Board logo

標題: 港媒：大陸首艘航母改裝核動力 [打印本頁]
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 12:01     標題: 港媒：大陸首艘航母改裝核動力

8/25/2011

香港鏡報月刊表示，目前停靠在大連港的航母訓練平台，將改建為中國大陸首艘核動力航母，並命名為「旅順號」。大陸國産的另2艘常規動力航母最快分別在2014與2015年試航，1年後服役。
　　
鏡報月刊9月號的封面署名文章透露，依大陸海軍艦艇命名條例，航母命名將由中央軍委主席決定。中國大陸的航母今後將用復合式命名，首艘航母很可能命名為「遼寧-旅順號」，也可簡稱「旅順號」。
　　
香港明報引述這篇文章說，因為旅順口記載了當年日俄的侵略行為以及前蘇聯為新中國培訓海軍的歷史。
　　
文章說，中國大陸原有1艘江衛II級527號「旅順艦」，年前已改名為「洛陽艦」，就是為了騰出這個名字。
　　
大陸首艘航母為購自烏克蘭的前蘇聯航母「瓦雅格號」。在決定重建瓦雅格號前，北京當局已批准自製4艘航母的計劃，首批2艘常規動力航母最快分別在2014與2015年下水試航，1年後服役。
　　
文章透露，屆時中國大陸可能把近7萬噸的瓦雅格號改建成核動力航母，並安裝先進的電磁彈射器。
　　
據表示，瓦雅格號有了核動力産生的強大電力，便可安裝電磁彈射器，這是大陸航母趕超美國的關鍵技術之一，所以專家和軍方都支持。
　　
刊登在鏡報月刊的這篇文章作者「梁天仞」曾撰寫多篇有關大陸軍事的報導文章。
作者: satil    時間: 2011-8-26 12:35

唉! 又 "超美"!  

EMALS 亦已在Gerald Ford-class carrier應用, 2015年服役.  

幾時先可以有創新, 突破, 唔好一味老番抄襲可以嗎?!
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 12:48

回復 2# satil

It takes time... Common sense tells us that EMALS is complicated... 2015, no way, maybe another 1 or 2 decades...
作者: satil    時間: 2011-8-26 13:23

回復 3# lo_pak

就係因為美國 "話" 做緊, 咁大國一定又要 "超" "趕" 一番, 又話我地有! 相信一定做得快過美國. 勁過美國啦.
作者: sheep    時間: 2011-8-26 13:29

回復  lo_pak

就係因為美國 "話" 做緊, 咁大國一定又要 "超" "趕" 一番, 又話我地有! 相信一定做得快過美 ...
satil 發表於 2011-8-26 13:23



    高航母
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 13:49

回復 4# satil

If it's a steam catapult, it occupies quite a bit of room and it's not worthwhile/efficient to put it on medium size (<70,000 tons) aircraft carrier. They have the reason to go for EMALS...
作者: peter236    時間: 2011-8-26 14:05

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-8-26 14:19 編輯
回復  satil

If it's a steam catapult, it occupies quite a bit of room and it's not worthwhile/effi ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-8-26 13:49


That's not true, the UK's Queen Elizabeth, France's Charles de Gaulle and Brazil's Sao Paulo aircraft carriers are all <70,000 tons, but with catapults.

This article is crap anyways, with their information source questionable.
They will probably put nuclear power into their aircraft carriers after they have successfully built 2 to 3.

The current Aircraft carrier is conventional power and soon they will trial operate this carrier. They will not take out conventional power and then install nuclear power, since that will delay their trial operation.
作者: peter236    時間: 2011-8-26 14:10

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-8-26 14:15 編輯
唉! 又 "超美"!  

EMALS 亦已在Gerald Ford-class carrier應用, 2015年服役.   

幾時 ...
satil 發表於 2011-8-26 12:35


Fcuk you, moron.
That is not 老番抄襲. Many other countries aircraft carriers are also using or developing it.
作者: satil    時間: 2011-8-26 14:14

回復 8# peter236

hey, u fuxker, u right, this is 有中國特色的自我研發 !  
作者: peter236    時間: 2011-8-26 14:16

回復  peter236

hey, u fuxker, u right, this is 有中國特色的自我研發 !      ...
satil 發表於 2011-8-26 14:14


fcuk you anti-Chinese self-hater.
作者: satil    時間: 2011-8-26 14:20

回復 10# peter236

對你來講, 任何人都是反中,

實際你連用中文都唔用, 用英文! 你都表現出媚英得很.
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 14:23

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-8-26 14:37 編輯

回復 7# peter236

Have you count on how many aircrafts they can carry? In addition, what are they?? And what are the usages...

For British, they have F35B backup in the lineup...
For French's Charles de Gaulle, it's nuclear powered... Although they are thinking going back to regular power, which is not in their original proposal...
For Brazil, they are just... fooling around near the coast...

One of the very important issue of having catapult is to launch fixed wing AEW aircraft... Why do they choose fixed wing? One is, they can stay in the air for "LONG", second, they can carry heavier load....
作者: peter236    時間: 2011-8-26 14:47

回復  peter236

Have you count on how many aircrafts they can carry? In addition, what are they?? A ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-8-26 14:23


The trend is to use smaller remote control planes on aircraft carriers. That is why the US is now cutting cost and shelving the big aircraft carriers.
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 14:50

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-8-26 14:54 編輯

回復 7# peter236

No idea if China will put the nuclear core on the aircraft carrier... It very well depends on conditions... You can tell why Russia has so many nuclear powered submarine but they don't even have one nuclear aircraft carrier in deployment... From French's case, you know how dangerous it is to put a nuclear core on an aircraft carrier...
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 14:56

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-8-26 14:57 編輯

回復 13# peter236

Yes, there is a trend. Smaller remote planes can do some works, but not all... And, it doesn't relate to why US scale down the size of the big aircraft carrier... Otherwise they will think of building medium size aircraft carrier.
作者: peter236    時間: 2011-8-26 14:57

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-8-26 14:59 編輯
回復  peter236

No idea if China will put the nuclear core on the aircraft carrier... It very well  ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-8-26 14:50

China will wait until they have successfully built 2-3 aircraft carriers, before they will use nuclear power.
For Russia, it is because of the lack of funds, that's why they are not building larger aircraft carriers.
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 15:00

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-8-26 15:03 編輯

回復 16# peter236

I think what you have missed is the term "efficient"...

For China, for sure, they will try putting the nuclear core on the ships, but it will be difficult because of the confined space and maintenance... It may not be as wise as using conventional power...
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-8-26 15:06

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-8-26 15:27 編輯

回復 16# peter236

And, other than the size that can carry more equipments/planes, what're the advantages of larger aircraft carrier versus medium size aircraft carrier?

Hint: Why Russia submarines SSGN/SSBN are usually larger than their US counterpart...

More explicit hint: Yorktown at Midway warefare...

P.S. - One of the problem you have for your view in China's development..."又要馬兒好, 又要馬兒不吃草..." To me, I'm more neutral...
作者: peter236    時間: 2011-8-26 16:01

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-8-26 16:06 編輯
回復  peter236

I think what you have missed is the term "efficient"...

For China, for sure, they  ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-8-26 15:00

The second and third Chinese aircraft carriers will be larger than the current, but not too large.

Please update your knowledge. The trend is for smaller aircraft carriers. The US is now researching on smaller remote control fighters and spy planes. Large aircraft carriers of 100,000 tons will become obsolete soon.

Chinese is now researching on new generation of nuclear power plants.

Hint for you:
-new technology is safer than those Japanese nuclear power plants
-smaller in size, so an be adapted for use on aircraft carriers
作者: MoiRhapsody    時間: 2011-8-26 20:29

回復 18# lo_pak


    佢完全唔理人地中途島既實戰經驗!！！好野!
人地多又做多過你，沉都沉得多過你，落到場乜鬼野new tech ，theory都係廢物



歡迎光臨 溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://loyaukee.com/forum/) Powered by Discuz! 7.2