What do you mean? My post did not suggest any chance of a chimney.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
Why are we acknowledging it as a "chimney." Let's just call it additional structure, to not confuse people into thinking it's a chimney.
In my post , I used quotation marks wheneever referring the supposed structure, it should be clear enough that it is not in anyway acknowledging it being chimney if people bother to read. I don't get why people got so sensitive to the word when the sentences said the opposite.
I think both are in the right here -- Taxiya putting the word in quotation marks and reading the sentences themselves should be enough for people to understand what he means.
But at the same time, I do find that the literacy for this forum seems to be declining recently, with some people being unable to actually read, so I personally sometimes phrase things in a way that makes it very difficult for what I write to be unintentionally misintrepreted and to dumb things down as much as I can.
In any case, I think Taxiya's analysis on the previous page is very reasonable and time will tell just what that structure ends up looking like on the mockup.
I was just joking nvm.
Ok, thanks for clearing that up.
That's not how physics works. You can roughly estimate power needed for speed as a cubic function. The Nimitz are powered by roughly 200 MW, around the same as the retired Iowa battleships whilst being over 50% heavier. I have doubts they can even hit 30 kn except at light loads with a freshly cleaned hull. The newer Fords can probably get close to 40 kn in a clean state if they push all the power enhancements towards propellers but, again, doubtful given they've be squandering the power advantage on something tactically meaningless vs powering the increased demand from all the sensors and catapults. They would also have to deal with cavitation issues on propellers spinning that fast. A lot of headache for no good reason.
Don't need to rely on absurd statements to say keel blocks arrangements don't point to fast speed hull. But that's not confirmed either. The fineness of a ship's run is 3 dimensional. Transom sterns are all squarish at the rear from top down. You can't see the vertical curvature from a satellite photo. Not to mention the growing rise in experiments, enabled by increasingly powerful CFD, with stern interceptors and other appendages to reduce stern resistance and negate the need for a fine run.
Too early to pronounce any conclusion based on the sparingly few blocks we see IMO.
Last edited:
The Iowa class had about 200 thousand shaft horsepower in propulsion, which is 150 kw, and resistance scales slower compared to displacement, so Nimitz class probably can sail slightly faster than the Iowa class, I believe. Otherwise I agree with you, it is impractical for any large ship to travel at or near 40 knots, it will be like climbing a water mountain all the time.
Major progress!!!!! the side modules have been put in place around the module in the middle
Still measures 43.03m beam, but some say after correction for the angle it should in fact be 43.8m wide. So possibly the largest carrier ever built said by Captain on Weibo.
