CVF (UK) vs CVF (FR)

Trident, although news on this is unclear it appears that CVF will have a displacement roughly similar to that of PA-2, because it was agreed that a bit more money spent would allow for increased harmonisation, thus reducing cost overall.

Even given the real plus points of STOVL operation, I must admit I’d like to see the F35C on the CVF.

I think the size difference will be minor. Its quite possible that the UK RN will adapt some of the changes recommended by the French. You will recall someone posted on here a French article recently that implied this was the case. One of those was much more aviation fuel capacity which added something like 3000 tonnes to its displacement.

One area of capability where the CVFUK will have a small advantage is the ability to operate in extremely poor weather conditions where STOVL aircraft have shown an advantage over conventionals carrier vessels. Some of you will recall the incident during the Falklands in in 1982 when Lt Commander Broadwater was forced to eject when his Harrier was blown/slid off the deck in very High winds and seas. Those were supposedly conditions that were two sea states worse than any conventional carrier has operated in.

Whatever the advantages and disadvantages of Rafale vs. F35B there is no doubt that PA2 with catapults and arrestor gear will be a more flexible vessel with a lot more possibilities for air ops than the CVF which will be limited to a single type of fighter aircraft. The difference in size could be accounted for by many things, such as;
Defensive systems and weapons
Protective arrangements (I believe CVF will not have any armour to save costs)
PA2 will need more powerful steam generators for the catapults and the associated auxiliary systems
Differences in how displacement is measured
Different auxiliary equipment
Even using a common hull design there is scope for each customer to modify it for their own requirements
France being more honest about design growth and budget creep
To my mind the AEW requirement is one area where Anglo-French co-operation would make a lot of sense in pursuing joint Hawkeye procurement and support programs.
Does anybody know what engines PA2 will go for? A WR21 or LM2500 based package, or something else entirely?

If, the UK changed to the F-35C they could have a more effective strike group than any other Carrier Air Wing out there. As the French will operate Rafales and the Americans a split force of Lightnings and Super Hornets…….

Whatever the advantages and disadvantages of Rafale vs. F35B there is no doubt that PA2 with catapults and arrestor gear will be a more flexible vessel with a lot more possibilities for air ops than the CVF which will be limited to a single type of fighter aircraft. The difference in size could be accounted for by many things, such as;
Defensive systems and weapons
Protective arrangements (I believe CVF will not have any armour to save costs)
PA2 will need more powerful steam generators for the catapults and the associated auxiliary systems
Differences in how displacement is measured
Different auxiliary equipment
Even using a common hull design there is scope for each customer to modify it for their own requirements
France being more honest about design growth and budget creep
To my mind the AEW requirement is one area where Anglo-French co-operation would make a lot of sense in pursuing joint Hawkeye procurement and support programs.
Does anybody know what engines PA2 will go for? A WR21 or LM2500 based package, or something else entirely?

Hard to say, the Rafale will have the edge in terms of performance (same for the AEW component in the shape of the Hawkeye), but the UK’s F-35s will be stealthier. Now if the RN got F-35Cs and Hawkeyes of their own….

What I’d be most interested in is how big the differences between both vessels will be – PA2 is now estimated to weigh in at no less than 74000 tons while the highest number floating around for the CVF is 65000. Are both figures accurate? If not, which one is off (or what are the correct displacements if they really are different)?

Mind you, the PA2 is CTOL so it does make sense that it should displace more, but 9000 tons? That sounds like it is actually physically larger (length, beam), which would imply less commonality.

Seems like the two designs have less in common than we were first told???

One possibility is that they have adopted the old CVA-01 practice of using a quoted displacement to represent a design, even after that displacement changes. It meant that the ‘50,000 ton’ design could actually be bigger than (for instance) an earlier 55,000 ton design.

Hard to say, the Rafale will have the edge in terms of performance (same for the AEW component in the shape of the Hawkeye), but the UK’s F-35s will be stealthier. Now if the RN got F-35Cs and Hawkeyes of their own….

What I’d be most interested in is how big the differences between both vessels will be – PA2 is now estimated to weigh in at no less than 74000 tons while the highest number floating around for the CVF is 65000. Are both figures accurate? If not, which one is off (or what are the correct displacements if they really are different)?

Mind you, the PA2 is CTOL so it does make sense that it should displace more, but 9000 tons? That sounds like it is actually physically larger (length, beam), which would imply less commonality.