00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
Who the hell builds an LHD that is well over 300 meters long and 42+ meters wide (at waterline), let alone without anything resembling a well deck on the ship??
Last edited:
Apparently, the red circle marks the location of the first overhang(flare). It looks like the flight deck sponsons are finally starting to take shape. We'll probably get better pictures soon:
All satellite move to Middle East , no update ?
Excerpt from a tender document on 4x 20MW steam turbine power generators for the 004 CVN, with the awarded unit said to be the 704th Institute. Posted by @星依樱未 on Bilibili.
While I won't challenge that Ford class may have higher electricity generation, but I would advice being careful when quoting figures because they may be stated in different contexts.
Usually, China's report of power rating of generator is (constant) operational power output of electricity (额定功率). There is a 10% margine to maximum allowed output (最大功率). By this convention, it is 20*110%=22MWe. Chinese standard ususally use 10% as the margine.
What is 26MW in case of ford? Maximum allowed shaft power (MWs) before the generator? Or maximum operational (constant) shaft power? It could end up at 26 x 96% / 1.1= 22.7MWe. Not much difference. Here the 96% is the generator's efficiency, 10% (0.1) is the figure taken from Chinese covention above.
Besides, China's EM arresting gear can recover most of the energy from the landing aircraft and feed back to the grid, essentially recovers most of the energy that is consumed by the launcher. On the other hand, Ford class' AAG will dump the energy as heat, so naturally Ford needs a larger generation capacity. Considerring that EM launcher is probably the largest single electricity consumer, Ford has to have much larger demand on the electric plant.
In conclusion, I am afraid it is pointless to quote a single number without context.
Last edited:
I agree with your points, though given that they directly mention electrical power in a interview with Vice Admiral Moore back in 2016, it's safe to assume it's total installed generator capacity not raw shaft power.
Last edited:
Total shaft power for Ford Aircraft Carrier is 260MW and capacitycity of on one NPP is 125MW. Although exact data is classified. Similarly Type 004 is also about 100-150MW power capacity and speculative 250-300MW shaft power. Nuclear power plants in Aircraft Carriers use steam for heating and water desalination also, so U may say about half is used for power generation. But 20-26MW seems like auxiliary power generation units.
Would appreciate if more light is shed on this aspect. I am baffled by these assertions ie claims and counter claims.
Would appreciate if more light is shed on this aspect. I am baffled by these assertions ie claims and counter claims.
Last edited: