CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

by78

by78

General
Hendrik_2000 said:
Are you the self appointed police of this forum? Shut up!
Click to expand...

I'm telling you that Youtube commentator you're so fond of is beneath SDF's standards. He's so blind that he couldn't even tell a JL-10 trainer from a J-16!

And what qualifies you as the authority of content quality, seeing that you think highly of Minnie Chan, the same Minnie Chan who recently used a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to headline her article?

We've had this conversation several times already, so allow me to cut-and-paste my previous reply to you:
I'm not a sheriff, self-appointed or otherwise, but merely an adult with emotional control who adheres to more rigorous standards of information dissemination and who exercises the right to call things as I see them. I take the time to separate facts from opinions, wishful thinking from factual analysis, and I present information only after I have vetted it. When I do expressed an opinion or speculate, I make it clear that it's an opinion or speculation, meaning I don't phrase it as if it's a fact. I don't pretend to know what I don't know, and I most certainly don't pass information from fanboy forums without critically examining its veracity, especially when the original information is in a language I don't understand.

I hope you'll agree that SDF is not a fanboy forum, and as such, certain prevailing attitudes and practices at Pakistan Defence Forum do not apply here.
Click to expand...
 
james smith esq

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
by78 said:
I'm telling you that Youtube commentator you're so fond of is beneath SDF's standards. He's so blind that he couldn't even tell a JL-10 trainer from a J-16!

And what qualifies you as the authority of content quality, seeing that you think highly of Minnie Chan, the same Minnie Chan who recently used a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to headline her article?

We've had this conversation several times already, so allow me to cut-and-paste my previous reply to you:
Click to expand...
What you might expect in response may be along the lines of “Okay, Boomer”!

smh!
 
Last edited:
A

ashnole

New Member
Registered Member
A fleet of 6 Aircraft Carriers (excluding Liaoning & Shandong) is what the PLAN should ideally aim for by 2045. Two of those six being conventionally-powered Medium Carriers such as the one they're building currently and four being nuclear-powered Supercarriers. That would provide PLAN in wartime with two Carrier Task Forces, each CTF comprising of two nuclear Supercarriers + a conventional Medium Carrier + *at least* two dozen escorts two-thirds of them being destroyers.

So far as Liaoning & Shandong are concerned, they could be used for peacetime training and wartime limited Sea Control missions.

The only thing PLAN needs to stay cautious of is going crazy with Carriers at the expense of SSNs/SSGNs. Going forward, a lot of wisdom & discipline will be needed in the highest echelons of PLAN to maintain a balance between the Carrier lobby and the Nuclear Sub lobby.
 
M

Mischa

New Member
Registered Member
Squidward said:
I've read somewhere else (in this thread, I think?) that 003 was originally designed to have 4 steam catapults, and probably didn't have the bow JBD blocking the elevator. If so many changes were made, I wonder if the PLAN will actually be satisfied with such a radically altered design.

What are the odds that the PLAN opts to go for another carrier after 003 that meets their initial design expectations for 003, i.e. 4 catapults (though this time they'll use EMALS) and enough length to accomodate the EMALS without blocking an elevator with a JBD, yet still conventionally powered as per the original design? Though since you'd probably be widening the ship and definitely lengthening it, such a "003 but with the original amount of catapults and positions" design would probably be getting close to 100,000k tons displacement.

... at which point yeah, you might as well swap over to nuclear propulsion and call it 004. Still, it's interesting to think of what 003 was originally supposed to look like.
Click to expand...
I saw a proposal of using 3 catapults somewhere else, probably the same point of view has already been raised in this thread before. They use EMALS on 003, which is more reliable. And based to PLAN's research on US carriers, they found that the No.2 and No.3 catapults are the most frequently used ones. No. 4 shares some of the responsibility from No.3, and works more as a backup. 4 catapults layout mainly saves the aircraft's waiting time during the launch (from 6 to 3.5min per aircraft), and a minor improvement to the launch efficiency.

This carrier aims to form combat effectiveness ASAP, so it's more like a simple enlarged CATOBAR version of CV-16. In this way, most of the operational experience from CV-16 could be directly put onto the new carrier. However, the EMALS progress was appreciable, so the 003 is delayed to wait for the new catapult technology. And that's why they placed an order for CV-17. Type 003 is never aimed to be perfect. We may probably see type 004 to have a totally different layout.
 
A

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
About usefulness of aircraft carriers- when the USN, RN, MN, IN stop building the aircraft carriers and retire their own- then China can too. Meanwhile, China has to build them as well, and try to build as much as possible and as quickly as possible. At the same time, China must also have secondary focus on submarines, especially nucelar powered ones.
 
by78

by78

General
I think this is a recent image

52131501296_1b80033de9_o.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top