Lusty or Ark this aftermnoon

[John Farley]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v145/johnfarley/IllustriousorArk20Nov2008.jpg

Wot is that on the stern then?

(sorry it was a long way away)

[airborne_artist]

I think it may be a mock-up of an F-35.

Found this page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22310427@N08/2728577459/) and this one (http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/photos/lockheedmartinf-35lightningii/f-35-model-on-hms-illustrious-22038.aspx) - which possibly confirms my hunch.

[Flarkey]

it is a navalised TSR2?

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

There was talk about a demo mockup recently wasnt there

[Flarkey]

Ministry of Defence | Defence News | History and Honour | 'Lusty' visits London for Remembrance events (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/HistoryAndHonour/lustyVisitsLondonForRemembranceEvents.htm)

[John Farley]

I am sure you are right re the F35 mockup.

I just could not believe my eyes!

JF

[hurn]

Yeah its the F35 mockup.

After looking at those links it looks like the one I saw at Yeovilton a couple of years ago, but with some British roundels added.

[Tourist]

Or possibly the harrier that has been flying out of Culdrose.........:ugh:

[Not_a_boffin]

1 - Its Lusty, Goalkeepers not Phalanx
2 - The cabin on the flightdeck is associated with the trials she's been running with the VAAC harrier
3 - but that does look like the Dave-B mock up unless they've radically changed the tail set-up of the VAAC. Bit big for an original Harrier as well.

[George211]

It was onboard before LUST left Pompey for London. It's made of fibre glass and has no lashing points. Also it's too large for the CVS lifts so couldn't be taken into the hanger. There was a degree of concern that a gust of wind would result in the first JSF ditching.

[Radar Command T/O]

Speaking from some (very) recent experience.....

1. It's the same F35 mock-up that was on the Ship for Meet Your Navy in July, and again for the recent London visit. Couldn't crane it off before sailing for the VAAC trial due to being at anchor rather than alongside.

2. It will go down the lift - it was in the hangar for some of the receptions held in London, and was kept in the hangar for the duration of the VAAC trial, only coming back up Thursday morning before Lusty's return to port.

3. It does have lashing points (of a fashion), but nothing you'd want to trust in a Sea State 6.

[NoHoverstop]

Radar Command T/O - thanks for putting the record straight. As was shown with XW175 in 2000, 2005 and more recently, getting a FBW STOVL jet into a CVS hangar is entirely possible even if it takes a little extra effort to "right-size" it for the lift. However, what the world really wants to know, or at least hear some good rumours about, is who zapped the model while it was in the hangar? :D Now I'll admit the wardroom attire of some of Lusty's guests might be construed as a clue, but I know it wasn't me and I don't know who it was.

[GreenKnight121]

Note the tie-down chains...

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j17/albion_2006/IMGP0332.jpg

[BEagle]

....lashing points....

Good old Navy - they love their traditions...:rolleyes:

[beerdrinker]

As opposed to the Crabs' habits.

[BEagle]

I really do hope that the Fleet Air Arm receives the F-35B, but quite when, I hesitate to guess...

What can the RAF anticipate?

Leased A330s, privatised training, hopefully A400M and perhaps the odd Nimrod MRA4 sometime next decade.

But lots of 'brand awareness' logos and sundry marketing tat, no doubt.

OK - you win :ok: !

But as regards the GR9, apart from operating from the little carriers of today, it doesn't seem to offer a huge improvment over the Scimitar of some 45 years ago. Both multi-role mud-moving and recce (except that the Scimitar had 4 mighty 30mm radar-ranged Adens), both high subsonic (except that the Scimitar was capable of M0.95 at 36000 ft and had a 50000 ft ceiling), both capable bomb trucks capable of carrying over 8000 lb of bombs - neither have AI radar and the Scimitar would have had AIM-9 if it hadn't been phased out.

Hopefully F-35B (shame the carriers aren't big enough for the F-35C) will be rather more cutting edge than the Harrier now is.

But phasing out the SHAR 2 was a travesty.

[spheroid]

Oh the Fleet Air Arm will deifnately get the F 35...... but, what sort of Officer will be sat in it..? Will he be a Naval Officer or an Air Force Officer?
Thankfully, by the time the F35 enters service the CDS will have changed hands

[Lurking123]

Oh Gawd, you don't want to be doing that. Some beancounter will see the photo and deduce that Dave will fit on one of the current 'carriers'. With a flick of the pen the two ships on order will be morphed into a new off-white paint scheme for Main Building. :ugh:

[Bismark]

Hopefully F-35B (shame the carriers aren't big enough for the F-35C) will be rather more cutting edge than the Harrier now is.

Looking back at past info (mainly Hansard) on the CVF they are perfectly big enough for the F-35C (Hoon et al stated they must be capable - ie big enough - for both conventional and VStol), the ships just need the cat and trap - space all designed in to take such kit.

[GreenKnight121]

But, with nothing designed in to produce steam for the models of catapult currently in production, so those can't really be fitted. The RN will have to wait for EMALS.

There is spare electrical generation capacity, and room, for the power-generation sets for EMALS, but that won't be ready for production until ~2014... The first components of the EMALS equipment are scheduled to be delivered in 2011 for installation in the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), which is scheduled to be delivered to the US Navy in 2015. CVN-78 will be the first ship fitted with EMALS.

[Not_a_boffin]

Part of the several hundred tonnes associated with the "CV" margin is set aside for a couple of steam plants, condensers and distilled water plants. Too late for Lizzy, but with the way things are, still just about possible for PoW. Of course, whether the capacity of these plants would be enough to feed a C-13 (or BS6.....) at a rate sufficient to launch every minute is another question.....as is whether we could re-establish a steam module in the engineering courses, or accommodate the required clankies aboard ship.

[Jetex Jim]

But, with nothing designed in to produce steam for the models of catapult currently in production, so those can't really be fitted. The RN will have to wait for EMALS.

Are electric catapults or traditionally generated steam catapults the only options?

The steam catpult was a British development which borrowed quite a bit from the V1 launch catapult. And the V1 launcher was powered by what was war time Germany's favorite chemical -- Hydrogen Peroxide.

See below for recent thinking on Hydrogen Peroxide synthesis
Degussa/Headwaters Incorporated Building Demonstration Plant for Direct Synthesis of Hydrogen Peroxide | Business Wire | Find Articles at BNET (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_/ai_n15683135)

[LowObservable]

Why is it chained down? They think it's going to fly?

[LowObservable]

Several hundred tons? They'd need that for EMALS too. Three 80,000-pound motor-alternators per cat. Get 'em whizzing up to speed, slam the switches and convert inertia to electricity in three seconds.

Now consider that they won't let you use your cell phone with its 3 volt battery inside the airplane, in case it turns upside down...

[RS30]

Good point, just what will all those teslars (I think that's the unit) of magnatism from the EMLS do the the chips 'n drives in Dave's PCs? Has anyone tried it? Come to think of it, the rest of the ship's IT might get wiped with every launch. Guess the EMP resistance of these gin palaces had better be top notch, or will it back to valves and transistors?:hmm:

[Lyneham Lad]

I doubt that I am alone in not knowing what EMALS consists of and how it is intended to work. As ever, Google is your friend :ok: Be prepared to put your thinking caps on before reading (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/emals.htm) !

[rmac]

Disney have been using Electro magnetic launch systems for their roller coasters for years.

Maybe just another mickey mouse idea :p

[kluge]

Hey BEags so you too have just read the latest Aeroplane Monthly eh ?

[BEagle]

No I haven't - is there anything special in it?

To what do you refer, kluge?

Edit: Ah-ha, I see! Thanks to Google. I might buy a copy - it looks quite interesting!

[NickB]

Looking back at John Farley's picture that opened this thread, if one focuses at the centre of the carrier with the a/c to your LHS, that F35 could almost be a Buccaneer on the back of the Ark!

Or have I been 'reading' too many 'art pamplets' under the covers!! :E

[Green Flash]

Jet Jim

Hydrogen Peroxide

Very very VERY naughty cat fuel and I would go long way to design it out of any system, let alone store tons of the bloody stuff on a boat! Steam or electric rail:ok:

[desk wizard]

Don't think the RN has had good experiences last time it tried using HTP.......

HMS Explorer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Explorer)

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

And as for what's believed to have happened on the Kursk...

Russian submarine Kursk explosion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_submarine_Kursk_explosion)

[Jetex Jim]

Oh come on boys, no guts no glory. What would Nelson have made of all this, girly, we don't fancy HTP nonesense? It's only water with a dash more oxygen, where's the harm in that?

But at least people are talking cats and traps now, not all this barmy SRVL stuff with the only variant of the JSF that DOESN"T have an arrestor hook. Of course that's not hazardous at all, right?

[hulahoop7]

"Oh Gawd, you don't want to be doing that. Some beancounter will see the photo and deduce that Dave will fit on one of the current 'carriers'."


The laughable fact is that we can currently only generate around 6 - 8 Harriers for Lusty - let alone 36 for a CVF. Lusty could probably handle 10 - 12 F35Bs... so you actually have a point. Some might say.. if we are unlikely ever to get above 12, why even bother building a new ship. Spend £1.5bn on a massive SLEP for Vini, Lusty and Ark.:ugh:

[GreenKnight121]

Spend £1.5bn on a massive SLEP for Vini, Lusty and Ark.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b336/Bager1968/Carriers/ArkStrike2.jpg

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b336/Bager1968/Carriers/ArkAngle.jpg

[BEagle]

Ah bless, what sweet little boats.....:rolleyes:

[Widger]

Wot the hell is that last picture....bears no resemblance to anything past or planned!

[GreenKnight121]

Both pictures (note the upper one is a mod of an official photo with the same added double-overhang of the lower one) are the brainchild of a poster on Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Message Board - Yuku (http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/) by the handle of "Sunk at Narvik".

He came up with this as a modernization for the Invincible class ships a couple of years ago. It is purely an amateur "what-if" idea.

[Sunk at Narvik]

Oh my, almost spluttered my coffee all over the keyboard when I saw those again :O

[hulahoop7]

Don't forget your catamaran version too!

[Sunk at Narvik]

That might be a pic too far :=

[steamchicken]

Very surprised (and pleased) to see Lusty in London river the other week, complete with the cardboard Dave and the unluckiest sailor in Britain. Someone's got to be on watch at nine o'clock at night on the day the ship pulls into London of all places!

[Oggin Aviator]

Probably the Upper Deck Sentry - one is on watch on the Flight Deck 24/7.

Very surprised (and pleased) to see Lusty in London river the other week, complete with the cardboard Dave and the unluckiest sailor in Britain.
Dont forget the mighty Mk7 that visited!

[GreenKnight121]

That might be a pic too far :=


I almost put it in too, but I thought the same thing as you.

You know me there as Bager1968.