Chinese nuclear powered resupply ship. . .

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
121
"Will China's Next-Generation Supply Ship be Nuclear-Powered?"

"On September 6, 2018, China’s comprehensive supply ship Hongzehu (Hull 881) was honorably retired, marking that the Chinese Navy has entered a new era of modernization. With its retirement, perhaps the country’s next-generation supply ships have been already under construction.

On September 5, the No.719 Research Institute of China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation (CSIC) unveiled a model of a nuclear-powered comprehensive supply ship based on the marine nuclear-powered platform demonstration project.

This ship aims to meet the demand of escorting large ocean-going fleet, so as to enhance the fleet’s maritime control and combat capacities. Perhaps this means China’s next-generation supply ships, nicknamed “nannies for aircraft carriers”, will be fueled with nuclear power. "


"China’s nuclear-powered aircraft carriers that will definitely be built will need nuclear-powered supply ships."

I. Am. Shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,401
Reaction score
35
I wonder about the economics of paying the premium for nuclear power on a ship like this. Carriers and subs have mission requirements that can justify the cost. An ice breaker that lives year round in an arctic environment might also break even on the accounting ledger. The reactor-to-ship cost ratio for a humdrum supply vessel makes this a proposition only for countries with minimal debt worries.
 

Attachments

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
121
Also the less fuel you have to carry for yourself the more you can offload and the smaller your ship can be.
 

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
441
Reaction score
0
Website
rp-one.net
If it's a fast ship, nuclear power is not unreasonable.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
740
Reaction score
23
Is this a little like the nuclear ice breaker that turned out smaller and non nuclear?
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,132
Reaction score
72
sferrin said:
Also the less fuel you have to carry for yourself the more you can offload and the smaller your ship can be.
Ship's fuel is such a small portion of the total, though. I couldn't find exact numbers, but in the US AOEs, just eyeballing the tankage suggests that ship's fuel stowage was probably less than 20 percent of the cargo fuel capacity, so elimination ship's fuel would have a very small impact on ship size or cargo capacity.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
121
Foo Fighter said:
Is this a little like the nuclear ice breaker that turned out smaller and non nuclear?
You do realize they're not the same project right? By the time they started talking about a nuclear icebreaker the conventional icebreaker recently launched was already under construction.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
740
Reaction score
23
Yes, which is why I asked if it was LIKE the ice breaker which seemed more propaganda than real.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
121
Foo Fighter said:
Yes, which is why I asked if it was LIKE the ice breaker which seemed more propaganda than real.
You missed the point. The icebreaker news is talking about TWO DIFFERENT icebreaker projects.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
740
Reaction score
23
Fair enuff, ta. I appologise for being as thick as ink that day...
 
Top