armyreal.com Forum's Home

ArmyReal.com Forums (http://www.armyreal.com/forum/index.php)
-   Military Hardware, Gear and Technology (http://www.armyreal.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   3.2bn giant carrier deals signed (http://www.armyreal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6413)

jrj1000 07-03-2008 09:21 AM

3.2bn giant carrier deals signed
 
3 Attachment(s)
The Ministry of Defence has signed contracts worth 3.2bn to build the UK's biggest ever aircraft carriers.

The 280-metre-long HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales will be capable of carrying up to 40 aircraft.

The contracts will create or secure 3,000 jobs at Govan, in Glasgow, 1,600 at Rosyth, in Fife, 1,200 in Portsmouth and 400 in Barrow in Furness.

The defence secretary said the vessels were needed to launch military strikes and humanitarian operations.

Peace-keeping role

HMS Queen Elizabeth will come into service in 2014 and HMS Prince of Wales in 2016. The total cost of both vessels, including additional features like electronics, will be almost 4bn.

Each ship will be a similar size to the ocean liner, the QE2, with a flight deck the size of three football pitches.

This will make them more than three times the size of the existing Invincible-class carriers.

The two aircraft carriers will provide our forces with the world-class capabilities they will need over the coming decades," he said.

"They will support peace-keeping and conflict prevention, as well as our strategic operational priorities."

Speaking in Govan, Mr Browne said the carriers would provide "very large floating bases for the Navy and the RAF", entirely under "sovereign control".

"They will allow us to project force," he said. "But they will also allow us to make a contribution to the protection of the sea lanes of the world, because as a trading nation we rely on those being secure."

'Bigger punch'

Although both will eventually carry the new Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, those will not be ready on time for when the ships enter service.

This means that at first, the ships will carry the ageing Harrier aircraft instead.

jrj1000 07-03-2008 11:34 AM

Side topic....
 
4 Attachment(s)
Do you think the British goverment should have found a way to adapt Eurofighter for carrier use?
or do you think......the Joint Strike Fighter is the way to go....even though they will not be ready for the carriers?

Eurofighter specs.....


Crew: 1 (Typhoon F2) or 2 (Typhoon T1)
Length: 15.96 m (52 ft 5 in)
Wingspan: 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in)
Height: 5.28 m (17 ft 4 in)
Wing area: 50 m (540 ft)
Empty weight: 11,000 kg[115] (24,250 lb)
Loaded weight: 15,550 kg (34,280 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 23,000 kg[115] (51,809 lb)
Powerplant: 2 Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 90 kN (20,250 lbf) each
Performance

Maximum speed:

At altitude: Mach 2[116][117] (2,120 km/h, 1,320 mph)
At sea level: Mach 1-1.2 (1,460 km/h, 910 mph)[citation needed]
Supercruise: Mach 1.5 (1,593 km/h, 990 mph) [118]
Range: 1,390 km (864 mi)
Ferry range: 3,790 km (2,300 mi)
Service ceiling 19,812 m (65,000 ft[119])
Rate of climb: >315 m/s[120][121][122][verification needed] (62,007 ft/min)
Wing loading: 311 kg/m (63.7 lb/ft)
Thrust/weight: 1.18
Armament

Gun: 1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon
Air-to-Air missiles: AIM-9 Sidewinder, AIM-132 ASRAAM, AIM-120 AMRAAM, IRIS-T and in the future MBDA Meteor
Air-to-Ground missiles: AGM-84 Harpoon, AGM-88 HARM, ALARM, Storm Shadow (AKA "Scalp EG"), Brimstone, Taurus KEPD 350, Penguin and in the future AGM Armiger
Bombs: Paveway 2, Paveway 3, Enhanced Paveway, JDAM, HOPE/HOSBO
Laser designator, e.g. LITENING pod


Joint Strike Fighter specs

-35A (CTOL) Conventional take-off and landing for US Air Force
F-35B (STOVL) Short take-off and landing for US Marine Corps, and the UK Navy and Air Force
F-35C (CV) Carrier variant for US Navy
Dimensions
CTOL and STOVL Length 15.4m
CTOL and STOVL Height 4.6m
CTOL and STOVL Wingspan 10.6m
CV Length 15.5m
CV Height 4.6m
CV Wingspan 13.1m
Engines
Turbofan Engines P&W F135
Thrust 164.6kN
Performance
Maximum Take-Off Weight 27,216kg
Maximum Speed Mach 1.8
Weapons
Air-to-Air Missiles 2 x AIM-120 AMRAAM
Bombs 2 x JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) 1,000lb precision air-to-surface munition
Gun 1 x 27mm (not on STOVL)

Marine4Life 07-03-2008 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrj1000 (Post 63895)
Do you think the British goverment should have found a way to adapt Eurofighter for carrier use?
or do you think......the Joint Strike Fighter is the way to go....even though they will not be ready for the carriers?

Eurofighter specs.....


Crew: 1 (Typhoon F2) or 2 (Typhoon T1)
Length: 15.96 m (52 ft 5 in)
Wingspan: 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in)
Height: 5.28 m (17 ft 4 in)
Wing area: 50 m (540 ft)
Empty weight: 11,000 kg[115] (24,250 lb)
Loaded weight: 15,550 kg (34,280 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 23,000 kg[115] (51,809 lb)
Powerplant: 2 Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 90 kN (20,250 lbf) each
Performance

Maximum speed:

At altitude: Mach 2[116][117] (2,120 km/h, 1,320 mph)
At sea level: Mach 1-1.2 (1,460 km/h, 910 mph)[citation needed]
Supercruise: Mach 1.5 (1,593 km/h, 990 mph) [118]
Range: 1,390 km (864 mi)
Ferry range: 3,790 km (2,300 mi)
Service ceiling 19,812 m (65,000 ft[119])
Rate of climb: >315 m/s[120][121][122][verification needed] (62,007 ft/min)
Wing loading: 311 kg/m (63.7 lb/ft)
Thrust/weight: 1.18
Armament

Gun: 1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon
Air-to-Air missiles: AIM-9 Sidewinder, AIM-132 ASRAAM, AIM-120 AMRAAM, IRIS-T and in the future MBDA Meteor
Air-to-Ground missiles: AGM-84 Harpoon, AGM-88 HARM, ALARM, Storm Shadow (AKA "Scalp EG"), Brimstone, Taurus KEPD 350, Penguin and in the future AGM Armiger
Bombs: Paveway 2, Paveway 3, Enhanced Paveway, JDAM, HOPE/HOSBO
Laser designator, e.g. LITENING pod


Joint Strike Fighter specs

-35A (CTOL) Conventional take-off and landing for US Air Force
F-35B (STOVL) Short take-off and landing for US Marine Corps, and the UK Navy and Air Force
F-35C (CV) Carrier variant for US Navy
Dimensions
CTOL and STOVL Length 15.4m
CTOL and STOVL Height 4.6m
CTOL and STOVL Wingspan 10.6m
CV Length 15.5m
CV Height 4.6m
CV Wingspan 13.1m
Engines
Turbofan Engines P&W F135
Thrust 164.6kN
Performance
Maximum Take-Off Weight 27,216kg
Maximum Speed Mach 1.8
Weapons
Air-to-Air Missiles 2 x AIM-120 AMRAAM
Bombs 2 x JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) 1,000lb precision air-to-surface munition
Gun 1 x 27mm (not on STOVL)

I think they should have found a way to adapt the Eurofighter. Not because of the specs you listed, but because of availability of it as well as the ability of the carrier to hold multiple types of fighter planes. Limiting carriers to one type is ok, but I'm all for versatility. You put more than one type of fighter plane in the air and you have the upper hand. Besides, some planes are better in certain areas and situations. Why not have both handy just in case?

A. hister 07-03-2008 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrj1000 (Post 63873)
The Ministry of Defence has signed contracts worth 3.2bn to build the UK's biggest ever aircraft carriers.

The 280-metre-long HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales will be capable of carrying up to 40 aircraft.

The contracts will create or secure 3,000 jobs at Govan, in Glasgow, 1,600 at Rosyth, in Fife, 1,200 in Portsmouth and 400 in Barrow in Furness.

The defence secretary said the vessels were needed to launch military strikes and humanitarian operations.

Peace-keeping role

HMS Queen Elizabeth will come into service in 2014 and HMS Prince of Wales in 2016. The total cost of both vessels, including additional features like electronics, will be almost 4bn.

Each ship will be a similar size to the ocean liner, the QE2, with a flight deck the size of three football pitches.

This will make them more than three times the size of the existing Invincible-class carriers.

The two aircraft carriers will provide our forces with the world-class capabilities they will need over the coming decades," he said.

"They will support peace-keeping and conflict prevention, as well as our strategic operational priorities."

Speaking in Govan, Mr Browne said the carriers would provide "very large floating bases for the Navy and the RAF", entirely under "sovereign control".

"They will allow us to project force," he said. "But they will also allow us to make a contribution to the protection of the sea lanes of the world, because as a trading nation we rely on those being secure."

'Bigger punch'

Although both will eventually carry the new Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, those will not be ready on time for when the ships enter service.

This means that at first, the ships will carry the ageing Harrier aircraft instead.

:rolleyes:Ja! Well how are you going to defend this ship from Russian or future Chinese ships or Submarines? The last ship the Royal Navy had this size were all sunk by Germany and Japan...How many people died???????????????:rolleyes: England are becoming copy cat looking at Nimitz which we all know are so exposed against a true enemy...Very silly!

SniperAlpha1 07-03-2008 04:29 PM

I think you are "very silly."

A. hister 07-03-2008 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperAlpha1 (Post 63919)
I think you are "very silly."

That is because you can't think out of your box...... and thats a fact!

Marine4Life 07-03-2008 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. hister (Post 63917)
:rolleyes:Ja! Well how are you going to defend this ship from Russian or future Chinese ships or Submarines? The last ship the Royal Navy had this size were all sunk by Germany and Japan...How many people died???????????????:rolleyes: England are becoming copy cat looking at Nimitz which we all know are so exposed against a true enemy...Very silly!

Do you think that they, meaning England, didn't think about that? THEY'RE AIRCRAFT CARRIERS! I'm sure that England isn't going to spend that type of money on ships that have little or no protection against said enemies. Besides, if those carriers go down, so do the aircraft on it unless they're in the air. That will cost England more than they have invested if they lose the carriers and planes. So I'm sure they have it covered.

jrj1000 07-03-2008 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marine4Life (Post 63896)
I think they should have found a way to adapt the Eurofighter. Not because of the specs you listed, but because of availability of it as well as the ability of the carrier to hold multiple types of fighter planes. Limiting carriers to one type is ok, but I'm all for versatility. You put more than one type of fighter plane in the air and you have the upper hand. Besides, some planes are better in certain areas and situations. Why not have both handy just in case?

Yeah....it would have been more cost effective also...Eurofighter can take on both roles...Air Defence....and ground attack...the JSF will have that both capabilities also....but will take longer to be ready for service...there were certain areas of stealth tech we needed for the JSF from the US goverment...witch they took their time handing over...so that delayed the project....once JSF enters service....we will have them both.... Eurofighter....and JSF....but the current version of Eurofighter cant take-off from carriers.....not british carriers anyway....because they use the so called ski-jump platform...so VTOL aircraft are better.....im with you on this one....it would have been easier to adapt Eurofighter IMO

jrj1000 07-03-2008 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. hister (Post 63917)
Ja! Well how are you going to defend this ship from Russian or future Chinese ships or Submarines? The last ship the Royal Navy had this size were all sunk by Germany and Japan...How many people died???????????????:rolleyes: England are becoming copy cat looking at Nimitz which we all know are so exposed against a true enemy...Very silly!


Why do you always argue for argements sake???.....Look...our carriers made it through the cold war with the Soviets fine......do you think this was luck???...you have got to be more intelligent then that surley:D....Unless nations are ready for war they are not going to attack a ship like that......as for China or Russia attacking ......well yeah in the future.....maybe...who knows???:rolleyes:....but we will cross that bridge when we come to it....who the f uck are you ...Mystic Meg??....Warships on the open ocean are ready for any eventuality...and its most poitent defence is its aircraft......

OK ive got a good one....... lets not bother buliding these ships incase they get attacked:rolleyes::D

its like not buying a Benz incase it gets into a traffic jam.....do you know the definition of WARSHIP???

Look at the Falklands conflict........we had the right things in place.....and no carrier got touched.....granted that was a conflict...and the carriers got protection

but hey.....we could always go into carrier protection aswell if you want???

........turn a corner man.... or jog on.......or at least be construtive if your ramberling

Marine4Life 07-03-2008 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrj1000 (Post 63938)
Why do you always argue for argements sake???.....Look...our carriers made it through the cold war with the Soviets fine......do you think this was luck???...you have got to be more intelligent then that surley:D....Unless nations are ready for war they are not going to attack a ship like that......as for China or Russia attacking ......well yeah in the future.....maybe...who knows???:rolleyes:....but we will cross that bridge when we come to it....who the f uck are you ...Mystic Meg??....Warships on the open ocean are ready for any eventuality...and its most poitent defence is its aircraft......

OK ive got a good one....... lets not bother buliding these ships incase they get attacked:rolleyes::D

its like not buying a Benz incase it gets into a traffic jam.....do you know the definition of WARSHIP???

Look at the Falklands conflict........we had the right things in place.....and no carrier got touched.....granted that was a conflict...and the carriers got protection

but hey.....we could always go into carrier protection aswell if you want???

........turn a corner man.... or jog on.......or at least be construtive if your ramberling

Thats what I was trying to tell him. That would be the dumbest mistake in Naval history. I couldnt imagine air craft carriers being unprotected at sea. That/s setting yourself up for failure. I don't believe countries are out to fail when they spend billions of dollars like that.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.