Next Chinese aircraft carrier - Type 002 'Shandong' and Type 003 'Fujian'

[Grey Havoc]

Probably both considerations are in play.

 

[TomS]

Newport News uses covered building galleries for some of their block construction now. Weather is their primary justification.

 

[Deino]

Via Bltizo/SDF aka @RickJoe_PLART

"GE updated JNCX, with imagery from 10th March.

We are finally able to measure the beam of 003 directly rather than having to measure a secondary object to extrapolate its beam."
I consistently measure between 40-41 meters on GE, which is similar to what the CSIS satellite imagery earlier this year measured."

 

[sferrin]

Exclusive: Satellite Images Reveal China's Aircraft Carrier 'Factory,' Analysts Say (excerpt)

https://twitter.com/x/status/1184756575753388033

 

[Deino]

latest image ...

 

[sferrin]

It's mind-boggling the pace they're setting there. We'd still be counting Snail Darters in the US.

 

[totoro]

Via Bltizo/SDF aka @RickJoe_PLART

"GE updated JNCX, with imagery from 10th March.

We are finally able to measure the beam of 003 directly rather than having to measure a secondary object to extrapolate its beam."
I consistently measure between 40-41 meters on GE, which is similar to what the CSIS satellite imagery earlier this year measured."

GE is usually quite precise and can be trusted. But we don't know if that width is waterline beam or beam at hangar level or any other figure.
Here are some known carrier waterline beams:
Kuznetsov 38 m
QE 39 m
Forestall 39.4 m
Nimitz 40.8 m

Here are some widths at hangar level (estimated from images from the front of each carrier)
Kuznetsov 39.7 m
QE 40 m
Nimitz 41.2 m

So, if the 40.5 m width of the Chinese carrier pertains to the waterline beam, it would make it almost as wide as nimitz. Suggesting displacement over 90 000 tons.

If, however, we are looking at hangar level width, the waterline beam would be less.
38.7 m if using kuznetsov as base for comparison.
Or 39.5 m if using QE for comparison.
Or 40.1 m if using nimitz for comparison.

Of course, we also may not be looking at hangar level. We may also be looking at either above or below the hangar level.

Bottom line is, a bit too early to deduce the true waterline beam at this point. And without it (as well as length figure) it's a bit too early to estimate displacement.

 

[Deino]

I must admit, I'm a bit confused, since I cannot find the Type 002 carrier thread - the copied and modified Liaoning class - ... any way after a long wait, finally it seems as if today is the day, the PLAN commissions its second aircraft carrier.

Earlier this day, the Air China VIP Boeing 747-8I (B-2479) operated by the 34th Transport Division has arrived at Hainan and most reports assume that the commissioning ceremony for the Type 002 carrier will take place this evening.

Concerning its name and pennant number, there is still some uncertainty, but all recent reports assume it not to be - as long expected since years - the CV-17 'Shandong' but more likely the number 17 (or IMO 12 ;-) ) and the name "Hunan".

Anyway, in a few hours we will surely know.

 

[Deino]

And yet a minor surprise ... it is finally the Shandong numbered '17'

 

[Archibald]

How do you say "Top Gun" in Chinese ?

 

[Deino]

 

[sferrin]

Thought the similarity to this old pic was amusing.

 

[Deino]

Great comparison of both sister-ships

 

[helmutkohl]

^ nice pic. looks like its 80-90% the same. would it be accurate to say the new ship could still be considered as part of the Kuznetsov class despite being made in China?

 

[Moose]

^ nice pic. looks like its 80-90% the same. would it be accurate to say the new ship could still be considered as part of the Kuznetsov class despite being made in China?

There are substantial enough modifications under the skin to qualify as a derivative or close follow-on in my book. But very close in dimensions and major design aspects. At the end of the day, one could call it the same class without sounding silly.

 

[Hood]

The flight deck layout is very similar, but the various sponsons seem to be a bit smaller for small increases in deck space, especially aft, nothing major but it helps deck parking.

 

[sferrin]

^ nice pic. looks like its 80-90% the same. would it be accurate to say the new ship could still be considered as part of the Kuznetsov class despite being made in China?

There are substantial enough modifications under the skin to qualify as a derivative or close follow-on in my book. But very close in dimensions and major design aspects. At the end of the day, one could call it the same class without sounding silly.

Maybe more like Kitty Hawk / JFK?

"John F. Kennedy is a modified version of the earlier Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carriers.[2] Originally scheduled to be the fourth Kitty Hawk-class carrier, the ship received so many modifications during construction she formed her own class.[5] The ship was originally ordered as a nuclear carrier, using the A3W reactor, but converted to conventional propulsion after construction had begun.[8] The island is somewhat different from that of the Kitty Hawk class, with angled funnels to direct smoke and gases away from the flight deck. Kennedy is also 17 feet (5.2 m) shorter than the Kitty Hawk class.[8]"

 

[Archibald]

Never thought about this before, that the Russian carrier now has two half-brothers (or sisters, for you english language, ships are feminine).

 

[helmutkohl]

^ nice pic. looks like its 80-90% the same. would it be accurate to say the new ship could still be considered as part of the Kuznetsov class despite being made in China?

There are substantial enough modifications under the skin to qualify as a derivative or close follow-on in my book. But very close in dimensions and major design aspects. At the end of the day, one could call it the same class without sounding silly.

Maybe more like Kitty Hawk / JFK?

"John F. Kennedy is a modified version of the earlier Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carriers.[2] Originally scheduled to be the fourth Kitty Hawk-class carrier, the ship received so many modifications during construction she formed her own class.[5] The ship was originally ordered as a nuclear carrier, using the A3W reactor, but converted to conventional propulsion after construction had begun.[8] The island is somewhat different from that of the Kitty Hawk class, with angled funnels to direct smoke and gases away from the flight deck. Kennedy is also 17 feet (5.2 m) shorter than the Kitty Hawk class.[8]"

this makes me feel nostalgic for the Forrestal class (I think it the Kitty Hawk's predecessor). I feel its the perfect size for many other navies.

 

[Deino]

Finally before year's end again a clearer image of the #PLAN Type 003 aircraft carrier.

(Image via @电池王_ at Weibo)

 

[JFC Fuller]

Thanks Deino.

It is definitely starting to look more ship like, the various modules are starting to be placed in order though the stern is still absent (part of it seems to be under the environmental shelter at the extreme top left of the second image) and the bow section appears to be in pieces (part of it may be between the two environmental shelters). They also don't seem to have started welding the various superblocks together and there is no sign of anything from above the current hull level. Definitely a long way from completion.

According to various twitter accounts the Chinese destroyer launch count for this year is now 10, rather than the previously reported 9, as another 052D has been launched at Jiangnan.

 

[sferrin]

And they'll have plenty of escorts. China recently launched its 24h Type 052D Burke analog and SIXTH Type 055 cruiser (think Tico replacement).

China Launched the 24th Type 052D, 6th Type 055 & 71st Type 056 Vessels for PLAN - Naval News

The Chinese naval shipbuilding industry maintained its impressive production rate in 2019. In the past week alone, no less than 3 destroyers and a corvette were launched by various yards.

www.navalnews.com

 

[uk 75]

Impressive looking ships but hardly a serious threat to the USN and JMSDF. Their Soviet counterparts died early and often in NATO wargames. Is India the main opponent?

 

[fredymac]

It looks like the construction is occurring just a few feet above water level (ie, no dry dock). Do they intend to translate the ship out into a floating drydock (you can see what may be rails extending to the water)? The LHA's built at Pascagoula are around 27,000 tons and I would guess this thing may significantly exceed 60,000. What is the largest ship that has ever been launched this way?

 

[sferrin]

Impressive looking ships but hardly a serious threat to the USN and JMSDF. Their Soviet counterparts died early and often in NATO wargames. Is India the main opponent?

Think of these as Training Exercises. Carrier four or five will be a Ford.

 

[uk 75]

Sferrin
Impressive though the shipbuilding capacity in China is, the USN has nearly a century of carrier operations and over half a century of nuclear carrier under its belt. The Japanese have a land aircraft carrier so do not really need big carriers.
The Russians have still not got an effective carrier.

 

[Hood]

Cannot doubt the impressive turnout of the shipbuilding industry. Of course we don't know what the quality control is like, but we haven't heard of any incidents like that befalling the poor old Kuznetsov which seems to lurch from disaster to disaster.
The main factor is the crews and how well trained they are and how well they can plan strategy and execute it. Many navies have looked impressive on paper/at anchor and then on the day it mattered muffed it and ended up with egg on their face.

 

[sferrin]

Sferrin
Impressive though the shipbuilding capacity in China is, the USN has nearly a century of carrier operations and over half a century of nuclear carrier under its belt.

It didn't always. Also, is 50 better than 35? It could be argued that we've actually got less experience now than we did a decade ago.

 

[donnage99]

China is building more large warships in a year than the entire fleet of UK.

 

[uk 75]

I acknowledge China's economic and industrial muscle. But I still just see some nice targets for Western SSNs.

 

[uk 75]

Further to my point above, carriers of all sizes have a short life expectancy in General War. US and UK carriers have served in limited war and peacemaking/keeping. I cannot really see China having any appetite for this kind ofwork.

 

[sferrin]

China is building more large warships in a year than the entire fleet of UK.

They've already got SIX Type 055s (cruisers) launched. We can't even admit that the Tico replacement needs to be a cruiser.

 

[uk 75]

The Ticos were originally regarded as destroyer sized substitutes for nucleae CGN47 cruisers. Western navies have all moved from cruisers to destroyers. The Type45s are glorified frigates originating in the abortive NATO ftigate.
I would expect the Ticos to be replaced by more Burkes

 

[uk 75]

Sorry about typos above. Am using a phone. One or two Chinese task groups operating in the Far East or Indian Ocean like the Indian Navy seems entirely reasonable for a country of China's importance.. I do not see this as an existential threat to operations by Western task groups

 

[sferrin]

The Ticos were originally regarded as destroyer sized substitutes for nucleae CGN47 cruisers. Western navies have all moved from cruisers to destroyers. The Type45s are glorified frigates originating in the abortive NATO ftigate.
I would expect the Ticos to be replaced by more Burkes

A very poor choice. A step backwards really.

 

[Hood]

China is building more large warships in a year than the entire fleet of UK.

China makes more steel in one year than Britain produced since the industrial revolution. They could (in fantasy world theory) rebuild a facsimile post-Ironclad Royal Navy of every ship the RN has ever built since the late 1800s in one year.

China have had the advantage of centralised design, they are told what to design and they go off and do it. They know what a peer Navy like the USN looks like and they have set out to copy it. They are probably still thinking in terms of 1970s-90s terms of strict class descriptions and sizes; cruiser - destroyer - frigate. It doesn't matter what you call a ship, what matters is what its designed for and what armament and sensors it carries. A modern networked frigate with suitable missile capacity is probably far more powerful than the missile destroyers of 30-40 years ago.

The Chinese have been studying aircraft carriers since the 1970s and since they got their hands on the old Melbourne, but its been a long process. They probably know the technical details as well as any Navy but its how they actually put them into use that matters. A lot of speculations in the 1980s about how the Soviets might use their carrier fleet proved to be wide of the mark and those speculations now seem to have been transferred to the Chinese (i.e. power projection using overseas client bases), whether the Chinese will adopt Russian or US doctrine remains to be seen.

 

[totoro]

I'd say it's already visible they're going after US doctrine, rather than Russian one. They removed the antiship missiles from their carriers and they train their airwing with antiship missiles, something Soviets/Russians never did. And they third carrier that's being built is evidently something sized towards the US carriers. I guess we can't be 100% certain it will feature only catapults until we see the main deck, so there's still a small chance it'll go down the Ulyanovsk route of combined ski jump and catapult path, but that's a question that'll be answered pretty quickly. (I for one don't believe they'd go down the EM catapult route and use those catapults only for heavy loads, still retaining the ski jump ramp)

 

[stealthflanker]

Im interested in likely propulsion. If nukes this will perhaps be the first nuclear powered surface warship build by China. If it's conventional then i would expect they will go with scaled up version of the previous designs.

 

[totoro]

Carrier 003 is conventional, that is pretty much a consensus by now.

 

[stealthflanker]

Then it should be similar in performance to maybe Kitty Hawk or JFK. Another interesting part would be whether it is conventional or Turboelectric/IEP (Integrated Electric Propulsion) Conventional is mature and proven. IEP However may allow broad flexibility in upgrade, power management, fuel savings and damage control as the ship can be made more compartementized.