Latest
Second image is from a couple days ago for comparison
Second image is from a couple days ago for comparison
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
Latest
Second image is from a couple days ago for comparison
The port side of the newly installed hangar roof/flight deck surface module is a little bit odd, as it doesn't seem to fully cover the port side hangar module "wall".
I suppose it could be an image artefact/perspective --- or alternatively the hangar roof/flight deck module is legitimately not fully covering the port hangar module "wall", in which case it is a little bit odd but not hugely so.
It may just mean that on the remaining port side hangar module "wall" it is intended to be further covered by a flight deck overhang module that attaches atop the wall rather than adjacent to it.
That small shadow dot in the middle of the hangar roof/flight deck surface module is probably some sort of small protruding structure that may be temporary in nature.
Edit:
Considering where this "00X/004" is at right now -- imo it is approximate to November 2020 for 003 when accounting for differences in hull construction methods.
003 back in the day:
October 2020:
December 2020:
January 2021:
And by July 2021, 003 had most of its flight deck complete and island installed (but of course still with two openings in the hull left unfilled for work on the propulsion sections).
For 00X/004, depending on how they progress with the rest of the ship (which imo are not nuclear specific and simply "building a carrier") -- there is a chance that within 6-8 months, 00X/004 might be in a similar state of completion where most of its flight deck (including outline, and catapult trenches) is structurally present, and even its island may be installed.
Which is to say, by August-October the ship's "visual profile" may well be mostly complete and key characteristics able to be measured and identified.
Last edited:
Latest
Second image is from a couple days ago for comparison
Also note the "temporary supporting structure" seen at the stern end of the ship has been removed - Or there wasn't any in the first place (and the "structure" could just be a misidentified object).
I am more inclined to be blocked due to the distortion of the viewing angle (please note that the front of the dry dock in the new satellite image has moved forward a lot compared with the previous image, and of course, the individual does not rule out the possibility that the tail really has no arc transition or conical projection at all)
It may be called stubbornness, but I really think that as the tail of a ship, its turning point is too sharp, perhaps it is still a construction section.
Just wait and see. I don't think there's a need to track it so intently, because it won't change things so much whether it's a bit longer or not at the stern, unless one is very heavily invested in the ship being a bit longer at the waterline.
It's already a carrier in the Nimitz/Ford size class, I don't think being so focused on whether it might be a further bit bigger is constructive.
Just as a refutation of the paper data of "315m waterline", my personal calculation is longer at present, and the tail of 003 is similar to that of Ford and Nimitz. I just feel a little confused....
Similar white parts also appeared in Shandong construction, which may be used as a criterion.
There's no need to be confused.
Just accept that 315m is likely the waterline length for now, so that we don't have to withstand continuous posts every time there is a new image floating the possibility of it being longer.
If it ends up being longer and we see an additional stern module clearly added, great. But it's wasting thread space to constantly watch for it and having everyone comment on whether something is or isn't there, and then having people debate over it.
(Besides, even if a stern module is added, it may not necessarily count towards waterline length after all. Just let it go for now for the sake of everyone's sanity)
Another noteworthy point is that, based on recent hi-res satellite imagery, I’ve estimated the midsection width of this vessel’s hangar to be approximately 30m, which is slightly narrower than that of the Ford. It is well-established that:
- The 00X's flight deck (based on the land-based mockup) is wider than the Ford’s, with a length that is comparable or even longer.
- The 003’s hangar is also slightly narrower than the Kitty Hawk. While its overall hull is shorter, its flight deck area is comparable or even larger.
Imo it's a bit early to make that kind of call.
I think if one day we had more set specs of the hangar for 004 (including length) then we might speculate a bit, but even then there may be multiple reasons for the difference (damage control, organic design goal reasons, etc)
Old photos that I don't think have ever been shared. Date unknown.
