armyreal.com - Forums

Go Back   ArmyReal.com Forums > Military Discussions > Military Hardware, Gear and Technology
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

  #1  
Old 07-03-2008, 09:21 AM
jrj1000's Avatar
jrj1000 jrj1000 is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Living the dream!!!
Posts: 2,815
Thumbs up £3.2bn giant carrier deals signed

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.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	navycvfb.jpg
Views:	400
Size:	67.7 KB
ID:	271   Click image for larger version

Name:	[(1632)-14-12-2005]carrier5[1].jpg
Views:	633
Size:	37.5 KB
ID:	272   Click image for larger version

Name:	750px-STOVL.jpg
Views:	625
Size:	63.2 KB
ID:	275  
Reply With Quote

  #2  
Old 07-03-2008, 11:34 AM
jrj1000's Avatar
jrj1000 jrj1000 is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Living the dream!!!
Posts: 2,815
Default Side topic....

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 m² (540 ft²)
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/m² (63.7 lb/ft²)
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)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	eurofighter-raf-operational_1.jpg
Views:	615
Size:	62.2 KB
ID:	278   Click image for larger version

Name:	eurofighter_gbu-16.jpg
Views:	498
Size:	32.6 KB
ID:	281   Click image for larger version

Name:	img5.jpg
Views:	432
Size:	25.9 KB
ID:	282   Click image for larger version

Name:	img8.jpg
Views:	380
Size:	11.5 KB
ID:	283  
Reply With Quote

  #3  
Old 07-03-2008, 11:49 AM
Marine4Life's Avatar
Marine4Life Marine4Life is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The Country
Posts: 796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrj1000 View Post
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 m² (540 ft²)
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/m² (63.7 lb/ft²)
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?
__________________
OOH RAH!

Last edited by Marine4Life; 07-03-2008 at 06:30 PM..
Reply With Quote

  #4  
Old 07-03-2008, 04:21 PM
A. hister's Avatar
A. hister A. hister is offline
Command Sergeant Major
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Strasbourg (family are Prussian )
Posts: 422
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrj1000 View Post
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.
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??????????????? England are becoming copy cat looking at Nimitz which we all know are so exposed against a true enemy...Very silly!
__________________
Meine Ehre heißt Treue
Reply With Quote

  #5  
Old 07-03-2008, 04:29 PM
SniperAlpha1's Avatar
SniperAlpha1 SniperAlpha1 is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chagrin Falls, OH
Posts: 1,776
Send a message via AIM to SniperAlpha1 Send a message via MSN to SniperAlpha1
Default

I think you are "very silly."
Reply With Quote

  #6  
Old 07-03-2008, 04:40 PM
A. hister's Avatar
A. hister A. hister is offline
Command Sergeant Major
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Strasbourg (family are Prussian )
Posts: 422
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperAlpha1 View Post
I think you are "very silly."
That is because you can't think out of your box...... and thats a fact!
__________________
Meine Ehre heißt Treue
Reply With Quote

  #7  
Old 07-03-2008, 06:37 PM
Marine4Life's Avatar
Marine4Life Marine4Life is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The Country
Posts: 796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A. hister View Post
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??????????????? 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.
__________________
OOH RAH!
Reply With Quote

  #8  
Old 07-03-2008, 08:07 PM
jrj1000's Avatar
jrj1000 jrj1000 is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Living the dream!!!
Posts: 2,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marine4Life View Post
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
Reply With Quote

  #9  
Old 07-03-2008, 08:36 PM
jrj1000's Avatar
jrj1000 jrj1000 is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Living the dream!!!
Posts: 2,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A. hister View Post
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??????????????? 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....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???....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

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
Reply With Quote

  #10  
Old 07-03-2008, 09:28 PM
Marine4Life's Avatar
Marine4Life Marine4Life is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The Country
Posts: 796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrj1000 View Post
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....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???....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

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.
__________________
OOH RAH!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:21 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    
·Contact Us   ·Legal   ·Privacy   ·Link To Us    ·Advertise With Us    ·About Us    ·Site Map     
     Copyright 2004-2019 Activv, LLC. All rights reserved. Armyreal.com is a service provided by Activv.
This website is not affiliated, endorsed, authorized, or associated in any way with any government, military or country.