Assuming they all use the same hull-form, propellers, water-line, draught, lenth-beam ratio, etc…. when everything else in the drive train is equal? The above article didn’t consider those. Biggest differences are probably the propellers (unless someone can show it’s the same since CVs/Enterprise) and hull-form. Both of these are also the key to advancement in submarine technology, very hard to say they haven’t been changed since each successive class of CV/Ns. Still…very unlikely to reach 40kts imho….even at 35kts for such a huge beast is crazy. In 10 hours it will be over 400 miles off.

power turbines being rated so and so doesn’t mean it can’t be in overspeed mode. Very damaging but who knows, these marine turbines are really ruggedized. In that case, yes, the amount of steam generated is important. But, just guessing here, just like the above article since no real engineering values were given, how can one conclude one way or the other? Another way to look at it is the successive increase in the weights but the top speed is about the same? Increasing by over 20% in weight from CV-63 to the newer Nimitz but similar top speed since the power turbine is the same? Try that on any boat/vehicle and you’ll see that does not make sense.