MwRYum
Major
Those are most likely just temporary workshops, nothing more.
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
what satellite images?
About the power plants that is intended to power this big ship? Doesn't it have to be significantly more powerful than the QC280 considering
1. It supplies electric power for IEP
2. Power to the screws to propel this giant
3. Operate EM catapults
4. Electric power for other operations including radars.
1. It supplies electric power for IEP
2. Power to the screws to propel this giant
3. Operate EM catapults
4. Electric power for other operations including radars.
They can just crank more out as they need.
it never hurts to have one more set of measurements.
I used both the drydock dimensions and the shelter dimensions as base, for double security factor.
Tried to take into account the slight off nadir angle of the image, which may make the carrier a bit longer if not carefully choosing the stern ending point.
Anyway, I am getting this:
317 m overall length
80.5 m overall deck width at its widest point (but not taking into account any possible antenna/rail protrusions)
76.3 m deck width at mid point.
Elevators are 20 m by 14.7 m in dimension
Catapult length seems to be 109 m.
How does that compare to Nimitz for example. Also measurements taken via GE, not just using readily available numbers:
333 m length
78.6 m max deck width
76 deck width at mid point
Elevators are 15.5 m by 20.8 m/25.6 m.
Catapult length is some 106 m.
*of course, all these are subject to errors due to low resolution. So a meter or two here or there is quite possible/likely.
So indeed, quite peculiar that PLAN decided to have a carrier with a smaller and narrower hull feature a deck even slightly wider than a Nimitz. And on a deck shorter than Nimitzes, to have a catapult slightly longer than one on Nimitz.
Given all this and my previous displacement estimates, I'd say 003 should be right around 80 000 t. Give or take a few thousand tons.
I'm really happy with how this ship turned out. I'm not one of those die-hard nuclear power enthusiasts, as long as it gets the job done (project power in the Western Pacific region), it's a good carrier. Even with these conventionally powered 80,000 ton CATOBAR carriers, if China has say 6 of them plus CV 16 & 17, it's going to be one hell of a force to be reckoned with.
Are you measuring the drydock width as 80.4m wide? Because the set of measurements done by horobeyo on twitter was based off the drydock internal width being 82m wide, from contractor documents for the shipyard back in the day.
In any case, the general size of the ship is already pretty clear.
The waterline beam of the ship is within spitting distance of a Nimitz (~0.5 meter within range, depending on the measurement).
Extending the ship's flight deck to be Nimitz/Ford length would've required a commensurate increase in hull length and displacement. Can't see that happening without at least a further increase in propulsion output, which may or may not have been viable.
It isn't explicitly stated but I think the estimates of displacement that most people are putting out, including totoro, are full displacement