The New Carriers - Page 2 - Ships Nostalgia
20:24

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

The New Carriers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #26  
Old 19th February 2012, 14:36
wigger wigger is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 3,464
Its certainly going to be interesting to see what will eventually fly off the carriers and I can see pros and cons for the large vs small ships arguments. With a smaller platform do you limit the number of aircraft types that are availiable for use? The Harriers are a great loss and had a few more years left at least, but if they had survived, when they eventually were disposed of sometime in the future, what would be around to fly off a smaller carrier?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 19th February 2012, 20:19
Phill's Avatar
Phill Phill is offline   SN Supporter
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1975 - 1989
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
My location
Posts: 1,816
I found this site elsewhere on ships Nostalgia, a spherical panorama of the construction of the Queen Elizabeth well under way at Portsmouth. Worth a look.
Phill

http://www.360cities.net/image/hms-q...4.24,0.21,99.6
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 20th March 2012, 18:40
chadburn chadburn is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,986
Looks like it's all going wrong, the arrestor hook version of the F-35C which this Government decided to go for rather than the VTOL has now got serious design problem's with the positioning of the hook which will delay it's entry into service and we may have to go back to the VTOL version as the best option.
__________________
Geordie Chief

From Grey Funnel to any Funnel, just show him/ me the money Mabel
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 20th March 2012, 18:43
Duncan112's Avatar
Duncan112 Duncan112 is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1981 - 2003
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
My location
Posts: 1,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadburn View Post
Looks like it's all going wrong, the arrestor hook version of the F-35C which this Government decided to go for rather than the VTOL has now got serious design problem's with the positioning of the hook which will delay it's entry into service and we may have to go back to the VTOL version as the best option.
Maybe we should just keep the Harriers?
__________________
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

George Santayana (1863 - 1952)
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 20th March 2012, 19:04
chadburn chadburn is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,986
Never heard as yet as to whether the Harrier's have actually been shipped to the State's, I do know that the F3 Tornado's are kept "alive" until they are placed into the scrapping rig.
__________________
Geordie Chief

From Grey Funnel to any Funnel, just show him/ me the money Mabel
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 20th March 2012, 20:47
Pat Kennedy's Avatar
Pat Kennedy Pat Kennedy is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,518
Apparently the 'cats and traps' plan has become an absolute shambles with costs soaring out of control to asn estimated 2 billion, and the programme delayed by a further 7 years until 2027.
An embarrassing 'U' turn is on the cards.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...?newsfeed=true


Pat
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 25th March 2012, 02:17
jamesgpobog's Avatar
jamesgpobog jamesgpobog is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Other Navies
Department: Engineering
Active: 1970 - 1976
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,311
Quote:
You don't maintain ships of that sort for the purpose of dealing with current, expected military contingencies, but for the purpose of dealing with future, unexpected military contingencies. If you wait until you actually need such ships before you begin to build them, then it will be too late.
^^^This^^^

It is the exact same reason that airline pilots are not paid big money to fly the planes. They are paid big money to know what to do when everything goes pear-shape...
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10th April 2012, 09:51
DAVID ALCOCK DAVID ALCOCK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 219
did you see the two sections being moved on the news last night 4000 tons each 6 decks high being moved like a pair of containers!!quite impresive,more impresive will be moving the combined lump righ round scotland!!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10th April 2012, 18:50
gordy gordy is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
My location
Posts: 1,388
I saw a news report on the move of the sections and was slightly puzzled when a shipyard boss was asked about the tolerance involved in joining them.
20mm he declared.
Eh?
Shurely some mistake.
__________________
A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10th April 2012, 19:05
DAVID ALCOCK DAVID ALCOCK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 219
i sailed on NORWEGIAN WIND after she was streched and the hull was virtualy smooth 1 or 2 mm at most . if it is 20mm the sections will hardly meet and i hope they get it better for the prop shafts
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10th April 2012, 19:35
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadburn View Post
Never heard as yet as to whether the Harrier's have actually been shipped to the State's, I do know that the F3 Tornado's are kept "alive" until they are placed into the scrapping rig.
Hi Chadburn,

I think that the various permutations of aircraft for either carrier use or as land based assets is more flexible than is generally disseminated by the media. It seems to be that military tacticians base threat levels on the weapons fitted to the various delivery platforms. Yes, the carrier business is a right cock-up, however with our own meagre supply of up to date ordinance and what we can 'borrow' off the U.S. we should be ok until the carrier/s are completed and fitted out.

Fingers crossed chaps. Pax Britannica


LouisB
__________________
R814683
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11th April 2012, 17:40
chadburn chadburn is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,986
We can only hope Louis that while the "gobby" Hilary Clinton is providing the rhetoric to the South American's we have a committed Anglophile like Casper Weinberger in the present American Government as it was on his permission we were allowed to "raid" their stock's of military equipment. God Bless him and of course Reagan.
__________________
Geordie Chief

From Grey Funnel to any Funnel, just show him/ me the money Mabel
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11th April 2012, 18:43
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadburn View Post
We can only hope Louis that while the "gobby" Hilary Clinton is providing the rhetoric to the South American's we have a committed Anglophile like Casper Weinberger in the present American Government as it was on his permission we were allowed to "raid" their stock's of military equipment. God Bless him and of course Reagan.
Totally agree Chadburn. Unfortuately the average uninformed punter either doesn't know or couldn't give a proverbial - it's all me me me these days - don't care as long as I get my i-pod. This is what we have spawned I'm sad to say.


LouisB.
__________________
R814683
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 21st April 2012, 09:45
DAVID ALCOCK DAVID ALCOCK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 219
According to the bbc its back to INFERIOR PERFORMANCE STOVL F35 due to cost of cats; i bet we still have to pay for cats because the contract has been sined(deliberate miss spell)
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 21st April 2012, 15:56
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAVID ALCOCK View Post
According to the bbc its back to INFERIOR PERFORMANCE STOVL F35 due to cost of cats; i bet we still have to pay for cats because the contract has been sined(deliberate miss spell)
It appears that the whole thing is on hold - somebody has quoted performance figures and maintanence costs from each aircraft and found the STOVL lacking in certain things - others deny that this is the case. Meanwhile the shipbuilders have reached the stage of having to know what to build for.

Type 45's as well have been built to a strictly cost saving spec. Could have been somewhat more potent and flexible in available missile types for the same hull layout - also last minute fitting of Phalanx 1B. Somebody with a bit of warship knowledge must have suddenly twigged !

The whole thing, carriers and type 45's seem to have a slightly Alice in Wonderland feel about the forward planning and last minute realisations of what is required.


LouisB.
__________________
R814683

Last edited by LouisB : 21st April 2012 at 15:59.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 21st April 2012, 19:00
DAVID ALCOCK DAVID ALCOCK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 219
who was the twit who signed the contracts in the first place in order to win scotish votes ???
oh it was TONY B LIAR now ex pm and full time counter of his own money
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 22nd April 2012, 12:46
chadburn chadburn is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAVID ALCOCK View Post
According to the bbc its back to INFERIOR PERFORMANCE STOVL F35 due to cost of cats; i bet we still have to pay for cats because the contract has been sined(deliberate miss spell)
It's not just that, but the American's have found that the hooked version has serious design problem's in regard's to the positioning of the hook!!. This will set the whole build programme back year's apparently. Still curious to know as to whether the Harrier's have been shipped to America yet or is their some agreement that they will stay here for the moment.
__________________
Geordie Chief

From Grey Funnel to any Funnel, just show him/ me the money Mabel
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 22nd April 2012, 13:51
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadburn View Post
It's not just that, but the American's have found that the hooked version has serious design problem's in regard's to the positioning of the hook!!. This will set the whole build programme back year's apparently. Still curious to know as to whether the Harrier's have been shipped to America yet or is their some agreement that they will stay here for the moment.
I know that as a none professional outsider it is easy to criticise but the whole MoD procurement system reminds me of a quote from a book about the Titanic sinking, when it became obvious that all was lost : "and the band played on".

Years ago, when I was involved in minor warship building, the costing always seemed very flexible and overuns seemingly never used to worry the companies directors all that much. It would appear that at least in part, the old 'flexible' system of management still exists but the bottomless financial barrel has been removed causing some consternation and puzzlement amongst older civil servants.



LouisB.
__________________
R814683

Last edited by LouisB : 22nd April 2012 at 14:01.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 22nd April 2012, 14:22
Arkroyal's Avatar
Arkroyal Arkroyal is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 191
When the erestor gear is finaly in operation, the ships will be alot better than if they VTOL.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 22nd April 2012, 18:30
DAVID ALCOCK DAVID ALCOCK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 219
problem with f????35 vstol can only lift about 10 min fuel(allegedly)
cat version f35c c=carrier cant land on carriers (allegedly)
oooooopppsssss
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 22nd April 2012, 22:27
FG86 FG86 is online now  
Senior Member
Organisation: Royal Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1982 - 2010
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,351
The maths are quite simple, unfortunatley its not only the polititions who are causing confusion, the RAF remain anti carrier, the thought of the FAA returning to full strike capability and deploying world wide worries them, they feel threatened hence the fantastic PR machine they maintain feeding posion against Naval aviation, it was the RAF who insisted that the FAA Harrier FRS2was scrapped ahead of the creation of the joint Harrier wing equipped with only the GR7/9, hence we lost our fleet defence & fighter long before the present harriers were sold, at the time even the US attempted to stop the FRS 2 scrapping all to no avail, The RAF convinced the politians of the day that the GR7/9 was sufficent to act as a fleet fighter / strike aircarft.
As for the F35, well the C variant is superiour in all aspects, larger range, loiter time, weapon load and airframe strength. The F35B is more expensive, slower, more fragile and still has serious doubts about the engine / lift reliability, yes it can operate from smaller decks and land vertically however it is far more complex. The big issue here is why it costs so much to fit catapults and arrester gear as the carriers were designed for it however not initially intended for it to be fitted. Both carriers are still in build stage without the flight deck even constructed, surely it cannot cost 2 Billion to alter the build at this early stage? the Electro magnetic catapulkty system has been designed and is presently under test in the states, so again there is less R&D required.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 22nd April 2012, 23:02
wigger wigger is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 3,464
The US have also cast suspicion over the supposed Cat price, they fail to see how it can be so expensive!
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 23rd April 2012, 08:55
DAVID ALCOCK DAVID ALCOCK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 219
we could alsobuy the french
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 23rd April 2012, 11:26
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by wigger View Post
The US have also cast suspicion over the supposed Cat price, they fail to see how it can be so expensive!
It seems that there is some underlying and powerful political interference going on to sway decisions that had been made. If we end up with a carrier/s with aircraft that will not do the job required fully or will not stand up to the rigours of maritime operation then it should be openly and publicly stated by the Government commitee responsible.

If on the other hand the whole carrier concept - including the best suited aircraft - is beyond affordability then that also should be publicly stated. The alternative is that we end up with totally unsuitable kit that has cost a fortune and could help bankrupt the country with no real military or strategic gain. It's no good going to a wedding in your best suit if the backside of your trousers is hanging out.



LouisB.
__________________
R814683

Last edited by LouisB : 23rd April 2012 at 11:33.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 23rd April 2012, 11:41
DAVID ALCOCK DAVID ALCOCK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 219
TRY warship projects discussion boards 3.0 minor navies for a Brazilian project which gives the choice of cats and skijump
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Carriers. OLD STRAWBERRY Royal Navy 25 16th April 2012 12:41
Who will buy the carriers? The old ones? NickNZ Royal Navy 23 1st April 2010 03:40
RN Carriers CEYLON220 Royal Navy 26 23rd June 2008 21:13
RN to get new carriers ddraigmor News and Views from the Shipping World 38 26th April 2007 21:58
L.P.G. Carriers. janathull Ship Research 18 19th March 2007 14:52



Search the net with ask.com
Support SN
Ask.com and get


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.