3 Problems for China's New Fujian Aircraft Carrier



PDS Debt is offering a free debt analysis. It only takes thirty seconds. Get yours at https://PDSDebt.com/task23

There are a lot of reasons why you would want the EMALS. It produces less stress on expensive aircraft frames, as well as better energy efficiency. According to a senior Chinese researcher, they have run hundreds of tests using their EMALS with their J-15 multirole fighter jets. There are no reports of it being tested with F-20’s. The General R Ford has proven their EMALS work in over 200 public test launches. EMALS is a new system, so it needs to be tested that much. In fact, the US EMALS initially had problems with its power system, its efficiency and reliability during Post Delivery Tests and Trials.

The 200+ test launches have allowed the US carrier to solve the issues, one by one. The Chinese EMALS, on the other hand, is far from this stage of development. In fact, there is no definitive data on whether the Chinese EMAL system really works because it has never been seen publicly working. What we know is this capability requirement came all the way from the top. Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post reported that the Central Military Commission, which is run by President Xi Jinping, requested electromagnetic launch. That would kind of be like if President Biden had a pet project at the department of defense. But there have been persistent questions about whether a non nuclear powered ship could achieve that result. Sources in the PLA claimed a team led by China’s top naval engineer Rear Admiral Ma Weiming had figured out a solution.

Join this channel to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSq3p5NKEtyp5Rjd4ctiEbg/join

Task & Purpose is a military news and culture oriented channel. We want to foster discussion about the defense industry.

#NAVY #WAR #MILITARY

Email [email protected] for inquires.

source

32 thoughts on “3 Problems for China's New Fujian Aircraft Carrier”

  1. I never really understood why the power supply for the catapult should be that much of a problem. There are containerized gas turbine generators rated at 40 MW and more. Even if they manage to get an overall capacitor bank/catapult efficiency of just 20% that is enough to launch 30 ton planes at 300Km/h with a cycle time of 15 seconds, which I guess is less than it even takes to put a plane on the catapult.
    The problem the US had is probably only because they for some reason wanted to power the catapult from the main electrical system rather than have a separate generator for the catapult. A 'neater' solution probably but much more complex and from an engineering point of view.

    Reply
  2. Going from 0 to 100 regarding the launch system is like a company that has no experience in the field of building GPUs claiming to make a new chip that will top Nvidia + AMD.
    It is in theory possible that it will happen – but in reality, they will fail, on the hardware as well as software (driver compatibility e.g.)

    The same will happen with China I guess. Yeah, in theory they may solve problems that the USN has not managed to solve, but that's a little like saying: My retirement plan is winning the lottery. You can win the lottery, but we all know you won't win it.

    Reply
  3. I figured out what their integrated power system is! It really will allow them to power an EMALS. They integrate their aircraft carrier with the local power grid of whatever city they are ported in (Shanghai for instance). Then they can indeed show their EMALS working… while it’s plugged in to land! 😂😂😂

    Reply
  4. You pronounced NUCLEAR powered correctly twice in a row! Dude! I am so proud of you. You are becoming more professional and dignified day by day. Kudos. Keep up the good work. Please brag about this breakthrough to your speech therapist.

    Reply
  5. 航母的航程事实上最大的问题是海外基地,和航母本身的关系不太大,毕竟航母除了自身航行需要的动力之外,还需要考虑航空燃油以及航空弹药的补给。

    其次,看到你说3台升降机,就知道这个视频的有多无知了。

    既然你偏向美国,那你应该早都读过美国1998年4月发布的航母模拟实战报告,去理解一下报告中关于升降机的使用情况。

    Reply

Leave a Comment