PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Future Carrier (Including Costs)
View Single Post
Old 6th November 2018 | 08:39
  #5291 (permalink)  
WE Branch Fanatic
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 102
From: Devon
Bing/KenV

It does appear I got my issues mixed up. The problem was caused by funding issues and the operational tempo. However nuclear still would have be the wrong choice for the UK, cost, politics, and manpower.

I really wanted to flag up the fact that the F-35B trials have involved operating in sea state six with fifty know winds, when some carrier critics on here claimed that the limits FS Charles De Gaulle encountered in the Mediterranean in 2011 (sea state four or higher and recovering aircraft became an issue) were some sort of fixed thing for all carriers. A 65 000 tonne ship is more stable than a circa 40 000 tonne one, and vertical landing (and rolling vertical?) and less sensitive to ship motion than catching a wire.

Trials continue: HMS Queen Elizabeth begins second phase of F-35 trials

Beyond the completed DT-1 test requirements—which were performed within the same flight envelope as will be used in the first operational test phase—the ITF also conducted about half of the testing that falls under the DT-2 threshold, or the flight envelope needed to reach initial operational capability (maritime).The ITF returned to the ship in late October for DT-2, which will concentrate on external stores testing, minimum performance short-takeoffs and SRVLs, and night operations.

The rapid progress is the result of many years of effort, despite politicians trying to make things harder for everyone.
WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Reply