I listened carefully - twice. He did say it. He said "designage". What the hell is happening to the language?

There are three crucial differences between QEC and CVN78 which might just have influenced that difference in configuration....

Ah! Yes;) That will be Nuclear ,EMALs and a Massive CAG

Can you point to a source on that?

Yep!!!! Be my Guest Quote .. my source of 8 surging to 12 Britain's Defence Squeeze: Channel 4 Dispatches on Channel 4 + 1, Mon 16 Mar 8:30pm - Your UK TV Listings at TVGuide.co.uk Ps this is about embarked aircraft!!! As the thread is about a Flat top ...this is a smaller number embarked in Defence review quote F-35 orders and deliveries are obviously being pushed further down the line. So Instead of having the two front line squadrons by the early 2020s, we will only have one. Thus the now advertised figure of 6 routinely embarked and 12 during a surge (previously it was 12 and 24).

Engines - They wanted to use the 2018-configuration F-35s but they cost three times as much as the drawings from 2005.

One and a bit out of three. Back to 736 for you!

809 if you don't mind...Spiv will not be amused;)

The railway track on the Forth Bridge, built in 1890, is 46 metres above the water level. Ther is about a 3 metre variation in the tide at Leith.

HMS Queen Elizabeth is about 55 metres above the water line..

...and is equipped with a fully folding mast!

Why does the QE need to go under it anyway?



Edited to remove: It's 110 metres, according to Wiki - height and height above the water level not being the same, of course.

Perhaps because the QE is being built upstream of the bridge, i.e. to reach the open sea the QE has to pass underneath the bridge.

Well, that would explain why it needs to go under it.

ps; thanks for the 'ie' explanation ;-)

I think that I saw that the top masts can be lowered down so that the Carriers can get out to sea.
What surprises me about the video is that there are F35s that look to be working in the video, a leap of faith I would have thought...

Draken, not so sure about if there is/was a ramp at Lakehurst, but there has been a ski jump at Patuxent River Naval Air Station, or as most call it "Pax River". Lakehurst does do most of the initial catapult and arrestment testing for US (and French) Navy aircraft. Pax River does the majority of US Navy test and evalation, envelope expansion, weapons release trials, etc and has been heavily involved in F-35 Work. They first got a ramp there in the 1980's? and tested many aircraft on the ramp- even the F-14.

Pax River recently got a newer ramp for the "B". I have seen it. Agree that I have not heard of a F-35 using a ramp yet.

2014 Article on the newer ramp at Pax River.

Pax ski jump readied for future F-35B Lightning II launches -- DCMilitary.com

Port side too for a liquid RAS...That's a new one for a carrier:rolleyes:

One hopes that the trials validate the chosen ramp profile, given the build-state of the carriers....

Can do both sides (L), multiple points. RAS(S) and RAS(A) on stbd side as the storing routes are (quite correctly) via the lifts which are again - quite correctly - clear of the t/o and landing areas.

Not like we haven't done close company RAS - port and starboard before. One of Hermes here, you're probably there somewhere!


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...b852631f55.jpg

Yes I'm at Vertrep!!!! But we are only taking FFO aka liquids to Stbd and Solids only to Port, you are taking liquids to Port on the QE????? Correct? So the skipper will be on the other side in the bridge taking station on a liquid only RAS ooh: We never could or would take liquids to Port,to dodgy ps don't think you could do a 6 ship RAS today lol. http://www.rfa-association.org.uk/in...etin-3?Itemid=

Sandiego89

Thanks for the correction.