Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
Re: Aircraft Carriers
The Spanish and Italians, who, and all credit to them, have some nice VSTOL carriers...but limited in their AEW capability, in their EW capability on strike missions, the range and payload issues already mentioned of their strike aircraft...or the US and France...and let's be honest, the real target here is the US.
With the new UK carriers capable of operating cat and trap E-2Ds the ability for defending the carrier (and its huge investment in manpower and capability and financial investment) is strengthened several fold over the helo AEW currently envisioned. This alone, IMHO, makes it more than worth it. To have, in essence, a super carrier with AEW coverage that is 200 or more mile in radius less than what you get with the true AEW aircraft is simply unacceptable in my opinion. Then add to that cross decking not of just the F-35C, but the F-18E/F super hornets, future US 5th gen air dominance fighters, future US 5th gen dedicated attack, EW, and ASW aircraft, and future advanced US AUAVs.
You end up with a much more capable carrier overall...a whole lot more capable and for their entire life
I would advise getting the lusty back into working order for VSTOL, crossdecking some US Marine aircraft and then bringing on a few F-35Bs when they are ready and using that as a stop gap until the Quenn Elizabeth is launched.
Anyhow, just my thoughts. The US could and should help this happen, politically and even financially. It would pay for itself several fold and be great for the US to be able to depend on a couple of more carriers of this capability to be available from one of our allies on the world scene and lighten the load, particularly in the Atlantic, but also the PG and Asia.
Well, let's see, when going for crossdecking, which could be a huge advantage, who would you rather cross deck to to gain experience and to add capability?
The Spanish and Italians, who, and all credit to them, have some nice VSTOL carriers...but limited in their AEW capability, in their EW capability on strike missions, the range and payload issues already mentioned of their strike aircraft...or the US and France...and let's be honest, the real target here is the US.
With the new UK carriers capable of operating cat and trap E-2Ds the ability for defending the carrier (and its huge investment in manpower and capability and financial investment) is strengthened several fold over the helo AEW currently envisioned. This alone, IMHO, makes it more than worth it. To have, in essence, a super carrier with AEW coverage that is 200 or more mile in radius less than what you get with the true AEW aircraft is simply unacceptable in my opinion. Then add to that cross decking not of just the F-35C, but the F-18E/F super hornets, future US 5th gen air dominance fighters, future US 5th gen dedicated attack, EW, and ASW aircraft, and future advanced US AUAVs.
You end up with a much more capable carrier overall...a whole lot more capable and for their entire life
I would advise getting the lusty back into working order for VSTOL, crossdecking some US Marine aircraft and then bringing on a few F-35Bs when they are ready and using that as a stop gap until the Quenn Elizabeth is launched.
Anyhow, just my thoughts. The US could and should help this happen, politically and even financially. It would pay for itself several fold and be great for the US to be able to depend on a couple of more carriers of this capability to be available from one of our allies on the world scene and lighten the load, particularly in the Atlantic, but also the PG and Asia.
Re: Aircraft Carriers
Always think aHead, the things that come out of that noggin of yours boy, you make me look like a simpleton.
Always think aHead, the things that come out of that noggin of yours boy, you make me look like a simpleton.
Re: Aircraft Carriers
Did you see of mine. A lot of technical, military eye candy there...and even for the USAF. But I think it could be done if we got our house in order. PM me on what you think.
Hehehe...long time since I have heard the term "noggin!" You're dating us.
Did you see of mine. A lot of technical, military eye candy there...and even for the USAF. But I think it could be done if we got our house in order. PM me on what you think.
Re: Aircraft Carriers
Well your horizons are significantly broader than mine, and if half your ideas were brought to fruition, we'd likely never have to fight again. The first order of business is regime change, BHO needs a permanent vacation. Actually there are only 185 Raptors extant today, and I'd still like to have 700, but getting it back into production should be a priority, failing that,the F-23 could benefit from the not a Raptor factor, and in spite of a slightly more complex FCS would likely be a nice addition. Love the AHX Helo, that thing will rock and roll. I definetly believe most naval aviators would like a twin engine A2A bird, for the redundancy that other engine provides as well as greater payload on the delivery end, looks like Christmas overall but thats what keeps the boy in us alive. I like the idea of cross decking , but I'm afraid that the eclectic British psyche, almost demands a ramp. The stealth sub is also very cool and submarines in particular are always a neat boat, that bring an old form of stealth to the table.
Well your horizons are significantly broader than mine, and if half your ideas were brought to fruition, we'd likely never have to fight again. The first order of business is regime change, BHO needs a permanent vacation. Actually there are only 185 Raptors extant today, and I'd still like to have 700, but getting it back into production should be a priority, failing that,the F-23 could benefit from the not a Raptor factor, and in spite of a slightly more complex FCS would likely be a nice addition. Love the AHX Helo, that thing will rock and roll. I definetly believe most naval aviators would like a twin engine A2A bird, for the redundancy that other engine provides as well as greater payload on the delivery end, looks like Christmas overall but thats what keeps the boy in us alive. I like the idea of cross decking , but I'm afraid that the eclectic British psyche, almost demands a ramp. The stealth sub is also very cool and submarines in particular are always a neat boat, that bring an old form of stealth to the table.
Re: Aircraft Carriers
Yes I know evil dark Lord of the Sith, thats exactly what you said before the Millenium Falcon ended up on your six and blasted you out of the galaxy! That my boy, is exactly why I don't depart from my area of expertise and critique the bath toys and bulldozers.
Yes I know evil dark Lord of the Sith, thats exactly what you said before the Millenium Falcon ended up on your six and blasted you out of the galaxy! That my boy, is exactly why I don't depart from my area of expertise and critique the bath toys and bulldozers.
Re: Aircraft Carriers
Just a few remarks about your proposal, Jeff.
About freedom of navigation -
Rotterdam was the largest port in the world and is still growing. The maximum draft of ships entering the port is about 90 ft. I recently read about plans to increase the depth of water in the port of Charleston from 45 to 50 ft by 2024. In the mean time Rotterdam is now port 10 or 11 and among the first 10 six are Chinese when we include Singapore. Also China only borders on the Pacific, while the US also has coasts on the Atlantic, so China's interest in freedom of navigation is very much larger than that of the US.
About forcing the Iranians to accept a US friendly regime -
The CIA in concert with MI6 replaced a democratic government by the dictatorship of the Shah in 1953 and the Iranians were very unhappy about that. Besides the Iranians would be ashamed to accept a new puppet regime after seeing the Iraqis and the Afghans getting rid of US occupation. There are more Iranians than Iraqis and Afghans together.
OT
Just a few remarks about your proposal, Jeff.
About freedom of navigation -
Rotterdam was the largest port in the world and is still growing. The maximum draft of ships entering the port is about 90 ft. I recently read about plans to increase the depth of water in the port of Charleston from 45 to 50 ft by 2024. In the mean time Rotterdam is now port 10 or 11 and among the first 10 six are Chinese when we include Singapore. Also China only borders on the Pacific, while the US also has coasts on the Atlantic, so China's interest in freedom of navigation is very much larger than that of the US.
About forcing the Iranians to accept a US friendly regime -
The CIA in concert with MI6 replaced a democratic government by the dictatorship of the Shah in 1953 and the Iranians were very unhappy about that. Besides the Iranians would be ashamed to accept a new puppet regime after seeing the Iraqis and the Afghans getting rid of US occupation. There are more Iranians than Iraqis and Afghans together.
Re: Aircraft Carriers
The initiative for Iran is for a republican secular government which would mean free and open elections. If they vote differently, that would be up to them. IOW, though our goal would be for a more frendly government, the only acceptable avenue to that is through open, free elections, as history has shown. The US would view that as tremendously better than what they have there now, and what a lot of the people there are very dissastisfied with as the 2009 uprisisngs showed.
The main purpose in providing the link earlier was to look at the technical military aspects of the proposal. Lots of technical/military eye-candy there. We probably should ignore the political portions so as not to drift away from the purpose of SD and invite (and rightflly so) the mods to step in.
The initiative for Iran is for a republican secular government which would mean free and open elections. If they vote differently, that would be up to them. IOW, though our goal would be for a more frendly government, the only acceptable avenue to that is through open, free elections, as history has shown. The US would view that as tremendously better than what they have there now, and what a lot of the people there are very dissastisfied with as the 2009 uprisisngs showed.
The main purpose in providing the link earlier was to look at the technical military aspects of the proposal. Lots of technical/military eye-candy there. We probably should ignore the political portions so as not to drift away from the purpose of SD and invite (and rightflly so) the mods to step in.
Last edited:
- Status