Aircraft Carriers III

Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
FORBIN said:
And more :)
View attachment 32670
Click to expand...
Those latest two pics of the CDG are EXACTLY what I have waited to see. Thanks Forbin.

GREAT pics, and like I said, represents the second most powerful type/class carrier out there on the high seas.

I just wish you guys had a t leastt wo of them...actually 3-4 would be best so you could always have two available.

Still, I'd love to see a Nimitz class side by side with the CDG outfitted with these Rafales raining hellfire on ISIS and other groups like them.
 
Last edited:
D

damitch300

Junior Member
Registered Member
poor lady is going to the same end as her sisters from another mother, invincible class.
Looks weird how all cabinets are opened like that, just like how thiefs work.
Never seen things like that before when a ship ia being scrapped (had been on 2 ships before scrapping/selling)
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Lethe said: ↑
Quick shp/tonnage ratios using data from Wikipedia:

Vikramaditya: 45400/180000 = 3.96 shp/t
Foch/Clemenceau: 32780/126000 = 3.84 shp/t
Ulyanovsk: 75000/280000 = 3.73 shp/t
Kitty Hawk: 81780t/280000= 3.42 shp/t
Enterprise: 93284/280000 = 3.00 shp/t
Kuznetsov/Liaoning: 67500/200000 = 2.96 shp/t
Centaur/Viraat: 28700/76000 = 2.92 shp/t
Vikrant (2020): 40,000/110000 = 2.75 shp/t
Nimitz: 100020t/260000 = 2.60 shp/t
CV-002: 80000/200,000 = 2.50 shp/t
Majestic/Vikrant: 19500/40000 = 2.05 shp/t
Charles de Gaulle: 42,500/81802 = 1.93 shp/t
Queen Elizabeth: 70600/107282 = 1.52 shp/t

No doubt there are inaccuracies in the data or my use of it, but hopefully it should be useful enough for a quick comparison.To see especialy for French with a surprise... but the more intresting are militaries capacities, power dépends CAW, aviation facilities and much also logistic, ammmos, fuel quantities we see it also after.
Click to expand...

To see especialy for French with a surprise... but the more intresting are militaries capacities, power dépends CAW, aviation facilities and much also logistic, ammmos, fuel quantities we see it also after.
Click to expand...

Time for the surprise yes this comparison can be useful and Clemenceau seems much more powerful than Charles de Gaulle but in this excellent report

The ability to accelerate from 0 to 20 knots in 4 minutes and reach speeds of 27 knots in 7 minutes, greatly increases its ability to survive during evasive maneuvers and allows it to catapult its Rafale with their maximum load and any security. On an aircraft carrier conventionally powered, you must turn on one or more additional boilers to increase the power (6 boilers on the Clemenceau) which can take tens of minutes
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top