Intrepid
Major
Two decks lower at the moment, but could be build later.
CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
No... I think the first picture confirmed of lifting the island module was on 25th September (slightly over a day ago).
The picture on wednesday post #234 I think does not depict the island module, but likely a deck-level-sealing-level (different shape of the module, far fewer wires etc)
And even common sense should be able to say that it's very unlikely to take an entire week to lift a single module >_>
edit: in fact, I'm a bit curious, what made you think it took a week to lift the module?
Type 001A CVBG (CVBG-17)
CNS Liaoning (CVBG-16) Just for Reference
For one minute, I thought this for CVBG-17
Nice pictures, but FYI CVBG stands for "carrier battle group," where as CV stands for "carrier (conventionally powered)" only.
so technically it should be CV-17, not CVBG-17 (which would imply "17th carrier battle group)
And here's a scaled closer comparison
Last edited:
antiterror13
Brigadier
Great ... so, 001A island is roughly 15% smaller and 001A can carry 3 more J-15 ... thats important parameters
MwRYum
Major
That leaves the question of what they did to achieve that...utilization of updated machinery instead of Soviet-era analog stuff perhaps? They can't change much on Liaoning but on CV-17 they can do that perhaps.
Hanger room is easier to guess though - without the P-700 VLS they can make the necessary redesign of compartments' layout to make more room for hanger?
First of all, I wouldn't take any very specific detailed claims too much to heart -- 3 extra planes may well be possible, but I wouldn't place as much credence on it as say, making a broader and vaguer claim like "a few extra planes may be put on board compared to Liaoning". In my experience, rumours which are overwhelmingly specific also have a tendency to have greater risk of being not true to the specificity that they claim.
Second of all, if the flight deck area is a little bit larger (such as if the island becomes a little bit smaller) and even due to minor better optimization fo the flight deck's tie down locations, then it may well be possible that the total number of aircraft that can be embarked on the carrier (i.e.: inside the hangar as well as flight deck itself) could be increased, with only minimal expansion or even no change to the hangar's dimensions compared to Liaoning
Bltizo you think reliable ?
Higgle said:↑
Further information on the 001A according to 匹夫哟, a reliable source apparently, though the name is not one I'm familiar with:
BEGIN QUOTE
Displacement larger than Liaoning's by about 4,000 tons, displacement at full load 64,000 tons. Overall length 306 m (1004 feet), main width 68 m, beam 71 m, island length 54 m, waterline length 285 m, waterline width 38m, draft 10.6 m. Liaoning flight deck area 15100 square meters, 001A deck area 15376 square meters, increased by approximately 300 square meters.
Ford's displacement is 106,000 tons, deck area 19,881 square meters. 001A displaces 64,000 tons, with deck area 15376 square meters. Can carry 3 more J-15's compared to Liaoning.
The 001A's island's maximum dimensions have been reduced to approximately 85% the size of Liaoning's island.
END QUOTE
I think the claims made by that post on cjdby are definitely plausible, and should be considered as a possibility, but like I wrote in my last post, I personally think any excessively specific numerical claims (such as specific displacement count, or clear single digit variations of things like airwing change) should not be taken as gospel necessarily.
- Status