CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Wow ... Yes, but what is - from my point of view - the most remarkable is how exactly this model from 15 years ago matches today's conditions.
I am not convinced by the "Shield box" theory, nor am I a beliver of nuclear powered 003. I don't bet on nuclear, nor would I be surprised.
But the argument of "nuclear plant + EMALS" being double risk (therefor not Chinese like) is not valid IMO. Remember, 003 was supposed to use steam catapult. EMALS being an extra risk was not there in the first place. If 003 was determined to be nuclear powered with steam catapult, it was NOT radical at all (explained later). After the PK, EMALS is in play, is it really an extra risk than steam catapult? NOT at all for Chinese, because China never operated steam catapult, EMALS does not pose any more risk. People, please don't be scared by the troubles experienced by USN. Steam can be equally troublesome for a new player like PLAN.
Now, is using a nuclear power plant in 003 really radical?
USN Nautilus (1958), Enterprise CVN (1960), Nimitz CVN (1968). 10 years from operational submarine plant to proper CVN plant.
PLAN 091 SSN(1974), now it is 2020, 46 years later. Even if we consider PLAN being idle during Deng's time, but from Jiang Zemin's 1990s it is almost 30 years.
Is it really radical that China spends 2 to 3 times of time of US to do the same work?
The argument of building a nuclear icebreak as test platform is far from convincing too. Give an example of other major countries who did similar thing? There is always a first time for everybody. Nautilus and Nimitz were a firsts for USN. USN did not test their CVN powerplant on some civilian boat, PLAN does not have to either.
But the argument of "nuclear plant + EMALS" being double risk (therefor not Chinese like) is not valid IMO. Remember, 003 was supposed to use steam catapult. EMALS being an extra risk was not there in the first place. If 003 was determined to be nuclear powered with steam catapult, it was NOT radical at all (explained later). After the PK, EMALS is in play, is it really an extra risk than steam catapult? NOT at all for Chinese, because China never operated steam catapult, EMALS does not pose any more risk. People, please don't be scared by the troubles experienced by USN. Steam can be equally troublesome for a new player like PLAN.
Now, is using a nuclear power plant in 003 really radical?
USN Nautilus (1958), Enterprise CVN (1960), Nimitz CVN (1968). 10 years from operational submarine plant to proper CVN plant.
PLAN 091 SSN(1974), now it is 2020, 46 years later. Even if we consider PLAN being idle during Deng's time, but from Jiang Zemin's 1990s it is almost 30 years.
Is it really radical that China spends 2 to 3 times of time of US to do the same work?
The argument of building a nuclear icebreak as test platform is far from convincing too. Give an example of other major countries who did similar thing? There is always a first time for everybody. Nautilus and Nimitz were a firsts for USN. USN did not test their CVN powerplant on some civilian boat, PLAN does not have to either.
Another day, another flyover.
Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the 003's construction is how quickly it comes together. We've heard rumors for a long time now that rather than being built from the keel up like the 002, this ship would feature pre-fabricated modules to be assembled in drydock.
Rather than building 5,000-ton to 10,000-ton super modules and then floating them into the dock like with the Queen Elizabeth, this shipyard adopts (what feels like) a more practical method of limiting module size to around 2,000 tons. These modules are transported over land and moved by gantry crane, making assembly a quick and procedural process, instead of having to flood the drydock for every new module.
It has only been around a month since the first module was moved into the dock, and now the hull below waterline is almost done. You can see a couple of remaining modules in the staging area waiting to be moved.
Sunday
In Sunday's image, there were 4 modules in the staging area:
A: Most likely a stern section owing to its strange flatness and slight upward slope
B: Some sort of middle section, the slope suggests it should go towards the bow or stern
C and D: Most likely bow modules due to the narrowness and taper
There was also some sort of strange assembly on one end of the ship. It made it difficult to tell which modules were going to go where. Thankfully, Tuesday's image cleared things up quite well.
Tuesday
In yesterday's image, we can see that section D was moved into drydock. The narrow bow section on that end of the dock is a fairly good indication of the hull's orientation. The confusing assembly from Sunday now shows a level of 'fullness', and has developed into a fairly complete section on its own.
So, as with most ships built in drydock, the 003's hull is assembled with the stern towards the water.
Now only modules A, B, and C are left in the staging area, so there is my guess on where they might go.
Timeline
What we're seeing here is a rapid pace of assembly, as expected of a construction process where the modules are prefabricated and then joined together in drydock. Looking at the length of each module, we can estimate that the underwater hull should be comprised of around 18 to 20 modules. Currently there are around 12 modules in the dock, plus 3 modules in the staging area. The missing large module amidships is still nowhere to be seen.
We first received news of the first module in drydock on July 23, which was 13 days ago. This means the modules were being moved at a rate of almost 1 module per day! Assuming there is no bottleneck in the fabrication of modules, we would see all lower hull modules in drydock before the end of this month!
Realistically, it will take a little longer for the modules to be properly connected, the machinery to be installed, and all the piping and wiring to be put together. But at this pace of construction, it might only be 1-2 months before the first module for the next layer come along.
Judging by the height of the current modules, the next layer of modules could be U-shaped, with 1-2 main decks above the machinery spaces, and the hangar deck immediately on top, with the hangar bay walls on the side.
Where are other modules like, say flight deck? Have they already been built or not? If they haven't, it will still take a long time to be able to see the whole ship.
Intrepid
Major
We are searching for them. We haven't seen any.
On closer inspection of some old images, we may be underestimating the progress of the construction even now.
Photo from 13 June, 2019.
One thing that just struck me is how tall these modules actually are.
We couldn't get a good idea of its dimensions before as there was nothing to put it into perspective, but now that we've seen the full length of the ship being assembled in drydock, there are some details we can figure out that were not possible before. Like that we can estimate each module to be around 15 metres long, given that there are 20 modules across a 300 metre waterline length.
For one, if we assume the internal layout is similar to a 80K-ton carrier like the Kitty Hawk or Nimitz, then there should only be 2-3 decks between engine room and hangar deck. After some doodling it seems like these modules have about 3 decks + double bottom below waterline, much like the Ford-class.
Now look at how tall these modules are, compared to the length. Then consider that the draft is approximated at 12 metres with 3 decks + double bottom. Then, add two decks on top of that, which should give an extra 6 metres. The math works out at an approximate height of 5 decks + double bottom, or around 18 meters tall, for each of these large modules.
This is important because that means we will not see any more 'super-modules'. There will not be any more prefabricated modules that comes anywhere close in terms of weight and dimensions. After all, why would you need more large modules when there are already 5 decks, and we have almost reached the hangar deck already? The next large pieces we see should be the overhang modules, and that's it.
So what does this mean in terms of progress?
The key point here is that the super-modules are complete, otherwise they would not have been moved into drydock. We can consider the lower 5 decks to be good as done. And if these are done, then there must be new pieces in the pipeline. They might be big and flat, for the one extra deck between engine room and hangar deck, a total of 3 decks above the engine room.
Or perhaps, the current modules already have 6 decks?
This module with 3 decks above waterline suggests that the super-modules might have topped out at 6 decks before being moved into drydock. If this is the case, then we have reached the hangar deck already, and the hangar bay walls and overhangs can be directly installed as soon as the super-modules are assembled in the coming few weeks.
Again, assuming no bottleneck in module fabrication, the rest of the hull can come together very quickly. We might even see a completed hull by the end of this year, and launch in Q2 next year. I was originally thinking Q3.
So, to answer the question - I hope that they have already been built. Because if they haven't, then this hull would be hogging the drydock for months. Personally, I think the hangar bay walls and the overhangs are just around the corner - probably assembled, we just haven't identified them yet.
Intrepid
Major
With only two decks above the engine rooms it would be a "wet" hangar deck like it was on USS Midway. I think, modern aircraft carriers will have at least or exact three decks between the engine rooms top (appoximately waterline) and hangar deck level.
From Forrestal to Ford "Supercarrier"-Standard:
3 decks and dobble bottom below waterline
3 decks between waterline and hangardeck
3 decks hight of the hangar
1 deck as so called gallery deck from top of hangar to the flightdeck
10 decks for the hull.
From Forrestal to Ford "Supercarrier"-Standard:
3 decks and dobble bottom below waterline
3 decks between waterline and hangardeck
3 decks hight of the hangar
1 deck as so called gallery deck from top of hangar to the flightdeck
10 decks for the hull.
From Staradmin
View attachment 62332
So 90% confirmed that Type 003 will be Conventionally powered with IEPS & EMALS
A Huge leapfrog for Chinese Shipbuilding Industry indeed. Double New - IEPS and EMALS
Could you for the less knowledgable of us explain how what you have posted implies IEPS and an EMALS configuration? I take it that this is a model shape for the island on the carrier but I don't see how the shape of the island let's us draw conclusions with regards to power generation and catapult type.