CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

[Blitzo]

I don't think this would be a trouble.

As long as we refer to EMALS by its full name, Electro-Magnetic Assisted Launch System, every time we mention it, the world will know that it is just an acronym for a concept. In fact, this acronym is the most appropriate, and any other way of writing it would be more complicated and unfamiliar to the public.

As for the American slur of "theft", why do you care? They do it every day, and it doesn't help even if you change the acronym.

Chinese state media in English, when referring to it, uses "electromagnetic catapult as well" rather than "EMALS".

If you or others feel strongly about it and want to continue to use the acronym "EMALS," then that is your prerogative, though I am at a loss as to why this particular hill is one that is being chosen to defend.


My argument is that "EM catapult" or "EM cat" is a far superior name for us to refer to the CV-18's catapult system with, as it is not only shorter, but it is also more technically correct than referring it to EMALS regardless of how one interprets the acronym (whether as a name for the GA product or using it incorrectly to be synonymous with electromagnetic catapult).

 

[iantsai]

GlobalTimes uses "EM catapults" and actively avoiding terms like "Chinese EMALS" when describing EM catapults on Fujian.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On the other hand, GlobalTimes informally uses "Chinese AEGIS" to describe Type 052D AESA radar, portraying it as a peer of contemporary USN ships equipped with the "Aegis Combat System".

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

From this, I can only conclude Chinese EM catapults don't want to be associated with shoddy reputation of General Atomic's EMALS or be considered a copy cat. GA's EMALS is plagued with reliability issues and low utilization rate. China's EM catapults work on a different principle with DC instead of AC and supercapacitors instead of flywheels. On the other hand, AEGIS is a proven system and worthy of peerhood or equivalence.

IMO AEGIS is the acronym that shouldn't be borrowed, the string Advanced Electronic Guidance Information System doesn't describe its technical features, but rather forces the word aegis, the mythical shield held by Zeus, which you could consider a trademark.

EMALS is not, it visually describes the principles and functions of the system.

 

[Temstar]

Maybe this is the table, it is from Ma Weiming's paper from 2016. I marked them in color, Orange: forbiding factors. Green: desirable. Blue: acceptable. It is clear that supercapacitor in the 2016s are not suitable for EM cat due to its low reliability, frequent need to replace and repair, short life. Some of the factors are unlikely going to improve over time because they are inheret disadvantages of supercapacitor (chemical degradation).

View attachment 122107

Yes, that was the table. I remember it was comparing 3 different things but 3rd option was way out of question.
Here's link for the stream:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Phead128]

IMO AEGIS is the acronym that shouldn't be borrowed, the string Advanced Electronic Guidance Information System doesn't describe its technical features, but rather forces the word aegis, the mythical shield held by Zeus, which you could consider a trademark.

EMALS is not, it visually describes the principles and functions of the system.

For foreigners, "Aegis" is a brand-name for Aegis Combat System-equipped classes, just like "EMALS" is a brand-name for General Atomic's EM catapult on Ford-class carrier.

"Aegis" is essentially one type of naval defense system, and "EMALS" is essentially one type of electromagnetic catapult (EMCAT).

In otherwords, China's goal has always been an EMCAT (if you will, an EMALS-style catapult). It's not specifically EMALS since EMALS is a specific US product which is one of many types of EMCAT (product category)

 

[Temstar]

GlobalTimes uses "EM catapults" and actively avoiding terms like "Chinese EMALS" when describing EM catapults on Fujian.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On the other hand, GlobalTimes informally uses "Chinese AEGIS" to describe Type 052D AESA radar, portraying it as a peer of contemporary USN ships equipped with the "Aegis Combat System".

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

From this, I can only conclude Chinese EM catapults don't want to be associated with shoddy reputation of General Atomic's EMALS or be considered a copy cat. GA's EMALS is plagued with reliability issues and low utilization rate. China's EM catapults work on a different principle with DC instead of AC and supercapacitors instead of flywheels. On the other hand, AEGIS is a proven system and worthy of peerhood or equivalence.

I think the proper way to translate Aegis the shield from Greek mythology is "埃癸斯", AEGIS the combat system is actually translated differently as "宙斯盾" or "Zeus's Shield", also worth noting in ROC it's translated as "神盾" or divine shield by similar logic.

Whoever made the call (Zhang Zhaozhong, perhaps?) to translate AEGIS by the meaning behind the name instead of the more common transliteration made a good call I reckon. Because then it allows 盾/shield to be extended to be used as a moniker to describe any ship equipped with large phase array radar used for air defense, hence the later nicknames like 俄式神盾/Russian-style Divine Shield to refer to 051C equipped with Tomestone and 中华神盾/Chinese-style Divine Shield to refer to destroyers with some type of 346 radar. Nowadays 盾舰/shield destroyer is used in general to refer to AAW destroyers with phase array radars (particularly if they got four big fixed ones and not small single or double sided rotating radar).

I don't like GT translating 中华神盾 back to English as "Chinese AEGIS" because that's missing the whole point of why the original translator invented the term "宙斯盾" to make the whole "shield" concept generalizable. I think a proper translation should be Chinese Divine Shield and let people familiar with military matters make the shield->aegis connection themselves.

Under the same logic EMALS or any Chinese translations of it should not be used as a general term to cover all EM catapults. Fortunately since EMALS doesn't have a catchy evocative name it doesn't have a proper Chinese translation and I see in Chinese Ford's system being referred to as "电磁弹射器（EMALS）" or just EMALS, and generally when referring to EM cats in general 电磁弹射器 is the term used.

 

[vincent]

Whoever made the call (Zhang Zhaozhong, perhaps?) to translate AEGIS by the meaning behind the name instead of the more common transliteration made a good call I reckon.

平可夫/Pinkov. Personally i think it is a stupid translation.

 

[kwaigonegin]

The US EMALS means Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System literally.

I think EMALS could also be abbreviation of Electro-Magnetic Assisted Launch System. In this case, EMALS can be treated a concept or general name for all EM aircraft launch systems just like LASER or SONAR, but not the name of a production of some company.

It's unlike the abbreviation AAG. We cannot call an electric-magnetic arresting systems AAG, because AAG(Advanced Arresting Gear) is something like a trademark of General Atomics and does not correctly describe the mechanism of the arresting system. I would prefer to call it EMERAS(Electro-Magnetic Energy Recovery and Arresting System) for the one on CV-18 and other future alike systems.

EMALS and EMERAS, or link them together, EMALERAS.

What do PLAN call it? Anyone here knows?

 

[JamesRed]

Chinese state media in English, when referring to it, uses "electromagnetic catapult as well" rather than "EMALS".

If you or others feel strongly about it and want to continue to use the acronym "EMALS," then that is your prerogative, though I am at a loss as to why this particular hill is one that is being chosen to defend.


My argument is that "EM catapult" or "EM cat" is a far superior name for us to refer to the CV-18's catapult system with, as it is not only shorter, but it is also more technically correct than referring it to EMALS regardless of how one interprets the acronym (whether as a name for the GA product or using it incorrectly to be synonymous with electromagnetic catapult).

I'm not sure if the phrase 'catapult' actually makes sense for the linear induction motor version. A catapult is a mechanical device that converts stored energy into kinetic energy, much like the steam catapult on an aircraft carrier. On the other hand, an EMALS type system uses electromagnetism to generate electromagnetic fields which accelerate the object. It seems debatable whether the latter would be called a catapult if it weren't for the precedent set by the former.

 

[Lethe]

I'm not sure if the phrase 'catapult' actually makes sense for the linear induction motor version. A catapult is a mechanical device that converts stored energy into kinetic energy, much like the steam catapult on an aircraft carrier. On the other hand, an EMALS type system uses electromagnetism to generate electromagnetic fields which accelerate the object. It seems debatable whether the latter would be called a catapult if it weren't for the precedent set by the former.

The catapults on Ford and Fujian are similar in their basic operating principle (i.e. linear motors) to the "mass drivers" that have long been theorised as an alternative means of launching spacecraft or cargo into orbit, and "space catapult" has been an alternative term for such notional devices since the beginning, as in Robert Heinlein's 1966 novel The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress which saw the rebellious lunar colonies threaten governments on Earth with their electromagnetic catapult:

Operation could not be secret. You can't buy or build a hydrogen- fusion power plant for such and not have it noticed. (Sunpower was rejected for obvious reasons.) Parts were ordered from Pittsburgh, standard UnivCalif equipment, and we happily paid their royalties to get top quality. Can't build a stator for a kilometers-long induction field without having it noticed, either. But most important you cannot do major construction hiring many people and not have it show. Sure, catapults are mostly vacuum; stator rings aren't even close together at ejection end. But Authority's 3-g catapult was almost one hundred kilometers long. It was not only an astrogation landmark, on every Luna-jump chart, but was so big it could be photographed or seen by eye from Terra with not-large telescope. It showed up beautifully on a radar screen. We were building a shorter catapult, a 10-g job, but even that was thirty kilometers long, too big to hide.

[....]

New catapult was tested with a load dropped into south Indian Ocean at 350 E., 600 S., a spot used only by fish. Mike was joyed over his marksmanship since he had been able to sneak only two looks when guidance & tracking radars were not in use and had relied on just one nudge to bring it to bullseye. Earthside news reported giant meteor in sub-Antarctic picked up by Capetown Spacetrack with projected impact that matched Mike's attempt perfectly--Mike called me to boast while taking down evening's Reuters transmission. "I told you it was dead on," he gloated. "I watched it. Oh, what a lovely splash!"

That is to say, irrespective of the accuracy of the term "catapult" for a linear induction motor, there is a lineage of use of the term that extends beyond the direct translation from USN steam catapult to EMALS "catapult".

 

[kriss]

I'm not sure if the phrase 'catapult' actually makes sense for the linear induction motor version. A catapult is a mechanical device that converts stored energy into kinetic energy, much like the steam catapult on an aircraft carrier. On the other hand, an EMALS type system uses electromagnetism to generate electromagnetic fields which accelerate the object. It seems debatable whether the latter would be called a catapult if it weren't for the precedent set by the former.

Electromagnetic catapults in their current technological state are still converting stored energy (in flywheels) into kinetic energy.