What's new

Type 00X/003 (former Type 002) Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions

Deino

INT'L MOD
Nov 9, 2014
9,768
14
15,583
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
...
From type 001 to type 003, China would have 4 aircraft carriers in 2025. In 2025, it is estimated that China's fourth aircraft carrier type 003 will be launched into service. By then, China will have at least 4 aircraft carriers.
...

Ähhhm ... From Type 001 to Type 003 I count only 001, 002 & 003 to three?! So how do they come to 4? :fie:
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
4,614
-1
10,982
Country
China
Location
United States
About 108,000 metric tons full load with the current size estimation and block coefficient.

The Ford class is around 102,000 metric tons full load.
If that's confirmed in next 2 years, I need a whole box of beer.
Even it is 85,000 tons, it will also be nuclear, because China doesn't have any suitable conventional propulsion for a carrier that weighs over 80,000 tons.

The Type 003 got a more robust waterline than the Ford class, so even both carrier got the same dimension, then the Type 003 would still have several thousands tons of leverage.
I think nuclear or not, has nothing to do with tonnage. Conventional propulsion can generate as much power as nuclear, but it will waste a lot of space and tonnage for fuel, as well as venting.
The mods of the CD forum went full retard by not allowing to post any satellite image. If you don't abide, then it would result an immediate ban.

That's why most people don't take them seriously anymore.


If the Type 003 can be confirmed with the draft height of 12.5 meters, and maintain its waterline to be no less than 315 meters, then it is going to outweigh the Ford class for sure.

The incoming aerial pic of December will be crucial to fulfill that definition. :enjoy:
I was banned from CD many years ago. Never want to register this $hitty forum again.
I hate CD, most mods in CD are just retard, especially in aviation sub forum.
 
Last edited:

samsara

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 28, 2016
2,649
8
7,736
Country
Lao Peoples Democratic Republic
Location
China
Ähhhm ... From Type 001 to Type 003 I count only 001, 002 & 003 to three?! So how do they come to 4? :fie:
The article assumed that 003 would be repeated (once) so the fourth carrier would remain be 003.

It's mentioned in the lines you quoted above, it should have set its wording more explicit :P

"From type 001 to type 003, China would have 4 aircraft carriers in 2025. In 2025, it is estimated that China's fourth aircraft carrier type 003 will be launched into service. By then, China will have at least 4 aircraft carriers."
 

ChineseTiger1986

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 27, 2010
23,004
11
40,826
Country
China
Location
Canada
If that's confirmed in next 2 years, I need a whole box of beer.

I think nuclear or not, has nothing to do with tonnage. Conventional propulsion can generate as much power as nuclear, but it will waste a lot of space and tonnage for fuel, as well as venting.

I was banned from CD many years ago. Never want to register this $hitty forum again.
I hate CD, most mods in CD are just retard, especially in aviation sub forum.
A conventional powered carrier over 80,000 tons is surely going to be a gas guzzler, especially China got very few military bases around the world.
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
4,614
-1
10,982
Country
China
Location
United States
A conventional powered carrier over 80,000 tons is surely going to be a gas guzzler, especially China got very few military bases around the world.
gas operational fee will be sky high. boiling water with heavy oil is possible. Just like Liaoning and shandong
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,753
8
10,670
Country
United States
Location
United States
gas operational fee will be sky high. boiling water with heavy oil is possible. Just like Liaoning and shandong
Very non efficient compared with a nuclear powered carrier ... IMHO it would not make sense using conventional propulsion for a carrier the size of the 003.
 

ChineseTiger1986

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 27, 2010
23,004
11
40,826
Country
China
Location
Canada
gas operational fee will be sky high. boiling water with heavy oil is possible. Just like Liaoning and shandong
The boilers are outdated technology, and it has never propelled any aircraft carrier that displaced over 80,000 tonnes.

And the aircraft carrier with gas turbines has never gone anything beyond 65,000 tonnes.

The most risk averse way is going through nuclear propulsion.
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
4,614
-1
10,982
Country
China
Location
United States
The boilers are outdated technology, and it has never propelled any aircraft carrier that displaced over 80,000 tonnes.

And the aircraft carrier with gas turbines has never gone anything beyond 65,000 tonnes.

The most risk averse way is going through nuclear propulsion.
China never built any ship power by nuclear larger than 15000 tons. I highly doubt they will do that in such a hurry.
I hope 003 is nuclear powered, and I hope technology is mature, which means there was other big ships powered by nuclear but we just don't know.
Boilers are not outdated technology, it can power any tonnage you want. Just take more space for fuel and venting.
 

shanlung

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2018
576
-2
1,079
Country
China
Location
Taiwan, Province Of China
A conventional powered carrier over 80,000 tons is surely going to be a gas guzzler, especially China got very few military bases around the world.

Are Chinese carriers required to go all over the world like Murica carriers?

I thought the furthest Chinese carriers need to go to will be to 3rd Island Chain.

Unless they want to go to 4th Island Chain and Frisco Bay to do Chinese FONOP in Frisco Bay itself
:D :cheers:
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
4,614
-1
10,982
Country
China
Location
United States
Boilers are have also cons, they give big IR signature and also have Big RCS and slower than gas turbine/Nuclear reactors
gas operation fee is not affordable. Fuel consumption is rocket high. Let's say 50 years of operation, it will cost 2 times of nuclear reactor. China definitely will choose nuclear over gas.

While boiler cost will be something similar to nuclear.

Boiler definitely has cons and pros. China can rent Gwadar of Pakistan to refuel 003, or some other friendly countries. Pakistanis won't worry about nuclear leakage. It's less sensitive as well. While nuclear need very special equipment and infrastructure for maintenance.

Also if China doesn't use carriers as much as US, most of time the fuel consumption is zero. While nuclear reactor cost will be the same no matter you use it or not.

If nuclear reactor is not mature, China will have no choice but boiler. A boiler carrier is 100 times better than no carrier.
 
Last edited:

FairAndUnbiased

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 25, 2011
7,227
0
10,700
Country
China
Location
United States
gas operation fee is not affordable. Fuel consumption is rocket high.
boiler isn't so bad. remember Kitty Hawk was steam boiler, has 20k tons less displacement (80k) than Nimitz (100k), but only carries 10-15 less aircraft. also, boiler can use cheap bunker fuel like tankers and freighters in order to share cost.

much of that extra tonnage is for shielding and containment requirements. boilers don't have the rigorous shielding and containment requirements.
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
4,614
-1
10,982
Country
China
Location
United States
boiler isn't so bad. remember Kitty Hawk was steam boiler, has 20k tons less displacement (80k) than Nimitz (100k), but only carries 10-15 less aircraft. also, boiler can use cheap bunker fuel like tankers and freighters in order to share cost.

much of that extra tonnage is for shielding and containment requirements. boilers don't have the rigorous shielding and containment requirements.
Also if there is any damage during the war, boiler is much easier to fix compare with nuclear.
nuclear reactor is not possible to be fixed at all.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)


Top Bottom