00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

[charles18]

Is there any actual advantages of having 4 reactors? .....

I explained this in a previous post:

"Call me weird but I've always "wanted" the Chinese to build a carrier with 4 nuclear reactors.
why?
This would open the possibility to creating a nuclear powered version of the Type 055.
If a carrier has 4 reactors each rated at 75,000 hp then 2 reactors would provide the right amount of power for the Type 055.
The PLA navy can create a modular design where the exact same reactors are used for both their aircraft carriers and cruisers.
This would lower construction costs."

 

[Tomboy]

I explained this in a previous post:

"Call me weird but I've always "wanted" the Chinese to build a carrier with 4 nuclear reactors.
why?
This would open the possibility to creating a nuclear powered version of the Type 055.
If a carrier has 4 reactors each rated at 75,000 hp then 2 reactors would provide the right amount of power for the Type 055.
The PLA navy can create a modular design where the exact same reactors are used for both their aircraft carriers and cruisers.
This would lower construction costs."

Why would PLAN want nuclear cruisers, they are expensive and don't offer much over modern gas turbine systems.

 

[Tomboy]

BTW the A4W entry is highly unlikely to be correct either. 208/550 = ~38% which is around the maximum efficiency achievable during its days, and not that much more these days. There's no way it can do that AND generate 100MW of electrical power. It's just thermodynamics, you need to either raise the reactor core coolant temperature or decrease the heatsink temperature to increase the efficiency of energy transfer. Neither of those things is feasible to any drastic extent with a PWR.

The heat sink temp is basically just the ocean water temp, so that's not gonna change with any reactor. The core coolant can be increased by using a different coolant like e.g. Sodium or Thorium salt, but as mentioned earlier they carry their own set of problems. Theoretically you can increase the pressure in the reactor core to raise the core coolant temp but there are no breakthroughs that will allow it to be done for any significant amount.

You're forgetting that Nimitz has two A4Ws, so combined thermal output is actually 1100MW. So overall efficiency is 28 percent for 308MW total mechanical output. This is a very realistic efficiency value. A1B supposedly have 25 percent higher thermal output hence 1400MW total, so at 30 percent efficiency total power available to the Ford should be around 400MW. 30 percent is pretty realistic for a modern reactor; Type 004 should have two slightly more powerful reactors due to being slightly larger for maybe 420-450MW electrical output since it'll most likely use IEP.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Delete

 

[00CuriousObserver]

We might finally see some relatively formal hints on that conventional carrier at Jiangnan

 

[Tomboy]

We might finally see some relatively formal hints on that conventional carrier at Jiangnan

View attachment 155071

View attachment 155072

Wait how'd we know it's going to be conventional, we know JN yard is also working on a nuclear ship.

 

[00CuriousObserver]

Wait how'd we know it's going to be conventional, we know JN yard is also working on a nuclear ship.

We "know" it was going to be conventical the whole time. When Yankee revealed it he said "one nuclear and one conventional"

 

[Alfa_Particle]

We might finally see some relatively formal hints on that conventional carrier at Jiangnan

View attachment 155071

View attachment 155072

A GT-IFEP/CODLAG Nimitz-analogous would be the dream. I don't want to see another Forrestal-class built in the 2020/30s.

 

[Tomboy]

A GT-IFEP/CODLAG Nimitz-analogous would be the dream. I don't want to see another Forrestal-class built in the 2020/30s.

IMO, my guess is that the new carrier is likely going to be gas turbine IEP with 4 QC500s and 4*20MW diesel generators for around 280MW total peak output and be slightly larger than Type 003 at ~90,000 tons full displacement. Should still be considerable cheaper than Type 004 due to using common powerplants with next gen CG/055 replacement while providing much better upgradability and sortie rate than Type 003.

It might be possible that PLAN is going with a hi-low mix for carriers as well, Type 004 being the flagship carrier type for global power projection and far sea duty but only ~6-8 will be built while JN's new ship will be smaller at 90kt and uses conventional propulsion for region power projection and fast response but can be built in large numbers quickly and cheaply(>10 total).

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Wait how'd we know it's going to be conventional, we know JN yard is also working on a nuclear ship.

Firstly hints from several Weibo posts by Otter, Adorable Whale and others, followed by one of the paid Qingting FM podcasts by the Guancha Trios by the end of 2024.

A GT-IFEP/CODLAG Nimitz-analogous would be the dream. I don't want to see another Forrestal-class built in the 2020/30s.

I've seen two different sayings on Weibo so far.

The first option is an improved sister-ship of Fujian with boilers and steam turbine engines, namely with COSAS propulsion system.
The second option has gas turbine engines (and perhaps also diesel (electric) engines), namely with COG(L)AG, COD(L)AG or IEPS systems.

I'm going to put it this way - The first option most likely means that there won't be conventionally-powered CVs after this; whereas the second option could mean that China will also go the dual conventional-nuclear route for her future carrier fleet, similar to her subsurface fleet. So it all depends on what the PLAN higher ups are planning for.

Either way, all the above are just my own observation on the matter.