CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
fzgfzy's carrier sketch is obviously just his own personal interpretation/elaboration of carrier details which he has come into knowledge of, such as 3 cats, 2 elevators, 70kt, conventional, etc. The details are certainly not correct just on a superficial examination. There are only 2 sponsons (forward port and starboard), which would leave the rear quarter of the ship completely undefended by CIWS. The stern-most part of the angled deck is directly perpendicular to the long axis of the ship (it should be perpendicular to the long axis of the angled deck). The width of the angled deck is too large compared to historical norms, eliminating significant areas of the flight deck where fighters can be spotted (people have already pointed this out). And finally the elevators are too large, even for lifting 2 fighters at a time.
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Is the alleged 2 elevator, 3 catapult carrier nuclear powered? Is it the reality behind the supposed new Chinese nuclear powered Nimitz ? Or is it just a CATOBAR variant of the kuznetsov design meant as another stepping stone to the eventual, presumably larger and more capable, nuclear powered fully indigenous Chinese carrier?
 

delft

Brigadier
Is the alleged 2 elevator, 3 catapult carrier nuclear powered? Is it the reality behind the supposed new Chinese nuclear powered Nimitz ? Or is it just a CATOBAR variant of the kuznetsov design meant as another stepping stone to the eventual, presumably larger and more capable, nuclear powered fully indigenous Chinese carrier?
I understood it is neither. It is not nuclear powered - better not invest in nuclear power before you know that the other aspects of the flattop design is working as expected. And it is a new design using all insights the designers have.
 

Intrepid

Major
Is the alleged 2 elevator, 3 catapult carrier nuclear powered?
The sketch shows a black rectangular for exhausts between the phased arrays.



Is it the reality behind the supposed new Chinese nuclear powered Nimitz? Or is it just a CATOBAR variant of the kuznetsov design meant as another stepping stone to the eventual, presumably larger and more capable, nuclear powered fully indigenous Chinese carrier?
It is an other intermediate design like 001A, remembers me to the "Mulan Lake"-mockup, same size like 001 and 001A. It is not the expected larger 002.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Is the alleged 2 elevator, 3 catapult carrier nuclear powered? Is it the reality behind the supposed new Chinese nuclear powered Nimitz ? Or is it just a CATOBAR variant of the kuznetsov design meant as another stepping stone to the eventual, presumably larger and more capable, nuclear powered fully indigenous Chinese carrier?

You're talking about 002.

And no, it will not be nuclear powered, it is the conventionally powered CATOBAR carrier that is meant to be built at JNCX as China's second domestically produced carrier and third overall carrier for the Navy after 001A.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
x-post from the j-15 thread, a recent satellite pic of huangdicun natf shows it appears to be complete

This image of huangdicun is from october 24 (taken by company digital globe); it looks completed, despite the low resolution and relatively plentiful watermarks (not purchased; screenshot), both catapults look pretty damn finished.
Of course we don't know when they reached that state, but based on the chronology of satellite images of Huangdicun, which goes back to October 17 being the earliest at this year (previously early being 2013), it already looked completed by then. In reality it was probably completed a bit earlier.
So based on this, it is very plausible that a J-15A could've been tested at the EM cat recently, given the state of completion the site looks like in the last month or so.

Now to wait for GE to update...

0OrZbjt.png
 

Quickie

Colonel
Are the double tracks part of the EMAL or aircraft tyre marks? If it's the latter, it could be indirect confirmation that aircraft have been launched. (Or it could be that of a test load)
 

Lethe

Captain
Would be interesting to know how this latest news compares with US development timelines. The Wikipedia article on EMALS suggests that a T-45 was launched from the installation at NAVAIR Lakehurst in 2010, but it is unclear as to whether this was the first launch of an aircraft using the system.
 
Top