How about 6 ships (spread out at intervals to create a 150m x 1.5 mile oblong ) that can deploy a cooling system between them and then produce a Picrete runway?

I'm surprised that the Picrete system was not used in one way or another.

Navaleye:
It's all very interesting.
Dave is, as you say, likely to end up delayed. Budgets, the AF would use the delay as an excuse to get more Raptors, and the Navy will use the delay to help fund ships. The GAO also argued forcefully that buying 400-plus aircraft before the end of flight test is risky.
Under the current schedule, too, the A and the C hit IOC around the same time (2Q13), which is ahead of what seems to be the UK IOC (3Q14). The main difference between the Marine, USAF/USN and UK timings would appear to be related to the three blocks of SDD capability:
Block 1 – Initial Warfighting Capability
Flight qualified, baseline air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons qualified. Pilot and maintenance training can commence. USMC declares IOC at this point.
Block 2 – Close Air Support and Interdiction
Qualifies additional air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons. Services can start planning deployments and staffing operational units. USN/USAF declare IOC once this Block completes OT&E.
Block 3 – Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses
Qualifies additional a/a & a/g weapons for use. Service Initial
Operational Capabilities are achievable. This is the RAF/RN entry into service standard.
So Dave C could be obtainable at the same time as Dave B, and without starting a catfight between RonO and Jackonicko, it can be stated that there is not a lot of $ difference between the two in flyaway terms.
Meanwhile, if I was the ruler of the Queen's Navee I would be seriously looking at Dave B's range. The external fuel tanks have apparently been dumped, possibly because they don't make a lot of sense except in very highly loaded configurations that may not even be able to do STOVL. The result is that 450 nm radius is the absolute max you're ever going to see, and that's with 2 x 1000 pounders and two AAMs.
And the only reason it happens at all, since the jet is overpowered and has a pretty standard internal fuel fraction (unlike A & C), is low drag without external weapons. Now, add external offensive ordnance - and since you are no longer stealthy, add a brace of SRAAMs - and range (or if you like, persistence-at-range) takes a double hit from weight and a marked drag increase.

Skunk,

Picrete was a very interesting material, it did have one big disadvantage though, it was largely composed of ice. Not a problem when operating in the North Cape, but more of a problem in the Gulf. :eek:

Low,

I suspect if Dave B was a done deal we'd have CVF Main Gate by now. Their Lordships would like to see us back in the proper carrier game again and would Jack. Not sure about light blue though.

It pains me to say it, but a few years ago our company had one of its perennial "how can we get involved in CVF / assist the IPT" business development sessions. Bear in mind that at this point we were past IG and moving into assessment phase, engineering detail for the concept designs being what is wanted at this stage

One of our "scientists" suggested that we offer to investigate a Picrete / ice-based carrier "because it's cheap and invulnerable and obviously that would be a good option for a study".

Many hands restrained me as I lunged for his throat..........

Janes - 15th Sept: Main Gate deadline approaches for UK carrier programme.
By Richard Scott

Industry stakeholders in the Aircraft Carrier Alliance (ACA) established to deliver the UK's Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF) programme are to submit their latest pricing data on 20 September 2006, a little over a month ahead of a planned Main Gate 2 (MG2) submission to the Ministry of Defence (MoD)......

Does anyone else find it touching that MOD, Lockheed Martin et al apparently think they can predict delivery dates in 2014 to within three months, in the light of their project management track record?

It's spelled Pykrete...

http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issue...tingisland.php

... and Dave B would just melt a hole in it and fall through the deck.

From the above link:

In late 1942, Lord Louis Mountbatten — the British military's Chief of Combined Operations — paid a visit to Winston Churchill at his official country home, Chequers. Mountbatten had with him a small parcel of great importance. A member of Churchill's staff apologized that the Prime Minister was at that moment in his bath.

"Good," said Mountbatten as he bounded up the stairs. "That's exactly where I want him to be."

- which would normally be a scary thing to hear that guy say...

LowObs

I really don't think any of the great & good this side of the pond care about the range / combat radius as long as they get their puffa jet and no-one loses face. It is however unforgiveable to try and add a buddy-tanker role to an a/c that is already struggling for endurance payload and this seems to be being overlooked. Dave C would at least let us look at getting a semi-sensible organic AAR asset (I keep thinking low-time Vikings......)

Wonder what happened to the tooling for the S-3? Lockheed could have been directed to stuff it in a warehouse. Engines (TF-34) still in production, new avionics. Fix some of the sillier equipment things. Good aerodynamics and so easy to bring aboard your grandmother could do it (almost). Good pick.

The Chileans aren't stupid. They're aiming to pick up between eight and a dozen low-time S3 and use them as MPA. Criminally underrated airframe, the hoover.

Dave B buddy tanker? Notfarginglikely unless they reinstate the underwing tanks and make the centreline pylon (currently no use except for the gun pod) wet for the buddy store. Or develop some aftermarket arrangement that fits in the weapon bays.

From the Telegraph: Grid chief to vet naval ships project

The Government has hired Sir John Parker, one of Britain's most respected industrialists, to carry out a thorough vetting of the plans for the Royal Navy's two new aircraft carriers, the biggest shipbuilding programme ever attempted in the UK. The news is a clear signal that the Ministry of Defence is near to signing off the multi-billion CVF contract to build the ships at the "main gate" stage, due on October 26.

I hope there is is somewhere to base them.

Also worthy of note is the VELA deployment.

It is the largest deployment since 2001 and will involve a significant number of Royal Navy (RN) and Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) Ships, Royal Marine Commandos and RN helicopters. In total, approximately 3,000 UK personnel will take part for some or all of the deployment. The Task Group includes: HMS Albion, HMS Ocean, HMS Southampton, HMS Argyll, RFA Wave Knight, RFA Mounts Bay, RFA Sir Bedivere, RFA Fort Austin, HMS Enterprise, RFA Diligence, RFA Oakleaf, Mine Counter Measure Squadron 1 and a Fleet submarine together with the Fleet Lead Commando Group, consisting of 40 Commando Royal Marines, 59 Commando Independent Engineering Squadron, 29 Commando Royal Artillery and 539 Assault Squadron Royal Marines. Also involved will be elements of Fleet Diving Unit 2 and 849 (B) Flight from RNAS Culdrose.

No carrier, no fixed wing aviation. As discussed on the last few pages of the Sea Jet thread, the cuts are biting..........

Could simply be that with Illustrious just retirned from AQUILA and (presumably) its crew on leave and with Ark Royal just beginning to be recrewed following her long refit, there are no carriers ready.

I've always suspected that Arks year long "refit" was a stealth cut however- I mean how long does it take to fit some extra tool boxes and flight deck tie downs?

Ark is still up at Rosyth. There's no big hurry to rush her back into service since we can't seem to find an airgroup for her.

Also, I hear that the Future Carrier Alliance has submitted two fully costed (STOVL and CTOL) CVF designs for Main Gate approval. Both horses are still in the race.

Does anyone know where the new carriers will be based if Portsmouth closes?

I was a nightmare getting the old Ark and Eagle into Devonport. CVF is bigger with a deeper draught. The King George V graving dock is also close by at Southampton, so I doubt if Pompey will go. Its had too much investment recently. Apart from the nuc refitting complex at Devonport, its not had anything like the same.

.
 

A small fortune has already been spent on pre-CVF work at Pompey. This includes archaeological surveys and raising the bits of the Mary Rose that were left behind after the other bits were raised.

You can bet they won't announce the closure of Portsmoth before a couple of billion has been spent finishing dredging the approaches :{

No way on God's green will CVF get into Guzz. Even if she could get through Smeaton Pass and round the corner, there's no Wharfage able to take her, unless you took up all of WML and even then she could never be bombed up from an Explosives safety PoV. For normal operational berthing, only Pompey has the jetty space (and lack of nuclear complications) to take her.

I think she's too beamy above the WL to safely fit in KGV, which will make the question of refits of immense importance to the future of Rosyth/Babcocks. The only other UK dock she'll fit is Harlands in Belfast.

Exactly. With that amount of work you can bet yr bottom dollar that Pompey is doomed. Rumour has it that Marchwood is being considered for the CVS.

Vec,

Marchwood is a slum. It has no facilities for naval ships, it only has finger berths, it cannot support a ship much over 20k tons. The chartered ro-ros currently using it are the max it can handle it. If anything Marchwood should close as their is nothing it can do that Pompey can't. The plans a few years ago for a new container port at soptn would have consumed Marchwood, so I'm afraid your post lacks any sense of reality.

Boffin,

I believe The KGV dock will be able to handle CVF and a statement from the MoD about potentially using Soptn as a secondary port was made on that basis. Although some alterations will be needed to nearby surface buildings. I'd like to see H&W back in business, but it has declined to almost nothing.