How reliable is this?The bow may be pointing towards water. Too early to say.
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
The bow may be pointing towards water. Too early to say.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
It would make sense to have this carrier nuclear powered but I think that is not going to be the case
The power plants should be going in about now
Where are they? Nuclear power plants require whole new protocol
The install will be guarded
And if it’s going to be nuclear powered is it also going to have EMALS?
I don’t think China is going to do both
Rather conventional power for CV-18 with CATOBAR or EMALS
And next carrier will be a CVN
The power plants should be going in about now
Where are they? Nuclear power plants require whole new protocol
The install will be guarded
And if it’s going to be nuclear powered is it also going to have EMALS?
I don’t think China is going to do both
Rather conventional power for CV-18 with CATOBAR or EMALS
And next carrier will be a CVN
Once again a brilliant writeup on the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy carrier program by Rick Joe aka our @Bltizo !
He reviews "these recent developments in context of what has been previously rumored for the PLAN carrier program. Projections of future carrier development and procurement trajectories will also be considered, including the topic of carrier airwings."
Congrats, hat off ... well done.
He reviews "these recent developments in context of what has been previously rumored for the PLAN carrier program. Projections of future carrier development and procurement trajectories will also be considered, including the topic of carrier airwings."
Congrats, hat off ... well done.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Ok so why is this thread labelled 002?
Should be 003
Mods can you change it
Should be 003
Mods can you change it
Intrepid
Major
Because it is the personal wish of a moderator.
... of "one" moderator.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
I am sorry you are a mod please change
I already did, but it was the explicit wish of @Jeff Head to change the name back to the one fitting his opinion, so that in all respect - even if I strongly disagree with him in this point - will not change it again against his will.
Last edited:
It still makes more sense to denominate unchristened aircraft carriers by their class and number 17 is obviously just a modification of the kuznetsov-class Liaoning and not a class on its own, regardless of how much certain fanatics want to deny it