00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread

Dante80

Junior Member
Registered Member
Thank you, this seems good enough for even the largest credible size 004 could be, atleast lengthwise. I suppose it doesn't matter much if the flight deck spills over the boundaries by abit.
Depends on those two cranes on rails over there. Generally speaking, I don't think it's a realistic impediment for future PLAN planning...



Mainly because I don't think PLAN will pursue something like a 150k ton CVN any time soon (or even ever, for that matter).
 

Tomboy

Captain
Registered Member
Depends on those two cranes on rails over there. Generally speaking, I don't think it's a realistic impediment for future PLAN planning...



Mainly because I don't think PLAN will pursue something like a 150k ton CVN.
004's flight deck is like to realistically reach over 80m+ at the widest section which may or may not be cause for concern depending on how much margin is there for the cranes.
 

lcloo

Major
Thank you, this seems good enough for even the largest credible size 004 could be, atleast lengthwise. I suppose it doesn't matter much if the flight deck spills over the boundaries by abit.
Not a problem. The aircraft carrier flight deck overhang could be more than 10 meters or so above the top edge or the floor of yard side of the dry dock. As illustrated with this photo of Shandong.
1769707084129.jpeg
 

para80

Junior Member
Registered Member
The drydock is one reason I noted before that will likely indicate Type 004 dimensions. And as I also mentioned, infrastructure is designed around anticipated capability. Therefore notions such as "They would have to move the cranes..." etc are IMO not plausible. Realistically PLAN tends to err on the side of caution in most things military capability, therefore I dont see them building a new carrier of extravagant dimensions either.
 

mack8

Senior Member
If the above measurement is roughly accurate at about 320 meters, then adding the bulbous bow would conceivably get the waterline length to over 330 meters, which again meshes well with the 333 meter waterline length number from the data table posted couple of days ago. Of course it goes without saying that clear sat images and much more accurate measurements are available in closed circles, but unfortunately we have to wait until someone posts those.
 
Top