It indeed does not guarantee.
The next one might be conventional with the nuclear coming later.
All in all, we really can't conclude all that much from the mockup abd models maybe or maybe not, who knows.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
The next one might be conventional with the nuclear coming later.
All in all, we really can't conclude all that much from the mockup abd models maybe or maybe not, who knows.
It's for members only right now, but typically he'll cut the stream into chunks and release them later.
And no, it doesn't necessarily mean in this FYP, but it is possible. For example, if we assume CV-19 has started construction and launches by 2029, and another carrier immediately starts following its launch.
The model’s main island looks off, but the funnel might be viable. It would make sense to keep the island as consistent as possible across future CVs (if any) and CVNs
To clarify: I’m speculating that future CVs and CVNs might share an identical (or near-identical) main superstructure, with CVs adding a funnel behind it. The advantage is consistency across the ships. I'm not saying this implies the next carrier is necessarily a CV or a CVN; current noises indicate it might be both.
If 3 carriers have been ordered, I think it would be a CVN plus two CV
Remember the CVN would be a brand new design, so does it make sense to immediately order more?
In contrast, we already have the Fujian in service, so there is a mature enough CV design, ready to start serial production.
---
Let's assume that a CVN and a CV are being built now, in separate shipyards.
The Fujian module assembly took 2 years before it was launched.
If we go with a notional 2029 launch date for the 1st CV, that means module assembly from 2027-2029.
And the logical plan is for another to follow immediately in the same shipyard. So module assembly for the 2nd CV would run from 2029-2031.
So we could be looking at the following carrier launch schedule
2029: 1st CV
2030: 1st CVN (assuming construction takes an additional year)
2031: 2nd CV
That is 1 carrier per year.
---
And if US-China relations get even worse, they might decide to continue this cadence.
After all, there are 2 shipyards and it should take 2 years to assemble the aircraft carrier modules and then launch.
---
I've said for a long time now that it was a mistake for the US to give up on engagement and go for containment.
Last edited:
I think diving too deeply into the "6th hull" is premature. A mere "it exists" is not enough imo to yield constructive conclusions at this stage.
I should specify that he said "规划", which is broader than "plan". It's closer to "there is a 6th hull on the program roadmap", rather than any specific details about the hull.
If we take this to mean "there will be a PLANS-21", I don't think anyone would disagree.
Similarly, if we assume the rumours about PLANS-19 and PLANS-20 to be true, i.e. construction has began for both, meaning largely finalized designs, then the news that PLANS-21 has entered some sort of preliminary planning/research/study phase is also reasonable.
The more important point is the added support for PLANS-19 and PLANS-20 being built simultaneously.
I should specify that he said "规划", which is broader than "plan". It's closer to "there is a 6th hull on the program roadmap", rather than any specific details about the hull.
If we take this to mean "there will be a PLANS-21", I don't think anyone would disagree.
Similarly, if we assume the rumours about PLANS-19 and PLANS-20 to be true, i.e. construction has began for both, meaning largely finalized designs, then the news that PLANS-21 has entered some sort of preliminary planning/research/study phase is also reasonable.
The more important point is the added support for PLANS-19 and PLANS-20 being built simultaneously.
I think it only makes sense to talk about a 6th hull, if it is expected to be built immediately or soon afterwards.
If they were going to wait until the next 5 year timeframe, there's another 4+ years until a decision has to be made on whether to start construction. And in 4 years time, the situation may have changed
For something as large and complicated as a CV, orders are placed years in advance regardless of the country, be it US, China or otherwise, let alone us noticing the first stages of construction in a drydock, the first step being the metal cutting. Recently there was mention of a 005, which gets me to the issue of project numbers for PLA CVs, is it estabilished that the project numbers work in the exact same way as to the other combatants, or that actually each carrier has it's own project number? The discussion lately and reference to a 003A points to the latter (logically) but just wanted to make sure.
Anyway, putting together recent hints/rumours, we seemingly already have 003A at JN and 004 at DL being built, and likely the sixth hull (004A? 005?) has already or will be ordered in the 2025-2030 FYP, my bet being on it following 004 at DL once it is launched. Further carrier construction plans will presumably be ironed out during the next FYP, 2030-2035.
Anyway, putting together recent hints/rumours, we seemingly already have 003A at JN and 004 at DL being built, and likely the sixth hull (004A? 005?) has already or will be ordered in the 2025-2030 FYP, my bet being on it following 004 at DL once it is launched. Further carrier construction plans will presumably be ironed out during the next FYP, 2030-2035.
For a mature conventional carrier design, I think we're looking at a <4 year timeline from order to launch, possibly even 3 years. And that includes a module assembly time of 2 years.
In the US, the biggest lead times are for specialty nuclear components, but a conventional carrier doesn't have this issue.
antiterror13
Brigadier
China may have more than 6 carriers by 2035 (including 001 and 002)
The interesting thing about the CV route is that they are much more transferable/sellable to other countries. CVNs require a lot of very specific training and material handling facilities. CVs however, do not. So China could easily sell these to allies when it wanted. So maybe to Russia, Pakistan, Indonesia or others down the road. Would be very surprised if that is not a consideration on what they are building.
Absolutely not. Full size supercarriers are incredibly expensive to own and operate, and you still need a lot of specialized crew to run the thing. Like, air crew, a major expense, would be shared no matter the propulsion type, and most nations would have to develop a carrier air wing from scratch. Of the countries you listed, only Russia has even the slightest clue how and the money budget to run carrier operations.