneous landing and take offs was in fact often sited as a major justification for extremely large super carriers through the 1950s and 1960s. In practice this proved impractical. But the flight deck layout of all US super carrier down to the last Nimitz was finalized as early as 1955, when the very first US angle deck super carrier, the forrestal, has Not even been commissioned let along had the navy gathered experience on the practicality of continuous high tempo simultaneous landing and take off. The allure of this was capabilities was so strong that despite evidence of insurmountable operational difficulties, the navy refused to foreclose on this theoretical capability down to when the Nimitz was designed around 10 years later.
there is no doubt by early 1970s, the USN had concluded simultaneously high tempo sustained take off and landings will never work. From that time onward new carrier sketch designs all have only 2 or 3 elevators. But for various reasons the navy kept building the same design from before early 1970s until the last Nimitz class, so the Ford class actually represent the first opportunity to reflect the rethinking that had actually occurred nearly 40 years earlier.
Last edited:
Hi how long usually it will take a carrier to be operational after launching 4 years or soI think this is the most likely official configuration of Type-003 with 3 catapults and 2 elevators.
any idea about it
thank you
It would seem from the new image that indeed as rumored before, 18 has two elevators on starboard and none on port..
I don't think its the final layer of the angled deck, maybe some of the support structures under it? If it doesn't get any wider it would be a very narrow bow section.
Looking at the picture it looks like the 003 is significantly wider than the Shandong. The elevators are shown carrying two planes at a time. Perhaps two elevators is enough.
I just trust PLAN has done their homework, I also believe the people who designed the ship as a group, is smarter than any individual here, so just let it be.