00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[Chaos314159]

I'm not sure what you're trying to convey, but that screenshot has way too much swearing to be constructive for us.

If you want to convey a point, feel free to say it yourself rather than using a screenshot of a translated twitter post please.

(I have no problems with the user you quoted, but for the purposes of this forum please write something more substantial than "that's all I want to say, thank you")

Ok, sorry.

 

[Blitzo]

Wrong. The 003 is barely better than a Forrestal and worse than a Kittyhawk. It's hull design still took massive cues from the Soviets and is just... Flawed and not good. I want a hull with STRAIGHT walls with a longer deck.

It needs a clean-sheet design to flush all that Soviet DNA out. CVs which AREN'T based on Soviet designs are needed.

The Type 003 is simply too small, too conservative, too flawed, and borderline obsolete of a platform to be "mass produced" if you're actually thinking long-term. Even an improved one wouldn't be any better significantly.

They'll need a genuine clean-sheet design for a "mass-producable" CV. And the Type 003(A) is NOT future-proofed enough.

Whether it makes sense to pursue a more "clean sheet" or "mass producable" CV depends entirely on whether a mass producable CV is something the PLAN even wants into the future, or whether they're comfortable procuring an all-CVN carrier fleet after they build "conventional CATOBAR carrier no. 2".

 

[Alfa_Particle]

Whether it makes sense to pursue a more "clean sheet" or "mass producable" CV depends entirely on whether a mass producable CV is something the PLAN even wants into the future, or whether they're comfortable procuring an all-CVN carrier fleet after they build "conventional CATOBAR carrier no. 2".

Well, if they are sane and clear-minded people (I know I'm overexaggerating) they'd agree with the USN's conclusion that the ideal CV fleet mixes both CVs and CVNs.

 

[Antares545]

what china clearly needs 1 million ton uber duper carriers made out of 20m thick pykrete making it unsinkable, and a runway long enough to launch h6's, y20's and h20's. /s

 

[shiftenter]

what china clearly needs 1 million ton uber duper carriers made out of 20m thick pykrete making it unsinkable, and a runway long enough to launch h6's, y20's and h20's. /s

Did you mean: Fiery Cross Reef

 

[Chaos314159]

The latest Sentinel satellite imagery suggests that Jiangnan is cleaning a platform outside the dock, raising questions about whether this indicates the start of construction on the so-called Type 003A aircraft carrier.

 

[Alfa_Particle]

The latest Sentinel satellite imagery suggests that Jiangnan is cleaning a platform outside the dock, raising questions about whether this indicates the start of construction on the so-called Type 003A aircraft carrier.
View attachment 164373

GOD PLEASE NOT A 003A PLEASE NOT A 003 MOD PLEASE BE 005 (that's NOT based on the Type 003)

 

[00CuriousObserver]

Wrong. The 003 is barely better than a Forrestal and worse than a Kittyhawk. It's hull design still took massive cues from the Soviets and is just... Flawed and not good. I want a hull with STRAIGHT walls with a longer deck.

It needs a clean-sheet design to flush all that Soviet DNA out. CVs which AREN'T based on Soviet designs are needed.

The Type 003 is simply too small, too conservative, too flawed, and borderline obsolete of a platform to be "mass produced" if you're actually thinking long-term. Even an improved one wouldn't be any better significantly.

They'll need a genuine clean-sheet design for a "mass-producable" CV. And the Type 003(A) is NOT future-proofed enough.

I have a feeling that any ~90k ton CV, even a clean-sheet design, will still be called "003A" or Fujian's "sister ship" for a while. Gonna be a bit annoying.

 

[Antares545]

I have a feeling that any ~90k ton CV, even a clean-sheet design, will still be called "003A" or Fujian's "sister ship" for a while. Gonna be a bit annoying.

i just dont think china should be building sub 100k ton carriers in the future. 6th gen fighters will be far bigger than current ones and as such the carriers should be larger to accommodate them

 

[mack8]

GOD PLEASE NOT A 003A PLEASE NOT A 003 MOD PLEASE BE 005 (that's NOT based on the Type 003)
View attachment 164374

Never mind that, for now it should be please be a carrier, please be a carrier.