Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CVF Construction

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Bager1968
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • May 2005
    • 3635

    And old news... the UK has been using a Harrier to develop proficiency in SRVL for over 3 years:
    http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...on-a-roll.html
    DATE:17/04/07
    SOURCE:Flight International

    Qinetiq's VAAC Harrier testbed will be used to demonstrate flight-control limits for a shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) mode potentially applicable to the Lockheed Martin F-35B Joint Strike Fighter currently preferred for the UK's Joint Combat Aircraft requirement. To be performed by the Aircraft Test and Evaluation Centre at Qinetiq's Boscombe Down site in Wiltshire, the work reflects continued interest in using the technique as a recovery option for the Royal Navy's two projected 65,000t Future Carrier (CVF) vessels.
    Note the part I colored red... The RN & RAF have been planning this technique for over 45 years!
    http://www.harrier.org.uk/history/history_p1154.htm
    Nevertheless, the RAF continued to refine its scheme for the deployment of the P.1154, the name Harrier having been provisionally chosen for the aircraft.
    .....
    The aircraft would operate from both main and forward bases, such as short airstrips or stretches of road, with four or six aircraft operating from the latter.
    .....
    Although it would have been capable of true vertical take-off, the normal means of operation would have been to use a short take-off, in order to minimize ground erosion and hot gas re-ingestion problems, and to maximise payload. Rolling vertical landing, with the engine throttled back, was to be employed at the end of each mission, with vectoring of the engine nozzles in forward flight envisaged to increase maneuverability, at the cost of significant deceleration. All of these techniques were to be explored 'in the field' during the Tripartite trials of the Kestrel in 1964-65. In the ferry mission extended wing tips were added to the aircraft, the 'combat tips' being stored in the rear fuselage. RAF P.1154s were to be capable of operating from all Royal Navy carriers, the aircraft having a folding nose to help it fit their deck lifts.
    Note that these operational plans were worked out in 1963-64!
    Germany, Austria and Italy are standing together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria's pint.

    Comment

    • Obi Wan Russell
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Oct 2006
      • 522

      Originally posted by obligatory View Post
      It is a scary standard practice on a carrier.
      You have to remember that the difference between SRVL and CTOL recovery is to do with the speed; a CTOL aircraft approaching the wires will hit the deck about 130 KIA whereas a STOVL aircraft making a SRVL will be coming in at more like 50 KIA. Stopping using brake alone with possibly a small degree of forward thrust from the engine/lift fan becomes a much safer option. Modern weapons are too expensive to simply ditch before returning to the deck and extending engine life given the high costs of these as well should make a significant difference to running costs, another important factor in these times.
      "Without Organic Air Power at Sea, you don't have a Navy, you have a Coast Guard."

      Comment

      • 90inFIRST
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Oct 2008
        • 240

        http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.uk/


        Sorry to get off topic but here some up dated news on the construction of CVF

        Comment

        • Super Nimrod
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Dec 2005
          • 1053

          Also if the aircraft comes in at 50-60 knots the ship will be moving forward at above 20 knots so the relative speed could be as little as 30 knots at touchdown, plus you have to allow for any headwind which could reduce this further.

          Comment

          • Al.
            Al.
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Nov 2008
            • 1005

            Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
            Making a few rapid counts:
            4x2 = 8 Phalanx for the Bay class.
            2x2 = 4 Phalanx for the Wave
            2x4 = 8 Phalanx for the Fort class
            6x2 = 12 Phalanx for the Type 45
            (3x2= 6 Phalanx for CVF)
            FFBNW may well be bean-counting, penny pinching of the worst kind or it may turn out to be genius. (Or inadvertent genius caused by bean-counting)

            CIWS are heading in different directions at the moment. Even confining ourselves to what the spams are up to

            Phalanx 20mm
            RAM
            SeaRAM Phalanx chassis
            CREWS Phalanx chassis
            57mm

            Are all possible options (admittedly on T45 at least two of these may be difficult due to the need to get ammo and/or power feed to the amidships position.

            Will CAAMM cannisters bolt-on to the midships of T45? Would RN prefer that to using RAM? 'til its trialled fully we don't know. RAM may turn out to be the better system.

            Do we even know if the hangar roof is capable of taking a weapon?

            I'd much rather see CVF with 2 Phalanx and 2 SeaRAM than 4 Phalanx. But if CAAMM is the winner we all hope then maybe again RN would rather bolt on CAAMM and have 3 or 4 Phalanx. Until trials are complete neither we nor they know which way to jump.

            The RN have been concerned over the relative effectiveness (or lack of) of small calibre CIWS so allowing these other flavours time to mature and then make a decision seems a better idea than just buying Phalanx coz that's what we've got most of currently and its the visual archetype that laymen can most recognise.


            Similarly at first glance tis nonsense to leave the central aisle of T45 VLS silo empty and the C position empty of Harpoon launchers but by doing so options are open:

            Middle row BMD Aster or Scalp or Tomahawk
            C postion CAAMM cannisters

            Middle row quadpack CAAMM
            C position Harpoon or Scalp cannisters
            Rule zero: don't be on fire

            Comment

            • Liger30
              Armed Forces supporter
              • Jul 2010
              • 901

              Originally posted by Al. View Post
              FFBNW may well be bean-counting, penny pinching of the worst kind or it may turn out to be genius. (Or inadvertent genius caused by bean-counting)

              CIWS are heading in different directions at the moment. Even confining ourselves to what the spams are up to

              Phalanx 20mm
              RAM
              SeaRAM Phalanx chassis
              CREWS Phalanx chassis
              57mm

              Are all possible options (admittedly on T45 at least two of these may be difficult due to the need to get ammo and/or power feed to the amidships position.

              Will CAAMM cannisters bolt-on to the midships of T45? Would RN prefer that to using RAM? 'til its trialled fully we don't know. RAM may turn out to be the better system.

              Do we even know if the hangar roof is capable of taking a weapon?

              I'd much rather see CVF with 2 Phalanx and 2 SeaRAM than 4 Phalanx. But if CAAMM is the winner we all hope then maybe again RN would rather bolt on CAAMM and have 3 or 4 Phalanx. Until trials are complete neither we nor they know which way to jump.

              The RN have been concerned over the relative effectiveness (or lack of) of small calibre CIWS so allowing these other flavours time to mature and then make a decision seems a better idea than just buying Phalanx coz that's what we've got most of currently and its the visual archetype that laymen can most recognise.


              Similarly at first glance tis nonsense to leave the central aisle of T45 VLS silo empty and the C position empty of Harpoon launchers but by doing so options are open:

              Middle row BMD Aster or Scalp or Tomahawk
              C postion CAAMM cannisters

              Middle row quadpack CAAMM
              C position Harpoon or Scalp cannisters
              It is simply penny-pincing, pure and simple.

              However i'll answer some questions: the 57 mm is a deck-invasive system, more of a gun for an OPV than a real CIWS. The installation on RN ships is higly unlikely unless it is chosen as main weapon of the C3 ships, and even this i see as unlikely. It will unfortunately end up having just a 30 mm gun like the current minesweepers.

              CAMM: if it goes on the Type 45, it is going to be quad-packed in the cells that now are loaded with Aster 15. Most likely at least. I don't see it going amidship, and either way CAMM is not a CIWS system, but a point-defence missile to replace Sea Wolf.

              Fitting missiles to the hangar roof of Type 45: it would happen only in case of war, no less. But it should be possible to bolt on it CAMM canisters since CAMM is a cold-launch missile and thus does not need a true VLS silos with the exhaust-management and all the other complications tied to it.
              Since CAMM is fired out of the canister by compressed gas and ignites its rocket only when 100 feet high into the air, and because it has no dedicate targeting and radar combat system, it can be bolted pretty much everywhere.

              Type 45 can take up to two more 8-cell launchers in its silos. The RN would like to fit 2 MK41 modules "Strike Lenght" for Tomahawk missiles, but Sylver A70 could be also fit, or more Sylver A50 cells for more Aster missiles, depending on needs. (and money)
              Apparently, the Fire Shadow loitering ammunition is also regarded as a possible future fit in the launch cells.
              The space behind the VLS silos is reserved to Harpoons or anyway Surface-Surface missiles, that would be installed in the same fashion as on the Type 23.

              Sea RAM: the RN trialed it on HMS York in 2001. It is the dream of the Senior Service for the future, but acquisition was stopped by lack of money and is unlikely to happen any time soon.

              As to effectiveness, Phalanx 1B is very good a system and can target even surface fast-movers like suicide boats. However, its limited range and stopping power generated concerns on its effective capability to stop anti-ship missiles. Even destroying an incoming missile at one mile of distance, the ship would still suffer damages from the slivers of the russian supersonic big missiles. SERIOUS damages.

              That's why RAM missiles are the way the US navy followed: they expand the range to a good 9 km in the best case, and thus destroy missiles at a good distance, with a higher kill probability and improved safety for the vessel.
              Anti-surface engegement is left to other weapons though.

              The best defensive outfit for the CVF would be a mix of Phalanx/Sea RAM coupled to a bunch of CAMM canisters.
              This would give it almost as much protection as the very well armed Cavour or like the Charles de Gaulle: both have Aster 15 missiles. The Cavour also adds Strales/Davide 76 mm CIWS and it has been reported that the carrier could carry Aster 30 as well since the Sylver A50 launchers were installed, and not the shorter A43.
              "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

              Comment

              • Witcha
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Jun 2010
                • 1241

                Can we, for a moment, turn away from all these budget-related arguments?

                Does anyone have any pics of the proposed AEW Merlin solutions from BAE and Raytheon? In particular I'm interested in seeing what Raytheon's AESA radar will look like.

                Comment

                • Fedaykin
                  Fueled by Tea
                  • Dec 2005
                  • 5295

                  Only a small picture included, lower block two taking shape in Portsmouth.

                  http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/8320...supercarriers/
                  Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

                  Comment

                  • swerve
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jun 2005
                    • 13612

                    Look back in this thread. There's at least one picture of the BAe proposal.
                    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                    Justinian

                    Comment

                    • Liger30
                      Armed Forces supporter
                      • Jul 2010
                      • 901

                      Originally posted by Witcha View Post
                      Can we, for a moment, turn away from all these budget-related arguments?

                      Does anyone have any pics of the proposed AEW Merlin solutions from BAE and Raytheon? In particular I'm interested in seeing what Raytheon's AESA radar will look like.
                      I've never seen pictures of the Raytheon proposal.
                      I had posted however a few pages back the images that were released of the Thales/Westland proposal.

                      You find the pics here: http://www.defence-update.net/wordpr...w101_asac.html

                      I try adding them in here, but at times it doesn't work for me, perhaps i do it wrong xd



                      "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                      Comment

                      • Liger30
                        Armed Forces supporter
                        • Jul 2010
                        • 901

                        Originally posted by Fedaykin View Post
                        Only a small picture included, lower block two taking shape in Portsmouth.

                        http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/8320...supercarriers/
                        The comments make my heart bleed.

                        But who the hell was so horribly bent on teaching you britons the goddamn phrase "we've got no empire anymore! We got no empire anymore! We don't need this, we can't afford that!"

                        Seriously, this people in these comments is both ridiculous and depressing. If britons have such a low idea of their own country, something is horribly messed up there.

                        Anyway, thanks for sharing!
                        Despite the bitching and stupid comments about delays and cost overruns and idiocies, the program is actually going awesomely well so far, and i reckon it will continue going well, unless the government once more imposes delay for absurd, irrilevant short term savings that push up final price...

                        Also, i'd like to know that guy who commented calling the carriers "insanely expensive". He's an idiot. They are not. They are actually damn cheap for what they are, and also require a very small crew.
                        Hell, can't they feel some pride at a creation of this size? Never before Europe saw something of this magnificence, and they all spit on it.

                        Truly, i don't understand britons anymore... i can't quite make out in which kind of world they think they live. Was it labour who made of so many britons such pathetic wimps and losers...?
                        It is absurd for someone like me who looks at the UK from the outside to think that today's britons have anything to share with Francis Drake, Elizabeth I, Arthur Wellesley, Horatio Nelson, Winston Churchill and Bernard Montgomery, or, in more recent times, with Sir John Forster "Sandy" Woodward.

                        If one reads what many britons say on your online newspapers, it is more likely he'll think to douchebags like John Lackland and Neville Chamberlaine.
                        "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                        Comment

                        • MiG
                          MiG
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Sep 2009
                          • 165

                          Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
                          The comments make my heart bleed.

                          But who the hell was so horribly bent on teaching you britons the goddamn phrase "we've got no empire anymore! We got no empire anymore! We don't need this, we can't afford that!"

                          Seriously, this people in these comments is both ridiculous and depressing. If britons have such a low idea of their own country, something is horribly messed up there.

                          Anyway, thanks for sharing!
                          Despite the bitching and stupid comments about delays and cost overruns and idiocies, the program is actually going awesomely well so far, and i reckon it will continue going well, unless the government once more imposes delay for absurd, irrilevant short term savings that push up final price...

                          Also, i'd like to know that guy who commented calling the carriers "insanely expensive". He's an idiot. They are not. They are actually damn cheap for what they are, and also require a very small crew.
                          Hell, can't they feel some pride at a creation of this size? Never before Europe saw something of this magnificence, and they all spit on it.

                          Truly, i don't understand britons anymore... i can't quite make out in which kind of world they think they live. Was it labour who made of so many britons such pathetic wimps and losers...?
                          It is absurd for someone like me who looks at the UK from the outside to think that today's britons have anything to share with Francis Drake, Elizabeth I, Arthur Wellesley, Horatio Nelson, Winston Churchill and Bernard Montgomery, or, in more recent times, with Sir John Forster "Sandy" Woodward.

                          If one reads what many britons say on your online newspapers, it is more likely he'll think to douchebags like John Lackland and Neville Chamberlaine.
                          Well, speaking for myself, as a Scotsman, I have little in common with Francis drake or Elizabeth the first anyway.

                          I'd imagine that Winston Churchill would be gratified at the robust criticism afforded by our liberal democratic institutions to be honest. The fact that such criticism is tinged with some form of ignorance of the technical issues is inescapable given the obscurity of knowledge required to have even a rudimentary understanding of geo politics and defence strategy.

                          Then again, the same criticisms can be laid a tthe door of any number of programmes, technical and social in many countries across the world. It is up to the government of the day to make the case for nationalising or privatising, building or breaking up.

                          So really, I don't see why you are getting so upset. The kind of criticisms will follow programs like the QE CVs for the simple line of poetry that someone once wrote about the British:

                          "In God and soldier we adore, in times of war and not before"

                          Comment

                          • Liger30
                            Armed Forces supporter
                            • Jul 2010
                            • 901

                            Originally posted by MiG View Post
                            Well, speaking for myself, as a Scotsman, I have little in common with Francis drake or Elizabeth the first anyway.

                            I'd imagine that Winston Churchill would be gratified at the robust criticism afforded by our liberal democratic institutions to be honest. The fact that such criticism is tinged with some form of ignorance of the technical issues is inescapable given the obscurity of knowledge required to have even a rudimentary understanding of geo politics and defence strategy.

                            Then again, the same criticisms can be laid a tthe door of any number of programmes, technical and social in many countries across the world. It is up to the government of the day to make the case for nationalising or privatising, building or breaking up.

                            So really, I don't see why you are getting so upset. The kind of criticisms will follow programs like the QE CVs for the simple line of poetry that someone once wrote about the British:

                            "In God and soldier we adore, in times of war and not before"
                            Hum, no. It is not the same thing.
                            And i doubt Churchill would be any happy of how his country looks now, so akin to throwing away its world relevance, so sea-blind when it comes to the RN he always cared for and even lead, and at a lot of other things which would most likely puzzle him at the very least.
                            I may be wrong, but the UK of today looks far different and far less credible than it did until perhaps ten years ago. Last time it impressed in favorable way was in 2000 with the resolute way in which the Sierra Leone problem was dealt with.

                            What a difference between that and the pathetic way piracy is now fought, and how the Royal Marines were held back by coward politicians when they were ready to step in in the infamous situation of the kidnapped yatch and fix it with whatever force it was required.

                            No, it truly isn't the same thing. And it is not just a lack of knowledge that surfaces in some comments, for example about the CVFs. It is a total, depressing lack of any kind of pride, actually.
                            Something that astonishes whoever looks at it from the outside.
                            "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                            Comment

                            • Stryker73
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Jun 2010
                              • 274

                              It's not the same country as it was in 2000, we're in the middle of a big recession and the population has had its fill of two wars where we've seen our soldiers, sailors and airmen die for very little return for British interests!!

                              There is a big difference between the Falklands/Sierra Leone and Afghanistan. We as a country will absolutely stand up for our interests/people but the vast majority I would say are sick of being involved in these wars.

                              It may come as a shock to you but the vast majority of Britons don't care a jot and have limited knowledge of their military so when these stories appear in the mainstream media you will get uninformed comments.

                              And there have always been self flagelating 'we no longer have an empire' types for as long as I can remember. For god sake don't read the Guardian!!

                              It amuses me that an Italian gets so worked up over it.

                              Comment

                              • Liger30
                                Armed Forces supporter
                                • Jul 2010
                                • 901

                                It's not the same country as it was in 2000, we're in the middle of a big recession and the population has had its fill of two wars where we've seen our soldiers, sailors and airmen die for very little return for British interests!!

                                There is a big difference between the Falklands/Sierra Leone and Afghanistan. We as a country will absolutely stand up for our interests/people but the vast majority I would say are sick of being involved in these wars.

                                It may come as a shock to you but the vast majority of Britons don't care a jot and have limited knowledge of their military so when these stories appear in the mainstream media you will get uninformed comments.

                                And there have always been self flagelating 'we no longer have an empire' types for as long as I can remember. For god sake don't read the Guardian!!

                                It amuses me that an Italian gets so worked up over it.
                                Too late. I read the Guardian already. And it horrified me to no ends. I try not to read online articles (and especially comments) on the Guardian anymore, but at times i can't resist the curiosity to see what demented points they'll make and what levels of stupidity they'll touch.

                                The top so far was the proposals to exit from the recession by cutting the whole of the armed forces. YAY! 500.000 jobless people + 350.000 defence industry jobs lost in one go along with a market of over 35 billions a year!

                                And the recession hit everyone, actually.
                                But not even Greece is in the same level of panic and "CUTSCUTSCUTSCUTS" mood as the UK is. It is almost impossible to understand for us what need is there to cut everything almost without reasoning on it to tackle the debt.
                                Italy sleeps with its beloved, monstrous public debt from the night of time, pretty much... We are still alive and going, and we certainly do not plan to cut our Lagunari (marines).

                                And having the Marines intervening to save britons wasn't what i'd call a war. Stay back and watch was demented. It is right to care for the risk hostages are put in if there's a military response... but to allow them to be taken away is just absurd.
                                I understand totally being tired of Afghanistan and Iraq effort (as Italian, i'm also sorta ashamed of how little overall our own contingent does...) and the hundreds of victims it took, but... You know. From that consideration... to seeing certain things... there's still a massive difference.

                                And well... I'm weird myself. I'm very fond of Britain, even if i'm italian. That's why i'm so concerned.
                                I'm one of those few ones that still remember our debts of gratitude to the 8th Army coming in Italy and kicking the germans out, too.
                                And i also see that every time the UK seemed to loose its grip on the international stage, bad things happened.
                                I'd totally feel better with a strong UK in Europe than with an isolationist, Guardian-like decadent country sitting on a small island.

                                Beware the Guardian and its policy! It is the first and greatest danger the SDSR should consider.
                                "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                                Comment

                                • Stryker73
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jun 2010
                                  • 274

                                  An on-topic post!

                                  Construction video of the diesel generators being installed at Portsmouth

                                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6JBFhJkSjo

                                  Comment

                                  • Liger30
                                    Armed Forces supporter
                                    • Jul 2010
                                    • 901

                                    Originally posted by Stryker73 View Post
                                    An on-topic post!

                                    Construction video of the diesel generators being installed at Portsmouth

                                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6JBFhJkSjo
                                    Yeah! This is the kind of great stuff we'd like to see a lot more often.
                                    Great find.
                                    "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                                    Comment

                                    • harryRIEDL
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Jan 2006
                                      • 375

                                      Originally posted by Fedaykin View Post
                                      Only a small picture included, lower block two taking shape in Portsmouth.

                                      http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/8320...supercarriers/
                                      LB02 isn't that the central block which when completed all the other bits will bolt onto. (in the build video)
                                      To Be or not TO be That is The Question you all should know the writer of that quote

                                      always look on the bright side of life monty python

                                      Comment

                                      • Fedaykin
                                        Fueled by Tea
                                        • Dec 2005
                                        • 5295

                                        That construction video is a welcome ane rare sight, I wish the powers that be would realise that they are a good way of promoting British industry.

                                        Really looking forward to seeing the first major superblock going to Rosyth.
                                        Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

                                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

                                        Comment

                                        • harryRIEDL
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Jan 2006
                                          • 375

                                          Originally posted by Fedaykin View Post
                                          That construction video is a welcome ane rare sight, I wish the powers that be would realise that they are a good way of promoting British industry.

                                          Really looking forward to seeing the first major superblock going to Rosyth.
                                          saying that I was surprised to see that Shipbuilding was responsible in large part for the growth of Manufacturing in the last quarter
                                          To Be or not TO be That is The Question you all should know the writer of that quote

                                          always look on the bright side of life monty python

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X