Aircraft Carriers III
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
now noticed this pretty critical tweet (I mean I thought that source would be cheering):
Unexpectedly protracted/costly development of EMALS suggests UK wise to adopt VSTOL for Photo of single ‘demo' launch only
Oh please.
now noticed this pretty critical tweet (I mean I thought that source would be cheering):
Unexpectedly protracted/costly development of EMALS suggests UK wise to adopt VSTOL for Photo of single ‘demo' launch only
What a rediculous conclusion for this person to draw.
They could have had steam easily and thus gotten all the benefit of cats and traps.
EMALs is brand new. It works and has been working for years. But the USN is going to go slow out in the oceans with it. They are having to re-write the book. If the UK went Cats and Traps IMHO they would have been foolish to use EMALs in any case because it is so new and they have not had any cats for decades now...so why overburden their own learning curve.
the US can and will afford to do so...but the UK could not. But they would not have had to.
Anyhow...what is done is done. Those two QE carriers are STOVL carriers and that is what they are going to stay throughout their lives. That horse has already left the barn.
Jura The idiot
General
Jeff I was surprised you didn't know
"A contract was signed in December 2011 with of San Diego to develop EMALS for the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers."
(the next sentence is "However, in May 2012, the UK Government reversed its decision after the projected costs rose to double the original estimate and delivery moved back to 2023, cancelling the F-35C option and reverting to its original decision to buy the STOVL F-35B.")
EDIT I mean even I read EMALS at some point had been planned to be installed aboard the QE-class ... using google, I quickly found yet another link:
EMALS selected as Royal Navy's choice of Catapult.
Tuesday, 13 September 2011
Last edited:
Jura The idiot
General
here's a pretty interesting blog post (I don't repost its text on this occasion; I'm even more skeptical than that blogger, but don't want to push it again 
in particular I disagree with his
Conclusion:
In Press: Some Thoughts On USS Ford (CVN 78)
August 2, 2017
in particular I disagree with hisConclusion:
)
In Press: Some Thoughts On USS Ford (CVN 78)
August 2, 2017
I think you would be surprised how quickly they could make her battle ready if they had to.here's a pretty interesting blog post (I don't repost its text on this occasion; I'm even more skeptical than that blogger, but don't want to push it again
Conclusion:
)
In Press: Some Thoughts On USS Ford (CVN 78)
August 2, 2017
But the point is, with the ten Nimitz class...they don't have to.
The Ford is going to be a leap ahead, there is no doubt about it. That is precisely why it is taking time because of the several new and very innovative and promising things they are doing.
As to the UK and some of its writers trying to blaim the QE class not being CATOBAR on General Atomics or on EMALs, that is just bunk.
Sure they could have worked it out to have EMALs, but they also could have shifted to steam and had a perfectly could CAT and Trap option.
After all, the US will be using steam cats on the last Nimitz class carriers for another 40+ years...which is still longer than the service life of the QE class.
So, the real issue is that the UK government of the time simply did not want to spend the money, one way or another, to make it CATOBAR. So they reversed their decisions...and in reversing it, and in having to go back and redesign, and then make it what it is...I will bet you that they have spent as much as the original CATOBAR would have cost anyway.
It is the nature of programs like this that such changes are very costly...even when they think it is going to save money. My experience has been that it rarely does.
Anyway, they have what they ave, and they will be able to make good use of the STO and arrested landings that they are going to have with the Ski-jump.
Next to the actual CATOBAR carriers that will be out there, these two carriers will be the most powerful available.
Jura The idiot
General
Jeff Head said:
"After all, the US will be using steam cats on the last Nimitz class carriers for another 40+ years...which is still longer than the service life of the QE class."
The QECs have a design life of fifty years, so barring any unforeseen events they will outlast the Nimitz's and their steam catapults. Everything else I agree with though.
Regarding the QECs/cat and trap, cost was a big factor to be sure, the RN was effectively given a fixed budget for the carrier programme and was faced with the choice of what could be afforded, one cat and trap carrier or two STOVL carriers. Also a move to cat and trap would mean a much smaller buy of aircraft to operate from the ship, and the prospect of having the order switched from F-35s to F/A-18s, which are great aircraft today, are not going to be competitive for the lifespan of the ship. A smaller buy (50+?) might see the 'light blue' make a bid for full control over the aircraft fleet in order to preserve their own strike potential (as they would be doubling up as replacements for the Tornado fleet).
When you look at the wider picture, the inescapable conclusion is the RN made the right choice. Two carriers with fifth generation aircraft are better than one with 4th generation aircraft, which the light blue might always find more important uses for than flying off a boat...
"After all, the US will be using steam cats on the last Nimitz class carriers for another 40+ years...which is still longer than the service life of the QE class."
The QECs have a design life of fifty years, so barring any unforeseen events they will outlast the Nimitz's and their steam catapults. Everything else I agree with though.
Regarding the QECs/cat and trap, cost was a big factor to be sure, the RN was effectively given a fixed budget for the carrier programme and was faced with the choice of what could be afforded, one cat and trap carrier or two STOVL carriers. Also a move to cat and trap would mean a much smaller buy of aircraft to operate from the ship, and the prospect of having the order switched from F-35s to F/A-18s, which are great aircraft today, are not going to be competitive for the lifespan of the ship. A smaller buy (50+?) might see the 'light blue' make a bid for full control over the aircraft fleet in order to preserve their own strike potential (as they would be doubling up as replacements for the Tornado fleet).
When you look at the wider picture, the inescapable conclusion is the RN made the right choice. Two carriers with fifth generation aircraft are better than one with 4th generation aircraft, which the light blue might always find more important uses for than flying off a boat...
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Also it's easier to surge two STOBAR than CATOBAR
End of the day more aircraft over target with two carriers than one
Just a small side note though
End of the day more aircraft over target with two carriers than one
Just a small side note though