00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
Without knowing the final length of the ship, the "upper bound" would be a highly unreliable number.
It is unironically better to just admit the best answer at this stage is "we don't know" rather than to come up with a number that gets people over enthusiastic that ends up having to be walked back.
Exactly! Since otherwise again such nonsense is being spread like when the Fujian was in the dry dock and its modules still not connected and that very special Indian analyst claimed it will be a 360-380m super-carrier!
I think most people here who ask it, just don't understand the basics of estimating tonnage and are a bit over-eager.
There are basics which have to be relearned, back when CV-17 was under construction, again when CV-18 was under construction, and now when the possible new CVN is under construction.
There's no reason to bother with poor opinions on twitter too much.
For people who wonder where we can reasonably make an estimate of tonnage, at minimum we need confirmation of waterline hull beam and waterline hull length. But ideally waiting until the flight deck is complete would be more sensible.
I think the most plausible explanation at the moment seems to be that the rear structure isn’t a test or simulation at all. It’s been part of the building from the very start and serves as office space, so there’s no reason to modify it.So, building on this, I wonder if what we are looking at with this island mockup, is that it is meant to represent the island design for both a nuclear powered carrier/CVN, and a new island design for a conventionally powered carrier/CV.
If we are operating with the assumption that the rear funnel structure actually represents a smokestack, the question is how do we reconcile it with the idea of a CVN being built at DL, and the possibility of a CV being built at JN as well?
One possible unifying answer, is that the island mockup is a new design that is meant to be compatible with a CVN as well as a CV.
The picture below as reference:
- The highlighted green part is the island for the CVN, with a commensurately much smaller deckspace footprint. The green cross over the rear smokestack indicates that the smokestack is "removed"/not present on the actual real CVN.
- The highlighted red part encompasses the island and the smokestack in total, which has a deckspace footprint similar to CV-18.
In other words, there are two "island configurations":
- CVN island configuration -- island only (green)
- CV island configuration -- island and connected smokestack structure (red)
The benefits of having a common "island design" between the CVN and CV is somewhat obvious -- they can keep the internals and subsystems arrangement of the CVN and CV basically the same, with some minor benefits in construction but most of the benefits would be in training ship crew.
The benefits of having a rear-set, connected smoke stack structure for the CV configuration (versus integrated into the island like on CV-18), could be to reduce the interference of the exhaust with the primary island's activities and subsystems (radars etc).
In other words, the CV island configuration is a bit of an improvement from CV-18 by having a rear-set smoke stack structure, while also offering island commonality with the sister CVN.
Now, what this entails for the mockup itself, imo is how do we make sense of the island mockup we see and the position of the island mockup?
Because what we'd be seeing is a "CV island configuration" (island and connected smokestack), but emplaced very aft on the ship, in a position more consistent with that of a CVN rather than a CV.
I see two possible answers in turn to that question:
A) They want to test the maximal permutations of the possibilities for CVN and CV island configurations and island placements; so they are basically testing a CV island configuration (which has the largest footprint and most "structure" to work with) in the newest island placement which is in the rear of the ship (i.e.: a CVN island placement). In other words, trying to hit two birds with one stone. The actual CVN would have a CVN island configuration (i.e.: no smokestack) in the same position as we see on the mockup (very aft on the ship), and the actual CV would have a CV island configuration as we see on the mockup but in a slightly more forward position relative to where it is on the mockup.
B) A slightly less likely answer (imo) is that the actual CV will have its island placed in the location as on the mockup (very aft). In that case, what we are seeing is still a case of trying to hit two birds with one stone, where the actual CVN would have a CVN island configuration (i.e.: no smokestack) in the same position as the mockup, while the actual CV would have the CV island configuration as we see on the mockup in the same position as the mockup as well.
This infographic explains that argument very well:
Engineer
Major
We don't even need those. For there to be a drastic increase in displacement, there must first be a whole new turbine design. No info on new steam turbine design means they would use the same design from 003. In other words, same displacement as 003.
The info-graphic is just mental gymnastics and explains nothing. The author is the type of people who would insist the carrier is nuclear even as smoke is billowing out from the funnel. They would claim that the funnel is "just for auxiliary engines". This was exactly what happened when pictures of 003 with smoke first appeared.
Here is an even better explanation of why the funnel is kept: all mock-ups are for conventional carriers.
You mean when right now basically everyone including the Trios, Soyo and Captain etc all these reputable posters saying its nuclear you still believe it's a conventional?
Sure, suit yourself ig
Engineer
Major
The mock-up clearly represents a conventional carrier. People like the author of that info-graphic believes the next carrier is nuclear like it's some sort of religion. It's like we are looking at a square, while these people are arguing how a circle can also have corners.
Last edited:
This isn't a very good measure because it depends on our ability to receive useful/accurate information for carrier propulsion details in a timely way, which is sparse for us, sadly.
I agree that the infographic is not useful.
However, the situation for 003 is different because the same people we rely on for credible rumours were fairly consistent and insistent that it would be conventionally powered to begin with, therefore the individuals trying to do mental gymnastics for why 003 "could be nuclear powered" were working against the usual cycle of PLA watching to begin with (i.e.: trying to fit imagery/evidence with credible rumours/grapevine).
The problem with this current mockup is we are left trying to reconcile what we see with the current credible rumours/grapevine suggesting the next carrier at Dalian is meant to be nuclear.
Unless the island is located in the incorrect position, I don't understand how it's feasible that funnel is meant to serve for the exhaust of a conventional carrier, unless we vastly underestimated the size of the next carrier, and it's actually 700m long.
The reason is because the heavy ducting for the uptakes cannot be bent very easily. This is why all conventional carriers must have a center laid island, to accommodate for the engines placed in the center of the ship. With the funnel size being on par with those of the 002, I doubt it's for auxiliary either, auxiliaries likely cannot be placed that far back either, nor underneath the island, unless the carrier architecture is completely modified to nothing we've ever seen.
This is why the funnel structure attached to the island is so perplexing, if the island was still located amidship, I'd say it's fair to call it a conventional carrier. However with it located as far back as ford, it becomes far less clear.