Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Old 3rd Jun 2006, 19:36
  #241 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,808
Received 19 Likes on 15 Posts
Have cats ever been fitted to a carrier that wasn't steam or nuclear powered?

Would anyone else like to comment on my points regarding the connection between the new carriers and littoral capability?
WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2006, 07:35
  #242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,446
Received 66 Likes on 31 Posts
Apparently not - frustrating isn't it?
Biggus is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2006, 11:44
  #243 (permalink)  
Suspicion breeds confidence
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,405
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
Apparently Poseidon is even worse than the original.
You couldn't call either of them classics, however, the special effects in the new one are top notch.
Here's a
Teaser
Navaleye is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 07:48
  #244 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 519
Received 161 Likes on 86 Posts
WEBF in some sort of order -

1. No carrier with cats has ever been other than steam / nuclear powered. Mind you, the only carriers that haven't been steam or nuclear have been STOVL jobs, like CVS, the Spanish & Italian ships and the Thai one.

2. It won't be CODLAG, it'll be some sort of integrated electric system (acronym not yet invented!)

3. You're correct - amphib and carrier strike are closely linked. But, you can use a carrier without the need for the Amphibs. Basically, the capability argument is too difficult to get past the treasury, (let alone for the DEC & IPTs to understand).
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 11:31
  #245 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MARS
Posts: 1,102
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
SASLESS, Nimitz class great idea but, Portsmouth is not deep or wide enough, it will not fit under the Forth Bridge and will not fit up Plymouth Sound either. So manpower aside, there is no-where in the UK where it could get alongside without being shunted out of the way by the Queen Mary etc. and no dock large enough to repair/refit! So either it goes back to the US for maintainance (JCA all over again!) or let the French repair it at Lorient!
Widger is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 11:44
  #246 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm sure I have seen a picture of the Nimitz at Portsmouth somewhere, maybe DRJ or 'trade journal' (read spotter's mag!)

I might be wrong, and it would have been some time ago as, IIRC, there were Phantoms embarked.
Green Meat is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 11:46
  #247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MARS
Posts: 1,102
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
It most certainly was at Portsmouth, but anchored in the Solent! That would be a great draft.....three years of liberty boats!
Widger is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 11:48
  #248 (permalink)  
Suspicion breeds confidence
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,405
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
I've never seen a Nimitz at Portsmouth, however, they would frequently anchor in Spithead. I think the last carrier to actually go alongside would have been an Essex or (at a pinch) a Midway. Portsmouth has a very narrow harbour mouth and the channel would need to be heavily dredged.
Navaleye is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 11:54
  #249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank goodness, though the old goldfish memory was failing me. Next numpty questions are:

A) The picture showed visitors on board, would they have been shipped (floated/bussed/armada of small boats) out?
B) Is it beyond comprehension to dredge the channel given the huge investment in the new carriers?

I'll call for the taxi now...
Green Meat is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 12:04
  #250 (permalink)  
Suspicion breeds confidence
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,405
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
They would run a tender service from ship to shore. No mean feat when you have a crew of 5,000 plus visitors to manage. The harbour is being dredged for CVF of course, but the Nimitz has a deeper draft then even a CVF. The problem with dredging is that you have to keep at it, its not a one off job and therefore costs dosh which seems to be in very short supply.
Navaleye is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 12:32
  #251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MARS
Posts: 1,102
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
It's not just the depth but the width as well. Historic buildings on both sidea and once alongside, no room for the ferries to get past and no room up harbour to turn either. Anyway, we still do not have a dock large enough. I understand that the CVF will be put together in Rosyth because that is the only dock long enough. Apparently it was the same one that was extended to take the Hood! I'll post a link if I find one.
Widger is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 13:15
  #252 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 519
Received 161 Likes on 86 Posts
CVF is being put together in Rosyth for two reasons :

1. Its next door to Gordon constituency
2. Harland & Wolff don't have the technical capability to build at that scale anymore (and have a poor recent record with non-upkeep RN/RFA work), Fort Victoria, Argus. They do have the biggest dock in the UK though, 550 x 90m and no bridge to get under.

Biggest carrier in Portsmouth harbour (not Spithead Charlie) in recent years was probably FS Clemenceau (32000 te, 230m long) in the late 90s.

Concur with Navaleye - maintaining a channel suitable for Nimitz would be very expensive. In terms of beam however, they're similar ships. CVF has been as high as 76m, but is down to about 68 now I think. Nimitz is ~ 76m at the flightdeck.
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 13:37
  #253 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,280
Received 490 Likes on 205 Posts
Widger,

Would you consider a "Wet Lease" arrangement on a Nimitz class carrier....we will provide the ship, ship's crew, up keep, and the Brits provide the aircraft, squadron personnel, RM's, helicopters, etc.?
SASless is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 14:24
  #254 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,327
Received 1,543 Likes on 705 Posts
Sorry, nowhere to put the beer barrels.....
ORAC is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 14:39
  #255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 519
Received 161 Likes on 86 Posts
No ACRB, no sorties.......
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 15:35
  #256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have the perfect solution for Pompey's harbour. Equip a car ferry with catapults in the car hold, and a platform with arrestor wires on top a la the early carriers converted from colliers etc. Fling 'em out the front of the car deck, get them to land on the flat bit on top. Fits snugly in the harbour, and what's more can also ferry troops and equipment overseas. Between cruises the Navy can get a bit of the investment capital back on cross-channel runs... CVRORO anyone?
Green Meat is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 16:08
  #257 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 897
Received 10 Likes on 6 Posts
Mr. Jerome Rivière complimented in his turn DCN for his satisfying assessment and his results, which exceed the hopes: the decisions of the Government, supported by the Parliament, were the maid.

Has anyone ever seen a Babelfish translation that wasn't ridiculous? And can someone post a link to the French text so we can read it?
steamchicken is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 20:01
  #258 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

I am 'ow you say? verry pleased to 'ave satisfied ze Minister
RonO is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2006, 23:51
  #259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
there is no-where in the UK where it could get alongside
Apart from Portland.



Widger is quite correct, Pompey has been dredged to its limit....anymore and the Historic buildings either side will fall into the Solent. That was why the Old Aircraft Carriers were based in Guzz. Despite the hard turn at Drakes Island.
vecvechookattack is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2006, 02:18
  #260 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It was reported that the Portsmouth CVF study said the biggest problem were the undersea cables that would have to be relaid if the entrance was made much deeper. Costs a lot apparently.

Don't the CVN's moor in Stokes bay?
RonO is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.