Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Navy aircraft UK carrier will be sold after three years, no jets.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Goldie fish
    Ocean is definitely for the chop before Vince. She wasn't built to naval standards, and was expected to only have a 20 year life span. Vince can easily do what ocean used to, up to point.
    Invincible was decommissioned in 2005 and is beyond repair at this stage. Illustrious is undergoing refit at the moment, due out of the dockyard next year. Ocean had her refit a couple of years ago and is a lot cheaper to operate.

    Comment


    • #32
      Am I the only one baffelled by their decision to put HMS Ocean, the navies specially build helicopter Carrier/Amphibious assault ship, into reserve and instead operate heli's off an older aircraft carrier??

      Also, is it not more expensive to operate a carrier with a catapult?

      Or would the high cost of operating the VTOL f35 cancel out the savings made with a carrier without the catapult?
      Theirs not to make reply,
      Theirs not to reason why,
      Theirs but to do and die:
      Into the valley of Death
      Rode the six hundred.

      The Charge of the Light Brigade

      Comment


      • #33
        Me too. Especially when 3 Cmdo aren't being touched.
        "The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by ZULU View Post
          Me too. Especially when 3 Cmdo aren't being touched.
          I mean why not scrap one carrier (which by-the-way I thought there were three Invincible Class Carriers in service) moth ball the other Carrier and moth ball all but 12 Harriers and keep a Squadron of 12 going under RAF command to keep the skills.

          That way if things did kick off, before the fully equipt QE Class arrived with aircraft, then they could be put back into service.
          Theirs not to make reply,
          Theirs not to reason why,
          Theirs but to do and die:
          Into the valley of Death
          Rode the six hundred.

          The Charge of the Light Brigade

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by DeV View Post
            So long as the all arms capability is maintained! Remember there are still conventional battles! Other countries have used heavy armour in Afghanistan to good effect.

            As so a recruitment ban until 2015 so, the document says redundanies (again!).
            how many MBT's have other nations fielded in Afghanistan?

            i think the Danes have up to 8 Leopard 2's in theatre - hardly a conventional force.

            we have over 400 Challenger 2 MBT's - being left with 240 after the cuts will still leave us in a position to fight in conventional warfare and we can easily field more MBT's than any other nation, other than the US so your doom and gloom regarding our MBT's is way off the mark.

            and who said anything about a recruiting ban? there will no doubt be some compulsory redundancies but we will still be recruiting thousands annually, and promoting as usual.
            so even lads from Ireland can still come and join us if they don't make the '200' at home this year.
            RGJ

            ...Once a Rifleman - Always a Rifleman... Celer et Audax

            The Rifles

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Goldie fish

              Why the troublesome, expensive, and inflexible submarines were spared though is even harder to understand.
              Sneaky beaky stuff? Long range strike capability?
              "The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by mugs View Post
                Am I the only one baffelled by their decision to put HMS Ocean, the navies specially build helicopter Carrier/Amphibious assault ship, into reserve and instead operate heli's off an older aircraft carrier??
                The decision hasn't been made yet, there is to be a review as to which should go.




                Or would the high cost of operating the VTOL f35 cancel out the savings made with a carrier without the catapult?
                Absolutely!

                Originally posted by mugs View Post
                I mean why not scrap one carrier (which by-the-way I thought there were three Invincible Class Carriers in service) moth ball the other Carrier and moth ball all but 12 Harriers and keep a Squadron of 12 going under RAF command to keep the skills.

                That way if things did kick off, before the fully equipt QE Class arrived with aircraft, then they could be put back into service.
                With the Invicible class was was in major refit, one operational and 1 ???? (I think in reserve) at any one time. It would cost an absolute fortune to just keep 12 Harriers!

                Originally posted by RoyalGreenJacket View Post
                and who said anything about a recruiting ban? there will no doubt be some compulsory redundancies but we will still be recruiting thousands annually, and promoting as usual.
                so even lads from Ireland can still come and join us if they don't make the '200' at home this year.
                You will be definitely be recruiting less as less places to fill plus your fully manned.

                Originally posted by Goldie fish
                I think the Invasion of iraq will be seen as the last great tank battle.
                They probably said that around the time of the liberation of Kuwait?!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by DeV View Post
                  You will be definitely be recruiting less as less places to fill plus your fully manned.
                  perhaps a little less but still thousands annually - hardly the 'recruiting ban until 2015' that you originally stated.
                  RGJ

                  ...Once a Rifleman - Always a Rifleman... Celer et Audax

                  The Rifles

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Hi there,
                    just a point to easyrider; gas turbine powered carriers generate more than enough steam for a catapult system.Considering the size of a carrier, the cat system is actually quite small, being mostly confined to directly under the deck.
                    Apart from all that, can someone explain why the RN are in the Caribbean, given that it's so close to the USA anyway?
                    regards
                    GttC

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                      Hi there,
                      just a point to easyrider; gas turbine powered carriers generate more than enough steam for a catapult system.Considering the size of a carrier, the cat system is actually quite small, being mostly confined to directly under the deck.
                      Apart from all that, can someone explain why the RN are in the Caribbean, given that it's so close to the USA anyway?
                      regards
                      GttC
                      Because there are British territories in the Caribbean. So they have a stake in things like counter-drug and hurricane relief missions. Nonetheless, there's of course been a cutback in this due to budget constraints.
                      "Everyone's for a free Tibet, but no one's for freeing Tibet." -Mark Steyn. What an IMO-centric quote, eh?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                        Hi there,
                        just a point to easyrider; gas turbine powered carriers generate more than enough steam for a catapult system.Considering the size of a carrier, the cat system is actually quite small, being mostly confined to directly under the deck.?
                        regards
                        GttC
                        I am not to sure on that GttC, I think they need a lot of steam at full boiler pressure, 40 to 50 bar. so much so that all boilers have to be fired up to full pressure and on line, this is a lot of work (for Stokers) and expensive. They also need large steam accumulators to store the steam before each launch. Would the gas turbines have that much heat energy in their exhaust?. They would be steaming at full speed, what would the exh. temp. be 400---500 C.?
                        An alternative would be the system the USN is currently fitting to their newest carrier ( USS Ford ?) which I think uses an electrically powered linear motor. She is not due to be commissioned until 2015. Even that would use huge amounts of power, no problem on a nuclear powered job.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          EMALS = Electro Magnetic Aircraft Launch System - aka rail gun

                          "The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Hi there,
                            Gas turbines will give you as much steam energy as you need.After all, how do you think the Ringsends of the world work? Instead of filling a furnace with coal,to heat water, to make steam to drive a steam turbine, you attach a jet engine, run it on diesel or gas or whatever can be vapourised and let it do the heavy lifting. Gas turbines on ships drive the props thru a reduction gearbox or else make steam and let a steam turbine drive the props thru the gearbox. Exhaust temps would be higher than 500 deg C, with around 750 C being typical.Gas turbines are also combined with diesels (CODAG) to allow for fast or slow speed work.
                            regards
                            GttC

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                              Apart from all that, can someone explain why the RN are in the Caribbean, given that it's so close to the USA anyway?
                              regards
                              GttC

                              As faughanballagh says protectorates/territorities (there were Harriers in Belize for a good while), but also contribution to fight on drugs, disaster relief etc

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by RoyalGreenJacket View Post
                                how many MBT's have other nations fielded in Afghanistan?

                                i think the Danes have up to 8 Leopard 2's in theatre - hardly a conventional force.
                                I believe the the Cannucks have a reinforced squadron (?around 20)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X