I'm sure the Chinese navy is under great pressure from policy makers to give them more options... as fast as possible.
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
I'm sure the Chinese navy is under great pressure from policy makers to give them more options... as fast as possible.
if it is near 80000t, then certainly its full displacement.
We shjall jhave to wait and see.
We do not know the dimensions yet. Or what type engines. Or wat type internal mechanisms.
Th Forrestal class carriers of the United States from the 1950s, the first purpose built "super" carriers, were 60,000 standard, by 82,500 full load. The US built four of those before moving on to the Kitty Hawk class and the USS Enterprise, the first nuclear carrier. The US built that first nuclear carrier from 1958 to 1960 and she was commissioned in 1961 and then served for over 50 years.
Thereafter the US built ten Nimitz class nuclear carriers.
The Ford class is the US Navy's 3rd generation of nuclear carriers.
The Forrestal class...five generations ago, were 990 feet long, with a 238 ft wide deck.
I could see the first full CATOBAR carrier of the Chinese being 82,500 to 85,000 full load displacement.
We shall see one day...but not for a while.
We do not know the dimensions yet. Or what type engines. Or wat type internal mechanisms.
Th Forrestal class carriers of the United States from the 1950s, the first purpose built "super" carriers, were 60,000 standard, by 82,500 full load. The US built four of those before moving on to the Kitty Hawk class and the USS Enterprise, the first nuclear carrier. The US built that first nuclear carrier from 1958 to 1960 and she was commissioned in 1961 and then served for over 50 years.
Thereafter the US built ten Nimitz class nuclear carriers.
The Ford class is the US Navy's 3rd generation of nuclear carriers.
The Forrestal class...five generations ago, were 990 feet long, with a 238 ft wide deck.
I could see the first full CATOBAR carrier of the Chinese being 82,500 to 85,000 full load displacement.
We shall see one day...but not for a while.
Actually, there is still no guarantee of that. Lets wait and see.
jeff, are you refering to short ton (used in the US) or the metric ton ? 1 metric ton = 1.1 short ton
While it is highly speculated that the first chinese CATOBAR will get a fossil fuel propulsion, I came across this message from late 2015 and wondered why no nuclear propulsion ?
Just check the carrier competition between China and India. Both nations got their first carrier from refurbished ex-USSR ships. Their second carrier, then first domestic built are both STOBAR and China clearly seems to be leading on this round. For the third round, both will go full CATOBAR, but India will go both nuclear and Electromagnetic while it is speculated China will go standard propulsion while being "undecided" on catapult technology.
China has decades of experience in naval nuclear propulsion through their submarine program while India is still nascent in this aspect. Chosing a nuclear powered aircraft is also a long term wiser decision because it prevents some logistic hurdles, especially around fuel, especially for a carrier which will get a much more "aggressive" role.
If Jiangnan seeks nuclear propulsion specialists, this might be an indicator that the nuclear option is not too far fetched for the third carrier.
There is no need to bring India into the discussion. There is NO competition here. The industrial base of these two countries are not in the same league. End of discussion.
INS Vishal, the Indian Navy's 65000 ton nuclear carrier, at this stage is probably going to enter service in the early 2030s if they're able to manage the programme well.
Read again, 2030s.
... "if they're able to manage the programme well," that is - which would be unprecedented.
Intrepid
Major
It lasts about 15 years to plan and build a nuclear carrier, so the jobs may be serve the 4th, 5th or 6th carrier.