CN Research reveals China has built prototype nuclear reactor to power aircraft carrier - Right now, only the United States and France have nuclear-powered carriers.

1.png

China has built a land-based prototype nuclear reactor for a large surface warship, in the clearest sign yet Beijing is advancing toward producing the country’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, according to a new analysis of satellite imagery and Chinese government documents provided to The Associated Press.

There have long been rumors that China is planning to build a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, but the research by the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in California is the first to confirm it is working on a nuclear-powered propulsion system for a carrier-sized surface warship.

Why is China’s pursuit of nuclear-powered carriers significant?​

China’s navy is already the world’s largest numerically, and it has been rapidly modernizing. Adding nuclear-powered carriers to its fleet would be a major step in realizing its ambitions for a true “blue-water” force capable of operating around the globe in a growing challenge to the United States.

Nuclear carriers take longer to build than conventional carriers, but once in operation they are able to stay at sea for much longer because they do not need to refuel, and there is more room on board for fuel and weapons for aircraft, thus extending their capabilities. They are also able to produce more power to run advanced systems.

Right now, only the United States and France have nuclear-powered carriers. The U.S. has 11 in total, which allows it to keep multiple strike groups deployed around the world at all times, including in the Indo-Pacific.

But the Pentagon is growingly increasingly concerned about China’s rapid modernization of its fleet, including the design and construction of new carriers.

2.png
FILE - In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, China’s third conventionally powered aircraft carrier, the Fujian, conducts a maiden sea trial on May 7, 2024. (Ding Ziyu/Xinhua via AP, File)

China currently has three carriers, including the new Type 003 Fujian, which was the first both designed and built by China. It has said work is already underway on a fourth, but it has not announced whether that will be nuclear or conventionally powered.

The modernization aligns with China’s “growing emphasis on the maritime domain and increasing demands” for its navy “to operate at greater distances from mainland China,” the Defense Department said in its most recent report to Congress on China’s military.

How did researchers conclude China has built a prototype reactor for a carrier?​

3.png
This satellite image from Planet Labs PBC shows the Nuclear Power Institute of China’s Site No. 1, also known as Base 909, in Mucheng Township, Sichuan Province, China, July 5, 2023. (Planet Labs PBC via AP)

Middlebury researchers were initially investigating a mountain site outside the city of Leshan in the southwest Chinese province of Sichuan over suspicions that China was building a reactor to produce plutonium or tritium for weapons. Instead they said they determined that China was building a prototype reactor for a large warship.

The conclusion was based upon a wide variety of sources, including satellite images, project tenders, personnel files, and environmental impact studies.

The reactor is housed in a new facility built at the site known as Base 909, which is under the control of the Nuclear Power Institute of China.

Documents indicating that China’s 701 Institute, which is responsible for aircraft carrier development, procured reactor equipment “intended for installation on a large surface warship.” as well as the project’s “national defense designation” helped lead to the conclusion the sizeable reactor is a prototype for a next-generation aircraft carrier.

What does China say?​

Chinese President Xi Jinping has tasked defense officials with building a “first-class” navy and becoming a maritime power as part of his blueprint for the country’s great rejuvenation.

The country’s most recent white paper on national defense, dated 2019, said the Chinese navy was adjusting to strategic requirements by “speeding up the transition of its tasks from defense on the near seas to protection missions on the far seas.”

4.png
FILE - In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, Chinese honor guard raise the Chinese flag during the commissioning ceremony of China’s conventionally powered Shandong aircraft carrier at a naval port in Sanya, south China’s Hainan Province, on Dec. 17, 2019. (Li Gang/Xinhua via AP, File)

Sea trials hadn’t even started for the new Fujian aircraft carrier in March when Yuan Huazhi, political commissar for China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy, confirmed the construction of a fourth carrier. Asked if it would be nuclear-powered, he said at the time that would “soon be announced,” but so far it has not been.

Neither China’s Defense Ministry nor Foreign Affairs Ministry responded to requests for comment.

Even if the carrier that has been started will likely be another conventionally-powered Type 003 ship, experts say Chinese shipyards have the capability to work on more than one carrier at a time, and that they could produce a new nuclear-powered vessel concurrently.

Article Link

Archive
 
Last edited:
I am confident that the radiation will compensate for the reduced number of moving parts and they'll maintain a healthy industrial attrition rate.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Gog & Magog
Remember this next time you see anti-nuclear propaganda. China would love for the US to completely abandon nuclear research, and is happy to use psyops to get useful American idiots to oppose it to hamstring our military defense capabilities.
 
Remember this next time you see anti-nuclear propaganda. China would love for the US to completely abandon nuclear research, and is happy to use psyops to get useful American idiots to oppose it to hamstring our military defense capabilities.
Being anti nuclear is one of the saddest ways you can show you are a fucking retarded luddite.

If humanity is ever going to ever do anything of significance beyond low earth orbit, nuclear power will be needed in vast quantities. Trying to stop its use and advancement is tantamount to dooming us to this planet.
 
Just sticking a nuclear power plant on a ship isn’t impressive. Operating it without killing your sailors on the regular is impressive.

It’s still pretty impressive that while the US has lost nuclear powered subs, it was never the NUCLEAR part that fucked up.

Unlike the Russians…
 
once in operation they are able to stay at sea for much longer because they do not need to refuel, and there is more room on board for fuel and weapons for aircraft
It's not strictly true for US carriers, is it. The carrier itself might be nuclear powered, but they've not yet succeeded in making reactors small enough to power planes. One of their carriers was recently turned into a giant floating parking lot for aircraft after the oiler which carries fuel for said planes ran aground near Oman. And the US Navy is at that unfortunate point in the replacement cycle where they've scrapped all the old ships without waiting for the replacements to be built.
 
It's not strictly true for US carriers, is it. The carrier itself might be nuclear powered, but they've not yet succeeded in making reactors small enough to power planes.
The point he was making was that without having to store fuel for the SHIP, more space can be devoted to fuel for the PLANES.

In the 1960s, at least for the US. Russia is a different story, they were to submarines what those people who never change their oil are to cars for a very long time.
More true than you realize, the reason so many Soviet/Russian nuclear subs have had accidents is that their reactors are ( or were ) a design where molten metal is used as the reactor coolant (some mix of lead /bismuth) so if they ever are powered off? It solidifies and bricks the reactor.

There were power couplings in port that you were in theory able to plug into to keep the metal warm while you were not out at sea, but, in typical Russian fashion, they never worked right, so the reactors had to be kept running at all times, leading to excessive wear and tear and them exceeding their component part lifespans while out on mission and sailors having to sacrifice themselves to put a hot running reactor back together while underway.

Such has never happened to a US sub. Even before the navy got serious with sub maintenance after losing 2 in the 60's to critical failures of non-reactor systems.
 
Back