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
  • pjhydro
    Rank 4 Registered User
    • Apr 2009
    • 886

    Second Carrier definately Conventioal. PoW to get cats. Just been leaked.

    Comment

    • ppp
      ppp
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jul 2008
      • 1331

      I don't see a need for two air forces, the RN and RAF must be made to share where it is beneficial. I don't favour either side, nor the Army, all are equally valuable to our country, and all have shown tremendous dedication to the country.

      Originally posted by pjhydro View Post
      Second Carrier definately Conventioal. PoW to get cats. Just been leaked.
      What do you mean by second carrier conventional? CATOBAR? Good to hear they will be CATOBAR carriers though

      Comment

      • MisterQ
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Jan 2008
        • 475

        Don't be surprised to see this whole thing subjected to a judicial review.

        Comment

        • Doug97
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Feb 2006
          • 429

          I thought the whole reason they weren't going to get catapults in the first place was to keep costs down? Now there's no money and cats are being installed?

          Defence review: HMS Ark Royal to be scrapped

          The BBC has learned that at least one of the new carriers will be redesigned so that it can deploy normal fighter aircraft that do not need a Harrier-style vertical lift capability.

          Comment

          • mrmalaya
            Generation 4.75+++
            • Jan 2010
            • 4664

            the reason they weren't going to change the design of the first carrier is because of money, but the second carrier can incorporate them quite easily.

            the question is whether they retrofit the first carrier at a later date.

            Comment

            • ppp
              ppp
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Jul 2008
              • 1331

              Originally posted by Doug97 View Post
              I thought the whole reason they weren't going to get catapults in the first place was to keep costs down? Now there's no money and cats are being installed?

              Defence review: HMS Ark Royal to be scrapped
              Well the fact that there's around 80 planes less than planned should free up the cash.

              Comment

              • Stan hyd
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • May 2009
                • 605

                I really do hope we dont lose the 1st Carrier after the 2nd comes into the fleet. I really do hope by then we have the money to refit her for CTOL operations!!

                Comment

                • mrmalaya
                  Generation 4.75+++
                  • Jan 2010
                  • 4664

                  unless the french have convinced the government the sharing of carriers might not be so bad.

                  I do think the fuss around the cost of 2 carriers is an attempt to lay the blame squarely at labours feet for the mess the defence budget is in. once they're in service they're hardly going to ditch one.

                  Comment

                  • MisterQ
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jan 2008
                    • 475

                    The insane thing is, QE could be convertedfor CATOBAR now, this whole thing is stupid.

                    And what about the 3 F35B we've already bought and paid for?

                    Comment

                    • Doug97
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Feb 2006
                      • 429

                      Originally posted by mrmalaya View Post
                      the reason they weren't going to change the design of the first carrier is because of money,
                      Why were they designed without CATOBAR in the first place?

                      Comment

                      • swerve
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Jun 2005
                        • 13612

                        Originally posted by MisterQ View Post
                        The insane thing is, QE could be convertedfor CATOBAR now, this whole thing is stupid.

                        And what about the 3 F35B we've already bought and paid for?
                        Convert it into a down payment on F-35C. There are precedents. Sellers are usually happy with that.

                        Converting QE would probably delay construction significantly, which would have a knock-on effect on PoW. We may get a catapult-equipped carrier as soon this way as if we started converting QE, & delays cost lots of money, enough that it may actually be cheaper to finish QE as planned, & refit catapults later.
                        Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                        Justinian

                        Comment

                        • F/A-18RN
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • May 2005
                          • 256

                          Now that its been confirmed that at least one of the CVFs will be completed as a CTOL carrier any ideas on what the flight deck configuration of the carrier should be? Should both cats be bow mounted as on HMS Hermes and HMS Victorious or one bow and one waste mounted as on the Fochs', HMS Eagle and Ark Royal and Charles De Gaule? I get the impression that the former configuration is the more flexible.
                          Also can I make a plea for the flight deck markings to be the same style as used on HMS Ark Royal in the late '70s?

                          Apologies if this is a double post, I could swear I posted this earlier this evening on this very thread.
                          Attached Files

                          Comment

                          • Liger30
                            Armed Forces supporter
                            • Jul 2010
                            • 901

                            Here is the most likely fitting: it is the one that was planned for the French PA2, which had to be the "third CVF" as we well know.



                            Thanks as always to Richard Beedall for his wonderful work and fantastic website!
                            "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

                            • Fedaykin
                              Fueled by Tea
                              • Dec 2005
                              • 5295

                              Originally posted by swerve View Post
                              Convert it into a down payment on F-35C. There are precedents. Sellers are usually happy with that.

                              Converting QE would probably delay construction significantly, which would have a knock-on effect on PoW. We may get a catapult-equipped carrier as soon this way as if we started converting QE, & delays cost lots of money, enough that it may actually be cheaper to finish QE as planned, & refit catapults later.
                              Yep, I think QE will complete as is albeit without the Ski Jump (to save government blushes about lack of Sea Harrier to run off it) and operate as a heli carrier. PoW will get the Catapult and Arrester gear engines. Which brings up a curious situation...

                              The cheapest and lowest risk option would be American EMALS catapult and MK13 arrester gear engines. But Converteam is developing its own solution and MacTaggart Scott still market their DAX-II arrester gear engine which is meant to be lighter, cheaper and able to stop a greater range of aircraft.

                              http://www.mactag.com/aircraft_arrest.html

                              Makes you wonder if there might be a totally UK solution in that respect.

                              One thing that is certain the American Improved Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System (IFLOLS) will have to be used considering all training will have to be done in America.
                              Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

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

                              Comment

                              • Stryker73
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jun 2010
                                • 274

                                Can someone explain why a CATOBAR conversion will put back the ISD from 2016 to 2020? Can't be all training up skills?

                                Comment

                                • swerve
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jun 2005
                                  • 13612

                                  Originally posted by Fedaykin View Post
                                  Yep, I think QE will complete as is albeit without the Ski Jump (to save government blushes about lack of Sea Harrier to run off it) and operate as a heli carrier. PoW will get the Catapult and Arrester gear engines.
                                  Not according to the SDSR.

                                  It clearly says QE will be delayed to allow her to be completed as cat & trap. It also says that one carrier will be placed in extended readiness, allowing the possibility of rotation with the active carrier, or regeneration if we ever need two. Unless the 2015 review decides to sell one, of course.

                                  Originally posted by Fedaykin View Post
                                  Which brings up a curious situation...

                                  The cheapest and lowest risk option would be American EMALS catapult and MK13 arrester gear engines. But Converteam is developing its own solution and MacTaggart Scott still market their DAX-II arrester gear engine which is meant to be lighter, cheaper and able to stop a greater range of aircraft.

                                  http://www.mactag.com/aircraft_arrest.html

                                  Makes you wonder if there might be a totally UK solution in that respect.
                                  Might explain the inordinately long delay.
                                  Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                                  Justinian

                                  Comment

                                  • Trident
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • May 2004
                                    • 3970

                                    I hope the bow catapult is shifted over to starboard though. If I recall correctly, the rationale for the arrangement depicted in Liger's image was increased deck parking space, but this comes at a price in launch/recovery rates. With the UK likely to operate a relatively small airgroup (for the size of the hull) and looking for a high sortie rate, the ability to conduct take-off and landing operations simultaneously might override this consideration, however.

                                    http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvfi...hales-6big.jpg
                                    sigpic

                                    Comment

                                    • Bager1968
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • May 2005
                                      • 3635

                                      Actually, the plan is that both QE and POW are to be pushed back 4 years, and QE will get the full gear*.

                                      Which would make sense... the push-back, while increasing the overall cost of both ships, will reduce the per-year cost (by spreading it over more years)... which is the important part to Treasury... as is pushing back the signing of the purchase contract for F-35 another 2 years.

                                      Stretching out the builds also extends the employment of the shipyard work-forces... not a small electorial consideration.


                                      From the RN's viewpoint, if QE is the one to receive EMALS/EMCAT, then by the time POW is well underway, the 2015 SDR & spending review might well be able to scrape together the funds for the second EMALS/EMCAT set to be installed during the last part of her build. This would be cheaper than putting a ramped QE back into the yard to remove the ramp and fit the whole EMALS/EMCAT set-up into a completed ship.

                                      The 2015 SDR & spending review may well find that the economy has improved enough to allow for more F-35C as well, and for POW & QE to both be used more than the current plan calls for.



                                      Not expecting that... just pointing out that there are options for later... this SDR didn't close as many doors as it might have.



                                      * http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum.../dg_191634.pdf

                                      Page 23...
                                      As currently designed, the Queen Elizabeth will not be fully interoperable with key allies, since their naval jets could not land on it. Pursuit of closer partnership is a core strategic principle for the Strategic Defence and Security Review because it is clear that the UK will in most circumstances act militarily as part of a wider coalition. We will therefore install catapult and arrestor gear. This will delay the in-service date of the new carrier from 2016 to around 2020.

                                      QE planned ISD was 2016, POW planned ISD was 2018**, thus this can only be a reference to QE receiving the "catapult and arrestor gear".



                                      **
                                      In December 2008, the UK MoD announced that the originally planned in-service dates of the carriers, 2014 and 2016, would be set back by about two years (2016 and 2018) to match the entry into service of the joint combat aircraft, the F-35B.
                                      http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/cvf/
                                      Last edited by Bager1968; 19th October 2010, 21:04.
                                      Germany, Austria and Italy are standing together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria's pint.

                                      Comment

                                      • MisterQ
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Jan 2008
                                        • 475

                                        If this was on the cards I wonder why we just funded SRVL integrationlast week?

                                        Comment

                                        • Bager1968
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • May 2005
                                          • 3635

                                          Originally posted by MisterQ View Post
                                          If this was on the cards I wonder why we just funded SRVL integrationlast week?
                                          You don't list your location on your profile, but considering the widespread belief that it was the UK that funded the research, I'll assume that you were referring to the UK when you said "we just funded SRVL integration last week".

                                          http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ification.html

                                          In actuality, the funding came from the U.S. Navy, but the work will be performed on behalf of the United Kingdom*.



                                          * Note the last part of the article:
                                          The US Marine Corps has also shown interest in potentially using the SRVL technique with its own F-35B fleet.
                                          That is why the USN funded the research... and why it will go forward despite the UK's switch to F-35C.
                                          Germany, Austria and Italy are standing together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria's pint.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X