CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

T-U-P

T-U-P

The Punisher
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
bustead said:

The launch is delayed to at least late June according to this guy. Opinions?
Click to expand...
His main points are as follows:
  1. He believes the location where 003 will be moved to is still under dredging operations
  2. There's a notice of delay to the dredging operation until June 30
  3. As a result he believes 003 will not be out of the drydock until after June 30
  4. Historically there's no reason for the launch date of 003 to coincide with any other specific/meaningful dates
  5. A notice will be issued for the towing, so look out for that

All of which are reasonable in my opinion. The biggest assumption he made is the location that 003 will be after launch. If you make the same assumption on the location, then it's reasonable to come to the same conclusion (after June 30). Then again, these points do not go against what we've been discussion here, namely there's no need to launch on any specific date, and that the launch is soon.

All in all, he is not making any outrageous claims (nor anything that we don't know) about the launch date in this video.
 
K

kentchang

Junior Member
Registered Member
abc123 said:
USN and Newport News that build one supercarrier every 4-5 years for last 50 years and do have accumulated knowledge and experience, have built Ford class with defects in such basic things like aircraft elevators. But of course, China when building FIRST really Chinese aircraft carrier, will make everything just fine, because they can't make a mistake. And no, you can't criticize that, because otherwise you are an hobbyst and probably American agent and China-hater?
Click to expand...
Amateurs criticize. Professionals talk about trade-offs/costs/missions/constraints. Doing essentially the same product for 50 years may not be such a good thing. Who has been building rockets longer? NASA or SpaceX? How about automobiles? GM or Tesla? Upstarts can afford to be disruptive because they don't have legacy equipment and people to maintain. You really can't teach old dogs new tricks. The mistakes with the Ford class is a great cautionary tale on risk management.

When a one-sentence message simply says XXX should have been YYY because you get ZZZ, you can dismiss that as being from an amateur. ZZZ is usually self-evident (like you can fit 500 aircrafts or go at 200 knots). The shallowness of the author is in suggesting whoever came up with XXX doesn't know such obvious benefits of ZZZ but the author does and willing to post it to show off his brilliance.
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
abc123 said:
USN and Newport News that build one supercarrier every 4-5 years for last 50 years and do have accumulated knowledge and experience, have built Ford class with defects in such basic things like aircraft elevators. But of course, China when building FIRST really Chinese aircraft carrier, will make everything just fine, because they can't make a mistake. And no, you can't criticize that, because otherwise you are an hobbyst and probably American agent and China-hater?
Click to expand...
Speaking of building aircraft carriers, I came across this Quora answer which touch-and-go mentioned the number of dry docks capable of supporting aircraft carriers that the US and China each have.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

For the US, it is stated that they have 18 dry docks that are "used for maintaining the nuclear-powered carrier fleet". The US Navy will be upgrading 2 of them to accomodate the Ford-class supercarriers, according to a news article by USNI.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Meanwhile for China, the author stated that China has 39 dry docks that are capable of building and maintaining aircraft carriers between the Jiangnan and Dalian Shipyards.

Considering that the US Navy only operates supercarriers, and that Liaoning and Shandong are one-off ships as China would be focusing on supercarriers in the coming future.

Here's my question: How many dry docks are available in the US and China respectively that are capable of building supercarriers? And what about dry docks in the US and China respectively that are capable of maintaining supercarriers? In terms of both civilian-operated and military-operated.

Supercarriers here refer to the 003, 004, Nimitz and Ford-sized aircraft carriers, and not the smaller ones like Shandong, Vikrant, Queen Elizabeth and Kuznetsov. The Type 075 and Type 076 LHDs and LHAs certainly aren't qualified as well.

This question always boggled my mind, as the actual data for such dry docks are kinda hard to find.
 
Last edited:
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
Speaking of building aircraft carriers, I came across this Quora answer which touch-and-go mentioned the number of dry docks capable of supporting aircraft carriers that the US and China each have.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

For the US, it is stated that they have 18 dry docks that are "used for maintaining the nuclear-powered carrier fleet". The US Navy will be upgrading 2 of them to accomodate the Ford-class supercarriers, according to a news article by USNI.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Meanwhile for China, the author stated that China has 39 dry docks that are capable of building and maintaining aircraft carriers between the Jiangnan and Dalian Shipyards.

Considering that the US Navy only operates supercarriers, and that Liaoning and Shandong are one-off ships as China would be focusing on supercarriers in the coming future.

Here's my question: How many dry docks are available in the US and China respectively that are capable of building supercarriers? And what about dry docks in the US and China respectively that are capable of maintaining supercarriers? In terms of both civilian-operated and military-operated.

Supercarriers here refer to the 003, 004, Nimitz and Ford-sized aircraft carriers, and not the smaller ones like Shandong, Vikrant, Queen Elizabeth and Kuznetsov. The Type 075 and Type 076 LHDs and LHAs certainly aren't qualified as well.

This question always boggled my mind, as the actual data for such dry docks are kinda hard to find.
Click to expand...


Largest dry docks in the world.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top